Once you go C&C, you never go back

[Treebore]

Jim Hague, Treebore:

We have exactly zero desire for arguments or bad feelings from elsewhere to show up here. Please stop propagating issues from one board to another, and let the subject drop. Thank you.

Sorry, I was hoping I was speaking generically enough, but obviously I wasn't.

 

[slimykuotoan]

I think Mr. gideon_thorne's sig says it all:

"Castles and Crusades. The game so cool that even people who hate it can't stop talking about it."

 

[Frost]

For anybody who actually gives two squats, I've reached my decision about C&C. By and large, this thread has been useful. The heat that it generated was rather unexpected, but I guess you'll have that anywhere online. Anyhow, I plan on picking up the C&C Player's Handbook when budget allows. I read the Quick Play rules and I am quite taken with the system. I play 3.5 now and I do like it, but I feel that it sacrifices too much in the way of speed. I DM a rather large group (7 players, some with multiple PCs), and we are lucky to get through one combat in a session. Really, speed of play is what started my exploration into C&C. Now, whether I will actually get a chance to use C&C is another matter. I'm currently knee-deep in a Rappan Athuk Reload campaign and I can't imagine changing systems mid-campaign. Most likely, whenever I do get around to getting the C&C PH, my group will give it a go when turn out is low for our game session.

In a fantasy land where I have time and money to spare, I'd like to pick up Grim Tales as well and explore combining it with C&C.

 

[Treebore]

For anybody who actually gives two squats, I've reached my decision about C&C. By and large, this thread has been useful. The heat that it generated was rather unexpected, but I guess you'll have that anywhere online. Anyhow, I plan on picking up the C&C Player's Handbook when budget allows. I read the Quick Play rules and I am quite taken with the system. I play 3.5 now and I do like it, but I feel that it sacrifices too much in the way of speed. I DM a rather large group (7 players, some with multiple PCs), and we are lucky to get through one combat in a session. Really, speed of play is what started my exploration into C&C. Now, whether I will actually get a chance to use C&C is another matter. I'm currently knee-deep in a Rappan Athuk Reload campaign and I can't imagine changing systems mid-campaign. Most likely, whenever I do get around to getting the C&C PH, my group will give it a go when turn out is low for our game session.

In a fantasy land where I have time and money to spare, I'd like to pick up Grim Tales as well and explore combining it with C&C.

Yeah, switching in the middle of RA:R would be a bit much. Good luck when you do switch, and you know where our message boards are if you ever need advice or clarification.

Lets see, the middle of RA:R, averaging one combat per session. See you in about a year! Assuming no TPK.

 

[slimykuotoan]

Hi Frost:

You might consider a 'one nighter' through SKYPE to get a handle on the rules as well.

They pop up all of the time on the Troll Lords site,

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

In a fantasy land where I have time and money to spare, I'd like to pick up Grim Tales as well and explore combining it with C&C.

Ummm... why?

Grim Tales is a d20 toolkit based around the d20 Modern rules. It's pretty much all about rules.

Obviously you can tweak and bash things from Grim Tales to fit into C&C, but if you're going to C&C explicitly because you want a faster system, it seems kind of against your goal to immediately start plugging in rules to complicate it. Especially when it's from d20 Modern which has some rather different assumptions about the game from D&D.

 

[gideon_thorne]

For anybody who actually gives two squats, I've reached my decision about C&C. By and large, this thread has been useful. The heat that it generated was rather unexpected, but I guess you'll have that anywhere online. Anyhow, I plan on picking up the C&C Player's Handbook when budget allows.

Welcome to the dark side.....

 

[Valiant]

I find no real arguement with you. It's all a matter of taste. I was unhappy ultimately with AD&D and looked to 3e to make me happy again. In a way it did, but not completely. C&C is what I wished 3e had been. It's a game I like better.

I agree with that completely, it is all a matter of taste, and more power to those who prefer 3E or C&C or whatever to AD&D or any other game . I just don't like to see the "old school" label placed upon it (when its anything but). 3E is modern D20 in rules, artwork, text, layout, you name it. The fact that they have a second home at DF does suggest that they have linked themselves to 1E.

 

[Greylock]

I just don't like to see the "old school" label placed upon it (when its anything but). 3E is modern D20 in rules, artwork, text, layout...

How on EARTH do you come to that conclusion? Yes, there is a d20 involved. The d20 is used to resolve most conflict situations - checks, attacks, saves etc. It has almost nothing else in common with D20 - The System ®. And how in the dickens have you determined what is D20 Art, Text and Layout? Do proper RPGs have to be written in a Gygaxian style in order to satisfy you?

 

[jdrakeh]

Yes, there is a d20 involved. The d20 is used to resolve most conflict situations - checks, attacks, saves etc. It has almost nothing else in common with D20 - The System ®.

The SIEGE basic mechanic is identical to the basic d20 System mechanic:

1. Roll 1d20
2. Add numbers to the result based on class, level, and ability modifiers.
3. Compare the result to a target number to determine success.

Then you have other, smaller things, such as armor working just as it does in d20, etc. There are, of course, some differences, too (namely primes) -- but at its core, the SIEGE mechanic is very much d20 System-derived.