Once you go C&C, you never go back

[Valiant]

In 3e though 'beating up hapless monsters' is really non-core; by the book, almost every encounter is a serious threat - 'challenging' or worse - and this is true at all levels. In 1e/2e, as in C&C, high level PCs especially will often wade through dozens of encounters with barely breaking sweat, though always there's the possibility of something dangerous or overwhelming. High level AD&D, OD&D, and C&C give a real sense of power as you trash dozens of the same (eg) trolls you ran from when low level. In core 3e you rarely get to do this, in fact IME players often positively _resent_ 'underpowered' encounters, because they still take a good while to set up and run (often a very long time to run), with no payoff in XP or danger.

So, in terms of 'threat demographics' C&C is very much old school. This is one of the things I like about it. I like 3e tactical combat, especially at lower levels, but I also like a game where PCs can become genuinely and obviously powerful in-game.

3E's idiotic skills feats and class attachments to monsters was one of the worst things 3Es designers came up with . Its nice that C&C didn't follow 3E in this regard, but neither did alot of other games (also NOT "old school) so it takes more then that to qualify, but your point is well taken.

Also, C&C has many annoying 3E similarities, for instance the Illusionist (WTF) and too many open doors to import 3E. That sort of adaptability isn't a strength, its a weakness, it comes off as wishy washy and unfocused (thats why I say its really 3E light, because thats where its most useful (something the Trolls are well aware of)...3Eers wanting something faster).

C&C suffers from a lack of true identity. It isn't old school, isn't 3E, and isn't unique enough on its own to make a splash. And now with PPP and OSRIC there's no reason to publish modules using C&Cs platform either. As Melan mentioned, just what is the point in publishing the game?

Gideon, besides the C&Cs usual marketing squad (most of them involved in its creation somehow), I have yet to see anyone whos ever played the game. The few copies our local gaming store did have sat in a sales rack for well over a year and then disappeared (I don't think they sold, though I didn't ask).
Anyhow, who's saying people should care if a game is "old school" or not to play it? No one on this thread has suggested that.

 

[Melan]

Also, C&C has many annoying 3E similarities, for instance the Illusionist

What the hell? 3e doesn't even have an Illusionist class, for Christ's sake!

 

[Greylock]

Also, C&C has many annoying 3E similarities, for instance the Illusionist (WTF)...

The Illusionist is a 1st Edition AD&D class.

And now with PPP and OSRIC there's no reason to publish modules using C&Cs platform either. As Melan mentioned, just what is the point in publishing the game?...

C&C is on a firm legal ground, unlike OSRIC, and has a healthy, committed group of publishers supporting it. It is a unique game, and has a great bunch of people writing new material for it.

Gideon, besides the C&Cs usual marketing squad (most of them involved in its creation somehow), I have yet to see anyone whos ever played the game. The few copies our local gaming store did have sat in a sales rack for well over a year and then disappeared (I don't think they sold, though I didn't ask).

Are you suggesting that every poster here who has played the game and supports it to one degree or another is on Troll Lords marketing staff? Or all we just figments of Troll Lords imagination? I know many people who play the game, and the books sell off the shelf in my area just as quickly as those by other publishers and in other systems. I suppose my anecdotal evidence or that of the other people who play have no role in your fantasy.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The Illusionist is a 1st Edition AD&D class.

Or an OD&D one (from the Strategic Review Vol 1., No. 4).

 

[scruffygrognard]

One of C&C's criticisms is that it is an "incomplete" game. Now, I can see people wanting more options out of it like a skill system and multiclassing rules, but C&C can be played as-is.

One of the design philosophies behind this game was the ability to customize it to your personal tastes. So if you don't like skills, don't use them. Or you can add in non-weapon proficiencies or skills and feats. And so on and so forth.

For those interested in some heavily-houseruled C&C (with the houserules being based on 3.X and AD&D) check out:
http://homepages.nyu.edu/~dp58/AD&D3.pdf

So far it's gone well in playtesting...

 

[S'mon]

Gideon, besides the C&Cs usual marketing squad (most of them involved in its creation somehow), I have yet to see anyone whos ever played the game.

Myself and my group all like it - the more grognardy players/DMs especially - and none of us were involved in its creation. I like its 3e-ish streamlining of AD&D.

 

[Dragonhelm]

In that case, why publish a game like C&C, though? 3e is pretty fine for rolling dice and beating up hapless creatures; moreover, it tends to promise a lot more stuff.

Why create any other game system?

Thing is, there are different ways to beat up critters and take their stuff. I would hope, though, that actual role-playing figures into the equation too. I won't say that any one system lends itself better to roleplaying than any other, I think different systems may lead to different ways to role-play.

There has to be some sort of quality which makes some people choose C&C over d20. Rules-light may be it. But then why C&C and why not True20 or some other easy system?

Because True20 isn't D&D. Maybe C&C doesn't have the D&D brand name, but it definitely has the D&D spirit. So it's draw, then, is a rules-lite game based on AD&D that uses the basics of the d20 mechanics.

 

[Turanil]

C&C suffers from a lack of true identity. It isn't old school, isn't 3E, and isn't unique enough on its own to make a splash. And now with PPP and OSRIC there's no reason to publish modules using C&Cs platform either. As Melan mentioned, just what is the point in publishing the game?

Gideon, besides the C&Cs usual marketing squad (most of them involved in its creation somehow), I have yet to see anyone whos ever played the game.

I have run C&C and enjoyed it, my players did too. In fact they greeted the very simple and easy to learn ruleset. One player who never bought any book, immediately ordered them. Now, I don't want to play OSRIC which is but 1e published in PDF under the OGL. I don't need OSRIC for that matter, since I still have all the 1e and 2e books. C&C made me want run again the kind of campaign I ran back in the day, but with much more satisfying rules. I don't care if it has a personality of its own or not. For me it's AD&D/BD&D streamlined and working better.

 

[gideon_thorne]

In that case, why publish a game like C&C, though? 3e is pretty fine for rolling dice and beating up hapless creatures; moreover, it tends to promise a lot more stuff.

There has to be some sort of quality which makes some people choose C&C over d20. Rules-light may be it. But then why C&C and why not True20 or some other easy system? That's a question TLG has to answer if it wishes to stay in business. "It's all the same to me" is a statement of no substance.

Familiarity. People like the familiar, but not the identical. Every time I hear folks talk at shows and various places about town, they say pretty much the same thing. They want something that is similar to what they remember from their youth, but new as well.

TLG's answered the question pretty well methinks. Considering they are still in business in a market as dodgy as this one.

And eventually, even all those OOP books on ebay are going to wear out after constant reselling and whatnot.

 

[gideon_thorne]

Outside of message boards, I've never heard of anyone owning, playing, running, or even talking about Castles & Crusades, FWIW. And I know quite a few gamers.

But yeah, I agree. Most people 'IRL' don't seem to care a great deal about the system being used, except in the sense of the 'we're used to this one' kinda thing. And then again, most people will try a system once, if nothing else.

I hear quite a bit different I guess. I know of a few hundred folks, personally, that play within a 6 hour area of where I live. 50 of those live about 45 minutes from me.