Any more info on Castles and Crusades?

[Mouseferatu]

So Troll Lord announced a while back they were doing "Castles and Crusades," a "rules-lite" version of D&D. They compared it to older editions.

Have they said anything more about it? Is it a new "version" of 1E D&D? Basic? Old White Boxed Set Pre-Basic? None of the above, but just a less complex version of D20? What is it?

Anyone? Bueller?

 

[johnsemlak]

It appears that it will be modeled on 1e AD&D, though I'm not really sure. TLG has been a little vague on such specifics so far.

 

[Melan]

You can find info on the TLG boards:
Here is some discussion on rules content.
And on a Certain Castle and Dungeons project.
Very interesting - if TLG pulls this off, I'm switchin'.

 

[TiQuinn]

You can find info on the TLG boards:
Here is some discussion on rules content.
And on a Certain Castle and Dungeons project.
Very interesting - if TLG pulls this off, I'm switchin'.

Okay, I've got a minor rant, but this is something that bugs me...whenever I hear about the possibility of a Castle Greyhawk project.

I know Gary's busy. I know he's got a lot of other projects that probably take precedence. I know there's a whole lot of notes spread between him and Rob Kuntz that probably need to be pulled together and sorted through for a product like Castle Greyhawk (Zagyg). But sheesh, I'm really tired of hearing/being teased about this one. I mean that was a very non-committal message from Troll Lord. Let me know when this one becomes real, all the appropriate parties are onboard and there actually IS a schedule. But right now, this still just feels too rumor-millish for me to get my hopes up.

And from a completely selfish, I'm a grump who has a cold and hasn't had his coffee point of view....dump the other projects, Gary, and let's get this one going!

Whining over!

 

[rounser]

On some level, maybe it's better that it (Castle GH) remain undesigned and unpublished. A bit of mystery and mythology and speculation may be better than the legend made flesh and all doubt removed, IYKWIM. I wonder how much the original resembled the tone of Castle Blackmoor, for instance.

 

[WSmith]

On some level, maybe it's better that it (Castle GH) remain undesigned and unpublished. A bit of mystery and mythology and speculation may be better than the legend made flesh and all doubt removed, IYKWIM. I wonder how much the original resembled the tone of Castle Blackmoor, for instance.

In all honesty, I am more excited by the fact the EGG likes the system enough that he would consider using it for CG/CZ than I am of this legenary locale actually ever coming out.

 

[Mouseferatu]

You can find info on the TLG boards:
Here is some discussion on rules content.
And on a Certain Castle and Dungeons project.
Very interesting - if TLG pulls this off, I'm switchin'.

Hmm... I've read through the various posts there...

So we're looking at going back to restricted multiclassing, back to a game with no skills or feats to differentiate Bob Fighter from Joe Fighter, and back to a game where only a thief can learn to pick a lock no matter how much the wizard may practice at it?

No thanks. Count me out. I'm all for simplicity. And I truly believe a simpler version of D&D should exist for beginners or those who are intimidated by the size/number-heaviness of the core rules. (In fact, I've done work on such in my spare time.) In essence, a Basic 3.5.

But 3.5-compatible 1E AD&D? No thank you. The concept sounds (to me) like the worst of both worlds--it lacks the options of 3.5, and it lacks the simplicity of Basic.

Now, don't anybody yell at me for jumping to conclusions. I intend to follow this, and if it starts looking different, or I discover I misinterpreted, I'll happily admit to being wrong. But from what I've seen so far, I can't say the idea appeals. I like being able to customize my characters.

 

[jasamcarl]

In all honesty, I am more excited by the fact the EGG likes the system enough that he would consider using it for CG/CZ than I am of this legenary locale actually ever coming out.

Why? He doesn't even seem to understand the 3e rules and a lot of his logic about the merits of 1e versus 3e comes off as the worse type of fallacious online prattle. I wouldn't trust his rules judgement. But that's just me.

 

[dcas]

Gary probably doesn't "understand" the 3e rules enough to say, write a 3e module (he has editors who convert his work for him), but I don't see how that's necessarily a flaw.

 

[WSmith]

Why? He doesn't even seem to understand the 3e rules and a lot of his logic about the merits of 1e versus 3e comes off as the worse type of fallacious online prattle. I wouldn't trust his rules judgement. But that's just me.

Wow, you felt so strongly about this you had to reply three times.

Why would you not trust his rules judgement? Have you ever read any of the Original AD&D rulebooks, especially the DMG? Have you ever played Keep on the Borderlands? Despite what Wizards is selling you, d20 D&D is not the be all end all to gaming. There are still people out there who like a different feel to D&D. Yes, there are bits and pieces of the original that is quite archaic and flawed. However, it has more soul and spirit than Dungeonpunk will ever have. You don't have to know the ENTIRE rulesset to know you don't like it. It is about the feeling you get when playing it. If it's not fun don't play it. What is so wrong with that?