Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="driver8" data-source="post: 2153689" data-attributes="member: 17559">I would give C&amp;C a look. The 6 saves are one of the biggest departures from d20. They arent any indication of the system. While the rules are different, they are not complex.To me, C&amp;C isnt necessarily simple, just easier to run. D20 is at its heart very simple-&quot;one roll to rule them all&quot; and all that-but the implementation of the rules can be complex, especially at higher levels. Add in feats skills-some passive, some combat related, and the game at its worse can become a bookkeeping nightmare.And to be honest, C&amp;C requires learning a new set of mechnaics. And while you may have to learn a different way of seeing task resolution, the implementation is simple. Combat is easier as well, a big plus for me. Admitatly, one of the main reasons that C&amp;C appeals to me is, apart from it simplicity, is the nostalgia factor. Stat blocks for monsters are much much shorter, usually just a line of text. Combat is easier as well. Old classes make reappearances, and are for the most part archetypes.While d20 may model things more precisely by giving people more options in regards to character customization, combat, etc..the C&amp;C characters does tend to generalize and abstract things like skills or combat.&nbsp; In addition there seems to be less a power creep-the stat modifiers are geared lower than d20. And theres no min/maxing-the saves over the aforementioned 6 stats makes all the stats imprtant.In the end it will be a matter of taste. I dont hate d20 by any means, I just find alot of the rules a bit unweildy. And C&amp;C isnt perfect either. Like many rule lite systems, there are grey areas which the CK and players must agree on. As a result, houseruling could get out of hand.In the end whatever faults C&amp;C may have complexity isnt one of them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="driver8, post: 2153689, member: 17559"] I would give C&C a look. The 6 saves are one of the biggest departures from d20. They arent any indication of the system. While the rules are different, they are not complex. To me, C&C isnt necessarily simple, just easier to run. D20 is at its heart very simple-"one roll to rule them all" and all that-but the implementation of the rules can be complex, especially at higher levels. Add in feats skills-some passive, some combat related, and the game at its worse can become a bookkeeping nightmare. And to be honest, C&C requires learning a new set of mechnaics. And while you may have to learn a different way of seeing task resolution, the implementation is simple. Combat is easier as well, a big plus for me. Admitatly, one of the main reasons that C&C appeals to me is, apart from it simplicity, is the nostalgia factor. Stat blocks for monsters are much much shorter, usually just a line of text. Combat is easier as well. Old classes make reappearances, and are for the most part archetypes. While d20 may model things more precisely by giving people more options in regards to character customization, combat, etc..the C&C characters does tend to generalize and abstract things like skills or combat. In addition there seems to be less a power creep-the stat modifiers are geared lower than d20. And theres no min/maxing-the saves over the aforementioned 6 stats makes all the stats imprtant. In the end it will be a matter of taste. I dont hate d20 by any means, I just find alot of the rules a bit unweildy. And C&C isnt perfect either. Like many rule lite systems, there are grey areas which the CK and players must agree on. As a result, houseruling could get out of hand. In the end whatever faults C&C may have complexity isnt one of them. [/QUOTE]

Verification