C&C - How can I use it with DnD?

[Angel Tarragon]

Okay, I've been contemplating purchasing Castles and Crusades. However, I'm involved with 6 campaigns currently. Four of the are DnD campaigns. So instead of starting a new campaign I'm considering using C&C in my DnD games. My question is: About how much of the book can be used without alteration in stadard DnD?

 

[Mythmere1]

Okay, I've been contemplating purchasing Castles and Crusades. However, I'm involved with 6 campaigns currently. Four of the are DnD campaigns. So instead of starting a new campaign I'm considering using C&C in my DnD games. My question is: About how much of the book can be used without alteration in stadard DnD?

If your D&D campaigns are d20 D&D, there's not much in the Castles & Crusades PHB that can be imported, because it's a book of core rules (same territory as the 3E PHB). If you're thinking of changing some fundamental rules, like turning or skills, it would be of some use as a resource for simplifying the d20 game.

However, it's really mainly useful as a game in and of itself, a parallel evolution that is what 1E might have become if the 3E designers had followed a different path and mission statement.

The "signal" that you might be a C&C player-to-be is if you've ever gotten bored during a 3E game or if as a DM you've ever considered it "work" to write an adventure. These are signs that either the pacing, flavor, or rules of C&C might work better for you than 3E.

If you're looking for a d20 sourcebook, you'd get more bang for the buck by getting real d20 materials. However, I strongly recommend C&C as a game system if that's what you want to try - it just sounds like you're already very satisfied with 3E D&D.

 

[rogueattorney]

Hmmmm... I've generally seen the question posited the other way around, "what can I use from 3.5e in my C&C games?"

Once the Monster book, the adventures, and the Xagyg campaign material come out, I think the answer to your question becomes more obvious.

As for the rules from the PHB, it's really a different game, so it might just be a case of getting ideas as to how to do a game set in a similar genre very differently. You could add some of the C&C class powers as class specific feats, perhaps adopting the Knight, Assassin, and Illusionist whole hog. I don't know how different the spell lists are, but you could check out how it does some of the same spells to see how they're handled differently. You could try out the less complex combat procedure and see if it meshes with your 3.5e game.

R.A.

 

[blizack]

I would have to agree with what the others have said - while the C&C PHB certainly has some interesting stuff in it, most of it isn't going to be that useful in a 3E D&D game. The C&C PHB works more like an alternative to the 3E D&D PHB. Castle Zagyg, the Castle Keeper's Guide, and the Monsters & Treasure book may prove more useful to somebody running D&D; we shall have to wait and see.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I guess it really depends upon your games, too. You may find that C&C fits some games better than others, so you may just want to switch.

For me, what I've decided to do is to use C&C for when I want to run an old AD&D module or for C&C-based products (i.e. Assault on Blacktooth Ridge).

If anything, C&C would be great for at least a one-shot for something different. The C&C player's book is great no matter what and a lot of fun.

 

[Breakdaddy]

I agree with the consensus. I would recommend C&C as a stand alone game, but it has little to offer a solid 3.x campaign except for minor tweaks, since the canon material is so intertwined in 3.x.

 

[Voadam]

How does it handle turning? I've been trying to come up with a good alternative for a long while.

 

[MichaelH]

How does it handle turning? I've been trying to come up with a good alternative for a long while.

The cleric makes a Wisdom check against a CC of 12 + the HD of the undead type. The cleric may only attempt to turn undead of one type per try. If successful, the cleric turns a number of undead equal to 1d12 + Cha modifier common undead, 1d6 + Cha modifier extraordinary undead, or 1 + Cha modifier unique undead. Common are your typical mindless undead like skeletons or zombies. Extraordinary undead have partial sentience and/or special powers, like wraiths. Unique undead are the most powerful undead. They would be your vampires or liches. If the cleric is 5 levels higher than the HD of the undead being turned, the undead is destroyed instead of turned. If the cleric is 10 levels higher, the maximum number is turned. That's it in a nutshell.

 

[S'mon]

I refer to my copy of C&C a lot for my current D&D game, and I think the C&C classes have a lot to offer especially for my lower-magic D&D world (few C&C classes cast spells). I've always hated the post-1e Bard, the C&C Bard is exactly what I wanted, and I've changed the Bard IMC so it basically looks like the C&C version - a warrior-poet rather than spellcasting minstrel. The C&C Monk, Knight, Assassin etc also look interesting.

 

[Akrasia]

I think that, in addition to the cleric turning ability, one could bring in a few C&C elements to a 3e campaign, though it would require some work.

For example:

(a.) Use the C&C combat system instead of the 3e combat system. This would require eliminating anything that depended on AoOs (e.g. spellcasting and rogue's sneak attack would probably have to revised), but could produce a (much) faster paced game.

(b.) Use the SIEGE system instead of 3e skills. This too would simplify things, though some care would be needed (e.g. certain rogue skills would need to be converted to 'class abilities').

(c.) Revise some 3e classes by drawing on C&C. If you wanted a 'rare magic' campaign, you could revise some of the 3e spellcasting classes -- e.g. ranger, paladin, bard -- by using the C&C versions of those classes. Replace spellcasting with some of the different abilities that the C&C versions of those classes have. (I think that S'mon mentioned doing this for the bard.)

Just some thoughts.