Castles&Crusades: Is this "The One"?

[darjr]

I have some experience with C&C. Here are my thoughts.

Pros: lots of support and supplements, love the setting Aihrde

Cons: my group did not like the siege engine, production quality for the books seems pretty low

The quality their books has increased a lot. The latest xagyg book is very nice.

 

[Jahydin]

My final "not going to buy any more C&C books moment" came after seeing the revised book during the recent Kickstarter and being very unimpressed.

Agreed. It was my getting off point as well.

Taking the core game to Lv20 knowing full well it plays best 1-12, distancing it from D&D (not needed since under Creative Commons, right?), and continuing to refuse to innovate even a tiny bit really makes the newer version a downgrade in every way for me.

Super stoked about ACKS 2E ATM, so expecting that to replace C&C as my OSR "go to".

 

[Jd Smith1]

Use the C&C setting with Hackmaster 5e (d100 system that has nothing to do with D&D).

 

[darjr]

The Trolls want to avoid the edition treadmill. Much like Goodman Games they don’t much like the idea.

In both cases I like that idea.

 

[Retreater]

The Trolls want to avoid the edition treadmill. Much like Goodman Games they don’t much like the idea.

In both cases I like that idea.

If they're going to release new printings with new art, rules for multi-classing, rules for higher level play, change the name of all their spells and how they're formatted, create splat books with ridiculously overpowered new spells and classes (such as Adventurers Spellbook) that compile some of the same spells with different rules, etc, then they can certainly take the time to clean up typos, rules ambiguity, and more.
Their expedited release schedule on Kickstarter has resulted in everything running behind and likely getting minimal attention from the designers, who already were publishing "good enough" stuff without much quality control.
And I'm not saying this as someone who hasn't run C&C. I ran a game a few weeks ago for a table of people who have been playing it for two years. IMO, the game is sloppy, even compared to TSR era games. I don't think reprinting the same book without changing it to reflect playtesting and table experience is a virtue.

 

[darjr]

If they're going to release new printings with new art, rules for multi-classing, rules for higher level play, change the name of all their spells and how they're formatted, create splat books with ridiculously overpowered new spells and classes (such as Adventurers Spellbook) that compile some of the same spells with different rules, etc, then they can certainly take the time to clean up typos, rules ambiguity, and more.
Their expedited release schedule on Kickstarter has resulted in everything running behind and likely getting minimal attention from the designers, who already were publishing "good enough" stuff without much quality control.
And I'm not saying this as someone who hasn't run C&C. I ran a game a few weeks ago for a table of people who have been playing it for two years. IMO, the game is sloppy, even compared to TSR era games. I don't think reprinting the same book without changing it to reflect playtesting and table experience is a virtue.

I didn't expect they were not changing anything at all.
Though the last two "playtesting and table experience" can lean into "new version" territory.

Do you have a link stating they weren't fixing any typos? I know they do ask for feedback on such things.

 

[jerryrice4949]

If they're going to release new printings with new art, rules for multi-classing, rules for higher level play, change the name of all their spells and how they're formatted, create splat books with ridiculously overpowered new spells and classes (such as Adventurers Spellbook) that compile some of the same spells with different rules, etc, then they can certainly take the time to clean up typos, rules ambiguity, and more.
Their expedited release schedule on Kickstarter has resulted in everything running behind and likely getting minimal attention from the designers, who already were publishing "good enough" stuff without much quality control.
And I'm not saying this as someone who hasn't run C&C. I ran a game a few weeks ago for a table of people who have been playing it for two years. IMO, the game is sloppy, even compared to TSR era games. I don't think reprinting the same book without changing it to reflect playtesting and table experience is a virtue.

I agree. Like I said in my previous post there is a lot to like about C&C. My group won’t go back to it because we didn’t like the Siege Engine but I was also turned off by the quality of books. Editing and layout and even some of the art is just not very good. I love some of their supplements and wish WoTC would take a page from what they do but man those books need a good editor and layout person badly.

 

[Retreater]

I didn't expect they were not changing anything at all.
Though the last two "playtesting and table experience" can lean into "new version" territory.

Do you have a link stating they weren't fixing any typos? I know they do ask for feedback on such things.

I got the PDF of the new version through the Kickstarter. Still the same sloppy editing.
I have had discussions online with Stephen Chenault in which he wrote "this is the way I like it - and you'll learn to like it" with regards to changing the format of the spells in a way that is pretty terrible (from many complaints online).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I like the idea of staying off the edition treadmill, but at a certain point, the books need a deep steam-cleaning in the form of hiring the best outside editors they can to catch and address all the typos, rules inconsistencies and factual errors possible. (What frustrates a lot of fans is that they write into the Troll Lords about these things and are told the errata is being compiled, but it doesn't seem to all make it into future printings.)

In addition, once a game is 20 years old, it's not inappropriate to look and see if there's anything they would do differently if they were doing it over again today. In many ways, Amazing Adventures appears to be their stealth 1.5 edition in that regard. I don't think the world would end if the next printing of C&C updated its rules but had all the replaced rules on the same page in a box, for continuity's sake.

As much as I'd like them to dump the SIEGE Engine, which I think is the biggest stumbling block to wider success, that doesn't seem likely to ever happen.

 

[Retreater]

What's really a shame for me is that C&C could've been poised to be like a "fuller" Shadowdark, a bridge between the OSR and 5e. You have high level play. The full list of classes and races you'd expect from D&D. I think it's being held back from its potential with the "never update" mindset.