How Quickly is C&C Catching on?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Shrug. I'll need to read C&C to be sure, but, based on the 'nostalgia edition', it has the same flaws which drove me away from AD&D 1/2e and which 3e corrected -- lack of character diversity. No skills, no feats, no multiclassing...to me, this seriously limits your ability to mold your character. "Anyone can just try to do anything!" tends to boil down to "Once one player finds a cool tactic, everyone else just copies him". I rather like the fact that 2 fighters in 3e can have totally different fighting styles based on their choices of feats and skills. I don't think I could go back to a game where everyone is just "a fighter", exactly the same as every other fighter.

It is easier to ignore rules than to add them. I have no problem allowing for cool stunts in 3e, and often grant a bonus if something is dramatically appropriate and fits the character concept. The strong rules framework is there to provide support for when I don't want to handwave it. It's a platform, not a cage.

The lack of feats, and to a lesser extent skills, is the draw of C&C for me. I found that stripping out the feat and skill systems from 3e was too much work and fundamentally changed the game to the point where I'd be better off finding a new system. I just found that if you love the detail and everything that is rolled up in 3e you are great, if you don't like that you are better off with a new rule system. YMMV of course. I'm just glad that someone created a more rules lite OGL system that captures the feel of old D&D. I love being able to run D&D/AD&D/AD&D 2e modules that I can convert on the fly. It's great for me. But I understand my view is a minority one. That's cool. As long as they put out the Monsters & Treasure book and the Castle Keepers Guide I think I'll be set for life.

Oh and Castle Greyhawk is a nice plus too.

 

[Lizard]

The lack of feats, and to a lesser extent skills, is the draw of C&C for me. I found that stripping out the feat and skill systems from 3e was too much work and fundamentally changed the game to the point where I'd be better off finding a new system. I just found that if you love the detail and everything that is rolled up in 3e you are great, if you don't like that you are better off with a new rule system. YMMV of course. I'm just glad that someone created a more rules lite OGL system that captures the feel of old D&D. I love being able to run D&D/AD&D/AD&D 2e modules that I can convert on the fly. It's great for me. But I understand my view is a minority one. That's cool. As long as they put out the Monsters & Treasure book and the Castle Keepers Guide I think I'll be set for life.

Oh and Castle Greyhawk is a nice plus too.

Shrug. I've been looking at Hackmaster as a 3e alternative, because it has that old-sk00l feel but WITH a skill system and 'feats' (in the form of Talents). I'm still wafflng, though, because monsters-with-classes are important to me, and that's harder to do with HM without a lot of handwaving.

(My biggest gripe with 3e would be the ubiquity of magic and magical items...I'm a big fan of the "A +1 sword! And I'm only 7th level! Oh frabjous day!" school of loot. Unfortunately, everything in 3e is balanced around players being walking magic shops...but that's another thread.)

 

[VorpalBunny]

Cant at the moment, last time I checked it was a favorable review by Akrasia, but havent looked in a week or two.

You can read his review on RPG.net here.

 

[Von Ether]

Currently C&C has some of my curiosity, the $20 price tag doesn't hurt. Truth be known, if I want a "rule lite" system that is easy to adjust on the fly, I'm pretty happy with Savage Worlds. SW seems to be just as fast and is more flexible. It's been out a year longer and has a "Common Knowledge" rule that's even simplier than C&Cs.

Basicaly, if I'm stuck gaming with a bunch of fellows who insist that they will only play d20 and that it will only be a standard fantasy game, then I might use C&C if I can't get them to Eberron.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Shrug. I've been looking at Hackmaster as a 3e alternative, because it has that old-sk00l feel but WITH a skill system and 'feats' (in the form of Talents).

Hackmaster is great, Ive had it for about a year now and like it a lot. Unfortunately, it looks as though Kenzer & Co. has all but dropped the line entirely. For this reason alone, I cannot recommend HM. It isnt as rules lite as C&C, but IS a very cool game in its own right. Beware of the cost of the complete monster collection, too. At over 100 bucks for the monster collection alone, the cost of entry is prohibitive. There is a stand alone monster guide that is inexpensive, but I found it lacking for a number of reasons that I wont go into in this thread.

 

[nsruf]

It isnt as rules lite as C&C, but IS a very cool game in its own right.

HM is all but rules-light. I own the PHB and GMG, and while they are a good read in parts (haven't even finished the GMG!), I don't think I'll ever run a game. The rules are just too bloated for my taste. Creating a character feels like filing a tax return claim, with the addition of randomness. And apparently you can't run combat without the fighters book because the initiative system isn't properly explained in either of the two basic books.

For me, HM requires too much effort from the GM to be worth playing. OTOH, C&C looks user-friendly and like I could start a game right away.

 

[Breakdaddy]

For me, HM requires too much effort from the GM to be worth playing. OTOH, C&C looks user-friendly and like I could start a game right away.

Perhaps I was being too conservative with my statement. In many ways HM is more rules heavy than even D&D 3.x. It is still a very fun game, but not in the least rules lite. C&C is my current game of choice due to its simplicity and compatibility with most things (A)D&D.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Shrug. I've been looking at Hackmaster as a 3e alternative, because it has that old-sk00l feel but WITH a skill system and 'feats' (in the form of Talents). I'm still wafflng, though, because monsters-with-classes are important to me, and that's harder to do with HM without a lot of handwaving.

(My biggest gripe with 3e would be the ubiquity of magic and magical items...I'm a big fan of the "A +1 sword! And I'm only 7th level! Oh frabjous day!" school of loot. Unfortunately, everything in 3e is balanced around players being walking magic shops...but that's another thread.)

I agree on the magic issue.

Hackmaster though, seemed like it was AD&D turned up to 11. They added even more rules and stuff to make a system with a lot of rules in the first place even more complicated. In 1e I could jsut drop a lot of stuff and not worry about it, but if I'm going to do that with Hackmaster I'd just as soon use 1e, which we did to finish our campaign.

 

[Lizard]

I agree on the magic issue.

Hackmaster though, seemed like it was AD&D turned up to 11. They added even more rules and stuff to make a system with a lot of rules in the first place even more complicated. In 1e I could jsut drop a lot of stuff and not worry about it, but if I'm going to do that with Hackmaster I'd just as soon use 1e, which we did to finish our campaign.

Yeah, well, I *like* complex games. BESM 2e is about as rules-lite as I'll ever go. My favourite systems are GURPS, Hero, and D20. I've collected all the HM rules (don't buy modules for any system), and they look like fun in a totally retro, 'turn it up to 11' way.

I'll be picking up C&C, of course. While my collecting habits are under a forced retrenchment due to finances, that's too iconic a book to leave out.

 

[Numion]

Hackmaster though, seemed like it was AD&D turned up to 11. They added even more rules and stuff to make a system with a lot of rules in the first place even more complicated. In 1e I could jsut drop a lot of stuff and not worry about it, but if I'm going to do that with Hackmaster I'd just as soon use 1e, which we did to finish our campaign.

I think that the 'right' way to play Hackmaster would be similar to the way it is portrayed in the comics. ALL the rules, even the wonky ones, are embraced, rules are lawyered to the boot, etc.. I wouldn't use it as a modernized D&D. I already have a game for that.