I got to playtest Castles and Crusades!

[Henry]

I'm wondering if Kenzer's Hackmaster didn't already take the market of 1st Edition players wanting nostalgia. C&C sounds interesting, so I'm looking forward to seeing it.

They may well have, judging from their sales numbers, but I also know that if a product comes along that emulates 1E even better, the majority are likely to proverbially "jump ship" in a heartbeat. I wish the Trolls well, but I'm insanely curious to see just how popular this game ends up being among the 1E community; when it comes out, I'll have my eyes glued to Dragonsfoot...

 

[Henry]

Moderators, it's probably about time to kill this thread.

Shadow, If you wish, I'll close the thread, but in light of what Davis of Troll Lord games just posted, I'm waiting to hear final word from you before I take any more action. If it's O.K. with both you and him, I'll leave it open for discussion, because it's a topic people are apparently loving to speculate on.

 

[cleaverthepit]

I think it is safe to leave it open. I have not checked, but Steve was supposed to post allowable topics for C and C members. Shadow, apparently was only allowed to peruse the rules and Todd did not elaborate on most mechanics.

As for third parties. Hmmmm, a few, yes.

Davis

 

[Belegbeth]

I'm wondering if Kenzer's Hackmaster didn't already take the market of 1st Edition players wanting nostalgia. .

The problem with Hackmaster is that it has to maintain a kind of "humourous" and "mocking" attitude with respect to its AD&D roots. Many people fond of 1E, or even just the "feel" of 1E, find that the joke gets a bit tired after a while. (After 10 minutes ...)

Hackmaster also adds layers of complexity to 1E, whereas C&C promises to do the opposite.

Finally, most of the Hackmaster modules are reworked versions of 1E modules ("Temple of Existential Evil," etc.).

 

[diaglo]

The problem with Hackmaster is that it has to maintain a kind of "humourous" and "mocking" attitude with respect to its AD&D roots. Many people fond of 1E, or even just the "feel" of 1E, find that the joke gets a bit tired after a while. (After 10 minutes ...)

some can see past the mock humor and still use the material

Hackmaster also adds layers of complexity to 1E, whereas C&C promises to do the opposite.

on this i completely agree

Finally, most of the Hackmaster modules are reworked versions of 1E modules ("Temple of Existential Evil," etc.).

i have at least 2 modules that are new material...K1 Indigo and RJK's City of Brass.

 

[francisca]

They may well have, judging from their sales numbers, but I also know that if a product comes along that emulates 1E even better...

Mmmmm. HM is built on the 1E/2E engine, not much emulation there at all, whereas C&C sounds like pure emulation.

Of course, it will be a matter of taste. Some will prefer one over the other, some will like both.

Looks like I need to get off my rear and send in my NDA.

 

[mistere29]

Well R.A you can sign up for playtesting by sending an e-mail to the trolls.

http://www.trolllord.com/contact.htm

 

[buzz]

The idea is to put the game back into the hands of those who play it, and not in the hands of a bunch of detached game designers. The framework will be simple and easy to change, and the implied permission will be in place to change it to reflect any preferred playing style, whether by using other OGL features, or adding custom features. The game will be playable as-is, but it also recognizes that gamers like to tinker and mold, and rather than confine that creativity to a small, publisher-defined set of "interfaces", C&C kicks the door open and says "Do what you want - I'll get out of your way."

I've read that first sentence over and over again, and I still have no idea what it's supposed to mean.

As for the rest of the paragraph, I'm not sure I understand how it makes C&C any different from just about any other RPG in existence, particularly ones published under an OGL or other "open" license (e.g., FUDGE).

(Sorry to be negative; count me as one of those who were expecting a "d20 Lite" and are now a bit disappointed.)

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

(Sorry to be negative; count me as one of those who were expecting a "d20 Lite" and are now a bit disappointed.)

Well why be negative, if you haven't seen the game.
Ken

 

[Geoff Watson]

I've read that first sentence over and over again, and I still have no idea what it's supposed to mean.

As for the rest of the paragraph, I'm not sure I understand how it makes C&C any different from just about any other RPG in existence, particularly ones published under an OGL or other "open" license (e.g., FUDGE).

It doesn't make them any different.
It's just meaningless ad copy that is used when they don't have anything particular to the topic to rave about.
It's also a surprising change from Gygax's past rants on playing D&D 'his way or else'.

Geoff.