Treebore
First Post
To paraphrase Weird Al, "Everything you said is wrong."
It is not the real D&D; it is not what 4E "should have been"; and it retains many of the shortcomings of 2E.
- Only D&D is the "real" D&D, and each edition is "Real".
- If 4E contained as little innovation as C&C everyone at WotC would have been deservedly fired.
- Wizards still go from suck to "Ultimate Power" within 10 levels
- Intra-party balance isn't even strived for
- Fighters still suck past 5th level
- Equipment dependency; Can you say it?
Further the SIEGE Engine is a cheap knock-off of the d20 mechanic, except it's mathematically backwards and half as intuitive. I call is "Son of THAC0".
The only improvement C&C brought over 2E was a more unified and sensible saving throw sub-system.
C&C is just as fun as AD&D, which is a compliment I assure you, but let's not get carried away.
Well, as someone who has actually used C&C for over 2 years now, and actually ran a game to currently 15th level, I would say you are the one who is wrong.
Don't forget I played 3E for almost 5 years (running or playing characters well into EPic levels), 2E for over 10 years (games to over 22nd level), 1E for 5 years (again, games to over 20th level), and OD&D for about a year (characters up to 300,000 XP's). Oh, and 4E for two months. Third level characters.
So I have not only read over the rules, but actually used them rather extensively, except for 4E. I am not feeling enough 4E love to keep playing it.
So yes, I definitely disagree with your assessment of C&C.