Kickin' it Old-School - C&C Rocks

[Akrasia]

...
C&C meets my definition of d20 lite ...

C&C draws on all editions of D&D.

I guess whether it is an 'updated' or 'modernized' version of OD&D/AD&D, or a 'lite' version of 3E, depends on what aspect of the game you focus on.

If you look at the way that the classes work, for example, C&C definitely resembles AD&D a lot more than 3E D&D.

OTOT, if you look at how most tasks are resolved -- via the d20 mechanic -- then C&C resembles 3E.

 

[Ourph]

I would like to point out, though, that many longtime fans of OAD&D (people who have enjoyed that game since the 70's) contributed heavily to C&C, and maintain that it does have a very strong "old school" character. Moreover, the system is apparently close enough to OD&D for Gary Gygax to agree to produce his original campaign setting -- Castle Greyhawk (renamed "Castle Zagyg" for copyright reasons) -- for C&C.

It would be fair to point out that many of the people who helped develop C&C had been playing D&D since the 70's (or in most cases 80's, starting with some form of Basic) but were playing 3e at the time development of C&C began.

It would also be fair to note that Gary is NOT using the C&C rules for his current playtests of Castle Zagyg, but is instead using slightly modified OD&D rules.

IMO, the comparison between Rules Cyclopedia D&D and C&C is valid (of course, I haven't seen the full ruleset yet). Unfortunately, I wouldn't call RC D&D "old school" by any stretch of the term. I think most people will consider C&C to be "D20-lite" despite the differences you mention, not so much because the system is actually stripped-down 3e D&D (it's not), but because most of the C&C fan base will use it as such. I see lots of 3e players saying they will use C&C as a simpler full-time system or as an easy to run one-off game, so it certainly seems to be filling that niche.

 

[Akrasia]

It would be fair to point out that many of the people who helped develop C&C had been playing D&D since the 70's (or in most cases 80's, starting with some form of Basic) but were playing 3e at the time development of C&C began.

This might be true of some playtesters, but many are strongly anti-3E as well, and wanted to make sure that C&C would not be 'd20 lite'. (I know this through what certain playtesters have told me, including some who are writing TLG modules for C&C. I am not a playtester myself.)

It would also be fair to note that Gary is NOT using the C&C rules for his current playtests of Castle Zagyg, but is instead using slightly modified OD&D rules.

According to my understanding, Gygax used C&C for the playtesting of the first part of the module (the Yggsburgh area), and switched to OD&D for the castle itself.

Zagyg is being produced for C&C, not OD&D, but the compatibility of the two systems is so great that it really does not matter IMO. (E.g. I am playing the classic B2 module for C&C with no conversion notes whatsoever.)

As I said earlier, though, it does not really matter whether one views C&C as an updated version of OD&D/AD&D, or a 'rules lite' version of d20, so long as people like the game.

It will be a successful product if it can meet both the demand for an 'in print' version of OD&D/AD&D (as C&C products can be used with earlier versions of D&D with little/no conversion, and vice versa), and the demand for a 'rules lite' version of d20 D&D.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I hope that there will be some expansion with this system, both into settings and maybe a few rules extras (i.e. psionics).

One can only hope.

 

[Akrasia]

I hope that there will be some expansion with this system, both into settings and maybe a few rules extras (i.e. psionics).

One can only hope.

The Castle Keeper's Guide will be devoted to optional rules (though I don't know if psionics will be among them). Unlike the DMG, it is not a 'core book' (and hence somewhat misnamed, IMO). Instead, I think it will offer advice and guidelines on developing your own campaign, plus a number of additional rules (e.g. skills) that can be used if you want.

 

[fredramsey]

After reading the boxed set in depth over the week-end, I must say I am backing off my original opinion. There seems to be just a bit too much missing. Perhaps that is why the PHB will be coming out. You could GM the boxed set, but you'd have to do quite a bit of filling in the details, which I know some people prefer.

Still a cool idea, though.

Oh, and where can I get a character sheet?