Once you go C&C, you never go back

[S'mon]

I like it a lot; it has the right level of detail for my needs. It removes the fiddlier bits from AD&D and reduces complexity from 3e.

 

[Numion]

See, I still think of ENWorld as a D&D forum. The preeminent pen and paper roleplaying forum. But frankly, most people I know, in real life, feel like discussion other systems and editions is simply no longer allowed here by the vocal majority of posters. Or criticism of the Golden Lamb of the moment.

It depends on how people present their case. Usually I've seen C&C crowd circle over edition wars threads like vultures, pimping their own game. This combined with the fact that the natural way for saying good things about C&C is to say bad things about 3E at the same time (for some people, anyway).

In 3E forum where a lot of people have a lot invested monetarily and emotionally in 3E, that might get a couple of folks annoyed. Now I don't frequent many forums aimed specifically at other games (like the C&C forums), so I don't know if this is a common thing to go sniping accross forums, like are there 3E fans going to C&C boards putting down C&C?

I do know from automotive forums that there are always the few Civic guys who have to go to Golf GTI forums to stir up people..

 

[JDJblatherings]

The poll needs a "Tried it, and it works great for when I want games of it's style"

 

[Melan]

C&C has kind of a history which still influences attitudes about it. There have been personality conflicts, flamewars, a lot of bruised egos and pent up passive-agressive behaviour (you can see it in this thread if you wish). C&C has attracted this sort of thing in part because it assumes a lot about the nature of roleplaying games which are antithetical to the current consensus. For example, it has a different attitude towards DM (or, uh, CK) authority, what the rules are supposed to accomplish and what a system needs to model than what is fashionable. Then there is the whole "rose coloured glasses/nostalgia" argument, the annoying proselytising by overeager fans (as another example, Scarred Lands comes to my mind), and the fact that the development process left a fair bit of people dissatisfied. A lot of self-proclaimed grognards take a very dim view of the game, much dimmer than anything I have read on ENWorld.

Myself, I started with the basic box as a baseline, and built a game of my own on top of that. It is no longer really C&C, but I must be thankful to the TLG people for catalysing my thoughts. The support material has been a bit ho-hum, and I am rather frustrated with the direction of the Castle Zagyg project... but the game itself is pretty solid if you would like a lighter alternative to D&D.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'd like to second that sentiment. There are some 'fans' of C&C who probably do more to ensure that potential interested parties never play it (in fact, I know that there are). Treebore is the best thing that C&C has going for it at many online communities.

That first part is true. Just look at this recent OP over on rpg.net. Now this is a way to start a thread.

"
(4E) Simpler, faster to play, easier to DM,

Nope.

More complex than ever before."


Posted by someone called....Treebore.


BTW, that's not taken out of context. That's the entirety of the OP.

 

[diaglo]

Then of course there's their main artist who is just plain bent.

when the Trolls moved the original C&C forums. i got dropped.
i thot it was b/c of my complaining about how it kept too much d02 and not enough OD&D in the game.

the artist was the only one who tried to keep me on the list.

 

[Omote]

C&C has worked for me, especially due to it's rule-lite approach to fantasy gaming. I love the fact C&C has taken the best elements from the 3E game and infused a lot of old-school gaming goodness with the system. The 3E game, especially at the higher levels of play just became to unweildy for me and our group ended up talking about mechanics and character optimazation more then actually adventuring! In playing C&C, we just got to play the game more and that alone hooked me to the system.

I still play a lot (I mean a lot) of 3E, and while personally I like the C&C game better, to each their own.

C&C is good gaming.

-O

 

[gideon_thorne]

when the Trolls moved the original C&C forums. i got dropped.
i thot it was b/c of my complaining about how it kept too much d02 and not enough OD&D in the game.

the artist was the only one who tried to keep me on the list.

If you haven't made it over to the new forums, your welcome to join any time. All we did with the old forums was send out a message letting people know of the move. None of us are technically adept enough to bring the membership list from ezboard to a pbb forum.

Diverse opinions are always welcome. So sayeth the pesky artist. ^_^

 

[gideon_thorne]

Honestly, I'd kind of like to see a multi-genre (or "generic" if you prefer) SIEGE system book -- with tools for building classes from scratch, a formula for creating balanced class abilities, etc (at which point, the claim that it can do anything by design would arguably be true).

I believe something like that is in the offing as well. When? I can't say specifically, simply because I don't know. Keep a weather eye out.

 

[John Quixote]

Well I tried C&C, and it didn't float my boat. I like the idea of a rules-lite game, but the d20-ish mechanic didn't seem to work well at all, especially for games above the 9th-12th range. Once you hit 13th-15th level play, C&C really breaks down, and at 15th+, it's just as bad as any other version of AD&D, from 1st up through 3rd-and-a-half.

On the other hand, C&C did inspire me to switch from 3e back to OD&D (BECMI/RC), and that kind of rules-lite, nostalgic gaming really did work for me. It made me happy to play, and it improved the experience for me as a DM and for my friends as role-players. So I can at least credit C&C with giving me the idea of leaving d20 System gaming behind, even if I didn't like or want to play C&C itself.