Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Philotomy Jurament" data-source="post: 3919371" data-attributes="member: 20854">For the most part, I think the characters are depicted with classic elements (NOT a lot of tattoos, piercings, huge weapons, et cetera); I think 3E is a far greater "offender" as far as that goes.  The style C&C uses often has a more modern look to it, but I don't think it's the way the PCs are dressed/groomed that makes it so.Be careful with the action criticism.  Many, many 3E images focus heavily on action (so much so that I get tired of seeing another over-the-top action image with screaming faces, et cetera).(FWIW, I generally prefer story/action art over pin-ups, too.)Rolling for various actions depends entirely on the DM, actually.  Since C&C doesn't specify what actions require checks*, and doesn't have a table of standard "target numbers" for actions, the DM makes the call on whether a roll is needed.  It's very possible to play C&C without using such rolls; the system doesn't even suggest them (contrasted with 3E, which does suggest them just by having a list of skills).  Common advice on the C&C forums is to not call for SIEGE engine checks for most tasks -- only when the danger of failure is significant in some way.  (Of course, it's also possible to play C&C with a "roll for everything" approach, but that's up to the DM.)Your table criticism is accurate; C&C is more like 2E or 3E, in this respect.  Your saving throw criticism is interesting; I've never considered C&C's use of the SIEGE engine for saving throws as limiting the DM.  Can you elaborate on what you mean?  (In my case, I found that I preferred the AD&D approach to saving throws, and house-ruled that in, but it wasn't because I felt limited, it was the way the probabilities/level/prime thing worked.)I agree with you that C&C isn't an old-school system like AD&D.  It can be played in an old-school manner, but if you move very far in that direction, you might as well play an older edition, instead.  (My C&C game has done this, over time -- it's basically AD&D, at this point.)  As I mentioned in a previous post, I think the new "options" book that is coming out may change some peoples' perspective on C&C; right now it's usually seen as an just an old-school system, which isn't really the case, IMO.C&C's strength isn't that it's "old school;" it's strength is that it's a system that lends itself to tweaking in one direction or the other along that scale, and making the game your own.  Hard-core old-school fans are better off with a REAL old school system.  Hard-core skills/feats/crunchy-options fans are better off with 3.X or 4E.  C&C is good for gamers who might fall somewhere in the middle, or who are exploring exactly where they want to be on that scale.(IMO, of course. --  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />)* Edit -- I'm speaking of general actions like climbing a tree or jumping over a crevasse or bargaining for a better price, of course, not things like saving throws or class abilities like a thief moving silently or a ranger tracking.</blockquote>

Verification