Ten observations on Castles & Crusades compared to d20.

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

[On C&C being easier to prep, but not play.] Could you elaborate on this? I have run two 3E campaigns (each lasted about a year), and have played 4 sessions of C&C now, and I would say that C&C is much easier to use than 3E, both in terms of prep and play.

I'll have to defer to your experience, because as I have admitted, I haven't actually used the system in play yet. I'm basing my statements on a thorough reading of the book, along with some distillation down into a few pages of notes on the highlights.

It just seems to me that there isn't really any less to actually do in terms of resolving conflicts. In fact, there may be more to do, in that you have to make rules up on the fly. If you have a solid mastery of d20, that probably won't take too much time, but if you have a solid mastery of d20, d20 doesn't take that much time.

[On some mechanics being more complex in C&C than they are in d20.] The saving throw mechanism is the only one I can think of off the top of my head. Do you have other things in mind?

Examples:

Adding a Wis check to the surprise round (by the way, there is no advice on what the CC should be for this check).

Shields that work against 1, 2, or 3 opponents instead of everybody (again, no advice on how to handle this--does PC choose, like Dodge feat, or does it only work against first attacker?).

Defensive attacks for large creatures or those with reach when they are approached by an attacker with a higher initiative.

PCs add class level to almost every check except those that are specific class abilities for other classes, so you have to know all of the class abilities and which classes get them.

Some class abilities (e.g., Traps, Climb) have the same name but work in different ways for different classes.

Encumbrance.

The crazy things that can happen if you miss your target in ranged combat (and how those things are different for crossbows than for other ranged weapons).

Multiple cover bonuses with very little advice on how to determine how much cover the defender has. And why would "full" cover only give you a +10 bonus to AC--if you can still be hit at all, it doesn't make sense to call if full, right?


Now, please don't take all this as being excessively negative. I want to make it clear that I'm really looking forward to playing this game. I have a game of C&C tentatively scheduled for Saturday, and I can't wait!

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

11. I don't think it's a good idea for a person to start out their gaming career as a GM using C&C as it now stands. There's just too much missing. For example, some rules refer specifically to differences in size categories, but as far as I can tell, the book never defines or even lists the size categories. Things like this are not differences between d20 and C&C--they are holes in the system. C&C looks like a really fun, easy game for a person who already knows how to play d20 pretty well.

 

[teitan]

A nice, fair summary. Some questions...



Could you elaborate on this? I have run two 3E campaigns (each lasted about a year), and have played 4 sessions of C&C now, and I would say that C&C is much easier to use than 3E, both in terms of prep and play.



The saving throw mechanism is the only one I can think of off the top of my head. Do you have other things in mind?

I don't see the ST mechanism as being complicated at all. It looks a lot more complex than it really is, not anywhere as simple as Reflex/Will/Fortitude but pretty intuitive and answers some questions much easier than others. I never really felt cmfortable with a Will save based on Wisdom for a fear check because that is more based on strength of character, Charisma. etc.

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

I've playtested C&C on Sunday and Tuesday and I found it to be easy to prepare for and to run.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Adding a Wis check to the surprise round (by the way, there is no advice on what the CC should be for this check).

It doesnt specifically state this, but I use the creatures hit dice just like with most other opposed checks.

 

[bolie]

Since I've got the book, I've noticed that C&C uses nonstandard mechanics for unarmed combat. Grappling, Pummeling, and Overbearing use a base AC of 15 with some modifiers, so you have a separate AC for these attacks. Size modifiers are also different.

The whole concept of fixed facing during a 10 second (why not 6 second, like d20?) round with a number of abstract actions resolved as a single attack is silly. If a single attack represents 10 second's worth of activity, then facing isn't necessarily fixed for that 10 seconds.

In addition, fixed facing adds another level of complexity during combat. And it definitely does lead to having people run around and attack from behind, gaining a bonus to attack someone "from behind" who should be able to turn and face you faster than you can get around behind them.

Bolie IV

 

[Breakdaddy]

In addition, fixed facing adds another level of complexity during combat. And it definitely does lead to having people run around and attack from behind, gaining a bonus to attack someone "from behind" who should be able to turn and face you faster than you can get around behind them.

Bolie IV

I wouldnt use the facing rules then, if I were you. It wouldnt hurt a thing. In fact, I agree about the facing rule, and am not using them at this point in my C&C game. I dont mind the 10 second round at all, though.

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

The whole concept of fixed facing...

To be fair, the fixed facing rules are in the Combat Maneuvers section, which is specifically designated as a series of optional rules. They aren't really part of the system proper, they are a variant.

 

[TerraDave]

PCs add class level to almost every check except those that are specific class abilities for other classes, so you have to know all of the class abilities and which classes get them.

Some class abilities (e.g., Traps, Climb) have the same name but work in different ways for different classes.

Vigwyn, thanks for the specifics! It does sound like there are some complications--the two above are especially troubling--in this rules light system.

Is it approaching the baroque inconsitency of AD&D? Of course, that wasn't hard to play, as people ignored/house ruled around it, which already seems to be the case with C&C, at least from what I have read on ENworld.

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

Vigwyn, thanks for the specifics! It does sound like there are some complications--the two above are especially troubling--in this rules light system.

Is it approaching the baroque inconsitency of AD&D? Of course, that wasn't hard to play, as people ignored/house ruled around it, which already seems to be the case with C&C, at least from what I have read on ENworld.

I never played AD&D (just Basic and 3e), but the complexity is not bad. I have distilled everything down into a couple of pages of notes I will keep at the table with me. All-in-all, the system is much less complex than d20, I was just pointing out that there are some things that are more complex.