The C&C poll

[msd]

I like C&C and enjoy visiting the Troll Lords forums - they have built a nice community of users who are, on the whole, a solid group of folks. Yes, there are a few zealots who come off overly bombastic and preachy, but what group doesn't have its share of "those guys"?

As for the game, again, I like the idea of a "lighter" D&D, but frankly, C&C seems to go to far. As others have noted, selectable skills and feats are neat and a feature of the current D&D ruleset that I really like. And frankly, the "C&C is modular...you can just add that stuff in" is not really an answer in my mind. If I have to finish the product to make it do what I want, I have to question whether the product is the right choice for me. For my dollar, its simply a lot easier to strip out the rules-heavy parts of 3.5 that I don't like than to add to C&C.

Having said that, I think C&C is still a fun game and I would readily play if someone offered...

 

[RFisher]

I was unsure how to vote.

As a player, I'll pretty much play whatever the GM wants to run.

As a GM, I don't really have a problem with C&C. I just find no compelling reason to choose it above other games for anything I want to do. & it can be a good source of ideas to steal for my classic D&D games. I was going to offer it as a compromise if my group balked at playing classic D&D, but that wasn't an issue.

Heck, given the choice, I think they might have choosen classic D&D over C&C anyway.

 

[Breakdaddy]

I play C&C now, although I've got an internet game of 3.5 going ATM, which is fun as well.

 

[Zulgyan]

Converting my D&D 3.5 campaign to C&C right now.

 

[Aus_Snow]

None of the above. At least, not currently.

 

[Mythmere1]

I blew out on 3e and wanted to play a simpler game, circa 2004. At the start, I was a big fan of C&C, but ultimately it has turned out not to be what I was looking for. I've ended up playing house-ruled 1e.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I like D&D.

And if I'm in the mood for something lighter, a system like True20 (or even SW Saga) does it without the preachy overtones.

I'm glad it exists for the fans it attracts, however. Obviously there's a vocal minority out there who don't like many of the directions that 3e took.

 

[KenSeg]

My group has been playing together for over 20 years now. We started with AD&D, moved into 2E, 3E and 3.5E. After much discussion, we all agree that we want to move away from 3.5E. The DM is looking over 1E, 2E and C&C now and will use one of them as a basis, then add back in his own houserules that we played with for years before 3E came about.

Looking forward to it.

-KenSeg
gaming since 1978

 

[diaglo]

My group has been playing together for over 20 years now. We started with AD&D, moved into 2E, 3E and 3.5E. After much discussion, we all agree that we want to move away from 3.5E. The DM is looking over 1E, 2E and C&C now and will use one of them as a basis, then add back in his own houserules that we played with for years before 3E came about.

Looking forward to it.

-KenSeg
gaming since 1978

might i suggest OD&D(1974)

 

[SteveC]

I think of C&C as a sort of "Jekyll and Hyde" sort of game. On the one hand it has this absolutely brilliant SIEGE mechanic, which is one of the best rules-light mechanics I've ever seen, while on the other hand it has ... AD&D. Ugh! If ever there were two tastes that did not taste great together (to me, this is just my opinion, m'kay...) it would be SIEGE + AD&D.

If I were to make a humble suggestion, it would be to release the SIEGE mechanic, combined with an aspect system ala Spirit of the Century as a standalone RPG product. I'd expect it to be about 32 pages total, and I think it would rock on toast.

--Steve