Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dragonhelm" data-source="post: 3612488" data-attributes="member: 3867">It's really a pity that some C&amp;C fans come across that way.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />True.&nbsp; And maybe I've been a little harsh on the TLG fan community of late.&nbsp; They're mostly good folks, but I get tired of the d20 bashing I see from some of those zealots.&nbsp; I believe that you don't build a fan base around a game system by tearing down another system.&nbsp; It's just a put-off.&nbsp; I hear a lot of C&amp;C fans talk about how C&amp;C works with AD&amp;D, but I think there needs to be even more outreach to D&amp;D fans without putting down d20 in the process.This is something I've questioned quite a bit, and I'd like to get other opinions on it as well.&nbsp; Is it easier to take a stripped-down system like C&amp;C and add in the things you want, or is it easier to strip out the things of D&amp;D that you don't like (i.e. attacks of opportunity, the crit system, etc.)?&nbsp; Because really, what I want in a game system is rules-light D&amp;D.&nbsp; Perhaps the closest I've seen to what I want is the new Star Wars SAGA Edition.&nbsp; I like a lot of the changes made there and would love to see something like that applied to D&amp;D.&nbsp; See, while I like C&amp;C for the most part, I still want to use stuff from the d20 products, and I'd like to do so with minimal conversion.&nbsp; I feel like, if I was to use D&amp;D materials with a C&amp;C game, I'd be spending so much time converting that it wouldn't be worth it.Of course, this all means that I have to have a game going currently...&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dragonhelm, post: 3612488, member: 3867"] It's really a pity that some C&C fans come across that way. :( True. And maybe I've been a little harsh on the TLG fan community of late. They're mostly good folks, but I get tired of the d20 bashing I see from some of those zealots. I believe that you don't build a fan base around a game system by tearing down another system. It's just a put-off. I hear a lot of C&C fans talk about how C&C works with AD&D, but I think there needs to be even more outreach to D&D fans without putting down d20 in the process. This is something I've questioned quite a bit, and I'd like to get other opinions on it as well. Is it easier to take a stripped-down system like C&C and add in the things you want, or is it easier to strip out the things of D&D that you don't like (i.e. attacks of opportunity, the crit system, etc.)? Because really, what I want in a game system is rules-light D&D. Perhaps the closest I've seen to what I want is the new Star Wars SAGA Edition. I like a lot of the changes made there and would love to see something like that applied to D&D. See, while I like C&C for the most part, I still want to use stuff from the d20 products, and I'd like to do so with minimal conversion. I feel like, if I was to use D&D materials with a C&C game, I'd be spending so much time converting that it wouldn't be worth it. Of course, this all means that I have to have a game going currently... ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification