"Try Castles & Crusades", they say. But no one's playing it!

[Nomad4life]

Not wanting to hijack away from C&C, but I was able to get my players to switch from D&D 3.5 to True20 by first showing them in a one-shot how it works, then converting over a well-remembered campaign from last year using the rules.

My reasons for switching are similar - rules bloat and problems with combat becoming too drawn out.

Pretty much the same thing happened to us, only we didn’t know we were making a permanent shift at the time. We ran what we thought would be a True20 one shot, and found that we simply could never go back to the clunk and clutter of 3.5 afterwards.

Aside from True20, I would say that C&C is our second favorite system on the market at the moment. I don’t think it’s really fair to say that “nobody’s playing” it. We sure are. I think that as more gamers drudge their way through jobs, marriages, and graduate school courses, rules-lite systems will only continue to increase in popularity.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I wasn't suggesting that C&C wasn't a d20 game, but rather that it uses multiple parallel sets of rules to resolve what D&D treats as identical mechanics: Things like hiding, climbing, flanking, fighting with two weapons, et cetera. It does so by taking these rules out of the "default" ability set for PCs and assigning access to them to specific PC types by transforming them into class abilities.

Except it doesn't.

All your examples use the same mechanic: roll a d20, apply modifiers, and see if you hit the target number. What are the parallel rules or different subsystems that you're talking about?

As for class abilities, things like hiding and climbing are NOT exclusive -- anyone can hide and anyone can climb; certain classes are better at it or can perform the action when others would find it impossible (e.g. climbing sheer walls with no equipment). Flanking is handled by your position in combat, no matter who you are; C&C uses facing, so if you attack from the flank, you get a flanking bonus to hit. Fighting with two weapons is handled by a set of penalties, no matter who you are: -3 primary hand and -6 off-hand, modified by Dex.

 

[GeorgeFields]

Thanks, guys.

Now, I'm torn between True20, D&Z, C&C, and HARP.

CURSE YOU ALL!!!!

 

[DungeonMaester]

While I never played C&C, I did read the PH practically cover to cover and it didn't impress me. I'd sooner play Rule's Cyclopedia D&D (warts and all) and call it nostalgia than play a hybrid system with none of the charm and memory of Old D&D and none of the option and consistancy of 3.5.

To your problem though.

A page of houserules can fix your problem. Begin with...

1.) Nothing from beyond the Core. As the DM, you should stick with this too.
2.) Races can only multiclass into there favorite class (humans and half-elves can pick one)
3.) Limit PrCs to Mystic Theurge, Eldrich Knight, and Arcane Trickster (patch PrCs)
4.) Dump any rules you don't like (suggestions: grapple, AoOs, material components)

You'll find the game runs smoother, but it a bit bland. Make sure you add the needed spice via RPing rewards.

Ive tried this (Dumping rules I dont like and only playing core and the sort) Only to find players become whining piss-ants ( I hope that is allowed, dont mean to flame) about how it is counter preductive to the game to not use the supplent and it stunts the creativity of the player for there back round. If there are people actually willing to play with these rules then I would be more then happy to Dm.

Sorry for any typos in adavance.

----Rusty

 

[GeorgeFields]

Ive tried this (Dumping rules I dont like and only playing core and the sort) Only to find players become whining piss-ants ( I hope that is allowed, dont mean to flame) about how it is counter preductive to the game to not use the supplent and it stunts the creativity of the player for there back round. If there are people actually willing to play with these rules then I would be more then happy to Dm.

Sorry for any typos in adavance.

----Rusty

I had that in 2e. It's in the new book! I've got it right here!
That's probably my biggest peeve with D&D - too much proliferation.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Pretty much the same thing happened to us, only we didn’t know we were making a permanent shift at the time. We ran what we thought would be a True20 one shot, and found that we simply could never go back to the clunk and clutter of 3.5 afterwards.

I like True20 a lot, too. I tried several different systems as one-shots or mini-campaigns when my group started wanting something other than 3E. The ones that stuck were C&C, Lejendary Adventure, and True20.

C&C became the system for our main game, and actually spawned a second campaign (the new group I mentioned, earlier). I never would've considered that when prepping and running my 3E game.

I run Lejendary Adventure on off-nights. I have a mini-setting/mini-campaign where the Avatars are all "vat creatures" (created humans) in a "pocket world" dominated by a handful of Wizard Lords. (A little Dying Earth influence.) I like LA's skill bundle approach, and I like that the Avatars start off being pretty potent, with relatively slow advancement.

We play True20 for low-magic psuedo-historical games. I ran a very cool ancient greece mini-campaign. I have a bronze-age Canaan mini-campaign warmining up. I want to do Vikings and Imperial Rome, too. True20 is great for things like this. The damage save system, conviction, no dependency on magic items, etc. all work exceptionally well for this kind of game.

Someday I'll probably play 3E, again. I bought Ptolus, which strikes me as the perfect setting for a 3E game.

 

[DungeonMaester]

*Dies from the shock of being replied to*

The way I see it, and always seen it, from AD&D and beyond is that, its the DM's world. What cultures exist, and subquintly do not exist is up to them. The same goes for fighting system and magic. It should only be changed to fit the way that magic and fighting is in the Dm's world.

Power to the DM. *Fist in the air*

Sorry for any typos in adavance.

---Rusty

 

[GeorgeFields]

POST # 100

The ones that stuck were C&C, Lejendary Adventure, and True20.

I run Lejendary Adventure on off-nights. I have a mini-setting/mini-campaign where the Avatars are all "vat creatures" (created humans) in a "pocket world" dominated by a handful of Wizard Lords. (A little Dying Earth influence.) I like LA's skill bundle approach, and I like that the Avatars start off being pretty potent, with relatively slow advancement.

I think I've still got the 3 core books for this. I'll have to look in the storage shed to see, though. I got them DIRT CHEAP - $2 for the three IIRC and haven't really looked at them.

*Dies from the shock of being replied to*

The way I see it, and always seen it, from AD&D and beyond is that, its the DM's world. What cultures exist, and subquintly do not exist is up to them. The same goes for fighting system and magic. It should only be changed to fit the way that magic and fighting is in the Dm's world.

Power to the DM. *Fist in the air*

Agreed!! I've decided to start getting away from published settings and work on my own. I just need to decide which system to use.

 

[wingsandsword]

So sorry, wingsandsword, your personal observations fail to refute the actual success of C&C.

Hmm, define success? You can't say the game is big, then turn around and say the products aren't widely available, these two things don't go together.

It sold out it's initial print run, okay, as was already said, we don't know how large that run was. What might have Troll Lord dancing in the aisles and thinking they have a super-hit on their hands might be an inconsiderable drop in the bucket to some people. Success in gaming is relative. They aren't losing money and can continue to turn out product, by that definition, yes, they are a success. They are a widely known part of the gaming field that everyday gamers who don't spend a lot of time on internet message boards know about, play, and talk about, no way in the 9 layers of Baator is that true.

When I never hear of it except online, when I know probably 3 dozen gamers in this city in real life from multiple social circles, and none ever talk about it, or play it, instead playing D&D (3.x, Basic, 1e), GURPS, WoD (old and new), d20 Modern, Arcana Evolved, Iron Heroes, various homebrew systems, Exalted, Deadlands, Star Wars (d20 and d6), and Call of Cthuhlu, I'll believe those games are (or were) successful. This town has a half dozen FLGS (anywhere from dedicated gaming stores to comic shops with sizable gaming sections) and several bookstores with gaming areas, and only the largest FLGS even carries the main book. If not for ENWorld, I'd have never even heard of C&C (at most being dimly aware of it being yet another book on the FLGS shelf collecting dust).

Looking at all that I'll say that C&C isn't a big game in the gaming world, and I'll trust these "personal observations" over somebody on the internet who keeps insisting that despite everything I see it's a big success in gaming and it's flying off the shelves.

When I hear my gaming buddies, especially those from groups that don't know and socialize with each other typically, start to talk about it separately, when I notice non-gaming bookstores starting to carry C&C books, when I notice my FLGS regularly restocking C&C every week when they lay out their new merchandise before they put it out on the shelves, then I'll think it might be more than a mildly profitable niche game.

 

[Agamon]

Okay, quick C&C question. Is there a difference between printings of the C&CPHB? My FLBNVLGS (that's Friendly Large But Not Very Local Gaming Store, as opposed to my actual FLGS) shows that they have 2 PHB's in stock, but also shows them as OOP, which is odd. Also, what's included in the Deluxe Case?