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

[bento]

We got a gully-washer last night and I didn't want my computer to get fried from the lightning!

Back to my post:

I don't care whether a game is selling like hot cakes or not, and neither should the OP. The most important matter in picking the game is this:

Does this game solve the problems I am having with D&D 3.5?​

After that, I'd look at issues of compatiblity (how easy or difficult is it to use with all the books you already own), what the learning curve is (will this be easy or hard for my players to pick up) and the style of game play promoted in the rules.

The next step after picking the rule set would be to create a one-shot adventure with pre-generated characters. I suggest pre-gen because you're still learning the rules, and this exercise will help you quite a bit to understanding them. Besides, you don't want your player's first experience with the game to be the frustration of spending an hour and a half creating a character for a game they may not care about.

Try to find an adventure that suits your group's style of play. Make sure it has different types of encounters to encourage a wide use of the new rules. I'd suggest taking an existing adventure, like Freeport or converting one of the WoTC or DDC shorter adventures. Don't worry so much about the plot or story, because the most important thing with this adventure is to show the new rule set in action, and why it is better than what they are playing now.

Before you play, along with the pre-gen character sheets, be sure to make copies of important feats or skills that the players can refer to when they play. I did this with my True20 one shot and it saved a great amount of time. Also if the game has a set of quick-start rules, make copies of this for each player.

Be sure to make any important crib sheets for yourself - you don't want a one shot like this to get too bogged down for you. You want to show it as fast, and easy.

Once you're through with the one-shot, be sure there is plenty of time afterwards to get your player's feedback. You'll hear complaints and complements, and don't use this as a time to argue. Just state why you like this rule set better, emphasizing their complements.

Good luck!

 

[Akrasia]

... I don't care whether a game is selling like hot cakes or not, and neither should the OP. The most important matter in picking the game is this:

Does this game solve the problems I am having with D&D 3.5?​

...

I agree wholeheartedly with this, as well as the rest of the advice you give. Excellent counsel.

(And I regret getting so side-tracked in explaining the dubious nature of anecdotal evidence to people.)

Great post!

 

[wingsandsword]

It is my belief that people are hammering C&C more vigorously than other niche games when it comes to claims about its popularity, simply because a some of the more vocal pro C&C people are/were using a lot of anecdotal evidence to support the theory that masses and masses of people were tired of 3e and that C&C was the saviour and the future.

Hence a backlash.

My personal theory is that C&C has sold about 3000 copies. That's a really good number for a small publisher, and indication of a smashing success for them. If the numbers are even higher, great for Troll Lords. I suspect I'm not that many thousand copies off, though.

Exactly.

I'm so opposed to the claims that C&C is big, because I've heard a lot of hyperbole thrown around in these parts about how big C&C is, how "the majority" or "the consensus" of 3e players are burnt out on all the rules and options and choices and want a simpler "rules lite" game, and how C&C is some big selling salvation of d20 & D&D. I even remember a few claims made around here that C&C sales were putting a distinct dent in D&D sales, that's when I really decided to take a closer look at how "big" C&C is, and realized that if not for ENWorld I'd have never even heard of it, and this from a gamer who keeps a pretty good eye on the industry.

It's the "Baghdad Bob" effect, if everybody is telling you something is very successful, that should be something you can notice, but you see no signs of it in your everyday life, even when you're looking for it, and keep looking for it, then it's probably not as successful as they say.

If the guess of 3000 copies sold is accurate, then that would be a real big deal for a small-press outfit, and if half of those copies were in use (the rest sitting idle by people who bought it but didn't like it, or can't find a group, or bought it to be completionist), and a typical gaming group of 5 people, that's 300 C&C groups total, pretty small compared to a whole lot of other games. I'm saying that C&C isn't some revolution in gaming, it's a small press product with a small audience that likes it a lot, and that small audience has a tendency to try and make it look like it's a huge success that's poised to stand alongside D&D.

I'm just annoyed at the weak anecdotal evidence that people are appealing to in order to support their perception that nobody is playing C&C.

And I'm just annoyed at C&C fanboys who try and make it look like C&C is some huge movement in gaming. I never, ever said "nobody" was playing it, I said that nobody I knew was playing it or had even heard of it and to me this indicated that it was almost certainly a small-time game, and I have said repeatedly that it has a small but dedicated fanbase, that can appear a little larger using the internet.

My "anecdotal evidence" is no better than yours, and it's enough to satisfy me. This isn't a formal academic debate, it's a discussion on how many people are playing C&C, and I have yet to see anything I'd call believable evidence that it's anything more than a modestly successful small-press product.

When other people come here and say they've never seen it mentioned, or sold, in their hometowns, and that they generally only hear of it online, that tells me a lot.

 

[JohnSnow]

I can't believe I'm jumping into this $#!+storm. But I have to ask...

Plus, the market for C&C is growing, while the market for d20 is shrinking... sure, there may be more players of d20 than of C&C, and there may ALWAYS be more, but, there are more people buying C&C every day, while more and more people have stopped buying d20 products. I track these numbers as my day job, and right now, the only d20 products that outsell Castles & Crusades in the hobby market are the Dungeon Crawl Classics. And C&C has not hit its stride by a long shot...

Ummm...what in the Nine Hells does he mean by "the hobby market?"

Obviously, "hobby market" excludes Wizards, but does it also exclude White Wolf (and therefore Malhavoc), Green Ronin and AEG? Cuz if it does, I have no trouble believing those numbers. However, technically speaking, Mutants and Masterminds, Arcana Evolved, True 20, Spycraft and Iron Heroes are not "d20 products" either (just OGL)...

So, what he's basically saying is that C&C (a core rulebook) outsells any single supplement, such as, say The Black Company (again, assuming Green Ronin isn't excluded)? That also is not hard to believe.

I do believe Castles & Crusades fans want to believe C&C will eventually outsell 3rd Edition D&D, so that the evil empire (Hasbro, in this case) will see the error of its ways and publish a simple game for them again. And that's not even close to happening.

Monte Cook has said the following: a runaway success for a third-party publisher (even one as clearly successful as Malhavoc) is a drop in the bucket compared to WotC's sales. I'm happy C&C fans have found an OGL game they can support. In that sense, C&C corrects a problem the retro "back to basics" movement was causing. The problem is that the hobby won't stay alive as a hobby if there aren't new books to buy. So, back-to-basics games keep people buying new books. Great.

Personally, I can get everything I'd want out of C&C by running a stripped down version of D&D. It wouldn't be that difficult. The system isn't nearly as mechanically "balanced on the head of a pin" as people think. It just requires a good DM who can make sound judgement calls - something so-called "rules-light" games take for granted. Anyone who frequents the Iron Heroes ezBoard would know that all the fans of that game are born tinkerers. We've bent, spindled, twisted, and mutilated the Core Rules. They're pretty hard to break.

Just my two cents. And I have played with C&C. Aside from the wonky XP tables and the lack of significant class features, it's pretty fun. Of course, it still uses the basic Vancian magic system...*twitch*

 

[Akrasia]

... My "anecdotal evidence" is no better than yours, and it's enough to satisfy me....

*Sigh*

The thing is, winsandsword, I'm not relying solely on 'anecdotal evidence'.

If you had actually read my most recent posts, you would see that I've referred to claims by someone whose job actually involves tracking sales.

If you can't see the difference these two kinds of claims, then I have nothing further to say to you.

 

[Akrasia]

... I do believe Castles & Crusades fans want to believe C&C will eventually outsell 3rd Edition D&D, so that the evil empire (Hasbro, in this case) will see the error of its ways and publish a simple game for them again. And that's not even close to happening...

I know many C&C fans. I don't know a single one of them who believes that it will overtake/outsell 3e D&D! Such a belief is clearly absurd.

...
Monte Cook has said the following: a runaway success for a third-party publisher (even one as clearly successful as Malhavoc) is a drop in the bucket compared to WotC's sales...

I would not dispute this for a moment.

...
Personally, I can get everything I'd want out of C&C by running a stripped down version of D&D. It wouldn't be that difficult...

Well, except for the easy compatibility with pre-3e D&D products.

However, I would be very interested in learning what your 'stripped down version of D&D' would involve, as I am seriously thinking about ways to 'streamline' the game myself. (Such discussions would probably be best in another thread.)

 

[buzz]

...right now, the only d20 products that outsell Castles & Crusades in the hobby market are the Dungeon Crawl Classics.

I'm sure Mr. Mishler has access to more accurate data than we do, but I'm somewhat doubtful here. Granted, it may depend on how he's defining "d20 products" (i.e., just 3rd-party stuff for D&D, or d20STL and OGL product in general?). But, e.g., on Amazon, C&C's PHB is ranked lower than Iron Heroes, M&M2e, World of Warcraft, Ptolus, Spycraft 2.0... and it's about 60,000 spots lower than #100 in the top-selling gaming list.

Granted, it's in the 90,000's, which is not bad for an RPG, and is doing better than, say, Arcana Evolved. And these stats get updated every hour, so there's fluctuation.

C&C has obviously found a consistent selling niche. More than any other d20 product but DCC? I dunno.

 

[der_kluge]

I guess my main question to the OP would be - why do you automatically assume that every supplement released for 3.5 must be available in your game?

What's wrong with just keeping with the core rule books? Furthermore, what's wrong with even limiting the classes? I don't allow druids or monks IMC.

I'm running a 3.5 campaign, and it's the best game I've ever ran, IMHO. My players are all having a blast, and they're constantly excited about the next game. The games are fast paced, and combat does not bog us down. Yes, there are complexities about 3.5 that I don't care for, but I'm good at glossing those over.


I would contend that it's not the system that's the problem - I say it's you.

 

[Christoph the Magus]

*Sigh*

The thing is, winsandsword, I'm not relying solely on 'anecdotal evidence'.

If you had actually read my most recent posts, you would see that I've referred to claims by someone whose job actually involves tracking sales.

If you can't see the difference these two kinds of claims, then I have nothing further to say to you.

Yes, but he doesn't give enough information to make his statements relevant. We'd need to see a list of the publishers that he's comparing TLG to, as well as the numbers of C&C sold to make it mean anything. The game is clearly successful for TLG or they wouldn't have made a second printing. But that doesn't mean that it's a driving force in the RPG market. The most successful 3rd party games have minimal impact on the market and C&C is no different.

 

[Maggan]

I'm sure Mr. Mishler has access to more accurate data than we do, but I'm somewhat doubtful here.

To Mr Mishler's credit, he is so confident that C&C is a success in the marketplace that he has founded a company that will provide support for the line!

And not just any support, it's Wilderlands of High Fantasy (in the future to be known as Wilderlands of High Adventure).

So he's evidently certain that C&C has a large enough fan base to support a line of products.

/M (unless there's another James Mishler, but I doubt it)