• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

What is a GOOD rules light system?

Second barsoomcore's comments about Green Ronin. I don't play True20, and I still think everything they put out just rocks.

I can't agree with Treebore's comment about C&C being "D&D as it should be," although I recognize that he's a true believer. :) I will (hopefully!) be playing in a C&C game soon which one of my players will be DM-ing, but at first glance, the system annoys me in that it has all the things that I breathed a sigh of relief were changed in 3e: Differential XP tables, abilities fixed purely to class instead of along feat/skill lines, etc. I feel like C&C is a simpler but not completely consistent system, which actually makes it more complicated. D&D has more fancy bits you can add on, but the basic engine is simple. True20 streamlines that basic engine further, whereas I feel that C&C just pulls out pieces and puts different (wonkier) pieces on. But that's me.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Votan said:
I had heard many bad things about Green Ronin but I must admit that one of the nice things about game shopping was discovering True 20. For a "low fantasy" game world it is far superior to D&D. I have definitely enjoyed reading it and figuring out how characters worked in that system.

Somebody defintiely put some thought into it.

Castles and Crusades was also very nice for the high fantasy approach to gaming and seems to have captured a lot of the feel of AD&D.


Wow, I can't imagine what you would have heard bad about Green Ronin. They consistently get high reviews, win Ennies and other awards, and almost every book they have produced is very solid. GR has had an amazing lineup of books since they started: Book of the Righteous, Book of Fiends, Freeport (everything), True 20, Mutants and Masterminds, Testament, Thieves World, Black Company, Skull and Crossbones, and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 2. GR is one of the two companies I'll buy books sight unseen from- the other being Pinnacle (makers of Deadlands and Savage Worlds).
 

I've been running C&C for 8 months, if there is anything wonky about the game it is the DM.

Yeah, it is very archetypical like 1E and 2E, but in C&C you can attempt to do any feat like maneuver from level one. Read my detailed posts on the first page of this thread. Also see what I did with skills. As for the xp differences, the classes in C&C are just as well balanced as 3E (meaning NOT), so make the xp tables the same.

So 3E limits you to what feats and skills are written on your character sheet. In my C&C games your character is limited by your imagination, the rules, and your dice rolls. Plus I like a very free form, do what you want as long as it is cool, style. C&C gives me that, 3E locks you down.

Yeah, I know what all you people still playing 3E are going to say about this, but unlike you I have been running C&C for over 8 months after playing/DMing 3E for about 4 years. C&C gives me what I want out of a rules system. 3E doesn't. If it gives all of you who still play an love 3E what you want, fantastic! It didn't give me what I want and I found C&C, so fantastic for me! So we are all happy! Fantastic for all of us!

But if your someone unhappy with 3E, give C&C a seriously hard look. I want all of us happy playing something, rather than getting fed up and walking away from RPG's forever.
 



mhensley said:
Hmmm.... a rules-lite fantasy game. How about Basic D&D? Easily gotten off of ebay and dead simple to play. Even easier (and for free), there's an OGL version being developed. Check it out here-

Basic Fantasy Roleplaying Game

There is one big advantage of C&C over basic, I can easily use any module or material from every edition of D&D I own, which is all of them, because of the SIEGE engine being versatile enough to allow for it. I do mean easily. Most of the time I am able to do it in my head, most of the time being defined as about 95% of it. The only ones that even cause me to look things up is the complex 3E monster with a lot of feats, skills, and special powers, which I rarely use because C&C is also on a lower "power scale" than 3E.

So I agree Basic is good fun, but it doesn't give me everything I want. Now if the open content version allows for such universal useage of every edition of D&D, then we would be talking.
 


They are doing a nice job with creating it. I'll have to read more later to see if the basic mechanics are good. I do like that they kept the thief stuff as percentile rolls.

The good thing for me is that I can use those two modules in my current game, especially the first one.
 

Treebore said:
There is one big advantage of C&C over basic, I can easily use any module or material from every edition of D&D I own...

Its just as easy in most cases to use any D&D module with Basic D&D rules. People have long played AD&D modules with Basic and vice versa. D20 stuff is really no harder to convert to Basic than it is to C&C. And as there are fewer rules in Basic, there is actually less stuff you have to convert. A lot of things are just dropped entirely and left up to roleplaying :eek: .
 

Nomad4life said:
Well, I would certainly agree with that, except that I can’t imagine there would ever have been a True20 had it not been for 3.X. I mean, you can’t trim the fat if you don’t have the full cow to start with, right?

True enough! :)

I guess I should have said that WOTC should have come out with a set of rules as basic as True20 for 3e initially, then added bits to flesh out the system for indiviual GM or player tastes.

As for HP in True20, I have to agree. Maybe just use the VP/WP route from Unearthed Arcana?
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top