Goodman Games

Hello all,

Lots of talk about Castles and Crusades. I'm considering picking it up, but wanted to know a little more about the system and why people are so high on it right now?

Ease of play? streamlined? More roleplaying friendly vs roll playing friendly?

Had nice conversation with Bruce Cordell, Arneson and Elmore during D&D world day and lots of talk about how D&D was moving away from its roots of role-playing, with too much complexity in the current edition, and too much time to resolve combat.

Thoughts??

Ben "superfan" Waxman

Well the simplest description to give about C&C is that it made several steps back towards 1E in order to be "simpler", however the SIEGE mechanic of the game has a lot more in common with 3E d20 than any previous edition.

However the SIEGE mechanic is also so awesomely flexible that it allows you to pretty easily use material from ANY edition of D&D, and any other similliar system for that matter.

The biggest things it has in common with older editions:

Character classes are the same as 1E/2E, plus Assassin, knight, and Illusionist are back as classes. I mean same as in You are given fixed abilities that improve with level. Variations between characters are achieved via selection of Primes and role play.

XP's are different for each class to level.

Monster in M&T are much more in line with 1E, but you can easily use them from which ever edition you like best.

For example I am running the 1e Against the Giants but using (for the most part) 3E giants.

C&C is also incredibly good for house ruling. Meaning the SIEGE mechanic allows for many house rules with little worry of "breaking" the game.

If your still interested I recommend going to the TLG website and look under the main banner for a "Why play C&C?" document. Then sign into our forums and ask more, if you want to go that far.

Our boards are very friendly. Over a dozen people have commented that we are the friendliest community on the web. But I think this board is very comparable. Plus Necromancers board has been very friendly the last couple of years.

Superfan,

I'm not as eloquent as Treebore is. I can't tell you how much fun DMing has become again since I dropped 3.X. The best I can do is to point you to my lengthy thread concerning my taking a friend through DCC#17 using C&C rules.

http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=834


The game moves faster. I don't have to spend time working over the rule set. Ragnar1965 doesn't have to make sure a PC has a feat or a skill. We "wing" it and have fun with the back and forth. The rules are no longer running the game; the DM is! As it should be and was back in the day.

Those are very important points as well. I would say the most important.

By the nature of the streamlined rules, easier (less complex) resolution of combat, and a common system to resolve checks and saves (the SIEGE mechanic), a player won't feel he can only do what's listed on the character sheet.

I've just started a game and, despite all odds, actually had my wife try the game. I have to stress that this is no minor miracle, but she did promise she would give it a fair shake. After our first session, where I pretty much outlined the system through a variety of situations and encounters, she looked up at me and asked: 'That's it?'. She couldn't believe it.

She had a blast partially because of the ease of the system (I also have to give myself some credit). I was able to focus a lot more on the story with some Role Playing and combat did not take forever! She's actually looking forward to the next game!

Things are just... less complicated. But that doesn't mean there are any less detailed. As mentioned before you can add to it what you like or ditch what you don't.

What I love about it is the full range of access I now have to all my AD&D material as well as my D20 material. I've mainly avoided running d20 games (I did briefly when it first came out) buy most of my DMing goes back with AD&D.

The game is easy to run because of, once again, the streamlined nature of the game and I feel that the game is a lot more balanced than what D&D 3.x is now (due largely to all the addtional books they've been putting out).

The fact that WOTC is getting pretty ridiculous with addtional guides and rulebooks with many new feats, spells, etc... hasn't helped either. However, I've also quickly grew to love some of the smaller companies such as Goodman Games, Troll Lord Games, and Necromancer Games. I still buy various d20 products from these companies even though I largely stopped buying those from WOTC.

I suppose, if I were to try and sum it all up, I'd have to say it really is more in the spirit of in the type of game I've always enjoyed. I know that, some of what I've said is pure opinion, but at $19.95 for the PHB (the M&T is also the same price), it's definitely worth a look!

Moriarty the Red

I played (not ran) a little 3.5 last night (actually, it was a playtest for something that should be appearing soon in a DCC product ). Our group is not a regular 3.X group, so we spent a fair bit of time remembering/looking up rules (the books got opened up several times).

One thing that occurred to me regarding this thread's topic was that one possible advantage of 3.X is that -since so much of it is already included SOMEWHERE in the rule books- the DM can have an idle player looking many of the things up while he's running other things in the game. As opposed to C&C where the CK is adjudicating more things on the fly.

Personally, I prefer the C&C way, but I can see some delegation of labor as having an appeal to some folks. *shrug*

moriarty and Treebore summed things up really well.

For me its just plain more fun to run a game of C&C.

For example I am running the 1e Against the Giants but using (for the most part) 3E giants.

Hey Treebore, could you clarify this? Do you mean you use the powers from 3.x? How's it work?

When I use the 3.5 MM I pretty much just use their HD and that also equals their BtH. Sometimes I will use their feats, any skill listed they definitely have.

Basically I use 3.5 when I want to advance monsters in the M&T. I use what parts I want ot and ignore the rest. Plus they get to use my "feat like actions" house rule, so they often get an extra attack or two, making them even more dangerous to the party.

Thanks all for the fine discussion. I am now settled on getting this. Even if I never run it, I HAVE to support a system that makes things fun and simple.

Here's hoping I can bring my group around to C&C!!!

Ben "superfan" Waxman

Good luck on getting your group to switch, and remember anything that you like in 3E can be carried over ro C&C with little problem.

One thing that is a drag is figuring out spellcasters. Many of the 3E spells (at least the ones module designers always use: cat's grace, stoneskin, etc.) are not in C&C, and the spells per day are all different. I'm not comfortable improvising those; take the time to figure out who should be able to cast what, what it's called in C&C , and what it does. Otherwise you can ignore all the skill/feat kludge just fine as suggested here. Also, I find the numbers of monsters are usually a little light in 3E products. DCC's are about right. Necro is too much You'll also have to improvise monsters for stuff like "dragonkin".

I am fooling around with the SRD now, and I'm surprised how close it COULD be to C&C, and how far stuff like "Bluff checks" seem to take away from the game. I'm still figuring out what people are talking about re "breaking" the game by removing things. It doesn't seem to be that big a deal.

If you played another earlier edition of D&D and liked it, and can bamboozle your players into going back to it, don't be afraid of that either. I've run many an enjoyable game with my old Basic/Expert rulebooks in the past couple of years, and it just don't get any cleaner than that.

BB