TheRPGSite

With all this licensing hoopla going on, I keep seeing Castles and Crusades mentioned.  I know they're on the, "Let's make are own license!" bandwagon.  Or something to that effect. 

I also know the game is up to 8th edition, and the differences between editions are minor. 

What is more amazing is that older versions are available as free PDFs, or at least the Players Handbook is.

https://www.tenkarstavern.com/2022/02/castles-crusades-players-handbook-7th.html?m=1 (https://www.tenkarstavern.com/2022/02/castles-crusades-players-handbook-7th.html?m=1)

It is yet another game you guys can check out if you want.  There is plenty of free games to be had it seems. 

7th printing of the PHB and 3rd printing of Monsters & Treasure are available for free. That's all you need (the Castle Keeper's Guide is more like Unearthed Arcana).

It's not completely true that it's completely unchanged through editions, in fact the Barbarian and Illusionist classes got a significant overhaul (for the better, IMO), but I think the difference between printings can be compared to CoC 2e-6e.

Technically it has no editions, just printings.  Everything is backwards compatible.  As importantly, converting AD&D 1-2e or D&D 3, 3.5, and 5e adventures are totally easy.  If you have experience with any of those systems, C&C is about the easiest game out there to just pick up and start playing. Plus, the Troll Lords are great guys; veterans who keep all the political BS out of their games and make everything right here in the USA.  Their customer service is fantastic.  Their forums are also pretty good.  Again, folks generally stick to talking about the game, not other stuff.

My only real criticisms are that their product editing is sub-standard and the quality of their published adventures is inconsistent.  Some are good; a few are awful, and most are just okay.  The editing issues remain there and I don't like their house style, mainly because they don't include full monster stat blocks.  But I have a ton of old D&D material and write my own stuff so it doesn't matter much. 

I will finish by saying that after being my intro to the OSR scene in 2016, C&C has remained my game of choice because for me it requires the fewest house rules with the most depth and options.  It plays and feels like AD&D with modern mechanics and a unified system (the Siege Engine, based on attributes) that I prefer to what modern D&D offers.  My players don't necessarily agree (they like OSE a bit more), but we play enough C&C and I highly recommend it if you're looking for an easy to learn D&D alternative.

I've was away from the hobby or at least on the periphery of it for a long time, outside of gaming with my kids, but I still love and support Castles & Crusades. The game is free to download/try, it is an extremely easy system to learn and run, it is very easy to port all sorts of older D&D materials/d20/retroclone goodness in it, and they are seriously nice guys who focus on making games and supporting their fans. Their Discord and Twitch interactions are fantastic, which I increasingly appreciate in this hobby.

These days, if I'm playing with my kids, it's gonna be Castles & Crusades.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 17, 2023, 07:10:35 PM
With all this licensing hoopla going on, I keep seeing Castles and Crusades mentioned.  I know they're on the, "Let's make are own license!" bandwagon.  Or something to that effect. 

I also know the game is up to 8th edition, and the differences between editions are minor. 

What is more amazing is that older versions are available as free PDFs, or at least the Players Handbook is.

https://www.tenkarstavern.com/2022/02/castles-crusades-players-handbook-7th.html?m=1 (https://www.tenkarstavern.com/2022/02/castles-crusades-players-handbook-7th.html?m=1)

It is yet another game you guys can check out if you want.  There is plenty of free games to be had it seems.

And I will say, it does seem like they're enjoying some new attention with all this recent OGL drama. Their Discord and Twitch channels have seen a lot of new folks, and I've seen a lot of general questions about the system. I think a lot of people are looking for someone new to support right now.

Had always heard good things about C&C but never checked it out. The other week I grabbed the free PDF of the PHB, absolutely loved it. Both of my groups have now switched from BECMI to C&C, as will all my published modules going forward.

Just got this in the mail yesterday. matter of fact.
(http://www.mithgarthr.com/images/c%26c.jpg)

Nice! Those new covers are fantastic—best they've done, I think.

Quote from: Zachary The First on January 18, 2023, 07:08:02 AM
Nice! Those new covers are fantastic—best they've done, I think.

Absolutely! I'm kinda bummed by CKG didn't have the alt cover though, haha. But, I couldn't pass up the deal on the starter set so I'll take what I can get. :)

I run two groups who alternate on Thursdays. Last week was either group's last game of actual D&D. Last night I converted all of the PCs for tomorrow night's group from RC to C&C, and it couldn't have been easier; it was almost just a copy/paste affair. Editing the two modules I'm working on is also just as easy, just changing up the monster stat blocks a bit and adding CLs in places like for secret doors, traps, locked doors, etc.

(https://mithgarthr.com/images/becmi_cnc_diff.png)

I bought it too as a possible replacement to 1E.

Mind you let's also not confuse popularity with the PHB being free as well. At this point only time will fellas imo it's still too early to do so. It has to replace D&D at most tables before I would consider it popular.

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 18, 2023, 07:23:45 AM

Quote from: Zachary The First on January 18, 2023, 07:08:02 AM
Nice! Those new covers are fantastic—best they've done, I think.

Absolutely! I'm kinda bummed by CKG didn't have the alt cover though, haha. But, I couldn't pass up the deal on the starter set so I'll take what I can get. :)

I run two groups who alternate on Thursdays. Last week was either group's last game of actual D&D. Last night I converted all of the PCs for tomorrow night's group from RC to C&C, and it couldn't have been easier; it was almost just a copy/paste affair. Editing the two modules I'm working on is also just as easy, just changing up the monster stat blocks a bit and adding CLs in places like for secret doors, traps, locked doors, etc.

(https://mithgarthr.com/images/becmi_cnc_diff.png)

If HD are d6, shouldn't the max hp for the Goblins be 6?

With a few minor tweaks, C&C is a brilliant game.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 07:42:26 AM
If HD are d6, shouldn't the max hp for the Goblins be 6?

Shit, good catch. Guess that's something I missed adjusting, haha.  8)

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 18, 2023, 07:23:45 AM

Quote from: Zachary The First on January 18, 2023, 07:08:02 AM
Nice! Those new covers are fantastic—best they've done, I think.

Absolutely! I'm kinda bummed by CKG didn't have the alt cover though, haha. But, I couldn't pass up the deal on the starter set so I'll take what I can get. :)

I run two groups who alternate on Thursdays. Last week was either group's last game of actual D&D. Last night I converted all of the PCs for tomorrow night's group from RC to C&C, and it couldn't have been easier; it was almost just a copy/paste affair. Editing the two modules I'm working on is also just as easy, just changing up the monster stat blocks a bit and adding CLs in places like for secret doors, traps, locked doors, etc.

(https://mithgarthr.com/images/becmi_cnc_diff.png)

Was there not an option to select the alt cover while shopping for this?

I forgot to select the alt. Over when I bought mine; it defaults to the regular cover.

Quote from: Dropbear on January 18, 2023, 08:02:09 AM
Was there not an option to select the alt cover while shopping for this?

I forgot to select the alt. Over when I bought mine; it defaults to the regular cover.

Not when you get it as the starter bundle.  :-[

I'll add that while you can get free character sheets off their website, if you're really wanting that 1e vibe, they also sell those pads of goldenrod sheets tailored to the different character classes.  They're useful because your class abilities are already printed on the sheet.

Quote from: Persimmon on January 17, 2023, 08:39:52 PM
My only real criticisms are that their product editing is sub-standard and the quality of their published adventures is inconsistent.  Some are good; a few are awful, and most are just okay.  The editing issues remain there and I don't like their house style, mainly because they don't include full monster stat blocks.  But I have a ton of old D&D material and write my own stuff so it doesn't matter much. 

This was my experience as well. I ordered their box set a couple of years ago and didn't make it 10 pages without multiple editing mistakes including the main combat mechanic. Hard to trust the rest of the material after that.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 18, 2023, 09:23:59 AM
This was my experience as well. I ordered their box set a couple of years ago and didn't make it 10 pages without multiple editing mistakes including the main combat mechanic. Hard to trust the rest of the material after that.

You either embrace the blatant editing errors or just accept them. There are multiple professionals who have edited the books FOR FREE as fan service and their comments and suggestions are generally ignored. It's like TLG just wants to have that crap in the game or something...I've owned every printing of the PHB since the initial release, and some of the errors are carried over for literally years.

That said, the game itself is basically AD&D but you can run it really drunk. That's the biggest selling point to me: very little brain power devoted to the mechanics and you can focus on the game itself.

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 10:39:54 AM
That said, the game itself is basically AD&D but you can run it really drunk. That's the biggest selling point to me: very little brain power devoted to the mechanics and you can focus on the game itself.

Probably the most apt description I've seen of it.  ;D

Of note:

https://trolllord.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Converting_5th_Ed_to_CC.pdf

4th printing of the CKG is available as of today, the 'new' cover is now the only cover.

Yeah I picked up a copy of the PDF. I love 1e/2e D&D... casual looking over of the PDF, gives me the warm fuzzies!

Still reading it, but it looks very cool. The hard part is trying to sell it to my group who have become enamored of "another system" (my fault). I'm going to withold my final judgement until I finish it - but it *does* look very cool. I've long considered doing my fantasy-heartbreaker 2e system, so at minimum I'll likely find some use out of it.

But I dig the layout, the art, the general feel of it. But I'll need to give it a deep dive.

So quick question.  Downloaded the free PHB and I love what I see.   How is play compared to 5e?  Looking at this it could become my replacement for 5e which I am planning to ditch as well as anything WOTC I have now that they went "Full Retard"

Quote from: GhostNinja on January 18, 2023, 01:08:49 PM
So quick question.  Downloaded the free PHB and I love what I see.   How is play compared to 5e?  Looking at this it could become my replacement for 5e which I am planning to ditch as well as anything WOTC I have now that they went "Full Retard"

I don't know how 5e plays, so I can't answer that, but how C&C plays depends on how you run it.

RAW, the way saves work are messed as you get to higher level challenges. It's appropriate for Ravenloft. If you want a different feel, you need to change the way saves work.

RAW, the way basic checks work means if you regularly roll dice, the characters are pretty incompetent. Either you need to significantly reduce rolling dice and generally allow success based on how the players describe the solution (old school style), and only call for rolls when you think the description is dubious and the method proposed by the players shouldn't work. Or you need to change the probabilities, to 12/15 or 8/12, depending on the feel you're going for.

The good news is you can change this stuff if you don't like it. If you want to change how two weapon fighting works, adjust the penalty from -3/-6 to -2/-4, and then you can have high dex Elves dual wielding without penalty, whereas RAW you can forget about it.

While the mechanics are much more d20 than TSR-D&D, "rulings, not rules" and your own house rules is very much a characteristic of C&C.

I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Quote from: GhostNinja on January 18, 2023, 01:08:49 PM
So quick question.  Downloaded the free PHB and I love what I see.   How is play compared to 5e?  Looking at this it could become my replacement for 5e which I am planning to ditch as well as anything WOTC I have now that they went "Full Retard"

Much faster, especially combat. No feats/skills/powers bogging shit down, orcs don't have 46,000 hit points.

I've only ran it once since learning the rules, but it was for my kids over the weekend and they grokked it just fine. Tomorrow night's the first "real" session with one of my groups, so I'll know more after that, but from the little play I've had with it, it played great.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 02:03:12 PMRAW, the way saves work are messed as you get to higher level challenges. It's appropriate for Ravenloft. If you want a different feel, you need to change the way saves work.

Saves basically scale with the characters. Which means a 10th level paladin has as about as much chance as saving vs. a 10th level spell caster as a 1st level one does against a 1st level spell caster. Some people who like AD&D (like myself) find this a bit irritating and I just used the AD&D save chart in most situations, but then I decided oh well, and just ran with it. Much closer to 3.X that way. I DO like the fact that it gets rid of dump stats because every stat is used against a different type of save. You could also simply give a flat bonus to saves and not add in any sort of scaling (save against a 1st level spell ALWAYS is 1st, not against the caster level), which makes it more AD&D-like. So, yeah, this is a point of contention, but remedied with some house rules.

Quote from: migoRAW, the way basic checks work means if you regularly roll dice, the characters are pretty incompetent. Either you need to significantly reduce rolling dice and generally allow success based on how the players describe the solution (old school style), and only call for rolls when you think the description is dubious and the method proposed by the players shouldn't work. Or you need to change the probabilities, to 12/15 or 8/12, depending on the feel you're going for.

Well, on average they have a 50/50 shot of accomplishing something that is the same challenge level as their character level IF you bother to roll for it, i.e., it is a significantly important roll. For example, trying to open a 1st level lock as a 1st level character is a 50/50 roll without stat bonuses if you have a prime in the skill. Obviously a much harder lock is 5% harder per level, which means it's nearly impossible for a 1st level rogue to pick a 10th level lock. Which makes sense in a 3.X way, but not necessarily in an AD&D way where locks are just static and characters get better every level. Again, it's a difference of approach. That said, rolling for everything is stupid, anyway. If the PCs encounter a rusty old chest and they knock the lid off the hinges with a sledgehammer, this shouldn't require a roll in the first place; that's a "modern" sort of sensibility.

I'll also point out that I make every skill listed for a character counts as prime, even if the stat technically isn't prime. This eliminates some of the 3.X-isms and makes it much more AD&D-like...characters are competent at whatever their classes are competent at. Primes still come into play with cross-class stuff, and saves, but the impact is much less impactful. You could just dump primes if you wanted and use the stat for skills simply for bonus purposes, but then humans get fucked to some degree. But again, easily adjusted as needed. Anyway, as you said, you can just adjudicate this in a way that makes sense for your game.

Combat is ascending AC with HD of creature added to roll which is insanely brain-dead easy. And it adds HD to saves as well. Can't get any easier than that!

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem and fixed it? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system.

I usually just give up, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Go old school. Instead of rolling for a perception check, ask the players to describe how their characters are searching.

Alternatively (or in addition), depending on what is to be noticed, give different classes their level bonus while making the check. Notice an ambush? Ranger, Rogue, Assassin and Barbarian all get to add their level to the perception check. Notice something to do with magic? Mages and Illusionists add their level to their perception check. See if someone is lying to you? Rogues, Assassins, Bards and Illusionists add level to their perception check. As for Clerics and Druids having a general advantage in perception? That's a little bit of divine inspiration. They have a guardian angel/fairy as it were.

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:14:01 PM
Saves basically scale with the characters. Which means a 10th level paladin has as about as much chance as saving vs. a 10th level spell caster as a 1st level one does against a 1st level spell caster. Some people who like AD&D (like myself) find this a bit irritating and I just used the AD&D save chart in most situations, but then I decided oh well, and just ran with it. Much closer to 3.X that way. I DO like the fact that it gets rid of dump stats because every stat is used against a different type of save. You could also simply give a flat bonus to saves and not add in any sort of scaling (save against a 1st level spell ALWAYS is 1st, not against the caster level), which makes it more AD&D-like. So, yeah, this is a point of contention, but remedied with some house rules.

Yeah, it depends on what you want. Given TLG advertised it as the 'Rosetta Stone' of D&D, it's a pretty serious problem as RAW it just doesn't handle high level AD&D play at all. But it's easy enough to fix to have it feel the way you want, which is pretty nice.

Quote from: migo

Well, on average they have a 50/50 shot of accomplishing something that is the same challenge level as their character level IF you bother to roll for it, i.e., it is a significantly important roll.

Only if it's your prime. Non-prime means you have a 10-15% chance of success on average. Which means you might as well forget about doing it. This really depends on how the players like to play and how the GMs like to run the game. If everyone likes rolling lots of dice, it's downright terrible. To be fair, somewhere later in the book it does say you should generally not call for a dice roll, and let the characters succeed at what the players described. But this is an example of poor layout, organisation and editing that has plagued C&C since the beginning.

QuoteI'll also point out that I make every skill listed for a character counts as prime, even if the stat technically isn't prime. This eliminates some of the 3.X-isms and makes it much more AD&D-like...characters are competent at whatever their classes are competent at. Primes still come into play with cross-class stuff, and saves, but the impact is much less impactful.

This solves the competence issue, but kind of ruins the Rogue class, and in particular for Humans. If you're a demihuman, your prime choices determine what you're good at as a Rogue, and there's one aspect you're not great at. A Human can be good at the entire scope of abilities. If you do it that way, every Rogue is the same, which gets a bit boring. I guess it depends on why you liked the AD&D 2e Thief (assuming you did). If it's simply a matter of at least being competent at something at first level, it works fine. But if it's also about being able to differentiate one Thief from another, with very different specialties, then it wipes that out.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:14:01 PM
Saves basically scale with the characters. Which means a 10th level paladin has as about as much chance as saving vs. a 10th level spell caster as a 1st level one does against a 1st level spell caster. Some people who like AD&D (like myself) find this a bit irritating and I just used the AD&D save chart in most situations, but then I decided oh well, and just ran with it. Much closer to 3.X that way. I DO like the fact that it gets rid of dump stats because every stat is used against a different type of save. You could also simply give a flat bonus to saves and not add in any sort of scaling (save against a 1st level spell ALWAYS is 1st, not against the caster level), which makes it more AD&D-like. So, yeah, this is a point of contention, but remedied with some house rules.

  Another possibility would be to set the CL modifier to half the CL/HD instead of the full value.

Quote from: Persimmon on January 18, 2023, 08:48:22 AM
I'll add that while you can get free character sheets off their website, if you're really wanting that 1e vibe, they also sell those pads of goldenrod sheets tailored to the different character classes.  They're useful because your class abilities are already printed on the sheet.

This should be standard for all class/level based games...

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 11:04:39 AM
Of note:
https://trolllord.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Converting_5th_Ed_to_CC.pdf

C&C will grab a bit of market share based on the current re-alignment currently going down in the hobby.

But unless they do a 5eish version of C&C they will never be a big player outside of the OSR.

Quote from: Jaeger on January 18, 2023, 03:28:38 PM

Quote from: Persimmon on January 18, 2023, 08:48:22 AM
I'll add that while you can get free character sheets off their website, if you're really wanting that 1e vibe, they also sell those pads of goldenrod sheets tailored to the different character classes.  They're useful because your class abilities are already printed on the sheet.

This should be standard for all class/level based games...

Yeah, it's one thing I like about it. It really plays to the strengths of having class and level. Once you start adding in feats and skills, and the ability to customize your character like that, you might as well just add a few more for class abilities and take class out entirely.

Quote

C&C will grab a bit of market share based on the current re-alignment currently going down in the hobby.

But unless they do a 5eish version of C&C they will never be a big player outside of the OSR.

They've already moved to give it a more 5e aesthetic. The artwork for the 8th printing is more like 5e, up to level 24 is covered in the PHB instead of being in a supplement, and they also changed the logo to be like 5e. The mechanics are still the way they've always been, but they also re-arranged the presentation. Assassin is now presented as an optional class, while multiclassing is presented front and center. I think they've definitely already made a pivot to make C&C more appealing to 5e players, while still maintaining backwards compatibility.

Now if they'd just swallow their pride and hire a good editor.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 03:23:00 PMstuff

Hey, there is no panacea...I still think, given the multitude of alternatives, C&C is a BEST D&D-like game simply because it is so open to interpretation and handles getting mangled in whatever way you want so gracefully. I think it has more in common with the OMEGA/Bard Games/Arcanum/Talislanta system than D&D in a lot of ways, which is about as easy to understand as it gets. Rolling a D20 to hit a target number is pretty simple for even the laziest players; it is up to the GM to determine just WHAT that target number is, and thus the GM is pretty much in charge of the actual mechanics behind the scenes. You wanna make giant charts of modifiers for a billion things, go for it, then you apply them and tell the players their target is 18. Done.

Quote from: GhostNinja on January 18, 2023, 01:08:49 PM
So quick question.  Downloaded the free PHB and I love what I see.   How is play compared to 5e?  Looking at this it could become my replacement for 5e which I am planning to ditch as well as anything WOTC I have now that they went "Full Retard"

I prefer to use the term, "Derp Evil". ;D

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 03:32:55 PM
They've already moved to give it a more 5e aesthetic. The artwork for the 8th printing is more like 5e, up to level 24 is covered in the PHB instead of being in a supplement, and they also changed the logo to be like 5e. The mechanics are still the way they've always been, but they also re-arranged the presentation. Assassin is now presented as an optional class, while multiclassing is presented front and center. I think they've definitely already made a pivot to make C&C more appealing to 5e players, while still maintaining backwards compatibility.

Now if they'd just swallow their pride and hire a good editor.

People will see through the aesthetics though.

By making it 5eish I'm not saying they need to adopt all the subclass, feat, nonsense 5e has.

Just do classes basically the same as they are already doing; just adopt the 5e base math, and DC ratings.
Ditch the siege and replace with Adv/Disadv -2/+2 for all modifiers.

It would be a more or less straightforward port. But it would require going through the whole game back to front.

So I believe that I can safely say that such a thing will never happen.

Quote from: Jaeger on January 18, 2023, 05:57:26 PM

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 03:32:55 PM
They've already moved to give it a more 5e aesthetic. The artwork for the 8th printing is more like 5e, up to level 24 is covered in the PHB instead of being in a supplement, and they also changed the logo to be like 5e. The mechanics are still the way they've always been, but they also re-arranged the presentation. Assassin is now presented as an optional class, while multiclassing is presented front and center. I think they've definitely already made a pivot to make C&C more appealing to 5e players, while still maintaining backwards compatibility.

Now if they'd just swallow their pride and hire a good editor.

People will see through the aesthetics though.

By making it 5eish I'm not saying they need to adopt all the subclass, feat, nonsense 5e has.

Just do classes basically the same as they are already doing; just adopt the 5e base math, and DC ratings.
Ditch the siege and replace with Adv/Disadv -2/+2 for all modifiers.

It would be a more or less straightforward port. But it would require going through the whole game back to front.

So I believe that I can safely say that such a thing will never happen.

They'd need to be quite sure that would work. I think one of the things they're counting on is because of very distinct mechanics that aren't anyone else's thing, they can keep C&C going forward for a 9th printing with at the most removing some spells and monsters. If they change it to be more like 5e, they open themselves up to being sued by Hasbro.

Especially when it comes to mechanics not being protected but the presentation is. A Prime is essentially a +6 bonus. They could switch from CB 12 and CB 18 to saying it's a +6 Proficiency bonus, no mechanical difference, just using 5e terminology, and what they have becomes less distinct, and the presentation of the mechanics becomes more arguable. Also taking into account that while C&C has similarities to 5e, C&C had them going back to 2004.

Then there's also potentially alienating existing customers. Those who like it are probably glad that no major changes are made from one printing to the next. They may feel they're better off sticking in a safe market of loyal customers and not getting sued.

What they could do that is no risk is finally hire a proper proof-reader, and someone to do the layout right. Like get Gavin Norman to overhaul C&C and present it like OSE. Same mechanics, completely compatible with existing C&C, but presented way better, therefore way more accessible, and also appealing to the people who like the system but are turned off by the terrible editing.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:06:48 PM
They'd need to be quite sure that would work. I think one of the things they're counting on is because of very distinct mechanics that aren't anyone else's thing, they can keep C&C going forward for a 9th printing with at the most removing some spells and monsters. If they change it to be more like 5e, they open themselves up to being sued by Hasbro.

They are functionally an AD&D clone now.

If hasbro decides to sue them, how close or not they are to 5e will make no difference.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:06:48 PM
Especially when it comes to mechanics not being protected but the presentation is. A Prime is essentially a +6 bonus. They could switch from CB 12 and CB 18 to saying it's a +6 Proficiency bonus, no mechanical difference, just using 5e terminology, and what they have becomes less distinct, and the presentation of the mechanics becomes more arguable. Also taking into account that while C&C has similarities to 5e, C&C had them going back to 2004.

And yet wotzi was not concerned about lawfare from TLG...

If they become the victim of Wotzi lawfare, their proprietary siege system will not help them.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:06:48 PM
Then there's also potentially alienating existing customers. Those who like it are probably glad that no major changes are made from one printing to the next. They may feel they're better off sticking in a safe market of loyal customers and not getting sued.

They would have to market it as it's own thing: C&C 5th age fantasy, etc,...

Which they already did a bit of with their 5e amazing adventures game.

Then they could see the response, and shift to what makes them more money.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:06:48 PM
What they could do that is no risk is finally hire a proper proof-reader, and someone to do the layout right. Like get Gavin Norman to overhaul C&C and present it like OSE. Same mechanics, completely compatible with existing C&C, but presented way better, therefore way more accessible, and also appealing to the people who like the system but are turned off by the terrible editing.

I don't understand lots of typos in the computer age.

Do these people not type it all out in word (which catches spelling errors) before they port it to a pdf format?

Not hard.

Quote from: Jaeger on January 18, 2023, 06:29:24 PM
They are functionally an AD&D clone now.

If hasbro decides to sue them, how close or not they are to 5e will make no difference.

They're really not. While there are clear call-backs to AD&D, there's also strong divergence from it. It is no closer to AD&D than Palladium Fantasy.

Quote
If they become the victim of Wotzi lawfare, their proprietary siege system will not help them.

It most definitely will help them. Whether it saves them entirely is another matter, but they're in a better position as they are now, than if they were to change the system to be more like 5e.

Quote

I don't understand lots of typos in the computer age.

Do these people not type it all out in word (which catches spelling errors) before they port it to a pdf format?

Not hard.

It's not just typos. But nobody understands why it hasn't been fixed. They just don't seem to care.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:36:17 PM
They're really not. While there are clear call-backs to AD&D, there's also strong divergence from it. It is no closer to AD&D than Palladium Fantasy.

I have all three games.

C&C is clearly a AD&D/BX derivative. And far far closer to AD&D/BX than palladium fantasy is.

Quote from: migo on January 18, 2023, 06:36:17 PM
It most definitely will help them. Whether it saves them entirely is another matter, but they're in a better position as they are now, than if they were to change the system to be more like 5e.

No it won't.

5e Mechanics like Adv/Disadv, ascending attack rolls: Stat+Mod vs. AC or its equivalent, or vs a TN, were all done in earlier game systems. Yet somehow wotzi has not been lawfared.

And C&C uses vancian casting. The magic system that is 100% D&D DNA in most every edition. If it was really about game mechanics, that alone would be enough to sink them.

Lawfare is pay to play.

Slight system differences won't help them when anyone with eyes can look at a C&C character sheet, and clearly see that it is a D&D clone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXGFOxYv9M&ab_channel=Heath%27sGeekverse (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXGFOxYv9M&ab_channel=Heath%27sGeekverse)

Great game.  It's been my go to since 2015 when I got back into gaming after a 20 year hiatus.  Plays just fine as is, no need to tinker with saves. 

I very much enjoy C&C, even though my default D&D is 0e. 

If I had a group who wanted to play AD&D, I'd sell them on C&C as it's AD&D 3.0.

I'll be interested in seeing what their C&C License might be when it arrives.

C&C is good.  I also love Old School Essentials.  Make mine Hyperborea 3e.

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:23:07 PM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

The math problems of higher levels in the SIEGE system is quite well known. Often making non-prime attribute saving throws almost impossible or near impossible against spellcaster of higher level. This is as of why many people changes target numbers for primes and non-prime checks.

Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

I love the work they did on the DMing side of things -- it's like AD&D with how much coverage there is. But on the player side, it feels a bit underwhelming... there's basically no abilities or choices. I'm used to 5e...

Quote from: Jaeger on January 18, 2023, 07:34:15 PM
Yet somehow wotzi has not been lawfared.

You seem to be confused. That nobody has sued WotC is irrelevant. Nobody has the money to win.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM
Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

Compare/contrast with D&D 3.X; the same issue is present. And to "fix" this, simply make the ability a non-prime for "spot" checks, or whatever you're trying to do. There is no specific WIS check outlined beyond what the GM decides to give one for; this is one of those 3.X-isms held over to C&C that doesn't really exist beyond "this is how we always did it". You can change this as needed.

The math is broken in so far as someone simply decides to just roll dice instead of applying some logical thinking. And if you hate WIS being tied to perception, change it to whatever you want. Have it tied to no attribute, or don't use it whatsoever. It's not a HUGE change, it's simply a change made to run the game how you want. Literal LOL @ balance...this is non-existent in any form of D&D.

When it first came out I did a lot with C&C. I also wrote some stuff for it (there's a Netbook of Classes still available in the Dragonsfoot resources. I also based several rpgs off the system - Go Fer Yer Gun! Medieval Mysteries and Tombs & Terrors. All heavily modified, of course. Haven't played C&C for a while, so I think I'll check it out again.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:23:07 PM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

The math problems of higher levels in the SIEGE system is quite well known. Often making non-prime attribute saving throws almost impossible or near impossible against spellcaster of higher level. This is as of why many people changes target numbers for primes and non-prime checks.

Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

Here's how we do "Perception" checks in our group:

A perception check is called for during circumstances when the characters may notice something out of the ordinary. It doesn't replace any kind of search check covered by another race or class ability.
Check: 1d20+Perception Score vs 15
Perception Score:
a. The average (round down) of the bonuses from "mental" attributes.
b. If a character has any "mental" attribute as prime they gain a +1 to the check.
c. Races that gain a bonus to Listen checks gain that same bonus to perception checks (elf +2, gnome +3, etc)
d. Ranger, rogue, assassin, barbarian, illusionist, druid, skald, and bard classes gain a +1 to their check.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:23:07 PM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

The math problems of higher levels in the SIEGE system is quite well known. Often making non-prime attribute saving throws almost impossible or near impossible against spellcaster of higher level. This is as of why many people changes target numbers for primes and non-prime checks.

Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

I just don't use perception/spot checks in the manner they started doing in later, inferior editions of D&D.  Always hated those in fact.  Tell me what you're looking at/for and I'll tell you if you see something.  I detest that "I rolled my spot check and it was 20" or whatever.  To me, that's turning roleplaying into roll playing. 

As for Siege Engine math, it definitely makes things scale differently than standard D&D.  It's more like MERP/Rolemaster in that respect, which I kind of like.  Because we tend to just use common sense I haven't encountered the class-based issues some people seem to have with the primes and how they affect certain actions because I try to limit the rolling unless it's absolutely necessary.  Players aren't constantly rolling perception checks, for example.

And I still think the old school roll under your ability score on a d20 is the most elegant way to handle most situations, hence my appreciation for Swords & Wizardry, which we also enjoy quite a bit.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on January 19, 2023, 04:29:00 AM
I love the work they did on the DMing side of things -- it's like AD&D with how much coverage there is. But on the player side, it feels a bit underwhelming... there's basically no abilities or choices. I'm used to 5e...

That's because you're not familiar with having actual freedom of choice and exercising your own creativity; you rely on the illusion of choice seemingly offered by the generic examples placed before you by the mind control squad at WOTC.  There are plenty of class abilities and these are pretty much what you got in 1-2e, with some interesting tweaks, especially to the races.  And you customize through your choice of primes, weapons, spells, etc.  Your archer could be an elf like Legolas or a Mongol type horseman.  Your bard could be the classic fop, the aging dwarf loremaster, the naked Celtic skald, or the Bedouin type out of the desert, with or without magic.   They add a ton of historically-derived classes in the various Codices,including Roman gladiators and Eastern European vampire hunters.

You have to remember in the parlance of the old TSR, these are "products of your imagination."  If you want to add a few extra special abilities from your favorite system, go ahead.  But, as I know from personal experience having previously played with a group that bounced around in editions, all those feats and skills tend to slow things down and doesn't add anything you can't come up with on your own. 

We used to joke that the youngest player in our group, who started with 3e, who was just obsessed with all the clutter on his character sheet, spent more time trying to shoehorn his feats and skills into the game than actually playing and problem solving.  It was like "I have a bonus against rear attacks in semi-darkness on the second Thursday of the month when they're initiated by a midget.  How can I manufacture that situation in the game?"

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 18, 2023, 03:11:05 PM

Much faster, especially combat. No feats/skills/powers bogging shit down, orcs don't have 46,000 hit points.

I've only ran it once since learning the rules, but it was for my kids over the weekend and they grokked it just fine. Tomorrow night's the first "real" session with one of my groups, so I'll know more after that, but from the little play I've had with it, it played great.

Great information.  I am liking what I am reading and I really like the idea of faster combat.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb on January 18, 2023, 04:31:23 PM

I prefer to use the term, "Derp Evil". ;D

Yes I misspoke.  I meant Derp Evil  ;D

Given the big push to get away from 5E this past week I would not have picked Castles And Crusades as one of the top contenders.

It seems like a good game, but so do a lot of others. 

My games to pick from are these. 

1.  Dragon Warriors.  It's got a different way of handling armor (saving throw), and uses magic points instead of amnesia for wizards.  And Fighters are not a thing.  Your basic warrior is a Knight, with GM options to rename it as Samurai, Huscarl, or whatever you like. 

2.  Any of the dozens of OSR games.  C&C is just one of those.

3.  Shadow of the Demon Lord.  Lots of character building options since you pick three classes over time instead of one at the start. 

Castles and Crusades might be ahead of the pack in the OSR because it's not using any OGL, thus it's "clean" right now.  But so are a lot of games.  Both Dragon Warriors and Shadow of the Demon Lord are also clear of any OGL stuff. 

I have to hand it to WotC to have a large chunk of gaming suddenly feel contaminated and verboten. 

Me, I'm sticking to my rules lite stuff.  It's still fun, and OGL or not I already own the books

Quote from: migo on January 19, 2023, 04:32:33 AM
...
You seem to be confused. That nobody has sued WotC is irrelevant. Nobody has the money to win.

This is the exact same reason why minor system differences will not save the D&D clones that these smaller game companies are making if Wotzi decides to lawfare them.

I acknowledge that particular individual trees are there. But I'm also looking at the whole forest.

Citing small system differences in a D&D clone like it's some kind of helpful argument, when the game company can't afford to fight back against the lawfare anyway, is just trying to invoke some forlorn hope.

Those system differences also mean nothing when they also use vancian casting, which is 100% D&D through and through.

That being said; Nobody knows exactly how full-retard Wotzi is going to go. Or if companies are going to band together, or if Baizuo will foot the bill, and be the front man.

Nobody knows anything right now.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM


Castles and Crusades might be ahead of the pack in the OSR because it's not using any OGL, thus it's "clean" right now. 

It isn't. They've been copy and pasting (with mistakes) since 2004. They almost certainly have SRD content that requires the OGL right now.

Castles & Crusades doesn't need to have it, but they would have to do a new printing with significant editing, and would really need to hire someone outside to do it for them, because I doubt they have the competence to clean it properly.

Their focus on mythology means they could take out the spells they need to, replace them with some more mythological ones, and also change the content of Monsters & Treasure to fit that mythological focus. The game would be the same, have full compatibility, but a slightly different tone.

They are currently working on removing anything that would be potentiall problematic with the whole OGL situation. They have their Twitch stream starting here in about 20 min (I don't think I can make all of this one) where they'll talk more about it, I'm sure.

Bought the 1st or 2nd printing books many moons ago and played a few games online.  Liked it for the similarity to 3e mechanics but none of the feats/etc. to clutter up things.  In lieu of the massive tomes in the 3e era, the C&C books were a breath of fresh air, for me, in just being so danged "light," and trimmed of fluff.  Plus, no dungeonpunk aesthetic that I could see, iirc.

Glad to see them still kicking.

Quote from: Danger on January 19, 2023, 07:28:12 PM
Plus, no dungeonpunk aesthetic that I could see, iirc.

They lasted 7 printings of the PHB. As of the 8th printing they're starting to lean that way.

Quote from: migo on January 19, 2023, 07:53:20 PM
They lasted 7 printings of the PHB. As of the 8th printing they're starting to lean that way.

Goddammit.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM
Given the big push to get away from 5E this past week I would not have picked Castles And Crusades as one of the top contenders.

It seems like a good game, but so do a lot of others. 

C&C has been one of the top games recommended as a 5e alternative for quite a while. I did a thread a while back asking for such recommendations, and C&C was far and away the top community pick. The reasons for this are quite possibly commercial as much as anything else. Outside of OSE, C&C seems to be the best marketed and distributed of the OSR big names. Player's Handbook pdfs are free, and it's one of the few OSR games you can reliably buy off Amazon. The presentation is more "modern"  than most competitors, it has most of the popular races/classes, it has tons of adventures, and is cross compatible with lots of adventures from other games. The only real barrier to entry for people coming from 5e is the SIEGE engine, which even though I don't personally like it, isn't exactly super difficult to learn.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM
My games to pick from are these. 

1.  Dragon Warriors.  It's got a different way of handling armor (saving throw), and uses magic points instead of amnesia for wizards.  And Fighters are not a thing.  Your basic warrior is a Knight, with GM options to rename it as Samurai, Huscarl, or whatever you like. 

I like DW a lot (I'm currently running it), but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone as a 5e substitute. Despite the fact that the corebook claims you could run any fantasy setting with it, DW's primary appeal (to me at least) is the specific semi-historical and heroic/romantic tone built into it. Also, a person coming from 5e or Pathfinder 2 is going to get severe culture shock from the mechanical changes and drastically fewer race/class options.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM
2.  Any of the dozens of OSR games.  C&C is just one of those.

My own favorite OSR games are probably Hyperborea and Fantastic Heroes and Witchery, with Helveczia possibly about to join that club once I get more time to read it, but all three are potential hard-sells to people first coming from mainstream fantasy games. Hyperborea has the class options and despite the weird-fantasy setting, feels just like D&D in play, but it's a THAC0 game, and is pretty steeped in AD&D crunch when it comes to how spells, travel etc. work. FH&W has tons of options as well and no THAC0, but also no bestiary, setting or adventures. Helveczia is an even more specific setting and tone than Dragon Warriors, and one that's even more different than what a nu-school D&D player would be used to.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM
3.  Shadow of the Demon Lord.  Lots of character building options since you pick three classes over time instead of one at the start. 

So, SOTDL is a game I'm of two minds about. Mechanically, I think it's brilliant. I don't love AC and never will, but it's the only game I know of that approaches 3.5/5e/Pathfinder levels of character customization without falling into the rules bloat that plagues those games. I think the mix-and-match class system takes the best elements of both D&D's class system and WFRP's professions and combines them, and I also think SOTDL has one of the most elegant spells-per-day system I've ever seen. On the other hand, I absolutely hate the setting, which seems to take all the worst elements of both modern D&D and Warhammer Fantasy. Even more than DW, the setting is woven into the spells and classes to the extent that it isn't easily extricable.

I believe I've heard that Robert Schwalb is working on a "high fantasy" version of SOTDL. When that comes out, there's a good possibility that it'll be the perfect 5e replacement.

Also those that do like Shadow of the Demon Lord should really check out Punkapocalytic, another Robert Schwalb product which is basically "Shadow of Lord Humongous". To me it's got a comparable level of cringe to the setting, but I see to be the only one that thinks so.

One of the other big OSR-adjacent games that hasn't seen much coverage around here lately is Dungeon Crawl Classics, which should also continue to do well in the current environment.  I'd say that its overall presence in the hobby exceeds that of C&C.  I've certainly seen it in lots of brick and mortar stores, including in my small hometown.  They also carry C&C at times and always have OSE in stock, for what that's worth.

Additionally, and germane to this thread, the brand new Swords & Sorcery game "Swords & Chaos" is based on the C&C Siege Engine, but take elements from DCC, most notably the Luck stat and the "Mighty Deeds" mechanic for warriors, along with spell corruption.  I haven't seen the full game yet as I backed only the physical book, but for those of you interested in C&C but wanting a few more elements from later D&D editions, this could be an alternative.

In running C&C, I didn't stress the Cleric / WIS / Perception issue.

Clerics have the spell Find Traps. Why? Because the Gawds apparently hate traps whacking their templars. Thus, a bonus Clerics gain with their Prime is noticing traps as frequently as Thieves.

Plus, when you have a group without a Thief, the Cleric is your Trap-Sniffer!

Quote from: Persimmon on January 19, 2023, 08:23:15 PM
One of the other big OSR-adjacent games that hasn't seen much coverage around here lately is Dungeon Crawl Classics, which should also continue to do well in the current environment.  I'd say that its overall presence in the hobby exceeds that of C&C.  I've certainly seen it in lots of brick and mortar stores, including in my small hometown.  They also carry C&C at times and always have OSE in stock, for what that's worth.

Additionally, and germane to this thread, the brand new Swords & Sorcery game "Swords & Chaos" is based on the C&C Siege Engine, but take elements from DCC, most notably the Luck stat and the "Mighty Deeds" mechanic for warriors, along with spell corruption.  I haven't seen the full game yet as I backed only the physical book, but for those of you interested in C&C but wanting a few more elements from later D&D editions, this could be an alternative.

DCC is very popular, but the authors also understand that it isn't for everyone, and tell you right at the beginning if you don't like certain things, the game is not for you. It's not a good pick for people who want something like 5e with as little change as possible. It's for people who want something distinctly different from 5e, but prefer something that is overall better designed than games from the 80s and 90s.

Quote from: Spinachcat on January 20, 2023, 12:48:28 AM
In running C&C, I didn't stress the Cleric / WIS / Perception issue.

Clerics have the spell Find Traps. Why? Because the Gawds apparently hate traps whacking their templars. Thus, a bonus Clerics gain with their Prime is noticing traps as frequently as Thieves.

Plus, when you have a group without a Thief, the Cleric is your Trap-Sniffer!

This is a good explanation. The other thing you could do is base perception off Charisma. Highly charismatic people have the ability to read a room and pick up subtle signs. It especially makes sense if you want to notice if someone is lying to you. Perception could also be based off intelligence, depending on what it is that the characters are supposed to notice. C&C gives you flexibility to use the attribute you think is most appropriate, and of course gives you the advice (buried in a later chapter) to not roll for every little thing.

If the Rogue's player announces as they're entering the room that they're searching for traps, you don't need to roll - just say that they found it. If the player didn't announce it, then you can secretly roll for them to see if they noticed it on passing.

If Perception is a problem, just make it automatically a +6 for the classes that are supposed to be good at it. Detach it from stats.

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 19, 2023, 08:11:17 PM
So, SOTDL is a game I'm of two minds about. Mechanically, I think it's brilliant. I don't love AC and never will, but it's the only game I know of that approaches 3.5/5e/Pathfinder levels of character customization without falling into the rules bloat that plagues those games. I think the mix-and-match class system takes the best elements of both D&D's class system and WFRP's professions and combines them, and I also think SOTDL has one of the most elegant spells-per-day system I've ever seen. On the other hand, I absolutely hate the setting, which seems to take all the worst elements of both modern D&D and Warhammer Fantasy. Even more than DW, the setting is woven into the spells and classes to the extent that it isn't easily extricable.

I believe I've heard that Robert Schwalb is working on a "high fantasy" version of SOTDL. When that comes out, there's a good possibility that it'll be the perfect 5e replacement.

Also those that do like Shadow of the Demon Lord should really check out Punkapocalytic, another Robert Schwalb product which is basically "Shadow of Lord Humongous". To me it's got a comparable level of cringe to the setting, but I see to be the only one that thinks so.

I've heard lots of good things about SotDL, but it seems like it isn't the kind of game you can run with any longevity.

Quote from: GhostNinja on January 19, 2023, 09:54:36 AM

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 18, 2023, 03:11:05 PM

Much faster, especially combat. No feats/skills/powers bogging shit down, orcs don't have 46,000 hit points.

I've only ran it once since learning the rules, but it was for my kids over the weekend and they grokked it just fine. Tomorrow night's the first "real" session with one of my groups, so I'll know more after that, but from the little play I've had with it, it played great.

Great information.  I am liking what I am reading and I really like the idea of faster combat.

Last night's session went off without a hitch! We only game for three hours, and lost one of them because we had an unexpected guest show up (good friend of a few guys in last night's group happened to be on my side of town and we hadn't seen him in forever so he hung out and shot the shit for a while), but we did get in a couple of combats, and some good RP and exploration. Combats again went just as quick as we're used to with BECMI, and my players (who are familiar with the TSR way of doing things as well as the 5E way of doing things) slid into C&C with absolutely no effort whatsoever.

That's awesome to hear! It really is a great "meeting" place for people coming from different versions of the game.

I am getting back into blogging, and did a "So You Want To Play Castles & Crusades" page--more about where people can find the main books, additional resources, and other things to get them started. (I'm surprised how many people don't know the PHB and M&T are free downloads, despite being promoted by the Trolls!)

Anyhow, feedback is more than welcome:
https://rpgblogredo.blogspot.com/p/so-you-want-to-play-castles-crusades.html (https://rpgblogredo.blogspot.com/p/so-you-want-to-play-castles-crusades.html)

I got my start in TTRPGs with Palladium (TMNT, Heroes Unlimited, and Rifts) in 1990, moving on to AD&D 2nd Edition, before branching out into World of Darkness (Mage and Hunter) in the latter part of the 90s.  I was an avid and early 3.0 adopter, didn't play much 3.5, played some 4e but didn't really like how it played until Essentials.  Then I started missing TSR-era play.  After getting into the Next playtest (don't recall which one), I ran an adventure for my group of friends, then moved and focused on my career.

I took about a decade off of TTRPGs, to come back in late 2021 to 5e.  After one session, I realized that it was not at all like the D&D Next packets that I play-tested, and I found it very different from other D&D systems though with a veneer of being like older D&D*.  This was somewhat disappointing, as my wife got me a Dungeon in a Box for Christmas 2021, and so I tried to DM her and my two teen daughters through it.  Unfortunately, they found character creation to be too confusing, with my wife at one point throwing her sheet and pencil across the room in frustration (she had previously played 3.0 and it was too different for her with too many decisions to be made before even playing, such as backgrounds and personality traits).

After flirting with OSE, in May I bit the bullet and purchased the tribute covers of C&C.  We rolled up characters in less than 15 minutes (and that included going over the SEIGE Engine), and set to the Dungeon in a Box.  I DMed it like I did TSR era game, and my wife and daughters had a blast.  We only ever rolled "skills" when there was a significant chance of failure, which kept the exploration phase moving quickly.  I had forgotten how fast old school combat could be, and so I DMed a random encounter as I would in 3.x and 4e and they just went all-out on my wandering monsters and decimated them, forcing the survivors to flee.

So, needless to say, my wife and daughters love C&C.  I'm trying to convince my best friend to switch his campaigns to it; he currently has all my books to review.  So many of us in our group have expressed nostalgia for the quick and imaginative play of 2nd Edition and earlier versions that it should be an easy sell to the rest of the group, but, hey, best friend is DM, so he gets final decision on what he wants to run. 

I am dipping my toes in Savage Worlds SWADE for the home game (in part because my best friend has my C&C books at the moment).  That's partly due to the Savage Pathfinder thread, me having followed it somewhat since 2012, and concern over the OGL's impact on TLG's ability to print new works.  The latter is being alleviated in part due to what TLG is posting on their Facebook group (don't care for Discord, sorry) in regards to pulling from the first game that they released, as well other comments from them about stripping out OGL material. 

All in all, I highly recommend C&C for an AD&D like experience with some more modern mechanics.

*It's mostly the proficiency bonus.  Everyone ends up with a +6 at 20th level.  This is the first time I've seen a D&D where your wizard attacks as well with a (proficient) weapon as a fighter.  That's a huge change to me, and one that I've not seen commented upon elsewhere.

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 19, 2023, 08:11:17 PM
C&C has been one of the top games recommended as a 5e alternative for quite a while. I did a thread a while back asking for such recommendations, and C&C was far and away the top community pick. The reasons for this are quite possibly commercial as much as anything else. Outside of OSE, C&C seems to be the best marketed and distributed of the OSR big names. Player's Handbook pdfs are free, and it's one of the few OSR games you can reliably buy off Amazon. The presentation is more "modern"  than most competitors, it has most of the popular races/classes, it has tons of adventures, and is cross compatible with lots of adventures from other games. The only real barrier to entry for people coming from 5e is the SIEGE engine, which even though I don't personally like it, isn't exactly super difficult to learn.

I think one change, even acknowledged in the CKG, makes SEIGE very easy to explain to 5e players: prime is the same as "trained" and it gives you a +6 to your roles against that attribute.

This also frees you to set DCs instead of adding an additional modified to either 12 or 18 depending on prime.

I think someone mentioned this up thread, but Troll Lord did a 1 hour Twitch episode last night where they went into detail about their plans for stripping SRD content out and producing a new printing of C&C.  They stressed that there will be new terminology and a few other tweaks, but that it would remain backwards compatible. 

Check it out here if you're interested: https://www.twitch.tv/trolllordgames

You do not need a Twitch account to simply watch.

Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

Quote from: Abraxus on January 20, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

I feel the opposite because I'm comfortable with the current, mostly AD&D terminology, spell names, etc.  I don't want to bother with trying to figure out what they're now calling "Magic Missile" or whatever.  So I'll likely not buy the new versions unless there's substantial new content.  But I've already got the latest versions of most things except the CKG anyhow so I'm probably fine for the foreseeable future.

Quote from: Abraxus on January 20, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

Guessing it is probably split between those who think this way, and those who want to grab the books with the precise terminology they have now. I can understand either approach.

Quote from: Zachary The First on January 20, 2023, 06:38:23 PM

Quote from: Abraxus on January 20, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

Guessing it is probably split between those who think this way, and those who want to grab the books with the precise terminology they have now. I can understand either approach.

I just dropped $150 on the starter kit last week, but will be getting the new versions at least in digital so I can use the new, SRD-free terminology because I'll be putting out 3rd party modules for it. Otherwise I'd not bother.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

My solution was to run Swords & Wizardry instead. The S&W Unified Save mechanic does the job of giving you a task resolution system much better than the C&C SIEGE/Prime system, IME. Or you can use the optional D6-based skill system.

Thinking about it, if you like C&C otherwise, say for the class descriptions (and I do like the C&C non-casting Ranger & Bard very much) you could import the S&W d20 Unified Save and/or D6 skill check system into C&C extremely easy. Add them in for both Saves & Skills/ability checks, you never have to refer to the SIEGE/Primes system at all!

Quote from: Abraxus on January 20, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

It's C&C. There will be crap editing and errata regardless.

Quote from: S'mon on January 21, 2023, 05:34:21 AM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

My solution was to run Swords & Wizardry instead. The S&W Unified Save mechanic does the job of giving you a task resolution system much better than the C&C SIEGE/Prime system, IME. Or you can use the optional D6-based skill system.

Thinking about it, if you like C&C otherwise, say for the class descriptions (and I do like the C&C non-casting Ranger & Bard very much) you could import the S&W d20 Unified Save and/or D6 skill check system into C&C extremely easy. Add them in for both Saves & Skills/ability checks, you never have to refer to the SIEGE/Primes system at all!

I also like S&W quite a bit, partly because of its single save mechanic, which really speeds up play.  And you could also just use the classic d20 roll under your attribute score mechanic to cover most miscellaneous skill checks and you're totally good to go.

Incidentally, for those who prefer them, C&C also has casting versions of the bard, ranger, & paladin but with their own dedicated spell lists, which gives them more flavor.

Quote from: S'mon on January 21, 2023, 05:34:21 AM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

My solution was to run Swords & Wizardry instead. The S&W Unified Save mechanic does the job of giving you a task resolution system much better than the C&C SIEGE/Prime system, IME. Or you can use the optional D6-based skill system.

Thinking about it, if you like C&C otherwise, say for the class descriptions (and I do like the C&C non-casting Ranger & Bard very much) you could import the S&W d20 Unified Save and/or D6 skill check system into C&C extremely easy. Add them in for both Saves & Skills/ability checks, you never have to refer to the SIEGE/Primes system at all!

A great suggestion. I have been thinking the same thing since this is how Blood&Treasure does it, which, has been my go-to option amogst OSR games. It is an elegant solution.

Quote from: Persimmon on January 20, 2023, 02:30:12 PM

Quote from: Abraxus on January 20, 2023, 02:19:17 PM
Might as well wait then for the recent printing of all their core.

Better to get the latest print runs and aim not a fan of going back and forth with errata.

I feel the opposite because I'm comfortable with the current, mostly AD&D terminology, spell names, etc.  I don't want to bother with trying to figure out what they're now calling "Magic Missile" or whatever.  So I'll likely not buy the new versions unless there's substantial new content.  But I've already got the latest versions of most things except the CKG anyhow so I'm probably fine for the foreseeable future.

I'm with you on this.  I know they have to change certain things for legal reasons, but that has no effect on my game at all.  I'll still call it a Magic Missile, Call Lightning, etc regardless.  I have every PHB from the 4th printing to the 8th, and multiple printings of the Castle Keepers Guide and Monsters & Treasure.  I don't need others at this point.

Jason Vey, one of Troll Lord's writer, made this statement on Twitter not that long back. Pundit even did a video about the backlash. This tweet caused Stephen Chenault to put out a tweet about how Troll Lord didn't get involved in politics, and Vey deleted the tweet.

"Seriously, ONLY an arrogant, entitled, middle-class, white male with the WORST kind of tinfoil-hat-wearing persecution complex would actually state that a vaccination requirement was "championing exclusion. WHAT THE F***."

Vey has featured prominently in the recent Troll Lord Twitch streams. There have been a couple of threads about C&C here and elsewhere that I normally would have hopped into to champion the system, but I've refrained because of this. I don't really like giving money to people who hate me, and it's obvious that Vey has an issue with middle class white guys, regardless of vaccination status. Otherwise why specify that particular demographic? Particularly when a lot of the more prominent people expressing vaccine skepticism aren't middle class white guys? Just an excuse to take a shot at someone he hates.

Vey is really their "Amazing Adventures" guy, as well as the owner of Elf Lair Games.  ELG has it's own fantasy system.  I don't recall him having any C&C products.  AA is a good game; Vey seems like a turd.

Edit:  I'm a big TLG fan and will continue to support them.  They're good guys who are focused on gaming.  Vey broke the rules, and it was addressed.  No problems.

Quote from: Klytus on January 22, 2023, 03:41:05 PM
Jason Vey, one of Troll Lord's writer, made this statement on Twitter not that long back. Pundit even did a video about the backlash. This tweet caused Stephen Chenault to put out a tweet about how Troll Lord didn't get involved in politics, and Vey deleted the tweet.

"Seriously, ONLY an arrogant, entitled, middle-class, white male with the WORST kind of tinfoil-hat-wearing persecution complex would actually state that a vaccination requirement was "championing exclusion. WHAT THE F***."

Vey has featured prominently in the recent Troll Lord Twitch streams. There have been a couple of threads about C&C here and elsewhere that I normally would have hopped into to champion the system, but I've refrained because of this. I don't really like giving money to people who hate me, and it's obvious that Vey has an issue with middle class white guys, regardless of vaccination status. Otherwise why specify that particular demographic? Particularly when a lot of the more prominent people expressing vaccine skepticism aren't middle class white guys? Just an excuse to take a shot at someone he hates.

You're right about Vey, of course. But this event also speaks positively of the Chenaults. They called Vey to task for his tweet and made it clear he isn't to do that again. As of the 7th printing at least, Vey doesn't seem to have worked on the core C&C products either.

Right—no company is going to be perfect. There was a situation, and they handled it, which is great. They're a solid company, who takes care of their fans.

Quote from: migo on January 22, 2023, 04:00:29 PM

Quote from: Klytus on January 22, 2023, 03:41:05 PM
Jason Vey, one of Troll Lord's writer, made this statement on Twitter not that long back. Pundit even did a video about the backlash. This tweet caused Stephen Chenault to put out a tweet about how Troll Lord didn't get involved in politics, and Vey deleted the tweet.

"Seriously, ONLY an arrogant, entitled, middle-class, white male with the WORST kind of tinfoil-hat-wearing persecution complex would actually state that a vaccination requirement was "championing exclusion. WHAT THE F***."

Vey has featured prominently in the recent Troll Lord Twitch streams. There have been a couple of threads about C&C here and elsewhere that I normally would have hopped into to champion the system, but I've refrained because of this. I don't really like giving money to people who hate me, and it's obvious that Vey has an issue with middle class white guys, regardless of vaccination status. Otherwise why specify that particular demographic? Particularly when a lot of the more prominent people expressing vaccine skepticism aren't middle class white guys? Just an excuse to take a shot at someone he hates.

You're right about Vey, of course. But this event also speaks positively of the Chenaults. They called Vey to task for his tweet and made it clear he isn't to do that again. As of the 7th printing at least, Vey doesn't seem to have worked on the core C&C products either.

If it's true that you can judge a company by the quality of its enemies, note that TLG has been the object of much ire over at TBP. :)

Quote from: Klytus on January 22, 2023, 03:41:05 PMit's obvious that Vey has an issue with middle class white guys, regardless of vaccination status. Otherwise why specify that particular demographic? Particularly when a lot of the more prominent people expressing vaccine skepticism aren't middle class white guys? Just an excuse to take a shot at someone he hates.

How will I know if I'm rich enough or poor enough to play Amazing Adventures? Did Jason help us out with an income bracket that he hates, perhaps a color chart so we know how paleface a male must be to be excluded from play? Are Italians olive enough to dice with him? And what about those deplorable White women smart enough to avoid poisoning themselves with medical experiments?

What a shame too. AA was a good game that I've run several times since backing the original edition Kickstarter.

I've played Shadow of the Demon Lord for a while as my 5e replacement, but I've started looking into Castles & Crusades as SotDL doesn't seem to be very well-suited for longterm play. Even if you space out advancements, characters jump in power very quickly and they soon run out of things to work towards. Plus, it seems like even at moderately higher levels - in SotDL's case 3 or 4 - the cracks in the system start to show. It's not as balanced as it seems initially and certain Path abilities and spells that can be obtained very early on can feel almost broken with just a little bit of cheesing.

Add on to that the terrible setting that takes some work scrubbing from the game's features, and the generally obnoxious "edgelordiness" and political leanings of its designer and the various game supplements, contrasting the comparatively excellent attitude of TLG and its stance against real-world politics in games, and I'm starting to feel like switching over.

For any C&C vets: how does C&C compare to SotDL? Is it about the same power level or lower? And how does it compare to 5e overall?

Bonus question, I checked out a system called Low Fantasy Gaming that also seems good, and its one-man designer has a fairly anti-woke, anti-political stance, but from looking over the rules it seems a little clunky in places. If anyone's played that, how does C&C compare?

I really quite like C&C. My only major issue is that there are no casting times/weapon speeds so I can't get granular with initiative like I can with 2e, and trying to houserule it in would be a nightmare. It's really the only thing keeping me from running it.

Quote from: shoplifter on April 07, 2023, 03:17:29 PM
I really quite like C&C. My only major issue is that there are no casting times/weapon speeds so I can't get granular with initiative like I can with 2e, and trying to houserule it in would be a nightmare. It's really the only thing keeping me from running it.

That level of detail could've turned me off to a game system. 

There is another great OSR game that has a weapon stat that's an initiative bonus.  The game is called Fantastic Heroes and Witchery.  Among its many good points is the weapon stat called Speed Factor (called segs).  Roll 1D6 each turn and add your weapon Speed Factor.  The highest goes first. 

It's a good game for a lot of other reasons.  It's one of the few games that includes transported Earth humans as a race option. 

C&C is my favorite version of D&D.

It's so easy to roll up a character and get into the action quickly. Combat flows at a reasonably speedy pace and doesn't bog down with lots of combatants.

Currently I'm playing in a bi-weekly online game (voice and Roll20) and some of us are up to 4th level. System working great so far in the lower levels.

It is a game that often sees a lot of houseruling, not because you need to, but rather because it's so easy to do to tweak things just the way you like.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on April 07, 2023, 06:47:23 PM

Quote from: shoplifter on April 07, 2023, 03:17:29 PM
I really quite like C&C. My only major issue is that there are no casting times/weapon speeds so I can't get granular with initiative like I can with 2e, and trying to houserule it in would be a nightmare. It's really the only thing keeping me from running it.

That level of detail could've turned me off to a game system. 

There is another great OSR game that has a weapon stat that's an initiative bonus.  The game is called Fantastic Heroes and Witchery.  Among its many good points is the weapon stat called Speed Factor (called segs).  Roll 1D6 each turn and add your weapon Speed Factor.  The highest goes first. 

It's a good game for a lot of other reasons.  It's one of the few games that includes transported Earth humans as a race option.

That game is so good. Wish it had monster suppliments