castles&crusades/d&d [Archive] - Wizards Community

castles&crusades/d&d [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
acidburn
06-12-07, 09:33 PM So I've been roleplaying for about half a year now and my dm says that he really likes the castles&crusades better then the new rules for d&d, and thats what we played the whole time. I was just wondering what differences there were between the two systems, and maybe if any of you have any experience with the c&c system, maybe what you like and dislike about it, or something like that:P .
A couple of my friends and I are thinking of starting a campaign, and I was just wanting to see if it would be that hard for me to make the change. Thanks guys;).
Particle_Man
06-12-07, 10:08 PM C&C is a rules lighter version of d20. Instead of feats and skills, you have class abilities and primes (2-3 "favoured" ability scores). The core C&C rules don't have multi-classing. Monsters are extremely simplified, and since characters are simpler, NPCs are simplified too.

Thus you have a game that is easier for the DM to run, but which gives less options to players unless the DM houserules them in.

I like C&C, but am having a devil of a time selling my gaming group on it. They have told me it is better as an introductory game for newbie players.
tete
06-15-07, 01:53 PM C&C reminds me of AD&D with less rules. Some times less is more and sometimes less is just less. I'd say its better and worse in some ways.
erc1971
06-15-07, 02:32 PM I recently made the move from D&D 3.5 to C&C.

Overall I like it much better.

Being rules light, there are going to be some things you can't do in C&C, however it's big draw is the rule lite system. With D&D, we literally spent half our time a the table in the book trying to decipher the rules; in addition the rules were written poorly/ambiguously - we we spent more time discussing/arguing what the intent of the rule was. With C&C, we just play. We almost never look in the book (except for spells now and then), and we get more done in 1 hour than we did in 4 with D&D 3.5. In addition, the lack of rules to make your character uber get people away from the munchkin attitude, and they start focusing on the personality behind the character and roleplaying.

I am very happy with it, and won't be going back for a long time.

Eric

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
acidburn 06-12-07, 09:33 PM	So I've been roleplaying for about half a year now and my dm says that he really likes the castles&crusades better then the new rules for d&d, and thats what we played the whole time. I was just wondering what differences there were between the two systems, and maybe if any of you have any experience with the c&c system, maybe what you like and dislike about it, or something like that:P . A couple of my friends and I are thinking of starting a campaign, and I was just wanting to see if it would be that hard for me to make the change. Thanks guys;).
Particle_Man 06-12-07, 10:08 PM	C&C is a rules lighter version of d20. Instead of feats and skills, you have class abilities and primes (2-3 "favoured" ability scores). The core C&C rules don't have multi-classing. Monsters are extremely simplified, and since characters are simpler, NPCs are simplified too. Thus you have a game that is easier for the DM to run, but which gives less options to players unless the DM houserules them in. I like C&C, but am having a devil of a time selling my gaming group on it. They have told me it is better as an introductory game for newbie players.
tete 06-15-07, 01:53 PM	C&C reminds me of AD&D with less rules. Some times less is more and sometimes less is just less. I'd say its better and worse in some ways.
erc1971 06-15-07, 02:32 PM	I recently made the move from D&D 3.5 to C&C. Overall I like it much better. Being rules light, there are going to be some things you can't do in C&C, however it's big draw is the rule lite system. With D&D, we literally spent half our time a the table in the book trying to decipher the rules; in addition the rules were written poorly/ambiguously - we we spent more time discussing/arguing what the intent of the rule was. With C&C, we just play. We almost never look in the book (except for spells now and then), and we get more done in 1 hour than we did in 4 with D&D 3.5. In addition, the lack of rules to make your character uber get people away from the munchkin attitude, and they start focusing on the personality behind the character and roleplaying. I am very happy with it, and won't be going back for a long time. Eric