Why doesn't Castles and Crusades get any love?

[Lord Nikon]

I believe that has since changed. I've a copy of QuickStart rules on PDF.

It's QuickStart, which means just enough to try it...

[Dramaman]

I believe that has since changed. I've a copy of QuickStart rules on PDF.

It's QuickStart, which means just enough to try it...

As opposed to what? A free pdf of the entire rulebook?

[DMMike]

Well, of course I love C&C...I was on the design committee after all. Not to mention I wrote two published modules for the game...

The only differences between C&C and OOP A/D&D are Ascending AC and how skill checks/saves are handled. AC is ascending, but the numbers work for AD&D if you subtract the AAC from 20. Skill Checks/Saves are handled by target numbers of 12 and 18 (Siege Engine). Basically you choose 3 attributes if human (2 if demihuman) as Primes and any checks/saves on those attributes the TN is 12+. If its not a prime its 18+.

Now, one of your primes must be linked to your class; STR for fighter, INT for Wizard, etc. The other(s) you put where you want. If the check is a class skill or something the GM thinks is plausible for your character to do then you add your level to the roll. If not, you don't. Attribute mods always add in, and the GM adds a Challenge level depending on the difficulty of the task (basically a penalty). If you try something that's the skill of another class then no matter your prime the TN is 18. This allows any class (for example) to try to Move Silently or Pick Pockets....its unlikely they'll succeed but they have a chance. Level is always added to saving throws, and saves are attribute based. Attribute chcks/skill checks are when the PCs act on something, saves are when they react to something.

That's it. Everything else is OOP A/D&D. In fact I've run A/D&D and used the checks/saves with nobody even aware of what I was doing!

I think C&C and TLG doesn't get enough credit for the game. It was, in a very real sense, the "proto-clone". At this time, everyone was terrified of doing anything too close to the OOP games because of memories of T$R's lawsuit happy period of the 1990s. C&C got close to the line, and survived lawsuits. So, people were inspired to get closer and closer because if TLG got away with it, why can't they? So, we later had OSRIC, LL, S&W, etc., etc., ad nauseum.

I like C&C and am always ready to play a game. I like the (relatively) uniform mechanic of the Siege Engine and the significant authority the GM (called Castle Keeper) has in the game.

Vince, if you want I'll loan you one of my C&C PHBs so you can look it over with no cost to you!

DM (good at being a loan-library) Mike

[teaman]

Mike,

Didn't know you were one of the designers. A couple questions, if you will indulge me:

1. Do primes factor into saving throws as well as "skill" checks?
2. Doesn't adding the level make many thing automatic at a certain level? (Level 12 from primes, though probably earlier with bonuses?
3. Do you see C&C surviving in the long run? I like a lot of what I see, and apparently so did the DnDNext designers.

[Lord Nikon]

As opposed to what? A free pdf of the entire rulebook?

Yes. S&w is free and even LL (no art) is free. Just about every clone or similar type game is free as a PDF.

[hive_mind]

I'm not Mike (obviously) but I'll take a quick shot at this.

1. Do primes factor into saving throws as well as "skill" checks?

Yes. saving throws are handled like any other attribute check.

2. Doesn't adding the level make many thing automatic at a certain level? (Level 12 from primes, though probably earlier with bonuses?

No, because the actual difficulty of a task is equal to a challenge base (18 normally, but 12 for Primes) plus a Chalenge Level set by the DM. The challenge level is usually equal to the level of the opponent (Monster hitdice against a foe, spellcaster level when saving against a spell, etc).

3. Do you see C&C surviving in the long run? I like a lot of what I see, and apparently so did the DnDNext designers.

No way to know, but I certainly hope Troll Lord games can keep it going.

[fjw70]

Let me try to give a more complete answer to the original question. I will answer from a personal perspective and then look at it from a more general perspective.

Like I said C&C is outdated for me. There are newer mechanics I want to add to AD&D so why house rule C&C when I can just house rule the original AD&D.

C&C missed the opportunity to really clean up AD&D. For example, it kept the different number of attacks for less than one hit die monsters and 1 or greater hit die monsters. That dividing line to too arbitrary for me. A 9th level fighter get 9 attacks vs goblins but only one attack vs. orcs. Also fighter damage scales very poorly as they level (even worse than AD&D).

Another example is having both backstab and sneak attack. Those two mechanics should have been combined into a single mechanic.

Very little separates C&C and AD&D in my eyes. The switch to ascending AC is nice but that is super easy to house rule onto AD&D. The Siege Engine seems to be it's biggest selling point, but once you know how it works then it is also really easy to house rule onto AD&D. Basically C&C is not different enough from AD&D.

From the more general perspective I see C&C having a couple problems.

First, if you want an old school game then why buy C&C when you can download LL, S&W, Dark Dungeons (among others) for free.

Second, the change to ascending AC is a double-edged sword. Some will see it as an improvement but other old schoolers will lose interest as soon as they see it since they are violently opposed the ascending AC. Many old schoolers (I believe) see the old vs. new school divide like many democrats and republicans see public policy. What's better isn't important. It's all about your team winning and giving the other team credit for an improve is seen as a loss for your team.

[DMMike]

I'm not Mike (obviously) but I'll take a quick shot at this.

1. Do primes factor into saving throws as well as "skill" checks?

Yes. saving throws are handled like any other attribute check.

2. Doesn't adding the level make many thing automatic at a certain level? (Level 12 from primes, though probably earlier with bonuses?

No, because the actual difficulty of a task is equal to a challenge base (18 normally, but 12 for Primes) plus a Chalenge Level set by the DM. The challenge level is usually equal to the level of the opponent (Monster hitdice against a foe, spellcaster level when saving against a spell, etc).

3. Do you see C&C surviving in the long run? I like a lot of what I see, and apparently so did the DnDNext designers.

No way to know, but I certainly hope Troll Lord games can keep it going.

Pretty much correct with the above. I'd further note that unlike OOP A/D&D Thieves; sorry..."Rogues" have statistically better chances in doing many of their skills. For instance a 1st level Rogue with a 16 Dex can pick the pocket of a 1st level [fill in the blank] or 1 HD critter 50% of the time. Dex is prime for Rogues so base of 12 + level 1 +2 for attribute bonus - target's level/HD of 1. So, on a D20 you roll 10+ and you succeed. A lot better than prior editions!

I really like the spellcaster bit of having an opponent's level factored in. It make a real difference in a spell getting cast by a 3rd level MU versus a 10th level Wizard.

I do hope TLG can keep C&C going, and I think they're going to try but depending on how 5E comes out they might have an uphill battle. The Dungeons & Dragons name still has a lot of pull in the marketplace. We'll see.


DM (Good at being Optimistic) Mike

[teaman]

Thanks Mike, for the thoughts. I hope they can keep afloat too, in spite of DnDNext.

If WOTC bloats up DnDNext far beyond the playtests, people will be looking for lighter alternatives. And WOTC's track record is to BLOAT (4E, I'm looking at you.)

[Papercut/Teazia]

ADnd3e Primeless is a much more refined version of C&C IMO, check it out. It has much mo Old School Gygax Flavor as well!

That being said C&C does deserve some credit along with HackMaster for being proto OSR. The former split with the OSRIC crowd is pretty common knowledge (although the trail of the dispute is disappearing in the mists of the interwebs). TLGs has not always been the most professional outfit, and they will wear their Castle Zagyg mishandling with shame for a time to come. They had the brass ring but fumbled it, big big huge time!

TLG do seem like nice guys, and patriotic to boot, but their professionalism, business practices, and execution leave much to be desired.

I do disagree with the assertion the C&C doesn't get love though, it gets tons on rpg.net, just not as much on OSRish sites as there is a more full fledged OSR bent to them (or outright hostility due to the TLG/Knights and Knaves Clownhouse rift).