Why C&C Should Be Your Go-To D&D

[alcyone]

Ascending AC -
I get it, you don't have any issue with THAC0, attack charts, descending AC. But with ascending AC, you directly compare your attack to the AC. It's just faster.

Everything's a SIEGE Check -
You could just say everything's a saving throw, because it all works the same way. Not EVERYTHING is a SIEGE check, but everything that could justifiably work as one is. I get it. You don't have a problem with saving throw tables and you have either a skill system or some kind of roll-under house rule. Fine, but again, this way doesn't require you look anything up, and it works for both saves and skills (and whatever other situations come up.)

Simple initiative -
You probably have the initiative system you want in other games, either what comes with the game or house ruled. C&C has a simple d10, high goes first, with very few exceptions system. Of course, you can use any system you want and very little if anything will break.

Monsters are simple -
Monsters stat blocks are pretty simple in C&C compared to newer editions, and don't require any cross referencing like older editions (Monster saves as fighter 1, for example.) A monster has physical and/or mental primes, and that with HD and AC are usually all you need to know. Monsters add their HD to attack rolls, and their HD form a CL for saves. Though terminology is not standardized like in d20, this just frees up the CK to house rule it.

You can still use your other books -
You never HAVE to, but if you want to get more detail on a rule, or just make a spell work the same way it did in your other favorite D&D, it will probably work, and not have much of a ripple effect.

Ripples get stopped in their tracks -
One of the benefits of a simple system is that there isn't a rich network of connections between different standardized mechanics. It is said that C&C was made for house ruling. The reason that works is your decisions are unlikely to affect other parts of the game. If you've ever tried to house rule d20, you understand what I mean. I get it, you are an ace at that stuff. You don't need to be one in C&C.

It's not D&D, but that's for the legal department to worry about -
At your table it quacks like a D&D duck.

It's alive -
Not that D&D is dead, even your oldest books. But if you have a question about C&C, its modules, or how it is used to run with old systems, you can get on the forums and get a quick(ish) response from another fan or a Troll.

I still love and play many editions of TSR and WoTC's games. These days, though, I have a lot of choice and not much time. So the most accessible bookshelf at my house has C&C on it. There are lots of games I like, but C&C is the one I want to play.

DISCLAIMER - Yes, I know, the non-C&C game you play works fine, by gum, and always has, since the napoleonic wars when your great great great grandad gave his life for a d10 with 20 sides. What are you doing here again?

[Relaxo]

Yes yes yes yes yes!

[DMSamuel]

Also, it's easy to introduce to new players, old or young, because the system is simple. And because it still includes all of the traditional fantasy tropes, it feels like D&D even though the letters are one slot back on the alphabet line. The ease of understanding and the traditional feel makes it a winner for veterans or newbies.

I truly believe that C&C is what 3e should have been... It IS my 3e.

[ThrorII]

Yup. I've house ruled a few things:
-level limits for demi-humans (instead of primes)
-DC15 checks instead of SIEGE checks
-simplified encumbrance

Other than that, we run it as AD&D 3rd Edition.

[serleran]

AD&D has ascending AC when your THAC0 gets negative.


I do not think the "only" reason one might consider C&C is because of numerically increasing AC. If that were it, anyone could choose any of a variety of games with the same underpinnings. There are numerous.

Therefore, there is probably some combination of things that those who like C&C like about C&C... ascending AC being, potentially, one of them.

For me, I could care less. Its just numbers. They're binomial and go both ways.

[Treebore]

For me its two things, it is the "Rosetta Stone" for D&D, so is easy to convert anything from any edition of D&D to it, as well as Paladium and other systems, as Serl has proven with his conversions, the second being thanks to the Prime system the game remains challenging even at high levels. So in C&C the PC's do not become super beings that become nearly immune or at least highly resistant to everything. The ease of house ruling certainly helps as well. As does the simplicity of the core mechanic.

[tylermo]

Couldn't agree more. As I've said before, occasionally a 3.5 or PF player (in paticular) might be put off by slower leveling, d4 wizard as opposed to d6, few spells, characters not being as powerful, etc. Also, I've got one old school friend who doesn't like the hd of monsters being added to an opposing players challenge level. Otherwise, I come across very few complaints.

[finarvyn]

I agree that C&C is what "AD&D 3" should have been instead of the 3E that we got.

I have a hard time with go-to games because often it comes down to my mood. OD&D has been my go-to game for decades because it's so easy to tweak and house-rule. While C&C is certainly in my "top five" RPGs of all time, sometimes I have the urge for crunchy games and 13th Age or D&D Next is fun for that.

[Breakdaddy]

I agree that C&C is what "AD&D 3" should have been instead of the 3E that we got.

I have a hard time with go-to games because often it comes down to my mood. OD&D has been my go-to game for decades because it's so easy to tweak and house-rule. While C&C is certainly in my "top five" RPGs of all time, sometimes I have the urge for crunchy games and 13th Age or D&D Next is fun for that.

LIES!!!!!

Nah, I'm with Marv on this one. I love C&C and it gets most of my Fantasy RPG table-time but I do switch it up a bit at times as the mood strikes. Most notably with OD&D (LBB) and Savage Worlds.

[Treebore]

I switch it up as often as I can, like right now I run Traveller for my face to face group, alternating with Aces and Eights being ran by my youngest son, tonight we start up a Summer game of Rifts, or play C&C one more time, before we wrap it up for the Summer Rifts game. My Thursday group is all about playing a variety of RPG's, which is why we change it up every 6 to 8 weeks, right now it is Traveller, when that wraps up this week or next, we start Shadowrun 5E.

So yeah, I definitely do not like doing one system all the time.

[Omote]

I like Castles & Crusades.

~O

[alcyone]

This is as positive and good-natured a thread as I can manage. It will take a lot of trolling and grumping to recover for me.

[Zudrak]

For me its two things, it is the "Rosetta Stone" for D&D, so is easy to convert anything from any edition of D&D to it, as well as Paladium and other systems, as Serl has proven with his conversions, the second being thanks to the Prime system the game remains challenging even at high levels. So in C&C the PC's do not become super beings that become nearly immune or at least highly resistant to everything. The ease of house ruling certainly helps as well. As does the simplicity of the core mechanic.

The first thing is THE main reason I've stuck with C&C. My reason for coming to it in the first place is EGG's recommendation back in 2005.

[Gundoggy]

I agree.

As much as I love reading 1E books, C&C is a more elegant game. The siege mechanic, simplified to hit for monsters, and the customization in skills/saves that choosing primes allows makes it extremely smooth to run. As a DM I can run most sessions without looking up specific rules all the time that 3.x and even 1E required.

[Omote]

You don't hear that C&C is an elegant game very often. I'm glad your brought that up Gundoggy, because I completely agree that the Siege Engine, how attributes work, primes v. non-primes is very elegant. I love it. I'm not sure I can ever go back to any other fantasy RPG again -- and this is coming from a massive fan of BECMI and Palladium Fantasy!

~O

[Buttmonkey]

I'm on board for the elegant reason, too. C&C is a more elegant version of what I played back in the early 80s. Learning C&C was like getting back on a bicycle after a few years, only a much better bicycle. It immediately makes a lot of sense and there is very, very little to learn (basically, the SIEGE engine, which takes all of 10-20 minutes to read about in the PHB). I like the idea of a modern 3 save system, but C&C's attribute-based saves are easy enough given that pretty much any save I can think of has already been categorized by the Trolls. Everything else is a SIEGE check. Good times.

[Litzen Tallister]

The elegance is a biggy. When our group (which is very D&D-centric in their fantasy rpg playing) was convinced to try 1st edition AD&D, the odd organization and seemingly arbitrary rules-systems (surprise mechanic anyone?) turned a number of people off. However, C&C manages to run a game that carries much the same feel, but in a streamlined, consistent, and easily digested manner. Also, no need for wildly varying rules systems based on what edition it happens to be. Going on Fifteen years now with minor changes between printings, but no need for a revamped new edition of Castles & Crusades.

[Fiffergrund]

My big reasons for being an evangelist and contributor, back in the day:

The rules that made it into C&C aren't arbitrary, and they work together. Everything else was left out so you could do it your way, and not be forced into the playing style of the person(s) writing the game.

Broad compatibility - suddenly, all of your older material is relevant again, and you can use it ON THE FLY.

Same feel during play as 1E, but doesn't require keeping track of a lot of numbers or tables. Yeah, I know a lot of us memorized the 1E tables, but having a mechanic that replicates the purpose of those tables, without requiring any reference to them - that's huge. Added bonus: the mechanic is nearly universal.

As an aside, a big case was presented for making combat part of the SIEGE engine, too. It was curbstomped in the end due to backward compatibility issues.

More elegant in the end? Maybe. But the idea was to feel like classic D&D, and when you over-engineer certain things, that goes away.

[ArgoForg]

C&C is the game I go to because it reminds me most of the games I used to play, when I could spend hours working on story and narrative and not on math/stat blocks/challenge levels/how do I offset this character's superhuman powers.

It's streamlined, it's easy to learn, easy to create a character in, easy to play, and lets the players focus on the scene and the game itself, not their character sheets. Oh, and combat doesn't have to last hours and bore me to tears waiting to move on to the next encounter.

I guess, in short, C&C is my go-to because the rules let me forget that there are rules.

[Julian Grimm]

From what I have been seeing at my game at the Raven's Loft these are the big three things that have created interest in the game:

1) Price of admission is much cheaper than many of the other games out there.

2) The feel of early D&D mixed with better and more streamlined rules.

3) Compatibility with OD&D all the way through 5e allowing for a flexible system.

[Gundoggy]

I recently started my group in the free Dragonsfoot module "Where the Fallen Jarls Sleep" using C&C of course. In a 4.5 hour long session they finished about 40% of the module. A combat that involved over 40 opponents only took about 20 - 30 minutes to complete. Use of SIEGE saves, and HD = to hit, made it super easy to run as a DM.

I have found myself going more old school...for example using the 1E version of magic items...especially swords like flame tongue vs. the extra damage 3E and C&C use for certain items. I also love swords +1/+X vs. some group as I can limit the amount of bonus bloat that +2 and higher weapons cause on the game.

The only thing I have to watch out for is that saves are deadlier in C&C I manage by applying only about 2/3 to 3/4 of opposing side's hit dice to saves while the PC's get full level bonus.

C&C saved my DM career. I switched back in 2007 after finishing running the Age of Worms in 3.5 and then telling my group I would never run 3.x again!!! The simplicity makes it more appealing than a straight return to 1E. They initially had hesitations but soon rediscovered the joy and freedom in old school gaming.

[Go0gleplex]

Definitely agree that C&C is what 2e AD&D should have evolved into. And I don't think I've ran into any other game that is as adaptable to house rules or even straight over into other genres than C&C, though I admit to not having played all of the game systems out there.

[TheMetal1]

BLUF: I like to play Castles & Crusades because its fun.