Farewell but not Goodbye

babbage · Post by **babbage** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:08 am

I'm posting this here because I know it's one of the few forums that won't start a flame war over the topic of d20. I say "d20" because all the d20 games suffer from the same mechanic.

Let me fill in my background first though. I started playing roleplaying games some 25-ish years ago with Basic D&D. I progressed to First Edition (1e) then Second Edition (2e). When Third Edition (3e) came out I adopted that and also it's update (3.5e). There have been a few breaks from playing, but not many, and I have been consistently playing for most of those 25 years. It has to be said though that it hasn't always been D&D. A fair few other RPGs were played including (but not limited to) Palladium, Warhammer, Paranoia, Star Wars, Traveller, Harnmaster, Runequest, MERP, Rolemaster, Spacemaster and others. Some of these persisted for a while but they never replaced D&D.

As you can see, I have a lot of experience of quite a few RPGs and have DMed most if not all of them for quite a few years. So, what exactly is the point of this thread? Well, the answer I'm afraid is rather elusive, but revolves around the direction of the hobby in general and D&D in particular.

When 3e came out I was ecstatic. We'd been starved of new material for a while and it all sounded great. I am a programmer by trade and have been involved in a fair few 'character generation' projects of my own over the years. As soon as I saw (and read) the 3e PHB I commented about how everything was based on formulas (the experience progression table, BAB, feats, skills and so on). This would make it easier to write software based on the ruleset. How prophetic! Over the coming months games started to appear, culminating in D&D Online and Neverwinter Nights 2.

Wizards of the Coast is a company and as such needs to make money. Even if they felt comfortable with a small return, Hasbro certainly wouldn't. And so the SRD and OGL were born. As other people have mentioned these are really mechanics to hand off the responsibility for creating the 'low-return' products such as modules and free WotC to concentrate on the 'high-return' products such as the core rulebooks. As they say, 'a pessimist is just an informed optimist' and so I realize I'm not going to change this. It is capitalism after all.

I wanted to like 3e, I really did. I gave it my all - I played it for years and DMed too. In the end though, it defeated me. As a player it felt too much like I was trying to get the next best thing - the next feat, a few more skills, more powerful magic items and so on. It didn't feel like D&D at all. As a DM I was constantly frustrated. My players would pick out obscure rules and, due to the intrinsic nature of 3e having every rule being counterbalanced with every other rule, felt duty bound to accept it. Over time I was spending more and more of my free time just preparing games. In 2e and all prior versions I didn't mind, as when it came to DM I was in control and was basically telling a story. That had changed. I now felt as if I was just responding to my players' actions.

You may argue that the DM is always in control and that I should just tell my players 'the DM is always right'. That was true in 2e and before, in 3e it is different. The balance of power has changed and not for the better. Even if I did adopt 'rule 0' the players would become acutely aware of me making seemingly arbitrary and inconsistent decisions. That kind of situation creates bad feelings and when all is said and done we are all here to enjoy ourselves. When it stops being enjoyable, we should stop playing.

Imagine my surprise then when I stumbled on C&C. This was the perfect tool for me. It would entice my players to pull back a little from the 3e precipice as well as placing control back in my hands. I duly bought the PHB and M&T books and away we went. Our Temple of Elemental Evil sessions have gone very well. Everyone has enjoyed themselves, the combats have zipped by and my preparation is practically non-existent (I use the stats from the module unchanged). An excellent product and you (the Troll Lords) can be very proud of yourselves.

But this tale does not end here. It ends with a confession. I am stopping playing C&C and going back to 2e. Why, if C&C was so perfect a product? Well, it was perfect. As I said it enticed a few players to pull back from 3e. These players were 3e fanatics so that just proves the appeal of C&C. However, these players have since disappeared and I am left with a core of players I have played with over many of the 25 years I have spoke about.

One night, one of these asked 'why are we playing C&C and not 2e?'. He, and everyone else, was enjoying themselves but was puzzled over the decision. We all knew 2e very well and none of the players were aware of the original decision as to why we were playing C&C. I confessed then that I didn't really know why any more.

I have a lot of material for 1e and 2e and yes they convert very easily to C&C (mostly with no conversion at all). But over the months I have found that I was house-ruling C&C more and more and in the end, it looked more like 2e than it did C&C.

So this tale has a happy ending (for my group at least). We've all been burned by the d20 catastrophe and 3e in particular. C&C helped us through that and if it hadn't happened I may very well have stopped playing roleplaying games altogether. Thank you then, to all the Troll Lords and those involved with it. Thanks also to the members of these forums who have provided me with a rare example of a group of individuals not afraid to discuss contentious topics in an adult manner.

Thank you all. Keep up the crusade! I shall drop by from time to time and will always lurk in the shadows...muahaha.
_________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:54 am

Well Babbage, you words will be missed but I do feel that I want to add a bit by perhaps helping you answer that one question.

Why play C&C and not 2e?

There is no real reason except for current product support. Personally I love both C&C and AD&D and I'm overjoyed that AD&D is so easily usuable within the C&C framework.

The only real difference is that C&C currently has a strong and growing presence with support. Unfortunately, the AD&D books are currently not being reprinted and you either have to resort to tracking down used copies or going with the PDFs.

That, however won't be a problem for older and seasoned gamers who have retained their collection over the years!
As far as C&C is concerned, you could probably adapt anything you like for C&C to 2E as easy as it was to convert 2E to C&C. I think that this, and other initiatives and support for OSR*C or similar projects will help breathe new life into AD&D as well.

Don't be a stranger!

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Greg Ellis · Post by **Greg Ellis** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:16 pm

Hey babbage, don't feel bad about it. We all do what works, and if that's 2E for you, there's nothing wrong with that.

Like moriarty said, don't forget that the "easy conversion" works in the other direction as well. I've used some C&C modules in a 1E game and it worked out just great.

Metathiax · Post by **Metathiax** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:51 pm

Quote:
I have a lot of material for 1e and 2e and yes they convert very easily to C&C (mostly with no conversion at all). But over the months I have found that I was house-ruling C&C more and more and in the end, it looked more like 2e than it did C&C.

I sure won't throw the first stone, especially since my own rules set is an hybrid of all editions of D&D (even the 3E! ) running on the C&C engine. I'll still stick with C&C as a basis though because I find its system to be faster and simpler than any of the iterations of D&D (I ended up ignoring many of their extra features anyway...) but each to his own. Though, I'm genuinely curious as to why you chose the 2E over the 1E? I started out with the 2E but, if I were to go back to AD&D, I think I would play the 1E. Book availability?

Happy 2E gaming!
_________________
"Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy." author unknown
My C&C Page
My House Rules v8

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:31 pm

Welp, when the CKG comes out, I hope it provides something useful for your 2e games. 8)
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Orpheus · Post by **Orpheus** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:00 pm

One of my friends who has been playing in my C&C game is an old 2e'er (much like myself) and he has mentioned playing a 2e session just for the fun and nostalgia of it. Plus, he does have a lot of good 2e material (it converts easy I know, but he hasn't yet fully made the jump to C&C and he has just gotten back into gaming like me so 2e feels natural for him). I've considered buying some the .pdf files for 1e off of rpgnow.com or getting some hard copies from off of trollandtoad.com just to play a little 1e for the heck of it (I never really played that edition of the game although my first few gaming sessions were 1e sessions) just to see what all of the hoopla for 1e is all about. I do, however, have a nice little collection of 2e stuff which I cherish. I'm sure that if Babbage is planning on playing 2e it's for that reason as well. Also, a lot of players who "came of age" during the 2e era see no need to play 1e since that's not the edition which they grew up with and love. That's what his friends know and that's what he knows. I have thrown a few 2e optional rules into my game so I know how you feel Babbage.

sieg · Post by **sieg** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:24 pm

Babbage,

As others have said, play with what works for you and your group. If its 2E, then by all means go for it!
The conversion issue (OOP A/D&D to C&C) works just as well the other way. You can use much of your C&C in 1E/2E as well.

So, Game on and good luck! We hope discussions here might be of use to you still!
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:43 pm

I largely do play 2E, I just use the SIEGE engine. Since I am using the SIEGE engine I am using spells, monsters, magic items, etc... from any of the books. Whatever I feel like using. Most commonly used are the 2E books, other than the C&C PH, and I use the treasure tables out of M&T and the xp guidelines form there as well.

So other than using the SIEGE engine as my "resolution mechanic" because it just makes things so simple and allows for easy assimilation of material from other editions, and even the stuff I use from Paladium Fantasy.

So other than that I would have no prolem playing straight 2E. However I did try pure 2E, I quickly was reminded of how much was "clunky", so sticking with the SIEGE system smoothed things out real well for me.

Other than maybe the clunkiness of there is no doubt your going to have fun. I didn't switch from 2E to 3E until I was just in time to buy the 3.0 books and then a couple for months later release 3.5.

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:53 pm

Good luck, babbage. At least you gave the game a good try. I'll still consider you a Crusader!
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

Maliki · Post by **Maliki** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:00 am

I ran/played 2E from the the release of the PHB until 3E was released, loved and had a blast with it. We tried 3E, then most of my core players moved on, my new players only knew 3E so we stayed with that (to inlcude 3.5). It got to the point that I looked for reasons to skip game nights I hated it. C&C came along and I loved it got the group to play it and had a good first campaign.

Then we passed the DMs screen around, another 3.5 campaign, then a 2E game. The 3.5 game had the same problems as as before it was just too much.

The 2E game which I had loved seemed clunky, with flaws I had not seen when we were playing back in the day, but after 3E and C&C they almost jumped out.

Thats why I stick with C&C I use it as my base adding what I like from any version of D&D.

But by all means if 2E works best with your group, go for it. The most important thing is to have fun with it. Good luck and good gaming!
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 10:21 am

I too have a very large collection of 2e material, some of 1e, and some of Classic. Yet, I found that C&C has provided me with a "solution" to what I perceived as a "problem" in all the past editions of D&D: the lack of a unifying game mechanic. This has always been the metric with which I always measured all game systems I played in the past 20 years.

So, what I am doing now, is simply to "fit" the C&C mechanics in my old games, and it has worked perfectly.

I am in the final stages of editing my OCRed Rules Cyclopedia, by adding bits and pieces of the SIEGE engine. It has been a long, hard labour of love for the games I like most.

Happy gaming, babbage!

Antonio

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:33 pm

I cast a 20 hd fireball @ babbage! Make a dex save.... no wait save vs. breath weapon! Enjoy your latest game of choice, we hope you stick around the forums.

Inkpot · Post by **Inkpot** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:58 am

I'll be honest about something. The reason I play C&C is simple: Erde/Aihrde.

I love the setting. Without the setting, I'd honestly move on to something else. Game engines mean very, very little to me as I usually end up house ruling the bejeezus out of them anyway. The SETTING is what draws me to a game, and Erde/Aihrde had me hooked from the very first time I cracked open the Codex.

So yeah...um....there's my two coppers.

Ink
_________________
Check out Inkpot's C&C Downloads: http://www.cncplayer.net/inkpot/index.htm

C&C: Blissfully devoid of gestalt neko-hin rogue/fighter/mages!!

babbage · Post by **babbage** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:55 pm

Thanks all and I am sticking around, just not using the rulebooks any more. It's much more to do with background rather than whether one ruleset is better than another. Our players all come from a 1e/2e background so it's easier for us to play with what we know (however easy C&C is!).

I am lurking though, and if I see any good ideas I'll nick - err, borrow - them!

Keep Crusading! Even if all that happens is that people awaken their old roleplaying hobby, it's a very worthwhile cause.
_________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

allensh · Post by **allensh** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:56 am

Just a question: why the OSR*C? Is it somehow verboten to discuss this? Considering that any compatible products are usable with C&C as is any first edition stuff, it would seem to me it would not be a bad thing...

Allen

Witterquick · Post by **Witterquick** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:13 am

You can look elsewhere to find threads about this, but essentially the OSR*C developers banned discussion of C&C on their forums. They have their reasons, and no need to give them any space here, but there's a solid line between the two communities, and I think it isn't unfair to say that it was place there largely on the OSR*C side.

It's lamentable, because I think there's a lot of common ground, but there you go.
_________________
http://strangequests.wordpress.com/

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:29 am

A quote from Fiffergrund from another thread on these boards:

"As much as there is bad blood in cyberspace (which I will address at length shortly in another thread), the real reason why that system that begins with OSR is not allowed for discussion here is simply legal insulation."

If curious, you could find the whole thread here, and readily see at least one link of example of 'bad blood':
http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

A shame but I having seen the little that I have seen already, I have to agree with the aproach being taken on this one!

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:15 am

I hope you find a game that is strong, enjoyable, and long-lasting. If you come back around, we'll be here.

By the way, don't forget all the C&C stuff can be used with those 2E games....

allensh · Post by **allensh** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:55 am

Witterquick wrote:
You can look elsewhere to find threads about this, but essentially the OSR*C developers banned discussion of C&C on their forums. They have their reasons, and no need to give them any space here, but there's a solid line between the two communities, and I think it isn't unfair to say that it was place there largely on the OSR*C side.

It's lamentable, because I think there's a lot of common ground, but there you go.

This is either a misunderstanding or a really bad move on the part of the OSR*C developers. I am very dissapointed by this.

Allen

Metathiax · Post by **Metathiax** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:36 am

Quote:
the OSR*C developers banned discussion of C&C on their forums

I really don't understand why would anyone be so pretentious about a game. I say that, if gaming makes them all indignant, they should simply quit doing so altogether...
_________________
"Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy." author unknown
My C&C Page
My House Rules v8

babbage · Post by **babbage** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:45 am

When you like anything so much it makes you evangelic, it's time to stop. That's my viewpoint anyway, but I am an old windbag.
_________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

allensh · Post by **allensh** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:05 pm

The problem apparently is that feel that C&C is not really "old school" but is merely 3.X in disguise.

From my perspective, I don't think C&C ever claimed to actually BE an "old-school" game, it merely said it had some features of "old-school" gaming. Yes, there are things that are like AD&D (and some things that hearken back to BD&D), but none of it is exact and some things are different. And there are things taken from 3.x...that was the idea!

I ran AD&D recently and enjoyed it a lot. I'm going to continue to do so. But I am also continuing running C&C and I'm probably going to run some 3.5 soon too. If they want to consider me a "traitor to the cause" and ban me too..its all good.

Allen

Metathiax · Post by **Metathiax** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:24 pm

Quote:
If they want to consider me a "traitor to the cause" and ban me too..its all good.

It sounds like some sort of sect to me...
_________________
"Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy." author unknown
My C&C Page
My House Rules v8

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:29 pm

allensh wrote:
The problem apparently is that feel that C&C is not really "old school" but is merely 3.X in disguise.

From my perspective, I don't think C&C ever claimed to actually BE an "old-school" game, it merely said it had some features of "old-school" gaming. Yes, there are things that are like AD&D (and some things that hearken back to BD&D), but none of it is exact and some things are different. And there are things taken from 3.x...that was the idea!

I ran AD&D recently and enjoyed it a lot. I'm going to continue to do so. But I am also continuing running C&C and I'm probably going to run some 3.5 soon too. If they want to consider me a "traitor to the cause" and ban me too..its all good.

Allen

*chuckles* With that lot the problems with C&C are many, if highly illogical. Everything from the unified mechanic to the '3e art which was clearly drawn by a 12 year old ect ect'.

The main difference between the two 'camps' as it were is this. C&C is inclusive, the system invites people to bring their own ideas to the table. And it really doesn't matter where the idea comes from. 3e, 2e, 1e, other game systems, its all good. It's just a game.
If someone still has it, they can post it, but we had, once upon a time, a document that spelled out what C&C was all about.

But to sum up. 1) The idea was to bring back a certain style and flavor of gaming. Ie rules minimalist and flexable 2) Gary (who did have veto power on C&C rules, fyi) needed a vehicle similar enough (not exact, because exact, despite opinion to the contrary isnt possible for a variery of reasons) to the game he knows to put together the CZ rules. 3) C&C is actually aimed at a younger/ newer market. Mainly those with a fresh perspective, untainted by the past like some of us old gits. (Not that I am particularly bound by a given era in gaming myself, I'm just beinf funny. )

Now, as to 'style'. This can mean many things to many people. So its particularly absurd to try and make a 'one shoe fits all' kind of game. Instead, if one puts some adjustable velcro into the 'shoe' as it were, people can wiggle the size to fit.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:30 pm

Metathiax wrote:
It sounds like some sort of sect to me...

Yeah, insect!
Some of them should be squashed like the nasty bugs that they are.
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:48 pm

I really tried to deal with the OSR team and had some rational discussion going on with them but they soon broke down. I don't see why they hate C&C so much nor do I understand why they spew so much venom to us when several C&Cers really like the idea of OSR.

However, the team could not and would not see any issue of legality and otherwise as constructive criticism. They viewed it as and attack and responded with venom. Even attacking Gary at one point when he refused to acknowledge and use the system.

Until it's seen as a fully viable document and until the legalities are sorted out (which may take years) I'm staying away from it completely.

And also nobody attacks my boy, Peter like that and get's away with it...
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

sieg · Post by **sieg** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:43 pm

What Julian said. From what I can tell, it'll be a year or two before we "find out" if it is "safe". I hope it will be, but IMO they're trading on pretty thin ice. Hope I'm wrong!

And yeah, I can't understand how they could call Peter's art "Gay"; when you consider how many laidies he draws. In various levels of dress (????)

Gay? Only if Peter's really a Lesbian.
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:46 pm

sieg wrote:
Gay? Only if Peter's really a Lesbian.

Man, I wish. There's some damn hot lesbians out there.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley