Troll Lord Games

if I wanted to incorporate monsters and spells into a C&C game.

specifically, I'm thinking about relative "power" levels between the D&D edition and C&C so that they feel about right?

I'm guessing 1st edition for the spells, and 2nd edition for the monsters (based on some HP and ability power inflation that is in C&C)

Any idea or thoughts?

Cheers,

J.

Actually, Classic D&D is "best" for straight conversions... with most monsters being more compatible with 1st edition.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Thanks,

I'm hoping to expand the list of spells and monsters from the editions that would be the closest fit, in terms of power scaling. (I know how easy it is to convert from different editions).

I'm not familiar enough with classic D&D to know if the spell list is larger than that which comes with the phb

Cheers,

J.

Well, for spell selection, 2nd edition is "best" if you happen to have the Spell Compendiums.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

serleran wrote:
Actually, Classic D&D is "best" for straight conversions... with most monsters being more compatible with 1st edition.

Interesting ... I always think of AD&D when I think of C&C, and not "classic" D&D. Of course, my D&D experience is mostly with OD&D so maybe I just haven't played "classic" editions enough....
_________________
Finarvyn

Lord Marshall, Earl of Stone Creek, C&C Society

C&C Playtester in 2003
OD&D player since 1975

When I worked on spells, the relative power was close to 1E equivalents.

2E spells would work if some attention is paid to those that are hideously overpowered.
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back

finarvyn wrote:
Interesting ... I always think of AD&D when I think of C&C, and not "classic" D&D.

I second this. I'm running ToEE right now and I haven't had any problems as of yet using the mosnters straight from the module (for those who don't ahve C&C versions). As far as spells go, I don't see a problem with either edition, though 1st Edition spells seem a bit more attuned to C&C, IMHO.

Mechanically, C&C is more like AD&D, but spiritually, it is the direct descendant of OD&D in the design process -- whether that happened is left to you to decide, and I really don't care if you agree or not. Therefore, to me, C&C is more like Classic (ie, "brown box" D&D) than anything because, unlike the regimented systems that "frowned" on houseruling, C&C encourages, demands, and rapes you if you don't.
So... if you're looking to import something, AD&D is likely the best option... but, if you're looking to see the how, and why, Classic is the way to go. That means what I said sounds contradictory. It is not.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

To echo Fiff, when I worked on the spells that were assigned to me I used 1E as the inspiration.

I got a lot of flak for the Sleep spell over at DF until I pointed out that it was just as powerful as it was in 1E.
_________________
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

sieg wrote:
To echo Fiff, when I worked on the spells that were assigned to me I used 1E as the inspiration.

I got a lot of flak for the Sleep spell over at DF until I pointed out that it was just as powerful as it was in 1E.

That's pretty dang funny.

I have used a lot of stuff from 1st Ed AD&D for my C&C game and I have had no trouble. Easy to convert to C&C and the power level of spells and monsters are pretty much spot on.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/