Troll Lord Games

... of people calling C&C a 'a D&D clone that's only played by old grognards on a nostalgia kick.' My post is at the top of the following page and the assinine response follows...
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=442418&page=4

It seems every time you suggest C&C for a new player who is looking to get into the hobby, there is some 4ron trying to 'set you straight' in this manner. And they always piss and moan about the lack of a DMG for the game, as if it's impossible to run a game without the 'holy triad' of books. And that's not the only argument driving me up the wall. 'If you don't play D&D you you're foolishly cutting yourself off from the largest gaming community' are you friggin' serious?

What I'd like to see is all the follks here who are not 'old grognards wearing nostalgia goggles' and who picked up the game because it was fun and easy, to go over to RPG.NET and tell that to this dingus directly, because he doesn't believe such a person exists.

Bah.

I know there is no real answer to this problem (outside of not going there) but I thought it better to come here and blow off steam instead of continuing to argue with the chucklehead. After all, all that will happen is a swarm of his stirge like peers will just scent blood in the water and descend upon the thread, possibly turning the OP away from RPGs altogether once he sees what an ass some gamers can be...[/code]
_________________
IMHO, AFAIK, YMMV.

The real solution is to avoid rpgnet and enworld, cause that's where all the sheep hang out who can't get away from the 'popular'.
Course, you might mention, as fast as D&D is going through editions, cause of the short attention span of the fans, C&C will be around long after 4e has turned into 12e.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Also, there are some very interesting "similarities" in the two...
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

So you can't run C&C without a DMG ? That's strange I use both my 1st ed and 3.5 edtion on occasion

Hrolfgar wrote:
So you can't run C&C without a DMG ? That's strange I use both my 1st ed and 3.5 edtion on occasion

That may be good for you, but what about the Virgin gamer that has no previous books???

Before I got my D&D Basic and Expert rules, back in 1980, I never heard of it before. My dad bought the game boxes from a recommendation from a co-worker of his. Good thing I had a complete ruleset because I started playing with a DM who only wanted veteran players in his game so he didn't have to explain all of the rules....

Playing C&C with no CKG is great for older players who have the proper books from previous editions of the D&D game, but for the ones with NO books are going to be lacking quite a bit.

Give the C&C rules to someone who has never played an RPG before and see what they do with it. Some of you may roll your eyes at this but consider: Not all of us were friends of GG. Some of us had to start all by ourselves. I am sure more than one of you besides me fit this category.

This, IMOHO, is the weakest link in C&C: only NOW is a CKG being considered. Then again, TLG's main customer base seems to have been the older players who were veterans of the first 3 editions of the game (D&D0e-1975,AD&D -1979, and AD&D2e - 1986). As such, they have their library of books to fall back on.

Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own. If TLG wants to attract a brand new customer base, the CKG must be a priority.

And, in final, consider my situation:

I LOST all of my older D&D/AD&D books due to all of my moves around the country (you always lose something when you move). What didn't get lost during the moves, they got destroyed when EL Nino of 1997-98 flooded my house. The only D&D books I have ATM are 3.0 and 3.5 versions. Yes, I can do the game from memory, if I had to. Then again, I have that luxury.

Just some ramblings from a grognard making an observation. Angering or irritating anyone was not my intent. Just something to think about.....
_________________
Registered Linux Minion #299419
Pathfinder RPG Advocate and C&C Acolyte

C&C Society: Sir Grendel of the Troll Lands
www.cncsociety.org
Famous Last Words: "Can I have a succubus for a familiar?"

I keep a scroll of, "Protection from Old-Schoolers" on hand for just such occasions.
_________________


John Adams

Quote:
Playing C&C with no CKG is great for older players who have the proper books from previous editions of the D&D game, but for the ones with NO books are going to be lacking quite a bit.

OK, I may not be a newbie to rpg's, but I HAVE NEVER OWNED D&D!
However, I love C&C (having bought 1st ed books on a whim ages ago) and it's become my game of choice (I'm an old Runequest/ Chaosium player/ ref, so have come over from the 'dark side' so to speak). I've bought some old ravenloft stuff (being a huge vampire/ gothic horror fan), but do not own anything like a DMG.

It is really getting on my nerves that the assumption is you need to be an 'old D&D' fan to enjoy C&C - Not True!

Also:

Quote:
Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own

is just plain WRONG - I'm assuming the CKG will add some fun tweaks, ideas and options, but C&C is a great (and COMPLETE) game as is (and one I intend to continue to play and support)

I know that I may be coming across in a bit of a rant here, but PLEASE can we put an end to this idea that you had to love D&D to love C&C

Yeah, I've got A LOT of incomplete games if I need a CKG/DMG/GMG for them.

As far as the OP and the, "I'm so tired of people calling C&C a 'a D&D clone that's only played by old grognards on a nostalgia kick."

In my personal opinion, I think we've caused that ourselves to a certain degree.

For newer players and those who are curious we are always shooting out old modules, RC, AD&D DMG, etc as possible purchases to add to their game. I don't think that should be the starting recommendations or the major selling point of C&C.

C&C is a kick ass game more than capable of standing on it's own. I think the C&C line should be played up more than it often is in folks recommendations. The game seems more like a novelty in some folks eyes when 50% or more of the recommended products are OOP books for a different system.

Just realised that I did this myself!

Quote:
I've bought some old ravenloft stuff

C&C is one kick*ss game, and ready conversion of a huge back-catalogue of modules and resources for a different game is an advantage, but really should not be seen as the main selling point; more icing on a very tasty cake!
But, I must say, that C&C has really inspired me to write my OWN stuff again - ideas may come from varios sources, but the game allows me to mesh them to my own liking, just giving a good, solid game-base to work with.

Cheers

D

The statement that no CKG = Incomplete Game is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

If the game were incomplete, quite simply, none of us could be playing it.

PHB + M&T = Complete Game. It has been this way from the beginning.
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back

Grendel T. Troll wrote:
Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own.

Somebody alert the media! The game we have been playing is incomplete! It has, apparently, not been able to stand on its on for the last five years.
_________________
kim@trolllord.com

Click here: http://tiny.cc/4rvo5

The guy is an idiot...and I've got more than enough of those to deal with on the day job than to waste my off time arguing with someone who's already made up what passes for a mind.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

Grendel T. Troll wrote:
That may be good for you, but what about the Virgin gamer that has no previous books???

I was only poking fun at what I consider a weak argument against starting with C & C.

I started playing D&D with the old 3 booklet set and Greyhawk supplement

I certain we did alot thing wrong then, and I'm pretty sure I still do them wrong today with C&C, RQ, and Pendragon today
RPG's are a fancy way to play make believe.

I think the release of the C&C basic set would be more helpful to bringing in new players then the CKG.

Grendel T. Troll wrote:
Playing C&C with no CKG is great for older players who have the proper books from previous editions of the D&D game, but for the ones with NO books are going to be lacking quite a bit.

No they aren't. Sometimes I think its the veteran players who seem to forget that even early D&D didnt have a dungeon masters guide, and the players and DM had to use their imagination and make it up if they didn't have a precise rule for something.

Quote:
Give the C&C rules to someone who has never played an RPG before and see what they do with it. Some of you may roll your eyes at this but consider: Not all of us were friends of GG. Some of us had to start all by ourselves. I am sure more than one of you besides me fit this category.

I have. And they do a damn sight more with it than even the 'veteran' players on these boards. Because no one's told them they HAVE to have a certain book or the game doesn't work.

Quote:
This, IMOHO, is the weakest link in C&C: only NOW is a CKG being considered. Then again, TLG's main customer base seems to have been the older players who were veterans of the first 3 editions of the game (D&D0e-1975,AD&D -1979, and AD&D2e - 1986). As such, they have their library of books to fall back on.

The folks posting here on the boards only represent about 10% of TLG's customer base. I personally know a whole bunch of players who are about half the age and younger of the people here.

Course, the CKG has been considered since the game was developed. But it was put on hold because its not an essential book and never has been.

Quote:
Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own. If TLG wants to attract a brand new customer base, the CKG must be a priority.

This is nonsense. The CKG is an optional book. It is not required for this game and never has been. And the game has stood quite well on its own for 5 years now and is the #1 seller of its kind on the market.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Hrolfgar wrote:
I certain we did alot thing wrong then, and I'm pretty sure I still do them wrong today with C&C, RQ, and Pendragon today

As defined by whom? Certainly not the game companies who really don't care how you play as long as you buy the books.
Or, perhaps you are talking about the first rpg designers? Course, I don't think so, cause, according to that lot, "Sticking to the rules never has been, and never will be, old school". To borrow a quote I heard from Tim Kask in any event.

Or are you referring to a bunch of bitter conservative old schoolers who are upset that anything after 1979 happened? Who keep trying to find the purest 'old school experience' by adhering as close as they can to a bunch of random and oft-times contradictory made up mechanics.

Cause, honestly, I don't see any rule, anywhere, that says 'this is the right way, the only way' to play any given game.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Most of the people on these boards are veterans, but if I take a look back and read the C&C PHB, all of the rules (except for monsters really) needed to play the game are in there. If you add the M&T, you have everything you need to run the game. I'm not sure how anyone can fail to see that. I'm not mocking, I'm just telling you that every rule in the C&C game is located within those two books.

The chatter on these message boards do say a lot about adding this rule here, and modifying this rule there, but NONE of these discussions need to be put to paper in order to play the C&C game.

Currently I am playing a C&C campaign BY-THE-BOOK. No additional rules whatsoever. Though most of the players have extensive RPG experience all of them are C&C newbies, and not one of them that I can remember has asked how to do something. When something comes up they want to do, they either look the rule up in the PHB, or ask the CK. I had anticipated many questions about the C&C game, and have been shocked thus far. This goes to show at least in one aspect that C&C IS A COMPLETE GAME. Totally.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Grendel T. Troll wrote:
Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own. If TLG wants to attract a brand new customer base, the CKG must be a priority.

Wow... that is inane. I have DM'd 1st Ed without a DMG, I DM'd 2nd Ed with a DMG. And now i run C&C without a CKG.

By your logic, no one here has been able to play for the last 5 years.

You don't have a sense of what the CKG is meant to be. It's not a bunch of hidden rules that players aren't meant to see. All the base rules are already laid out in the PH and MM. The CKG is a set of options, letting the CK tailor his game and setting. Nothing in it is required to play the game.

Ergo- it's not required to make the game complete.

-Fizz

The whole CKG thing is my argument for why the three book system has failed. There seem to be a large number of players who think any game should need three books to be complete.

After playing a number of systems where the entirety of the rules needed were in one book I can say that the idea that we need three books for any system is a mistake. This is why I am such a champion of the idea that the PH and M&T be brought into one volume.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

It's posts like this that make me really want to side with the idea to name the CKG something else all together.

C&C Options

or something.
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)

Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org

Luther wrote:
... of people calling C&C a 'a D&D clone that's only played by old grognards on a nostalgia kick.' My post is at the top of the following page and the assinine response follows...
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=442418&page=4

It seems every time you suggest C&C for a new player who is looking to get into the hobby, there is some 4ron trying to 'set you straight' in this manner. And they always piss and moan about the lack of a DMG for the game, as if it's impossible to run a game without the 'holy triad' of books. And that's not the only argument driving me up the wall. 'If you don't play D&D you you're foolishly cutting yourself off from the largest gaming community' are you friggin' serious?

What I'd like to see is all the follks here who are not 'old grognards wearing nostalgia goggles' and who picked up the game because it was fun and easy, to go over to RPG.NET and tell that to this dingus directly, because he doesn't believe such a person exists.

Bah.

I know there is no real answer to this problem (outside of not going there) but I thought it better to come here and blow off steam instead of continuing to argue with the chucklehead. After all, all that will happen is a swarm of his stirge like peers will just scent blood in the water and descend upon the thread, possibly turning the OP away from RPGs altogether once he sees what an ass some gamers can be...[/code]

I got myself permanently banned from rpg.net because of how many butt dwellers are there. The only place worse are the WOTC boards themselves.

BTW, I got banned for conclusively proving how predictable those butt dwellers are. They claimed I was cross board trolling, but the only inflammatory thing I did was predict their responses correctly.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Grendel T. Troll wrote:
That may be good for you, but what about the Virgin gamer that has no previous books???

Before I got my D&D Basic and Expert rules, back in 1980, I never heard of it before. My dad bought the game boxes from a recommendation from a co-worker of his. Good thing I had a complete ruleset because I started playing with a DM who only wanted veteran players in his game so he didn't have to explain all of the rules....

Playing C&C with no CKG is great for older players who have the proper books from previous editions of the D&D game, but for the ones with NO books are going to be lacking quite a bit.

Give the C&C rules to someone who has never played an RPG before and see what they do with it. Some of you may roll your eyes at this but consider: Not all of us were friends of GG. Some of us had to start all by ourselves. I am sure more than one of you besides me fit this category.

This, IMOHO, is the weakest link in C&C: only NOW is a CKG being considered. Then again, TLG's main customer base seems to have been the older players who were veterans of the first 3 editions of the game (D&D0e-1975,AD&D -1979, and AD&D2e - 1986). As such, they have their library of books to fall back on.

Until the CKG is published, C&C is an incomplete game that cannot stand on its own. If TLG wants to attract a brand new customer base, the CKG must be a priority.

And, in final, consider my situation:

I LOST all of my older D&D/AD&D books due to all of my moves around the country (you always lose something when you move). What didn't get lost during the moves, they got destroyed when EL Nino of 1997-98 flooded my house. The only D&D books I have ATM are 3.0 and 3.5 versions. Yes, I can do the game from memory, if I had to. Then again, I have that luxury.

Just some ramblings from a grognard making an observation. Angering or irritating anyone was not my intent. Just something to think about.....

I hear what your saying. I too have long believed that the books should be rewritten to be much friendlier to totally new RPG players.

I don't know if the CKG is going to be aimed towards some how helping with this, but I think its the PH that should be over hauled to help such new players, since that is likely to be the book they check out first.

I have read through the PH many times, I think it is pretty easy to understand and already gives solid examples, but its hard for me to figure out how someone new to RPG's would understand it. I can't ask my kids, because they all played RPG's before C&C even came out.

All I know is my youngest found C&C the easiest to learn and understand out of all the RPG's he was playing with me. He was 9 or 10 at the time, and was comparing C&C to 3.5 D&D and L5R. I think he played some GURPS with us too.

So I have no solid idea as to how the PH could be rewritten to be as easy as possible for someone with no idea about RPG mechanics to understand.

Heck, I just found out within the last month or so that two guys I have been playing C&C with don't even know the rules. They have been relying on us to tell them what they need to know. They recognize the terms, and even understand them to a degree, but they don't "know" the rules, or exactly what the SIEGE engine is. Yet, for two years I thought they knew the rules. I am trying to figure out if that is a good thing or not.

Edit: Just to be clear, I do not agree with you about the CKG. I have been running C&C for 3 solid years now, in multiple games. The PH and M&T have been all that I have needed. The only reason I have referred to other DMG's is for house rule ideas, magic items, and a couple of times encounter tables, I certainly haven't needed a DMG of any kind to run my C&C games. When I run or play in a C&C game, I only have the PH and M&T at hand, if a DMG of any kind was needed I would have it at hand too. I don't. My DMG's are on shelves 15 feet away, not with my C&C PH and M&T.

Technically I ran 2E D&D without a DMG, since I consider the 2E DMG a worthless pile of paper. The only reason it was of any use was for the magic items. Once the compendiums were out I put the DMG up on my shelves and never used it again.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Treebore wrote:
I have read through the PH many times, I think it is pretty easy to understand and already gives solid examples, but its hard for me to figure out how someone new to RPG's would understand it. I can't ask my kids, because they all played RPG's before C&C even came out.

I really don't know what the trouble is? I've shown complete newbs to RPG's how to play this game. One girl, at a tulsa convention, was doing better than veteran gamers once she caught the idea. Took me all of 10 minutes to explain it too.

The trick is to not bore people to death with a bunch of mechanics. Find something they can relate it too. Most folks at these conventions read, they know what story telling is. And more than a few know what games of chance are.

I find that, breaking it down into a few simple concepts, like interactive theatre, helps a whole load more than trying to bury people in a bunch of random number generators to start with.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Hehehe...

Though I agree that some people are still getting confused by the title, once they play the game one soon finds out what is needed and what is not.

Do I consider myself a veteran? Sure... after 20 years and a having lived through a couple of editions, I think some people may think of me as one.

However, let's visit the 'classic' three book formula which TSR set up for AD&D. Bearing in my mind that my formative years were with 2nd edition, do you know what I used the DMG for? Treasure and Magic Items. I can honestly say that I didn't use it for anything else. Mind you a lot of people had bad things to say about that edition of the DMG compared to the first but there you have it.

With 3rd Ed, this didn't change. Looking through WOTC's 4th ed DMG, it is even more useless to an experienced gamer and less than a dozen pages is of use since they moved the magic items as part of the PHB! However the one thing that the 4th Edition DMG does do is guide someone who has NEVER been exposed to a game IN ANY WAY and hold their hand and suggest how to run one. If this is what the book should be as opposed to a tool for those who run the game, then fine.

I think the C&C's PHB does that already as well as any good players book should.

Now as much stuff I have from various editions... and what ever else that I've acquired in my last 20 years of gaming, I have thought about getting rid of *all* of it on a couple of occasions. I need very little to run C&C and I'm happy about that. Unfortunately, I find that I'm too much of a collector to allow things to slip from my grasp so I doubt this will happen anytime soon.

If someone has a couple thousand burning a hole in their pocket though, feel free to let me know 'cause the promise of a large windfall of cash is always real enticing!
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

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

What's funny is that the detractors have no other arguments. I think they are getting severely butt hurt over a game that simplifies the rules to be playable any time and any where without a boat load of preparation and still be fun. While they buy book after book to tell them how to play we rely on two.

I think they're jealous.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

As one of those Old Grognards mentioned earlier here, I must say that its partly true. We of the B/Ex D&D and 1E communities have been ostrasized from our hobby for so long that when a new game came out that we could actually play that reminded us of the "old days" our excitement was (naturally) abundant.
But to back up Grendel here a bit, I think what he's saying is that currently C&C has no guidelines or advice for actually CKing a game; which is true. What made the 1E DMG so great (IMO) wasn't so much the rules but the advice on good DMing.

If you're already a RPG-er this isn't really necessary but for a total newbie this would be invaluable.
_________________
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

moriarty777 wrote:
However, let's visit the 'classic' three book formula which TSR set up for AD&D. Bearing in my mind that my formative years were with 2nd edition, do you know what I used the DMG for? Treasure and Magic Items. I can honestly say that I didn't use it for anything else.

*smiles* Same here, really. And this was the first edition DMG.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

sieg wrote:
But to back up Grendel here a bit, I think what he's saying is that currently C&C has no guidelines or advice for actually CKing a game; which is true. What made the 1E DMG so great (IMO) wasn't so much the rules but the advice on good DMing.

Page 105 to 125 in the C&C PHB. Advice on how to run a game.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

gideon_thorne wrote:
I really don't know what the trouble is? I've shown complete newbs to RPG's how to play this game. One girl, at a tulsa convention, was doing better than veteran gamers once she caught the idea. Took me all of 10 minutes to explain it too.

The trick is to not bore people to death with a bunch of mechanics. Find something they can relate it too. Most folks at these conventions read, they know what story telling is. And more than a few know what games of chance are.

I find that, breaking it down into a few simple concepts, like interactive theatre, helps a whole load more than trying to bury people in a bunch of random number generators to start with.

I agree its easy to explain, I am talking about totally new people checking this out with no one around to explain anything. Like Sieg also points out, there is no advice on how to actually run games.

So I think rewriting the books to include such advice, etc... would be a good move. Hopefully the upcoming CKG looked to the 1E DMG and other inspiration for good advice on running games.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

gideon_thorne wrote:
I really don't know what the trouble is?

It's not a manner of the mechanics or the concept being difficult to grasp. The only thing C&C lacks is a clear demonstration of what you can do with the game. It lacks the talk of dungeons and wildenress adventuires and how to craft your own.

The newb can quickly and easily understand the rules but what good is that if he isn't shown what to do with them.

A little guidance in that regard could help. That way some kid off the street could wander into a bookstore, pick up the books and know what sort of possibilities he was holding in his hand.

Personally, I think that picking up even 1 single module overcomes that. But, I think thats what some folks might be getting at.