Pathfinder After C&C

[dcfitch]

I have recently been lucky to find a C&C campaign in my city, after trying literally for years. I have played plenty of Pathfinder in the past and also D&D 4e...along with older versions of the venerable Old Game...but have always found C&C to be my favorite. Recently, our CK could not make it on game night, so another player offered to run Pathfinder. He is a solid player and a very solid GM and, since PF is his favorite system, he knows the rules very well. As we played, I could not help but think how much better C&C runs than PF. Not to knock PF...I happen to really like the system and in fact own most of the hardbacks. But the last PF session really cemented in my mind how much easier and more intuitive C&C is than PF. I refused to voice my concerns, out of respect for the GM, but I was surprised that most of the other players shared my opinion and voiced it. Just goes to show how well thought out and put together C&C is. (With that said, I really like D&D 5e. They seem to have finally learned what the Troll Lords have known all along: ABILITY CHECKS work!)

[pawndream]

dcfitch,

I have had similar experiences to you while running C&C here locally in Honolulu. I started a game about a year ago with mostly new players and a few who had some experience with 3.5, PF or 4e. The 3.5/PF/4e players were initially skeptical about the game because their character sheets had less options than they were used to. Their assumption was they could only do what was listed on the character sheet or what could be found within the very thin PHB.

Once they realized that they could pretty much try everything, despite it not being a feat, power, skill, etc. they started to see the benefit of playing in a rules lite system. They just describe what they want to do, we make a quick SIEGE check and move one. The game doesn't bog down into rules look-ups/discussions and everyone still has fun.

But the transition has not been without its challenges, especially during combat, where they still use terminology like 5-foot steps, etc. They also bring 3.5 assumptions to the game, like thinking they can go into towns and purchase magic items to outfit their character. In 3.5/PF, magic items are a necessity to be viable at a certain level. Their relative lack of magic items at 3rd-4th level is very distressing to them, because they have this perception they will get trashed in combat because of it. C&C doesn't really assume PCs have X-amount of items per level, though.

[Treebore]

My kids and their friends have played Pathfinder, 3E D&D, etc.. and now REFUSE to play them in favor of C&C. Why? Simply put, because C&C does everything so much simpler, and they can focus on the fun, rather than the rules. Of course my house rules help, they don't run any of their own games without using my house rules.

[Arduin]

It IS difficult to go back to slow and clumsy after getting used to, quick and agile...

[T1Hound]

I went from years of 2nd. The "Complete" books became a nightmare for us back then so we switched to 3rd. After awhile, that became worse as there an equal amount of books and 3rd party producing (like Mongoose books). We went to 3.5 buying even more books maybe. Finally, we thought Pathfinder was our solution. And then there were books, books, more books, and even the PFSRD which players were searching for traits (minor feats) to have the fully optimized character. It felt as though characters would want a feat over a magic item and the feats made characters have "no - I'm going to do this" because it was a feat.

C&C - I feel will be my last game. I can use all my 1st and 2nd edition items in it. There's a lot of support. Lots of web pages and user support - why change as we are having a lot of fun.

[ArgoForg]

I'm in the same boat. I played (largely) a rules-light 2nd edition for a long time before I took a long hiatus and eventually made the jump to 3E/PF, and although I liked them, I felt like a lot of the role-playing was left behind in favor of mechanics and that the combat just felt bloated and so overlong compared to what I remembered when I was playing 2nd. And GMing it really did feel like a chore. Statblocks were huge and cumbersome and I had to balance encounters and bleah.

So when I found C&C and first played it, it was a breath of fresh air and just like the game I remembered, and I fell in love with it immediately. I will still occasionally play PF if friends run it, and I still think the combats are tedious. But I'll never GM it again; C&C is, and for the foreseeable future will remain, my fantasy game of choice.

[Greyblade]

Same here, for the life of me, I couldn't face running a 3.0/3.5/PF game anymore. Too much rules bloat, too many specifics. Give me rules light & GM fiat everyday!

Besides, my best ever fantasy (D&D style) game has been run with C&C (see the Crusades section on this forum).

[Rigon]

My old gaming buddies are still stuck in 3.x. We got together for a vacation this past summer just to game and my buddy ran 3.x. What a hassle to figure all that stuff out again. I've been trying to convert them to C&C for a long time, but neither are want to spend the time "learning" a new system. I've even ran a game or two for them, bought them books, and talked about C&C, but they still aren't interested.

I did get them to look at 5e for a little bit, with the hope that they will make that conversion (a lot less crap involved than 3.x).

R-

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

Pathfinder is fun to play for some variety, but I couldn't imagine running it myself. As others have mentioned, it’s in full bloat, and there are just so many options out there. I imagine it can get to be min-max munchkin central.

[shadow]

Although I like the fact that Pathfinder has a lot of options, the overabundance of options can lead to a lot of min-maxing if the GM doesn't step in and put limits on things. Perhaps that's the reason I like Castles & Crusades - you can make a character without having to think about taking the optimal combination of feats and skills.

[Michael Montalto]

I've said this before and i'll say it again. I was a returning old school gamer who wanted to get back into gaming. I reviewed D&D, C&C and Pathfinder. I looked into all of the systems thoroughly. My conclusion was that I wanted the game system to get out of the way and let my group play and tell great stories.

Keep it simple
Expand if you desire
Tell great stories.

[dcfitch]

Well said, Michael Montalto

[serleran]

I have extensive experience playing nearly systemless games and those which try to rule everything, and yet I find that my preference is somewhere in the middle. A game that ignores itself is optimal.

[Go0gleplex]

I never got into PF. Though at the end of 3.5 as it transitioned to 4e I did look at it as I loathed the direction D&D was headed with 4th. C&C definitely got the win for simple, fun, and minimal investment. PF just looked like a continuation of 3.5 and I was already tired of spending more time putting a game together than playing.

[Arduin]

PF just looked like a continuation of 3.5 and I was already tired of spending more time putting a game together than playing.

Exactly how I felt at that juncture.

[Treebore]

3E simply made me feel as if my brain were melting when trying to keep all the rules straight in my head, especially all those damn feats! The only reason I own so much Pathfinder material is because Paizo does some great writing and has great productions values. Like their GMG is of great use to me simply because of all the NPC pre gens they have, which I can very easily convert to my C&C needs. Most of what I own are their adventure paths, adventure modules, and setting material. Again, all very easy for me to convert to my C&C needs.

Even so, a couple of years ago I stopped buying so much Pathfinder, because they pump out so much stuff nearly every month, I had to cut it, because along with everything else I usually end up buying for gaming, I was spending one to two hundred a month on RPG's. Cutting Paizo products consistently kept me under $100/month, usually under $50/month, until I got into supporting Kickstarters. In recent months I've managed to get that back under control too.

[AndyMac]

I was the Venture Lieutenant for PF in Cincinnati until 6 weeks ago (9/12/2015). I switched to C&C for a host of reasons.

1. Easy to play.
2. Easy to create encounters.
3. Game flows better.
4. No "rolls" for role playing.

I could go on. All in all, C&C is a superior system for what I like.

Pathfinder is focused on battle tactics. That's fun too, but I like old-school feel and simplicity of C&C more.

[Arduin]

Pathfinder is focused on battle tactics. That's fun too,

That's why I kept my Squad Leader boxes...

[AndyMac]

@Arduin

Alas for Avalon Hill!

[Arduin]

@Arduin

Alas for Avalon Hill!

Requiescat in pace

[maximus]

I've said this before and i'll say it again. I was a returning old school gamer who wanted to get back into gaming. I reviewed D&D, C&C and Pathfinder. I looked into all of the systems thoroughly. My conclusion was that I wanted the game system to get out of the way and let my group play and tell great stories.

Keep it simple
Expand if you desire
Tell great stories.

Agreed. I went through the same progression.

[rom90125]

My kids and their friends have played Pathfinder, 3E D&D, etc.. and now REFUSE to play them in favor of C&C. Why? Simply put, because C&C does everything so much simpler, and they can focus on the fun, rather than the rules. Of course my house rules help, they don't run any of their own games without using my house rules.

Your house rules are a book unto themselves!

[Treebore]

My kids and their friends have played Pathfinder, 3E D&D, etc.. and now REFUSE to play them in favor of C&C. Why? Simply put, because C&C does everything so much simpler, and they can focus on the fun, rather than the rules. Of course my house rules help, they don't run any of their own games without using my house rules.

Your house rules are a book unto themselves!

Only 15 pages, printed out with easy to read spacing, etc... Duke Omote's are closer to being a Novella, but he also stretches his page count out with all of his nice professional looking layout.

[finarvyn]

The one thing PATHFINDER has going for it is some nice sourcebooks. There is one about running kingdom-level campaigns and I just picked up one with Occult classes in it. I have no interest in actually running and/or playing PF, however. When I use their stuff I have to trim out around 2/3 of the fluff in statblocks in order to focus on the key information.

C&C is by far a better and more managible game system.

[Litzen Tallister]

I finally have started playing Pathfinder, pretty much solely at conventions. I find it alright enough, but in comparison to something like Castles & Crusades (or even 5th edition D&D), there's entirely too much going on at times and just about everything seems to provoke attacks of opportunity. Also, there's a lot of being unable to do things, even if creative, because the rules don't seem to allow it. However, the latter may be a GM factor rather than a system one. What I will say for Pathfinder is that they have built a good world and definitely have carved out their own milieu as far as how they go about telling the story of the game.

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

Want to try something cool? There's a penalty or Attack of Opportunity for that!

Pathfinder has plenty of good things going for it, but it's definitely also got a lot of the things that drove us from 3.5 to C&C.

Also, there's a lot of being unable to do things, even if creative, because the rules don't seem to allow it. However, the latter may be a GM factor rather than a system one.

[T1Hound]

Although I like the fact that Pathfinder has a lot of options, the overabundance of options can lead to a lot of min-maxing if the GM doesn't step in and put limits on things. Perhaps that's the reason I like Castles & Crusades - you can make a character without having to think about taking the optimal combination of feats and skills.

Very true. It's amazing the feats people take at low level vs at high level.

As a judge, I never thought / had experience with a feat players suddenly took that would break the adventure.