just was wondering how people feel about both games
how does castle and crusades stack up against d&d 5e
Printable View
just was wondering how people feel about both games
how does castle and crusades stack up against d&d 5e
I started playing Castles & Crusades when I first started on Fantasy Grounds back in 2011.
Castles & Crusades had that old school D&D feel which was familiar to me plus some simplified mechanics to make things a bit easier.
I like it a lot.
5E is a very well designed game that for many people improves on the experience of previous versions.
On Fantasy Grounds C&C is good but 5E is even better.
In my opinion C&C is superior. It offers enough challenge and at the same time that old school vibe (if you like this kind of stuff). The rules are simple enough to make the game run smoothly and the lack of overpowered super abilities makes the session even more rewarding when the players do overcome your challenges.
Of course, the C&C ruleset lack some of the automatic features the 5e ruleset has, but it's nothing you can't do by yourself (investing a tiny bit amount of time).
My fellow FG users may disagree with me, but for me 5e improves the experience of gameplay only if you compare with 4e or maybe some aspects of the 3.X (such as status blocks for monsters). Other than that, it's just an average game/system that got unrealistically popular much due to 2 persons: Jim Parsons and Matt Mercer (if it were not for those particular guys, D&D would not have half of its popularity now.
Apart from about 2 years of 4E D&D has never been challenged for the #1 spot in terms of games sold or games played.
In the immortal words of Dalton "Opinions vary".
5e has very rapid advancement. C&C plays like 1e/2e in the sense that it takes some time and effort to level. As such, I would say that 5e is better for a DM that wants campaigns to move briskly while C&C is better suited for a slow roll, we're doing this for a few years kinda group.
I enjoy Castles and Crusades a helluva lot. I've run several games now for the tabletop. And while I also like 5th edition, I prefer the low magic, more old school "feel" of C and C. When I create a character in 5th edition, I feel like I'm playing an unkillable superhero. But in tabletop, that's easily mitigated by a good DM. but on FG, C and C feel downright clunky compared to the slicker, more automated 5th Edition ( or, from my experience other rulesets like Savage Worlds,Pathfinder and the newer 2nd edition which is really nice). I'm in a group that started in C and C but moved over to 2nd edition. Even THAT runs better than the C and C ruleset. I think for the price, you get a lot of bang for the buck with the C and C ruleset, but I would happily pay more money for a completely updated, more automated version. I can't believe the Trolls wouldn't want that too, but they are a small company and maybe they don't have anything to do with it's implementation here on FG.Kind of a shame. the C and C set was the first thing I bought when I purchased FG. But I hardly use it.
Andraax is the C&C ruleset developer on FG. He isn't an employee of TLG or SmiteWorks. He is active here and on discord. You can submit a suggestion to him via the tracker he has set up:here.
Or annoy him incessantly like I do with PMs :D
Ah, so the ruleset is more of a community thing? I didn't know that. I hope I'm not coming off negative. I love the actual rules system. I play it every chance I get. And it hasn't stopped me from trying to put something together here on FG. But it's definitely not shiny. I always wondered how the different rulesets get implemented here. So Smiteworks doesn't get anything from the publishers, they just say, "hey we think our users would like ruleset x", and then they try to get permission to make it, and then try to find some coders to implement it?
Most of the rule sets available on FG, with the exception of maybe 5E and PF2, started as community driven projects, and its dedicated community members that do most of the ruleset maintenance/improvement. Once a ruleset os polished enough, SmiteWorks may go to the publisher seeking a license. Typically doesn't happen the other way.
Moon Wizard deals with the client and CoreRPG and only intervenes in other ruelsets if he has too.
Zacc, Celestian, Damned, Trenloe, Ikael, Madbeardman, Samarex, Andraax - none of them are employees, they are all contractors and members of the community.
Up until recently, the Troll Lords were clueless as to what they had on FG and what they didn't have here, which is why the DLC are a mess and the ruleset lags slightly (there was nobody working on the codebase to update it until about a year ago).
The Trolls are aware now, and plans are in the works.
The problem with adding "lots of automation" to the C&C ruleset is that it kinda violates the whole idea behind C&C. Unlike most varieties of D&D, you don't have a rule for how every little thing works in C&C, many things are left to the CK to decide how to handle it. If you start automating lots of the things, then you will undoubtedly find a bunch of CKs who do it differently, and then they can't use the ruleset. I try to balance some automation with the ability for the CK to make ad hoc decisions on the fly during the game (which is a hallmark of C&C). One example of this is Critical Hits / Fumbles. It's not in the basic rules, which is why it's an option in the ruleset rather than the "way it works".