Just had this pop up on my feed. Castles & Crusades is a wonderful game, and I love that I can use anything from the early days of D&D to AD&D to later d20 games with minimal issues. Plus, it’s a great company that takes care of veterans and loves interacting with their fans. Just a great company to support, especially in these turbulent days in the hobby.
They have a really nice veteran discount. I'm an Army veteran but have never used the discount because I want to support them, but awesome that they do that! I believe one of the Troll Lords is a vet -- but not sure who.
Just read earlier, back in 2004 Gary Gygax himself said this was the game that should have been AD&D 3rd Edition. That is what inspired me to check it out. Because man...there's no better endorsement than that.
@@DMTalesTTRPG A couple of other videos mentioned it. They said he was working with the company for a few years and C&C was the outcome. They said he made the point that C&C was the true successor to 1st edition.
@@luthersmithers6052 I'm super familiar with C&C and don't think the comment about D&D 2e is correct. Gygax and The Troll Lords were really good friends and Gygax wrote a variety of products for them. They were a great team -- and I believe the 3e comment -- but not so sure about the 2e comment -- just think a few RUclips content creators misstating that IMO. Gygax wrote "Dangerous Journeys" which is basically his game on what 2e should have been in his estimation.
C&C is my d20 game of choice and I have run it many years at GenCon! Its a DM’s dream how smooth and fast it runs and it can handle any situation. The World of Ahrde setting is my favorite as well, as it is grittier and leans more toward low to medium fantasy than high fantasy. Excellent review!
@@DMTalesTTRPG Awesome! I had several players that started in D&D 5e or Pathfinder 1e, and I convinced them to try C&C. They don’t want to go back. I’m running them through classic basic and AD&D modules using C&C and the siege engine. We’ve been playing for about 2 years, and the players have never been happier with a game system.
Most of my C&C table has played Basic Fantasy RPG with me. And others have played 5e, some AD&D back in the day. I’m running 5e, BFRPG, and C&C at the moment.
Printings are superior to editions because it allows troll lord games to update art and fix typos without completely reinventing the game and creating new typos. So each printing is an improvement over the last one as each typo is hunted down and corrected.
Plus, those that have played C&C for a long time. There are still typos, but not that many in the later printings. It's the early printings that had a lot of typos.
I am considering using BFRPG monsters and treasure for Castles & Crusades. I like Morale. I am also very new at this. What can I expect to need to change?
1:29 it should not be role played? So no ww2 role play also? What a silly thing to say, I just bought Sword and Caravan by theRPGpundit, it is based during the crusades and is absolutely excellent.
Ignoring the Crusades comment in the beginning the rest of the review was really good. I had heard of C&C and have been looking for info on it as it seems like a good mix between "old-school" and "new-school" while keeping the flavor of AD&D.
It’s a good game. The title is an homage but rather unfortunate. Had a trans-woman not told me to pick up the game I probably would have passed on it. My faith background has strong anabaptist roots, so my view of “Christendom” as a concept is…not positive.
@@DMTalesTTRPGIIRC the name is a nod to the original gaming society Gygax was part of before he created D&D so a neat little bit of nostalgia for those "in the know"
@@DMTalesTTRPG You know -- I never even thought of Castles & Crusades that way before. Always just thought it was a cool name. Don't attribute it to anything. Funny that a trans woman got you to check it out. It she's a youtuber I think I know who you are talking about - she does really good videos.
I LOVE Castles & Crusades, for all of the reasons you mentioned. I also really love the way the game handles combat. Elegant. My real gripe is that there are a lot of typos, which is weird to me when a book has undergone up to 9 print revisions.
I love the game as well. There are still a few typos in some of the later printings (agree no excuse) -- although it's the early printings where there were a lot of typos. Apparently, they have hired an editor now and the new Reforged version should hopefully completely eliminate this issue. Amazing what they have done, C&C came out in 2004 and still on 1Ed!! I can't name a single other company who has ever done this. Pathfinder said they would never go to another edition -- but I get it hard to stick with this. The Troll Lords has -- you can literally play with the first printing of the PHB and like the 4th printing of Monsters & Treasure etc.
Great video! Just a minor correction in the section where you mentioned the C&C homage covers you said "the Trampier covers" for AD&D 1e. Trampier did the cover for the AD&D 1e PHB and Sutherland did the covers for the AD&D 1e DM Guide and AD&D 1e Monster Manual.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Yeah, I figured you did. Just one of those quick slips of the tongue. Believe me people know their TTRPG info. I once remember a RUclipsr was reviewing the AD&D module B1 In Search of the Unknown -- and he got called out when he got the names of the wizard and the hero that created the dungeon in B1 wrong -- and got a bunch of corrections in the comments -- and of course people don't read all the comments first -- like I did -- so you'll get hit with this till the end of time. btw: Love the homage covers. I think they were all done by a really talented artist that does a lot of work with C&C called Jason Walton. I like that C&C really respected the original art, when they did the homage covers.
@@DMTalesTTRPG This one RUclipsr pronounces "Mystara" as "Meee-stara" - so annoying and he get's corrected all the time -- and he still does it. It's Mistara - like from the word "myst" :-) Yeah -- I agree fo-kai is correct proninciation -- yeah I hate when people correct you -- when you're actually saying it right. 🙂 One weird one -- is the company name "Green Ronin". The accepted English pronunciation of "Ronin" is for most "row-nin" -- i.e. a short "i" sound, but you hear a lot of RUclipsrs pronouncing it as "Row-neen" and I'm like "what" -- turns out "rown-neen" is right because that's the way the owner of Green Ronin, the company, pronounces his company name. Owner of company gets to decide how his company name is pronounced!
Yes, correct -- you can even mix and match. Example: 1st print of CK guide, 7th print of PHB, and 5th print of M&T. I have all the printings many times over and I just buy their books these days just to support them. Love that they have never done a 2nd Edition -- only company who's been around so long that has never done this. I hope they never do. Awesome game!!
Check, twilight vision is far more realistic. Even your everyday cat cannot see without any glimpse of light. Zero light, zero sight. Sure, I'll checkout the free pdf. Sometime...
The crusades can absolutely be roleplayed, I don't understand that statement. Even with all the bad shit that took place you cannot possibly b live that there weren't good people involved. Just look at Afghanistan or Iraq wars, terrible shit was done but you cannot say there were some really decent people who were caught up in the middle of that shit. For roleplaying anything is ok the table, it's up to the players to decide what experience they want to have.
Real question: what are the advantages of using C&C over Basic Fantasy? It’s a lot more rules weight… what do you get for it? I’m a little skeptical about the Siege engine. It seems like everyone house rules it, which makes me think it doesn’t work well.
I mean house ruling is one of the age old traditions of TTRPGs. The point of BFRPGS is, partly, to house rule it. As for advantages…it’s a difficult question because it’s not why I run different systems. C&C is more of an AD&D feel with faster mechanics so the vibe of the game is different. BFRPG is one of my favorite games ever, so I’m never going to tell someone it’s inferior. The siege engine works pretty well, though. I like the primary/secondary attribute concept.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I feel like Basic Fantasy is best suited for a dungeon crawl campaign. Does it seem like Castles and Crusades is the same sort of thing or does it have rules for things like warfare, domain building, etc?
C&C kinda does it all. The characters are a tad stronger than BFRPG characters of the same level, but really you could throw a BFRPG dungeon into C&C and it would work just fine.
I can see that. When compared to the other books with the updated design language, though, it looks dated. I’m actually looking forward to seeing the reforged version because with the new art, design, and editing I expect it to be very good.
Great system and is my go to these days. Needs more attention than it gets. Thanks for review. 7th printing is no longer free, it was for the holidays.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Yeah. It's a matter of preference. I like lower level play but not failing most of the time. I'm not sure how it's intended for higher levels, whether the difficulty tends to go up at the same pace as characters level up or slower. Even primary attributes are pretty harsh if you by default fail over 50 % of the time.
@@DMTalesTTRPG In combat you usually roll repeatedly whereas skill checks are mostly one at a time. There are of course many variables regarding when you have players roll at all etc depending on GM styles and tastes (and those of players). A matter of personal taste in any case and as said you really have a great way utilizing those failures for fun.
I hear you. But the game isn’t like 5e where you have people randomly saying, “I roll perception” all the time. Really you’re only calling for a roll when there’s a chance for meaningful failure. Most times it’s just, “Sure, ok, so you do this and then this happens.” No rolls needed.
There’s some really good books on the crusades. It wasn’t black and white. It’s an interesting point in time and has many wargaming and role playing opportunities. Your take seems to be akin to not wanting to play the Germans in ww2… history is there to learn from. 🤙 y’all do whatever you want though but everyone has a different view. Good overview been looking for a ruleset to get into OSR stuff! 😊
It’s more based on me reading some spiritual authors of the time, and how they seem to become completely different people when it came to the Cursades.
I actually like how they encouraged people to play humans in this, they didn't give detriments to the other races, they just gave humans more versatility, and not by anything I think would be regarded as overkill.
Thorough review. Thanks. Worst part of the siege system is its name. Skill resolution is better. To keep things simple, every skill check has a base 18. Skill checks using a primary ability add 6 to the roll.
I mean, the name is a pun so it kinda makes me chuckle. They have some alternative rules for primary and secondary rules, but I don’t think a +6 for primary attribute rolls is one of them. That’s actually one that would be worth submitting to get added as an alternative calculation. Pondering, I think they went with different bases just for the psychological effect. Most checks from a primary attribute are going to be under 20, so people we be more likely to try something, even if the math is exactly the same.
@@JockoJonson17 It's definitely better than calling it "skill resolution". It's cool that it has a name, maybe could come up with something better, although I'm not sure what.
@@DMTalesTTRPG What is the pun? I've been playing C&C and I guess I've never gotten the pun. If you mean just a pun of the phrase "Siege engine", being the name of a machine, you used to conduct sieges, then -- I did get the pun.
Exciting to hear an advert for DaddyRolleda1's t-shirts: I twitter-know him. A fine fellow. Another informative, useful, fun video. Sorry to be that person, but it's only the 1e PHb that Mr Trampier did the cover for: the DMG and MM covers were by Dave Sutherland. (Unless I'm wrong: always highly possible)
I haven't got or read the core C&C books, but I do have Engineering Dungeons and Engineering Castles: for a GM of any fantasy TTRPG, they are full of really useful ideas: a thousand things I wouldn't have thought of or remembered to include when making my own adventures.
S&W was my favorite D&D game until I found C&C. S&W still have a place on my table. But C&C is just too good. My players love it, even the ones with no nostalgic feelings for basic/advance D&D. Their settings are good too, a shame they throw all the love on Aihrde and do little to other settings. But it's unbeatable as it still a niche market. I hope they can get more recognition and popularity. I have the previous prints. I think I will pass this one.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I do still love S&W, it's just C&C robbed my table. Lol. I will eventually create some short campaigns to run with S&W. It's just difficult to make time as I already GM short campaigns of call of cthulhu to my group in addition to our main campaign of C&C.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I have only one group and we get together to play 1 or 2 times for month. Every new game we try holds our main campaign back. So it's not like I wouldn't want to play more games, it's more like we want to focus more on our main campaign. If I had more free time and maybe another group, I would play more games.
C&C came out in 2004, and Basic Fantasy came out in the 2010s -- so C&C was not based off of BFRPG or D&D 5e. It is is basically a version of AD&D 1e (using D&D 3e mechanics and getting rid of feats and skills from 3e).
Just learned about this game after watching a ClownfishTV video on it not too long ago, and it's honestly gotten me curious, especially with everything Wizards has been doing with D&D lately. Planning to grab the 7th printing of the Player's Handbook since the digital version is currently free on the TLG website for, I'm guessing, a Christmas sale just to check it out. Or maybe it's permanently free? I don't know. That said, after watching this video, I'll admit there are two issues I have with the system, one being (at least in my opinion) considerably bigger than the other: My first issue is Dwarves being the only race to have Dark Vision. However, the way you've explained it makes a lot of sense, and I know I've simply grown used to almost all races but Humans having it through 5e and games like Solasta: Crown of the Magister, so that's just something I'll need to learn how to handle. My second problem is one I deem to be far greater, and perhaps something I'm playing "devil's advocate" for as both you and at least one other commenter seem quite fond of the system, and that is the developer's decision to give Humans a blatant leg up over non-Human races. To put it plainly, why is it that in a fantastical world quite unlike our own, the actually interesting races are the ones that get handicapped, while every bog-standard John Smith and Jane Doe is some perfect being among them by comparison, despite bringing absolutely nothing worthwhile to the table? Whether it be a book, a game (tabletop or virtual), a show, or a movie, it's always the same thing. You see an Elf, you know full well they're wise, good with magic, and most likely sneaky, but don't expect them to carry much or be able to throw a punch due to their low strength! Or how about Half-Orcs? Strong with high constitution, but oftentimes low on intelligence and/or charisma! The strong, hearty Dwarf will be your best friend in the front line of a fight, but don't expect them to keep up with you in a 100 meter dash with those stubby legs! Then there's social standings in some games wherein non-Human races are liked by some, neutral to others, and outright hated by a third set. Or certain classes in non-TTRPGs being locked by race, with only rare exceptions like Guild Wars coming to mind otherwise without race-class locking. But if you're a Human? Basically NONE of that applies! Social interactions with any race that isn't Human in non-TTRPGs often start at "neutral" with little to no difficulties even getting to that point beyond a 5 minute fetch quest at most, Humans can be any class they so choose in non-TTRPGs, they often have zero downsides during character creation unless specifically given one by the player (instead getting to hand pick what they're best at) in TTRPGs, Human characters in RPGs are often deemed to be the "cannon" choice if there is a story with multiple races available, and the only "real" downside a Human character seems to ever truly have is lacking the ability to see in the dark without a torch! Now, I'm well aware of my usage of the word "often" in my little rant against the blatant favoritism shown to Humans in fantasy, and that's simply due to the fact I have to admit there are some, with heavy emphasis on the rarity of that "some," games where Humans rightfully get shafted compared to their more fantastical counterparts. Such examples include games where the player's only option is to make a monstrous character such as the World of Darkness games or, if we go back to when browser based games were far more common, Bite Fight, where humans existed merely as cattle for the player to hunt. There is also Guild Wars 2, where the developers outright admitted they viewed Humans as the most standard and boring choice a player could make during character creation when given far more interesting options like the Charr, Sylvari, Asura, or even the Norn, and as such purposely gave the Humans the most boring starting story they could manage, of which I wholeheartedly applaud. I've even been working on my own setting/system lately, and plan to add it to the short list of games that knock the "Jack of all trades, master of everything" Humans down more than a few pegs, simply because I'm tired of them getting this sort of preferential treatment.
The Crusades are a terrible part of history that shouldn't be roleplayed? Why would that be? Given that almost all of gaming - boardgaming, computer gaming, roleplaying - is about combat and conflict, there seems to be no reason to declare the crusades off limits. Except for the fact that it was European Christians attacking nonwhite Muslims. Is that it?
Sure, but that’s war in general which is tragic enough. As a Christian I find the Crusade’s hijacking of faith and the name of Christ to be used in a power play is something which need to be repented of, not romanticized.
Its an interesting topic to study. It’s definitely not this uncalled for aggression as it is portrayed in modern culture. It was a reaction to Islamic aggression and brutal Islamic expansion. Some campaigns are more understandable than others which are not. Overall there were not that many campaigns and battles they fought. If you compare it with the Islamic expansion it is not even comparable and it is almost laughable. No one criticizes the Islamic expansion though (thank God they weren’t able to conquer all of Europe). Now does that mean we have to agree with the crusades? No, but it is obvious that modern propaganda has completely rewritten history in peoples mind just like with most western culture and history, the non white culture is romanticized (even if much more brutal) white Europeans are vilified.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I have to wonder about the faith of the Europeans all over Europe, even up into Ireland who were for centuries captured and enslaved in the Middle East, children of women forced into sex slavery by muslims and brought up to revere Allah, the millions forced at sword point to convert or die. And it still went on even into the 1800s (and today). Seems like your faith was being fairly brutally hijacked by Muhammed when he turned the entire Middle East and North Africa and most of Spain from Christianity to worshipping a false god. Maybe a little context instead of blindly following the teachings of the anti-christianity crowd today is warranted.
@@nathanmorgan3647 I’m good, thanks. I critique my faith community I don’t react against another. Christianity’s got more than enough logs in our eyes to keep us busy.
I don't -- strangely never even occurred to me until watching this video. For me "Castles & Crusades" is just a cool name. No meaning to "Crusades" positive or negative.
Wes! You know I’m a big B/X, OSE fan but I also enjoyed most everything about AD&D and logged most of my gaming hours with AD&D 2e. Push me over the edge, why should I get C&C? Really interested in the elevator pitch from someone I trust. This is currently a game you’re actively playing with a group correct? If you have time, I’d like to hear your thoughts on why you’d think I’d enjoy C&C even though I’m already thoroughly enjoying OSE. Interested in a comparison of C&C and OSE. What’s the same, what’s different, what’s better, what’s worse. (My book shelves are extremely welcoming to new books even if my wallet is not.) Thanks again for another great review!
Hmmm… Well you saw the unified mechanic and…it’s a UNIFIED mechanic. So if you’re looking for stuff like a morale number in creature stats it’s not there. It’s a check-12 base for primary attributes and 18 for secondary. Encumbrance is a ton easier than OSE/BX coin based weight, though Carcass Crawler has a slot based system which I think is better still. Saving throws are ability checks, so it’s more simple than the abstract concepts of B/X. Combat is interesting. You can only move half your movement and still attack. Shields aren’t constant, they only get added for a certain amount of attacks per round.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I read the Players Handbook from front to back last evening. I completely understand why many would refer to C&C as AD&D 3e. It looks amazing. These books will be on my shelf within the week. It is inevitable. Thanks Wes!
Alternate rules for magic that ditches Vancian magic = definitely good stuff. Fuck Vancian magic. Hated it back in the day, hate it even more today. There's also the failed attempt at fixing it in 5e that simply takes the worst feature of Vancian magic: prepared spells and just make a small tweak to the amount you can cast.
Ascending Armor Class is better, So are skills, backgrounds and the lack of class restrictions for demi humans. "race" doesn't bother me, you talking about it doesn't bother me, people calling it something else doesn't bother me... but I still want a snickers. :P
Oh I like Ascending AC SOOOO much more. I think the Siege Engine is set up really well for the table, too. Folks seemed to enjoy it. I don't call for rolls a lot, though, only if there's a chance for meaningful failure. Check your leftover halloween candy for a snickers.... :-)
It's really only complicated for the Castle Keeper -- who has to set the DCs. Btw: I just play +6 for the players -- leaving the difficulty for me the CK in setting the DCs.
Theres nothing wrong with the crusades man, its a war like so many others in human history with badass warriors on both sides , no wars should be "celebrated" by that logic. Cant watch the rest after that take, sorry.
Hilarious that our minds full of mush now celebrate Moors killing the Jews and Christians and conquering North Africa and even Spain, but are taught how terrible the Christian response was.
1:20 you say that like we would spontaneously go off on an authentic crusade if you didn't say anything. Feeling kind of insulted. I wonder how much of your viewers you expect to go around with knives invading homes looking for loot and monsters.
To tell you the truth I don't know. I don't have the latest printing of the Players' book. From the peak I've had it seems to have changed a lot. The problem is they are all over the place in what they do. On my first channel I did a review of the book The Black Libram of Nartarus. What a sloppy book. The same picture in it three times?? And no matter what you say, presentation is half of the product. @@DMTalesTTRPG
From my running the core game hasn’t change. I had someone at my table with the last B/W edition. And it was no different. Stuff from the CKG was added in the Players Handbook and that was the biggest change. The latest design language has improved dramatically over the faux parchment background edition. This really shows up since (at least last I checked) Monsters & Treasures hadn’t been updated to the new design language and…it shows. The thing that does get me with Troll Lord books is the editing. Sometimes the way things are described is all over the place, and the presentation in Monsters & Treasures was inconsisent.
@@DMTalesTTRPG It's changed very little. Mechanics are still the same -- so not sure what @nightwind is talking about, except for the color change and formatting changes. There have only been three notable changes in the rules since C&C came out. They changed the Barbarian class (although you can still use the earlier Barbarian class if you'd like). They changed the Illusionist spell list (main change was adding healing), by the way nothing stopping you from using the old Illusionist spell list if you want. I thought it was interesting - to have an arcane spell caster with healing spells -- although their healing is not as powerful as a clerics), and they changed the encumbrance system, by simplifying it a little. I really thing @nightwind is talking about color and formatting changes. Also, some people who played really on played without the CK guide (as the CK guide) didn't come out until 2010. But the CK doesn't really change anything - -more than anything the CK guide add a bunch of "optional" rules and give's a boatload of world building advice, like you said.
Overly complicated. Why should a player with a low stat have that stat modifier nullified by their level? A pet rock isn't a genius because it's been on earth for thousands of years.
The same way an attack or proficiency bonus goes up? I treat it like Discworld. The old barbarian heroes are OLD and can barely move, but have made a habit of not dying.
Just had this pop up on my feed. Castles & Crusades is a wonderful game, and I love that I can use anything from the early days of D&D to AD&D to later d20 games with minimal issues. Plus, it’s a great company that takes care of veterans and loves interacting with their fans. Just a great company to support, especially in these turbulent days in the hobby.
It’s a good system.
They have a really nice veteran discount. I'm an Army veteran but have never used the discount because I want to support them, but awesome that they do that! I believe one of the Troll Lords is a vet -- but not sure who.
Just read earlier, back in 2004 Gary Gygax himself said this was the game that should have been AD&D 3rd Edition.
That is what inspired me to check it out.
Because man...there's no better endorsement than that.
This is a rather large compliment, yes.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Yes, but it got bigger because I just found out it was his desire for it to be AD&D 2nd edition.
@@luthersmithers6052 hmm, where did you see that?
@@DMTalesTTRPG A couple of other videos mentioned it. They said he was working with the company for a few years and C&C was the outcome.
They said he made the point that C&C was the true successor to 1st edition.
@@luthersmithers6052 I'm super familiar with C&C and don't think the comment about D&D 2e is correct. Gygax and The Troll Lords were really good friends and Gygax wrote a variety of products for them. They were a great team -- and I believe the 3e comment -- but not so sure about the 2e comment -- just think a few RUclips content creators misstating that IMO. Gygax wrote "Dangerous Journeys" which is basically his game on what 2e should have been in his estimation.
C&C is my d20 game of choice and I have run it many years at GenCon! Its a DM’s dream how smooth and fast it runs and it can handle any situation. The World of Ahrde setting is my favorite as well, as it is grittier and leans more toward low to medium fantasy than high fantasy. Excellent review!
Thank you very much!
This has been my experience running C&C. I absolutely love this system for the same reasons you listed as well.
@@opaqued2039 I have one session with it, and it’s rather fun.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Awesome! I had several players that started in D&D 5e or Pathfinder 1e, and I convinced them to try C&C. They don’t want to go back. I’m running them through classic basic and AD&D modules using C&C and the siege engine. We’ve been playing for about 2 years, and the players have never been happier with a game system.
Most of my C&C table has played Basic Fantasy RPG with me. And others have played 5e, some AD&D back in the day. I’m running 5e, BFRPG, and C&C at the moment.
I like how C&C is getting more love, it’s been my go to ttrpg for a few years.
The system is nice.
7:04 I really like that. I think I am sold and will probably start investing in some books to check it out. Thank you for the review!
Enjoy, it’s a very good game.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Totes off topic, but if you are into scifi, I had a book rec for you.
oh?
@@DMTalesTTRPG Nature of Predators by Daniel Pascap
Other than the title, what’s the premise?
C&C is my go to fantasy game. Feels like AD&D but flows smoother.
I enjoyed my first session running it.
Printings are superior to editions because it allows troll lord games to update art and fix typos without completely reinventing the game and creating new typos. So each printing is an improvement over the last one as each typo is hunted down and corrected.
I do see the logic in that.
Plus, those that have played C&C for a long time. There are still typos, but not that many in the later printings. It's the early printings that had a lot of typos.
I am considering using BFRPG monsters and treasure for Castles & Crusades. I like Morale. I am also very new at this. What can I expect to need to change?
Just check HD and damage output.
1:29 it should not be role played? So no ww2 role play also? What a silly thing to say, I just bought Sword and Caravan by theRPGpundit, it is based during the crusades and is absolutely excellent.
ok
Ignoring the Crusades comment in the beginning the rest of the review was really good. I had heard of C&C and have been looking for info on it as it seems like a good mix between "old-school" and "new-school" while keeping the flavor of AD&D.
It’s a good game. The title is an homage but rather unfortunate. Had a trans-woman not told me to pick up the game I probably would have passed on it.
My faith background has strong anabaptist roots, so my view of “Christendom” as a concept is…not positive.
@@DMTalesTTRPGIIRC the name is a nod to the original gaming society Gygax was part of before he created D&D so a neat little bit of nostalgia for those "in the know"
Right. I said it was an homage.
@@DMTalesTTRPG You know -- I never even thought of Castles & Crusades that way before. Always just thought it was a cool name. Don't attribute it to anything. Funny that a trans woman got you to check it out. It she's a youtuber I think I know who you are talking about - she does really good videos.
She does.
How are the crusades specifically a "terrible bit of history?" It was an effort to reclaim territory lost in an invasion.
Actually. No.
I LOVE Castles & Crusades, for all of the reasons you mentioned. I also really love the way the game handles combat. Elegant. My real gripe is that there are a lot of typos, which is weird to me when a book has undergone up to 9 print revisions.
The editing does need some work. Combat is really handled well, though.
This.
I love the game as well. There are still a few typos in some of the later printings (agree no excuse) -- although it's the early printings where there were a lot of typos. Apparently, they have hired an editor now and the new Reforged version should hopefully completely eliminate this issue.
Amazing what they have done, C&C came out in 2004 and still on 1Ed!! I can't name a single other company who has ever done this. Pathfinder said they would never go to another edition -- but I get it hard to stick with this. The Troll Lords has -- you can literally play with the first printing of the PHB and like the 4th printing of Monsters & Treasure etc.
Great video! Just a minor correction in the section where you mentioned the C&C homage covers you said "the Trampier covers" for AD&D 1e. Trampier did the cover for the AD&D 1e PHB and Sutherland did the covers for the AD&D 1e DM Guide and AD&D 1e Monster Manual.
Yah… Sigh. I knew that and still messed it up.
@@DMTalesTTRPG Yeah, I figured you did. Just one of those quick slips of the tongue. Believe me people know their TTRPG info. I once remember a RUclipsr was reviewing the AD&D module B1 In Search of the Unknown -- and he got called out when he got the names of the wizard and the hero that created the dungeon in B1 wrong -- and got a bunch of corrections in the comments -- and of course people don't read all the comments first -- like I did -- so you'll get hit with this till the end of time.
btw: Love the homage covers. I think they were all done by a really talented artist that does a lot of work with C&C called Jason Walton. I like that C&C really respected the original art, when they did the homage covers.
The homage covers are terrific.
You should see when I say “fo-sai” instead of “fo-Kai”- even though it’s an accepted pronunciation.
@@DMTalesTTRPG This one RUclipsr pronounces "Mystara" as "Meee-stara" - so annoying and he get's corrected all the time -- and he still does it. It's Mistara - like from the word "myst" :-) Yeah -- I agree fo-kai is correct proninciation -- yeah I hate when people correct you -- when you're actually saying it right. 🙂
One weird one -- is the company name "Green Ronin". The accepted English pronunciation of "Ronin" is for most "row-nin" -- i.e. a short "i" sound, but you hear a lot of RUclipsrs pronouncing it as "Row-neen" and I'm like "what" -- turns out "rown-neen" is right because that's the way the owner of Green Ronin, the company, pronounces his company name. Owner of company gets to decide how his company name is pronounced!
so new printings offer new rules but dont break backward compatibility, is that what I am understanding? Wonderful overview btw, thanks much!
Correct. This will be true even as they move away from the OGL.
@@DMTalesTTRPG thanks!
My pleasure.
Yes, correct -- you can even mix and match. Example: 1st print of CK guide, 7th print of PHB, and 5th print of M&T. I have all the printings many times over and I just buy their books these days just to support them. Love that they have never done a 2nd Edition -- only company who's been around so long that has never done this. I hope they never do. Awesome game!!
Check, twilight vision is far more realistic. Even your everyday cat cannot see without any glimpse of light. Zero light, zero sight. Sure, I'll checkout the free pdf. Sometime...
Oh yah, elves having twilight vision is is a huge selling point for me.
I don't even care about the realism. I just like to run games where characters can't see in the dark without their torches.
Seriously!
I love C&C gnomes! They always felt like the red headed step child of the dnd races, but C&C made them really stand out
Oh yes C&C gnomes are REALLY well done.
The crusades can absolutely be roleplayed, I don't understand that statement. Even with all the bad shit that took place you cannot possibly b live that there weren't good people involved. Just look at Afghanistan or Iraq wars, terrible shit was done but you cannot say there were some really decent people who were caught up in the middle of that shit. For roleplaying anything is ok the table, it's up to the players to decide what experience they want to have.
Ok
@@DMTalesTTRPG just saying, following that logic the entire middle ages is off limits. It's full of murder, rape and slavery
ok
@@DMTalesTTRPG alright
yup.
Real question: what are the advantages of using C&C over Basic Fantasy? It’s a lot more rules weight… what do you get for it?
I’m a little skeptical about the Siege engine. It seems like everyone house rules it, which makes me think it doesn’t work well.
I mean house ruling is one of the age old traditions of TTRPGs. The point of BFRPGS is, partly, to house rule it.
As for advantages…it’s a difficult question because it’s not why I run different systems. C&C is more of an AD&D feel with faster mechanics so the vibe of the game is different.
BFRPG is one of my favorite games ever, so I’m never going to tell someone it’s inferior. The siege engine works pretty well, though. I like the primary/secondary attribute concept.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I feel like Basic Fantasy is best suited for a dungeon crawl campaign. Does it seem like Castles and Crusades is the same sort of thing or does it have rules for things like warfare, domain building, etc?
C&C kinda does it all. The characters are a tad stronger than BFRPG characters of the same level, but really you could throw a BFRPG dungeon into C&C and it would work just fine.
@@DMTalesTTRPG thanks for the insights!
Thanks for watching!
That description of the flow of the monster book puts me in mind of earlier AD&D 1st edition books.
I can see that. When compared to the other books with the updated design language, though, it looks dated. I’m actually looking forward to seeing the reforged version because with the new art, design, and editing I expect it to be very good.
Great system and is my go to these days. Needs more attention than it gets. Thanks for review. 7th printing is no longer free, it was for the holidays.
Ah, thanks for the update! Glad you enjoyed the review.
There's a humble bundle out now
Yes there is.
The game seems fascinating! Looks like the difficulty of skill checks is a little high. Easily tweaked of course.
For non primary checks at low levels. YUP! There are alternatives in the rules, but I like the hard line!
@@DMTalesTTRPG Yeah. It's a matter of preference. I like lower level play but not failing most of the time. I'm not sure how it's intended for higher levels, whether the difficulty tends to go up at the same pace as characters level up or slower. Even primary attributes are pretty harsh if you by default fail over 50 % of the time.
@@paavohirn3728 I understand. But it’s no different than combat, and a tad bette than old school thieve’s skills.
@@DMTalesTTRPG In combat you usually roll repeatedly whereas skill checks are mostly one at a time. There are of course many variables regarding when you have players roll at all etc depending on GM styles and tastes (and those of players). A matter of personal taste in any case and as said you really have a great way utilizing those failures for fun.
I hear you. But the game isn’t like 5e where you have people randomly saying, “I roll perception” all the time. Really you’re only calling for a roll when there’s a chance for meaningful failure. Most times it’s just, “Sure, ok, so you do this and then this happens.” No rolls needed.
Bad take about the crusades. They actually provide a lot of great inspiration (both in heroism and in evil) for roleplaying.
From my perspective I disagree, but ok.
There’s some really good books on the crusades. It wasn’t black and white. It’s an interesting point in time and has many wargaming and role playing opportunities.
Your take seems to be akin to not wanting to play the Germans in ww2… history is there to learn from. 🤙 y’all do whatever you want though but everyone has a different view.
Good overview been looking for a ruleset to get into OSR stuff! 😊
It’s more based on me reading some spiritual authors of the time, and how they seem to become completely different people when it came to the Cursades.
I actually like how they encouraged people to play humans in this, they didn't give detriments to the other races, they just gave humans more versatility, and not by anything I think would be regarded as overkill.
Yah, it’s a nice feature.
Thorough review. Thanks.
Worst part of the siege system is its name. Skill resolution is better. To keep things simple, every skill check has a base 18. Skill checks using a primary ability add 6 to the roll.
I mean, the name is a pun so it kinda makes me chuckle. They have some alternative rules for primary and secondary rules, but I don’t think a +6 for primary attribute rolls is one of them. That’s actually one that would be worth submitting to get added as an alternative calculation.
Pondering, I think they went with different bases just for the psychological effect. Most checks from a primary attribute are going to be under 20, so people we be more likely to try something, even if the math is exactly the same.
SIEGE system is a great name. 👍
I like it
@@JockoJonson17 It's definitely better than calling it "skill resolution". It's cool that it has a name, maybe could come up with something better, although I'm not sure what.
@@DMTalesTTRPG What is the pun? I've been playing C&C and I guess I've never gotten the pun. If you mean just a pun of the phrase "Siege engine", being the name of a machine, you used to conduct sieges, then -- I did get the pun.
Not sold on the system... but that cover art honouring the Original AD&D covers is indeed lovely!
The covers are stellar. I’ll let you know what I think after I run the system a bit!
And now im subscribed toy your channel - CURSE YOU AND YOUR WITTY AND ENGAGING VIDEOS AND CLASSIC DND! CURSE YOU I SAY
[shakes fist at screen]
I’ll take it.
Exciting to hear an advert for DaddyRolleda1's t-shirts: I twitter-know him. A fine fellow.
Another informative, useful, fun video.
Sorry to be that person, but it's only the 1e PHb that Mr Trampier did the cover for: the DMG and MM covers were by Dave Sutherland. (Unless I'm wrong: always highly possible)
I haven't got or read the core C&C books, but I do have Engineering Dungeons and Engineering Castles: for a GM of any fantasy TTRPG, they are full of really useful ideas: a thousand things I wouldn't have thought of or remembered to include when making my own adventures.
Cool!
Ack! You are right! And I KNEW the MM was Sutherland, too. Thanks for the correction, and for watching!
And DaddyRolledA1 is a fine fellow.
I added a note in the description regarding my attribution error.
S&W was my favorite D&D game until I found C&C. S&W still have a place on my table. But C&C is just too good. My players love it, even the ones with no nostalgic feelings for basic/advance D&D.
Their settings are good too, a shame they throw all the love on Aihrde and do little to other settings. But it's unbeatable as it still a niche market. I hope they can get more recognition and popularity.
I have the previous prints. I think I will pass this one.
I love both.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I do still love S&W, it's just C&C robbed my table. Lol. I will eventually create some short campaigns to run with S&W. It's just difficult to make time as I already GM short campaigns of call of cthulhu to my group in addition to our main campaign of C&C.
@@itsasecrettoeverybody hey, there’s room for a lot of games!
@@DMTalesTTRPG I have only one group and we get together to play 1 or 2 times for month. Every new game we try holds our main campaign back. So it's not like I wouldn't want to play more games, it's more like we want to focus more on our main campaign.
If I had more free time and maybe another group, I would play more games.
Oh please don’t think I’m saying you’re doing it wrong! I’ve got a ton of games I want to play, but don’t want to derail my normal campaigns!
Thanks for the great review. It sounds an awful lot like BFRPG with some 5E tweaks.
In feel, yes. But C&C has a unified mechanic that BFRPG has deliberately NOT done
@@DMTalesTTRPG Thanks, I didn't realize that was the case. They look like VERY nice books.
They really are!
C&C came out in 2004, and Basic Fantasy came out in the 2010s -- so C&C was not based off of BFRPG or D&D 5e. It is is basically a version of AD&D 1e (using D&D 3e mechanics and getting rid of feats and skills from 3e).
Just learned about this game after watching a ClownfishTV video on it not too long ago, and it's honestly gotten me curious, especially with everything Wizards has been doing with D&D lately. Planning to grab the 7th printing of the Player's Handbook since the digital version is currently free on the TLG website for, I'm guessing, a Christmas sale just to check it out. Or maybe it's permanently free? I don't know. That said, after watching this video, I'll admit there are two issues I have with the system, one being (at least in my opinion) considerably bigger than the other:
My first issue is Dwarves being the only race to have Dark Vision. However, the way you've explained it makes a lot of sense, and I know I've simply grown used to almost all races but Humans having it through 5e and games like Solasta: Crown of the Magister, so that's just something I'll need to learn how to handle.
My second problem is one I deem to be far greater, and perhaps something I'm playing "devil's advocate" for as both you and at least one other commenter seem quite fond of the system, and that is the developer's decision to give Humans a blatant leg up over non-Human races. To put it plainly, why is it that in a fantastical world quite unlike our own, the actually interesting races are the ones that get handicapped, while every bog-standard John Smith and Jane Doe is some perfect being among them by comparison, despite bringing absolutely nothing worthwhile to the table? Whether it be a book, a game (tabletop or virtual), a show, or a movie, it's always the same thing. You see an Elf, you know full well they're wise, good with magic, and most likely sneaky, but don't expect them to carry much or be able to throw a punch due to their low strength! Or how about Half-Orcs? Strong with high constitution, but oftentimes low on intelligence and/or charisma! The strong, hearty Dwarf will be your best friend in the front line of a fight, but don't expect them to keep up with you in a 100 meter dash with those stubby legs! Then there's social standings in some games wherein non-Human races are liked by some, neutral to others, and outright hated by a third set. Or certain classes in non-TTRPGs being locked by race, with only rare exceptions like Guild Wars coming to mind otherwise without race-class locking.
But if you're a Human? Basically NONE of that applies! Social interactions with any race that isn't Human in non-TTRPGs often start at "neutral" with little to no difficulties even getting to that point beyond a 5 minute fetch quest at most, Humans can be any class they so choose in non-TTRPGs, they often have zero downsides during character creation unless specifically given one by the player (instead getting to hand pick what they're best at) in TTRPGs, Human characters in RPGs are often deemed to be the "cannon" choice if there is a story with multiple races available, and the only "real" downside a Human character seems to ever truly have is lacking the ability to see in the dark without a torch!
Now, I'm well aware of my usage of the word "often" in my little rant against the blatant favoritism shown to Humans in fantasy, and that's simply due to the fact I have to admit there are some, with heavy emphasis on the rarity of that "some," games where Humans rightfully get shafted compared to their more fantastical counterparts. Such examples include games where the player's only option is to make a monstrous character such as the World of Darkness games or, if we go back to when browser based games were far more common, Bite Fight, where humans existed merely as cattle for the player to hunt. There is also Guild Wars 2, where the developers outright admitted they viewed Humans as the most standard and boring choice a player could make during character creation when given far more interesting options like the Charr, Sylvari, Asura, or even the Norn, and as such purposely gave the Humans the most boring starting story they could manage, of which I wholeheartedly applaud. I've even been working on my own setting/system lately, and plan to add it to the short list of games that knock the "Jack of all trades, master of everything" Humans down more than a few pegs, simply because I'm tired of them getting this sort of preferential treatment.
The 6th printing is always free, as far as I know. Honestly, making humans attractive to play is one of my favorite parts of the system.
Looks interesting.
It is interesting
The Crusades are a terrible part of history that shouldn't be roleplayed?
Why would that be?
Given that almost all of gaming - boardgaming, computer gaming, roleplaying - is about combat and conflict, there seems to be no reason to declare the crusades off limits. Except for the fact that it was European Christians attacking nonwhite Muslims. Is that it?
Sure, but that’s war in general which is tragic enough. As a Christian I find the Crusade’s hijacking of faith and the name of Christ to be used in a power play is something which need to be repented of, not romanticized.
Its an interesting topic to study. It’s definitely not this uncalled for aggression as it is portrayed in modern culture. It was a reaction to Islamic aggression and brutal Islamic expansion. Some campaigns are more understandable than others which are not. Overall there were not that many campaigns and battles they fought. If you compare it with the Islamic expansion it is not even comparable and it is almost laughable. No one criticizes the Islamic expansion though (thank God they weren’t able to conquer all of Europe). Now does that mean we have to agree with the crusades? No, but it is obvious that modern propaganda has completely rewritten history in peoples mind just like with most western culture and history, the non white culture is romanticized (even if much more brutal) white Europeans are vilified.
I’m not playing “what about them,” I’m not ok with the way the faith I practice got hijacked by the crusades.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I have to wonder about the faith of the Europeans all over Europe, even up into Ireland who were for centuries captured and enslaved in the Middle East, children of women forced into sex slavery by muslims and brought up to revere Allah, the millions forced at sword point to convert or die. And it still went on even into the 1800s (and today). Seems like your faith was being fairly brutally hijacked by Muhammed when he turned the entire Middle East and North Africa and most of Spain from Christianity to worshipping a false god. Maybe a little context instead of blindly following the teachings of the anti-christianity crowd today is warranted.
@@nathanmorgan3647 I’m good, thanks. I critique my faith community I don’t react against another. Christianity’s got more than enough logs in our eyes to keep us busy.
Nice review subbed . 👍
Though I don't think most people associate the word Crusade with the actual Crusades historical period.
Given my vocation and my love of Church history I do.
I don't -- strangely never even occurred to me until watching this video. For me "Castles & Crusades" is just a cool name. No meaning to "Crusades" positive or negative.
Hope you get closer to monetized! I’ll keep watching to get it done!
Thanks!
My standard go to game. I love ttrpg.
My table has enjoyed it.
Wes! You know I’m a big B/X, OSE fan but I also enjoyed most everything about AD&D and logged most of my gaming hours with AD&D 2e.
Push me over the edge, why should I get C&C? Really interested in the elevator pitch from someone I trust. This is currently a game you’re actively playing with a group correct?
If you have time, I’d like to hear your thoughts on why you’d think I’d enjoy C&C even though I’m already thoroughly enjoying OSE. Interested in a comparison of C&C and OSE. What’s the same, what’s different, what’s better, what’s worse. (My book shelves are extremely welcoming to new books even if my wallet is not.)
Thanks again for another great review!
Hmmm…
Well you saw the unified mechanic and…it’s a UNIFIED mechanic. So if you’re looking for stuff like a morale number in creature stats it’s not there. It’s a check-12 base for primary attributes and 18 for secondary.
Encumbrance is a ton easier than OSE/BX coin based weight, though Carcass Crawler has a slot based system which I think is better still.
Saving throws are ability checks, so it’s more simple than the abstract concepts of B/X.
Combat is interesting. You can only move half your movement and still attack. Shields aren’t constant, they only get added for a certain amount of attacks per round.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I read the Players Handbook from front to back last evening. I completely understand why many would refer to C&C as AD&D 3e. It looks amazing. These books will be on my shelf within the week. It is inevitable. Thanks Wes!
They REALLY need to get an editor who will clean up the text, but the game is solid.
Alternate rules for magic that ditches Vancian magic = definitely good stuff. Fuck Vancian magic. Hated it back in the day, hate it even more today. There's also the failed attempt at fixing it in 5e that simply takes the worst feature of Vancian magic: prepared spells and just make a small tweak to the amount you can cast.
I like roll to cast a lot better. Shadowdark and Dragonbane have some nice takes on magic. Symbaroum may be my favorite.
Ascending Armor Class is better, So are skills, backgrounds and the lack of class restrictions for demi humans. "race" doesn't bother me, you talking about it doesn't bother me, people calling it something else doesn't bother me... but I still want a snickers. :P
Oh I like Ascending AC SOOOO much more. I think the Siege Engine is set up really well for the table, too. Folks seemed to enjoy it. I don't call for rolls a lot, though, only if there's a chance for meaningful failure.
Check your leftover halloween candy for a snickers.... :-)
Seige engine seems.... complicated... at first.
It can seem that. My players picked it up fast, though, and I enjoyed running it. In practice it’s very fast.
It's really only complicated for the Castle Keeper -- who has to set the DCs. Btw: I just play +6 for the players -- leaving the difficulty for me the CK in setting the DCs.
Theres nothing wrong with the crusades man, its a war like so many others in human history with badass warriors on both sides , no wars should be "celebrated" by that logic. Cant watch the rest after that take, sorry.
Ok. Happy New Year.
DEUS VULT
@@mikekerezman5587sigh.
The crusades were literal cultural and religious genocides. Saying there's nothing wrong with them is quite the idiotic take.
Hilarious that our minds full of mush now celebrate Moors killing the Jews and Christians and conquering North Africa and even Spain, but are taught how terrible the Christian response was.
Your silly and inaccurate comment about the Crusades as a historical period lost me. Stopped listening after that.
Can you unlike too, so even more people see this review?
@@DMTalesTTRPG I can’t help how RUclips works but I will be telling my many many gamer connections to avoid your page period
Awesome, THANKS!
@@DMTalesTTRPG you really can’t handle criticism can you? Maybe you’re in the wrong business
I mean, engagement’s just engagement to RUclips. This video was silent for a few months now there’s 6 comments in two days.
1:20 you say that like we would spontaneously go off on an authentic crusade if you didn't say anything.
Feeling kind of insulted. I wonder how much of your viewers you expect to go around with knives invading homes looking for loot and monsters.
Ok
Going color format was a HORRIBLE mistake on CC. A good game in the beginning, they made many mistakes on the way. I walked away from it.
The engine hasn’t changed at all, though, right?
To tell you the truth I don't know. I don't have the latest printing of the Players' book. From the peak I've had it seems to have changed a lot. The problem is they are all over the place in what they do. On my first channel I did a review of the book The Black Libram of Nartarus. What a sloppy book. The same picture in it three times?? And no matter what you say, presentation is half of the product. @@DMTalesTTRPG
From my running the core game hasn’t change. I had someone at my table with the last B/W edition. And it was no different. Stuff from the CKG was added in the Players Handbook and that was the biggest change.
The latest design language has improved dramatically over the faux parchment background edition. This really shows up since (at least last I checked) Monsters & Treasures hadn’t been updated to the new design language and…it shows.
The thing that does get me with Troll Lord books is the editing. Sometimes the way things are described is all over the place, and the presentation in Monsters & Treasures was inconsisent.
@@DMTalesTTRPG It's changed very little. Mechanics are still the same -- so not sure what @nightwind is talking about, except for the color change and formatting changes. There have only been three notable changes in the rules since C&C came out. They changed the Barbarian class (although you can still use the earlier Barbarian class if you'd like). They changed the Illusionist spell list (main change was adding healing), by the way nothing stopping you from using the old Illusionist spell list if you want. I thought it was interesting - to have an arcane spell caster with healing spells -- although their healing is not as powerful as a clerics), and they changed the encumbrance system, by simplifying it a little.
I really thing @nightwind is talking about color and formatting changes. Also, some people who played really on played without the CK guide (as the CK guide) didn't come out until 2010. But the CK doesn't really change anything - -more than anything the CK guide add a bunch of "optional" rules and give's a boatload of world building advice, like you said.
Overly complicated. Why should a player with a low stat have that stat modifier nullified by their level? A pet rock isn't a genius because it's been on earth for thousands of years.
The same way an attack or proficiency bonus goes up?
I treat it like Discworld. The old barbarian heroes are OLD and can barely move, but have made a habit of not dying.
@@DMTalesTTRPG I don't know. I don't play games with a proficiency bonus.
Interesting, what do you play?
@@DMTalesTTRPG Warhammer Fantasy Role Play. Paranoia. Warlock! Delta Green. Just got Imperium Maledictum.
I’ve wanted to play Paranoia forever. I need to pick that up.
“Crusades shouldn’t be roleplayed?” You lost me there with your woke speech.
Thank you for improving my standing in the algorithm.