Castles & Crusades is close enough to AD&D 2e (and For Gold & Glory, which I will interchange here often) and has a lower level of complexity (along the lines of B/X but with unified mechanics). This is one thing about the mid-1990s games that shot for a higher level of complexity above the 1980s B/X and tried to equate this depth of rules with maturity. They often added a lot of minutiae in rules depth that didn't add a lot in terms of gameplay.
Numbers and stats and modifiers ultimately do little except slow you down. A lot of the ability score modifiers in AD&D 2e feel more like trivia than useful abilities. In the 1990s, AD&D 2e sat in this strange place of trying to compete with the more mathematically complex games while trying to remain the mainstream fantasy RPG for those who enjoyed the novels.
I will still get my use out of For Gold & Glory and I love the game as a throwback to AD&D 2e. I would like to see more development in the AD&D 2e retro-clones as well, as this seems to be a system sort of stuck without too much development or active interest. It is a great book and can hold its own, but I would love to see a version take off and gain a typical B/X game audience and level of support.
But an AD&D throwback game has to be more than just AD&D 2e in my feeling since a lot of games hit that mark, at least with AD&D style of support, and exceed it these days.
I suppose Old School Essentials spoiled me with its clarity, minus complexity, plus new stuff design. I want a version of AD&D 2e that cleans things up and does things differently in ways that matter, all while giving me something new.
Well...I may have already had that.
Endless Minor Modifiers
But I started to generate characters in FG&G and felt that same 1990s slog of writing down all sorts of tiny modifiers here and there and feeling the pointlessness of it all. What is the real difference in the charisma chart having two different modifiers to loyalty modifier and reaction modifier, with only a one-point difference between them at the scores characters typically have? Dexterity has surprise and missile attack modifier columns that are exactly the same. And the whole bend bars/lift portcullis chance table, with a 17 STR being 13% and an 18 STR being 16%.
AD&D 2e in the 1990s exists in this strange place where it wanted to feel "detailed" and have all of these modifiers, but if you liked games like that you went to Rolemaster, Palladium, Runequest, or other fantasy systems that had special modifiers and detailed rules in style, and ones that actually mattered more to gameplay than numeric quantifiers to a limited set of circumstances.
Why go halfway?
If I want pure D&D or hybrid D&D/AD&D I will play B/X. If I want complex rules I will play Palladium or Rolemaster (or even GURPS). We made this same conclusion back in the 1990s and it still feels like a good choice today. If you are looking for an AD&D 2e simulation specifically, dive in with For Gold & Glory and you will have a blast.
But if you want an AD&D feeling and want an easier time you may want to consider a few more modern options. One of them is a game like Old School Essentials or any of the B/X options out there today. For me, I want something more than B/X with a little more of the power and monster scaling going on to get me that epic AD&D 2e feeling, but I don't want to go full D&D 3E or Pathfinder.
I want simple rules, epic power levels, and the old-school feeling.
So I pulled Castles & Crusades off the shelf again and gave it another look.
I didn't know I would end up liking it more after having this strange AD&D 2e perspective.
Unified Mechanics
So let's focus on today, and specifically look at C&C as an AD&D 2e replacement.
When you have a unified ability check system you have it all. All those charts with minor differences and things to track disappear. The entire game is simplified. Want to lift the portcullis? STR check please, with a negative modifier if the gate is particularly heavy. We are done, keep playing. None of these overly-codified "kings rules to roleplaying" really matter.
Balance on a log? Charm a guard? Spot a hidden object? Save versus poison? All are covered under a unified system. C&C gets rid of the class saving throw tables too and unifies the mechanic under the ability save system, which is a huge plus and elimination of record-keeping and chart reference. If a class or heritage is resistant to something, give them a save bonus for that, such as magic, charm, or poison. It works the same and is less record keeping overall.
Also, if you dislike the Siege Engine 12/18 primary/secondary target number (adjusted by level, ability mod, and difficulty) thing there is nothing stopping you from just using a straight d20 under the ability score (with modifiers) task resolution method instead. I don't mind it, but I saw this brought up a few times in comparison to B/X and it is worth mentioning.
More modern games started to value the elegance and simplicity of mechanics, and these rules have this "play math" designed into the game. If the majority of enjoyment is storytelling and action, then let's remove as much tedious record-keeping and stat-tracking from the game as possible and free up the time spent referencing and the mental energy needed to play the game.
Tough Monsters? Check!
Another plus Castles & Crusades has over AD&D 2e is the monsters are even tougher than that game. My ancient red dragon has 34 HD (+34 to hit also) and an AC of 32. They save on a +32 (with an extra +8 bonus) with a spell resistance of 6. The breath weapon does 34d10 damage and a bite that does 6d10. If I wanted to use the "larger/smaller HD" rules from FG&G and say this particular dragon was larger and had d12 HD instead of d8, nothing is stopping me (bump the XP up a level per HD die size I'd say). Now, given C&C characters are a little more powerful as well at this level, this feels right to me, especially when compared to first-level characters.
And C&C does not sanitize the demons and devils out of the game, though they are in a separate book.
I think this is the one thing that made me reconsider Castles & Crusades for a throwback AD&D 2e game, the high-level monsters feel way more powerful than their B/X counterparts. This hits the mark for me in terms of power level and feeling. While a B/X ancient red dragon is nothing to laugh at, I want that level of foe to feel more like Godzilla than a 60 hp and AC -1 (OSE or LL) creature.
And there are only a few AD&D-style games that scale monsters like that. D&D 3, 4, and 5. Pathfinder 1e and 2e. AD&D 2e and For Gold & Glory.
And Castles & Crusades.
With C&C being the most AD&D-like game on this list with a simple unified mechanic and simple core rules, this felt right.
So What is This For?
My dream was to replay some of the starting campaigns I played with my brother long ago in For Gold & Glory, since that seemed like a great throwback system that would get me that nostalgia hit. Once I started filling out those AD&D 2e character sheets and noting all of the special modifiers, I felt those old feelings of "this is a lot of work" come up.
And then I thought, this is why people play B/X.
Did AD&D lose its way in the 1990s with 2e? Did the weight of tables and modifiers added from Dragon Magazine articles and expansion books make the game more complete, but ultimately do very little for playability?
The revision for what we had was nice, the 2e books were a clarification on a system that already showed a little wear and tear, and it needed a new coat of paint and some changes for the time it was published in. A part of me wonders if a revision didn't go far enough, or they feared changing "too much" about the game.
And you see that same fear these days with the 4th Edition going in a different direction and the 5th Edition rolling back the 4E changes to bring the game back to its roots. But even late in the 5th Edition, we are already seeing the radical departures from D&D again.
Remember the old D&D rule that said every even number edition sucked? I kid, but so far we are batting 100 here on even number editions, and I hope they break the cycle with 6th, but from what I see the entire game and D&D cosmology is getting wanderlust again and going off into anime, space, plane-hopping, cartoon, and MMO territory again. Late lifecycle 5th Edition feels more like D&D 4 to me in worldbuilding, scope, and structure.
I could do my idea in D&D 5, but I will wait for 6th honestly, and try to get in again there. As for For Gold & Glory, I will find a use, but for now, just having the perspective of a true 2e clone gave me a lot of insight and that alone is worth the read.
I have C&C and it is simple and works. It hits my nostalgia notes while staying out of the way with complexity and record keeping. It is an "epic heroes" style of system, and the high-level monsters are truly terrifying. I could do this in B/X easily, but replaying some of my games with this system would feel epic - the epic I was attracted to with AD&D 2e and its sole retro-clone.
No comments:
Post a Comment