serleran wrote:
Its not. It cannot be used without official WotC approval because that creature is not in the SRD. They own the rights, totally, and it requires a license from Wizards to use. Sorry, but there are several "icon" creatures like that, such as carrion crawler, umber hulk, beholder, and some others. None of those appear in C&C material.

Bummer.  

Well, I'll adapt.  It's not like they can keep us from translating the creatures' statistics into C&C.

Keith

Keith the Thief wrote:
They have chromatic (evil) and metallic (good) dragons.  Alignment in C&C is the same as D&D, by the way.

The chromatic dragons include black ,blue, green, red and white.
The metallic dragons are brass, bronze, copper, gold and silver.

They can all bite, rend, whip their wings and cause windstorms, and lash their tails.

Breath weapons are what you'd expect: deadly toxins, fire, acid, lightening, and cold.

Again, this is from the Collector's Rules.  The Monsters and Treasure rulebook, I'm told, has 200+ monsters and considerably more detail.

Obviously, I could get the same essential game by playing OD&D, or the Mentzer sets or 1E if I wanted more compexity.  The reason I've gotten so interested in C&C is because it's a simple system that mirrors original D&D and yet is also commercially available.

I want my kids to have the experience of playing a game system where we don't have to buy all our products from eBay, but can, instead, go to a game or bookstore and window shop.

Keith

A funny and sad story:

My FLGS owner, a friend of many years, and normally a pretty good guy, absolutely detests C&C and won't carry ANY of the products.

Quote:  "If they want to release a 3rd edition supplement, fine.  If they want to release a 1st edition supplement, fine, but don't call it "Castles and Crusades" and take away everything that makes 3rd edition great."

Then the rant goes on how C&C can't possibly work because the entire 3rd edition game system is based on feats, character kits, monsters having classes/abilities and being half-dragon/mindflayer/black pudding, etc.  Needless to say, he's a 3rd edition true believer of the highest order (he's furious with me because I haven't switched these last years; keeps telling me "Someday you'll have to, you're playing a dying game, pretty soon you won't be able to find any players, etc; for my part I keep styming him by playing and playing and playing....!)

Honestly, I really got interested in C&C just to run a game someday, or maybe even a campaign, just to rub his nose in it....I don't plan on using ANY of the upgrades, supplements, or extra rules except what is in the core rulebooks...just to drive him even more insane!  

He is a good guy, but just cannot wrap his mind around the fact players would want LESS to their game instead of MORE (he thinks that anyone who has left 3rd Ed to return to 1st or 2nd edition is, to put it mildly, mentally retarded.)

Anyway, just curious, has anyone else dealt with this sort of rabid resistance to C&C among fanatic 3rd editioners????

Mike B.

Anyway, just curious, has anyone else dealt with this sort of rabid resistance to C&C among fanatic 3rd editioners????

Do not ever go to ENWorld. Ever. If you do not want to see such rabid fanaticism... avoid it. But, yeah, I have seen such things. I don't understand it. I just like to game. Sometimes, I want "more" but having something so easy to modify makes that "more" so much easier to accomplish.

Badmike wrote:
A funny and sad story:

My FLGS owner, a friend of many years, and normally a pretty good guy, absolutely detests C&C and won't carry ANY of the products.

Quote:  "If they want to release a 3rd edition supplement, fine.  If they want to release a 1st edition supplement, fine, but don't call it "Castles and Crusades" and take away everything that makes 3rd edition great."

Then the rant goes on how C&C can't possibly work because the entire 3rd edition game system is based on feats, character kits, monsters having classes/abilities and being half-dragon/mindflayer/black pudding, etc.  Needless to say, he's a 3rd edition true believer of the highest order (he's furious with me because I haven't switched these last years; keeps telling me "Someday you'll have to, you're playing a dying game, pretty soon you won't be able to find any players, etc; for my part I keep styming him by playing and playing and playing....!)

Honestly, I really got interested in C&C just to run a game someday, or maybe even a campaign, just to rub his nose in it....I don't plan on using ANY of the upgrades, supplements, or extra rules except what is in the core rulebooks...just to drive him even more insane!  

He is a good guy, but just cannot wrap his mind around the fact players would want LESS to their game instead of MORE (he thinks that anyone who has left 3rd Ed to return to 1st or 2nd edition is, to put it mildly, mentally retarded.)

Anyway, just curious, has anyone else dealt with this sort of rabid resistance to C&C among fanatic 3rd editioners????

Mike B.

I can't speak from personal experience since I don't know any 3E players.  The only ones I've encountered are the handful here on this forum.  

But when folks start having virulent reactions of this ilk, it usually means they perceive a real threat.  Maybe C&C is making enough of a splash to have the 3E community worried.

And while it may be a stretch to say that TLG will win out over WoTC, it's not without precedent that a big guy can get clobbered by an upstart.  All you have to do is "Google" something to see such results.

Keith

Badmike wrote:Anyway, just curious, has anyone else dealt with this sort of rabid resistance to C&C among fanatic 3rd editioners????

In fairness, I don't think any edition has a monopoly on fanatics. We're just fantatics that can type full sentences.

jamesmishler wrote:
Yggsburg does not contain anything about the Castle itself. It is a complete setting, consisting of Yggsburgh and the East Mark.

One you get the Upper Works, you can just run it as is. If you already have a campaign setting, place it wherever you want to. If you do not, you can use Yggsburgh and the East Mark as the setting, as the Castle and its dungeons are going to require a LONG series of adventures, and the characters will want to get more equipment, reinforcements, materials, and debauchery in between delves.

Essentially, if you already have a setting, you don't need Yggsburgh. But it is pretty cool, and as it is a small area (~30 miles NS by 50 miles EW) it can be easily dropped into just about any classic European-style Medieval/Renaissance setting...

Oh, and Dark Chateau is a prequel to the Castle. It was the home of Archmage Zagyg before he moved into the castle. It will give you a taste of what is in store... but you do not need to run it before you run Upper Works.

Hi guys,

Long time lurker, first time poster.

I'm the designer helping Gary produce Castle Zagyg. Just thought I'd pop in to say hello, and to mention that what James says above is spot-on. I'll be at Gen Con promoting the folio of the East Mark Gazetteer:

http://www.trolllord.com/newsite/zagyg/8059.html

All the best,
--Jeff T.



[/i]

FWIW, if you last visited ENWorld two or three years ago (or longer), I think you'll find it a different place now:  OD&D and AD&D are regular topics of discussion there, and they're quite welcome.  Discussions about AD&D and OD&D, OSRIC and C&C, and other classic or retro systems, adventures, and settings are quite common now (including, ironically, 3.0 sometimes ).  Depending on the week, there may be more discussion of Greyhawk (and I don't mean LG either) on ENWorld than there is on DF, for example.

Back in the Edition Wars days, there may have been more animosity toward older systems on ENWorld, but with 4.x looming on the horizon, and the level of change and expense introduced by WotC with 3.5, I think that the ENWorld fanbase has mellowed considerably.

Ghul wrote:
Hi guys,

Long time lurker, first time poster.

I'm the designer helping Gary produce Castle Zagyg. Just thought I'd pop in to say hello, and to mention that what James says above is spot-on. I'll be at Gen Con promoting the folio of the East Mark Gazetteer:
[/i]

Welcome, Ghul!

Question. How much material (if any) will remain exclusive to the upcoming East Mark Gazetteer once the Upper Works is published? I.e., material not in Yggsburgh or the Upper Works.

zhowar wrote:
Welcome, Ghul!

Question. How much material (if any) will remain exclusive to the upcoming East Mark Gazetteer once the Upper Works is published? I.e., material not in Yggsburgh or the Upper Works.

Hello,

Thanks for the kind welcome to the forums here, fellows. I'm just a lifelong, die-hard gamer who got a lucky break!

A: Enough to make it worthwhile (IMO), particularly if you are a collector of curiosities, or if you desire to get your Caste Zagyg campaign running straight away.

The differences are this:

* new maps of the East Mark area. There will be a beautifully rendered one by Peter Bradley that shows the East Mark, much in the same way that the Darlene map did, but without the encounter numbers to ruin it. (I love Darlene's work, but my biggest complaint with the original map was the ability to show it to your players while gaming.)

* new material on the East Mark. Racial distributions, lunar calendar, languages, farmland production, trees of the East Mark, a chronological timeline, and other new features that will enhance your Yggsburgh campaign. Keep in mind that the East Mark area covers an area of 1,500 miles and so can be dropped into most other campaign settings.


The module inside, Mouths of Madness, is indeed also the first module that will be in the upcoming boxed set, The Upper Works. It has, however, been slightly modified so as to stand on its own until the boxed set is released. Meaning, you don't have to wait to get your Castle Zagyg game running, once you're armed with the folio.

Hope that helps,
--Jeff T.