Quote from: Teodrik;907704Im wondering how C&C holds up today againt 5e(as a system)? I own neither. I read some people claiming C&C became obsolete and there is no reason playing it over 5e since they are kind of in the same design space: " A modern AD&D 3e", and 5e did everything better and smooth ( dont kill the messenger). For several reasons Im not "feeling it" for 5e, but C&C sure looks very tempting for aesthetic reasons. More classic look and feel somehow. But I ve also heard a lot of negative about SIEGE. Wonky math, especially for saving throws and spells.

I own both.

I think that C&C is a lot more like AD&D with modern-era mechanics built in. (Both MU and Cleric spell levels go 0-9, ascending AC, and so on.) Feels a lot like AD&D.

5E is more on the 2E/3E border. Remember when 2E had all those kits and choices, well 5E has lots of choices a lot like that. For example, if you want to be a wizard you have a half dozen varieties to pick from. Rogues have thief-types, assassin types, swashbuckler types, and so on. The rules are a lot more simplified than 3E and the bonuses have been scaled back to give an early-day power level feel, but it still comes with lots of options.

I won't say I like either one "better"; I play 5E most nowadays because that's what they play in the game store, but when I GM home games I'm just as likely to dust off C&C as I am to run 5E. Both are better written (in my opinion) than either 3E or 4E. I would say that 5E is easier to powergame, which can be a good thing or a bad thing depending upon your preference. C&C is more straight-forward in its approach, and encourages characters to fit specific classes which are more defined.