AS&SH's setting sounds pretty cool. Anyone care to share some detail on C&T's default setting? And - not being particularly OSR-savvy - how easy would it be to import setting material from AS&SH into C&T?

Quote from: 3rik;870861AS&SH's setting sounds pretty cool. Anyone care to share some detail on C&T's default setting? And - not being particularly OSR-savvy - how easy would it be to import setting material from AS&SH into C&T?

I think you could probably port the setting pretty easily to just about any system, as there's nothing in the Gazetteer (that I can recall) that requires the AS&SH rules. The monsters might require a bit of tweaking, as they're naturally statted for AS&SH. I ran the TAKEN from Dunwich module using AD&D and made monster changes on the fly. I'm sure most people could do the same with any D&D-based system.

Quote from: The Butcher;870680...I think there are only three classes (fighter, magician, thief)...

There's also the barbarian.

The classes are designed to encompass a wide range of archetypes. So fighters can choose among different 'fighting styles' that can enable them to range from heavily-armoured shield-masters to lightly-armoured swashbucklers.  Magicians can cast different kinds of spells: white magic (healing and protection), grey magic (illusions and mind-control), and black magic (destruction and summoning).  What kinds of spells magicians focus on will lead to very different kinds of characters (e.g., helpful 'white magicians' versus corrupted, malevolent 'black magic' sorcerers).

All characters are considered 'rogues' and thus can backstab.

I really like AS&SH, especially the setting and the art. The system resembles AD&D, which is cool, and so provides options via different classes (in contrast to C&T, which provides options via choices within classes).

Whether to go with AS&SH or C&T depends on what kind of game you want to run: a rules-medium AD&D-style game, or a rules-light 0e D&D game?  They both aim at the same overall genre, and do so quite well IMO.

The setting of AS&SH seems more tightly integrated with the rules, whereas the setting in C&T is provided more as an example of what you can do with the rules, rather than permeating the presentation of the rules themselves.  (I don't use the 'default' setting in C&T myself.)

I own both games and very much like both of them.  But I'm partial to C&T, for obvious reasons.

I'm not too familiar with C&T (for various odd reasons its one OSR title that has eluded me) but I did get a PDF version of AS&SH and really enjoyed it. I keep forgetting to go to North Wind and order a copy in print, which this thread is once more reminding me I need to do.

I'd say AS&SH is served less by the familiarity of the AD&D rules and more by how it adeptly weaves the sword & sorcery genre into them, providing a lot of flavor. Definitely worth anyone's time to check out.

I really liked AS&SH's art. I'm not sure about the system.

Firsts, the classes are out of whack. This was true in OD&D/AD&D but this was compensated for by some classes needing less XP.  But that is broken in AS&SH because the level cap is 12.  A 12th level Thief and a 12th Level barbarian might be the same level, but the barbarian will have needed twice as much XP and be much, much more powerful. Without the cap, the thief would be 15th or 16th level and more on par with the Barbarian.

There is no multi-classing, but a lot of B/X multi-class classes. Like instead of a Fighter/Magic-User, there is the "Warlock".   Again, in TSR games, this sort of multiclassing would have a price, you wouldn't be as good as a pure whatever. But thanks to the level cap, in AS&SH, they are (if not quite as good, very close)

Secondly, why make thief skills based on a d12? Other than being cute? Why not just go with d100%? It's more granular, it lets you know the odds easily. There's no reason to use anything but that, IMHO, but even a d20 would make more sense (which they actually used for the assassination table).

Thirdly, while I like the art, I don't think it fits the system. You see all these pieces with scantily clad adventurers. But that's simply not support by the rules. Like regular D&D, you need to wear armor to survive in combat unless you are a monk. And the monk is still pretty wussy.

And lastly,  the setting just seems silly. They took every place name they could from HPL and CAS's Hyperborea and jammed it together haphazardly.  Sometimes change the names slightly for no apparent reason (most the CAS stuff, since I guess they were unsure of the copyright status of his stuff).

Crypts & Things has much worse artwork, but the system is better designed and fits the genre better. The setting, while not especially original (feels like a Lin Carter pastiche), isn't simply a mish-mash of existing names used differently.

OTOH, the adventures for AS&SH are really good, while the C&Ts ones not so much.

Quote from: Akrasia;871056I really like AS&SH, especially the setting and the art. The system resembles AD&D, which is cool, and so provides options via different classes (in contrast to C&T, which provides options via choices within classes).

Whether to go with AS&SH or C&T depends on what kind of game you want to run: a rules-medium AD&D-style game, or a rules-light 0e D&D game?  They both aim at the same overall genre, and do so quite well IMO.

The setting of AS&SH seems more tightly integrated with the rules, whereas the setting in C&T is provided more as an example of what you can do with the rules, rather than permeating the presentation of the rules themselves.  (I don't use the 'default' setting in C&T myself.)

I own both games and very much like both of them.  But I'm partial to C&T, for obvious reasons.

This is helpful, thanks! I need to pick up a copy of C&T, because I do like OD&D a lot.

Well my boxed set of AS&SH just came in the mail this morning. I'm impressed, it's a really well put together product. The books are nice, the map seems good for gaming, and the character sheets should come in handy. The box itself seems fairly sturdy and the art is attractive, first thing out of my wife's mouth when she saw was "Ohh what game is that?" so I'll call that a win.

I'm debating on whether to go ahead and order a copy of CT or wait for the remastered version. I'm still flush with gift cards and cash from Christmas so I'm fighting the urge to impulse buy everything.

I don't have either of these.

Quote from: RPGPundit;871983I don't have either of these.

Try and dig up the AS&SH box set, it's a really well done product. The game within seems like a very cleaned up AD&D with nice S&S trappings.

I don't have the AS&SH boxed set since I'm a cannibalize-everything-for-B/X kind of guy, but I did go in on the adventures kickstarter and they're absolutely gorgeous and read as a lot of fun. Worth checking out.

Quote from: Arkansan;872038Try and dig up the AS&SH box set, it's a really well done product. The game within seems like a very cleaned up AD&D with nice S&S trappings.

The guy who did AS&SH tried to send me the box set, but the cost turned out to be prohibitive for him.

Quote from: RPGPundit;872444The guy who did AS&SH tried to send me the box set, but the cost turned out to be prohibitive for him.

Ahh. That's a shame as it's a really nice product, I'm supposing shipping to your location is expensive in general?

Quote from: Arkansan;872494Ahh. That's a shame as it's a really nice product, I'm supposing shipping to your location is expensive in general?

South America really is. It speaks volume to how much publishers value reliable and read reviews that so many of them have sent me books.

Crypts & Things for Conan? AS&SH for Conan?

What are the pros/cons for each?

Also, what are the pros/cons for either vs. 2D20 Conan?