Goodman Games

I think DCC needs a boxed set.

It would contain the core book (probably softcover to reduce the price, or even abridged), all the required dice (or at least the funky rare ones), a separate booklet explaining roleplaying to newcomers, and a quick-start adventure. This could make the game more accessible to experienced roleplayers and newbies alike. I could buy it for my friends.

Its a neat idea, but I just dont ever see that happening. Especially not with a full sized DCC book. Maybe a condensed book, but then you might lose the "feel" of DCC.

I think it would be pretty awesome not to mention very nostalgic to those of us old enough to remember the box sets from TSR.

boxes are weak. DCC is strong!

Some of us were talking about that on the google plus DCC RPG... thingy. Divide the core rulebook into 3 soft cover manuals, include dice, and a sweet module. Done and done. I think it's a fantastic idea!

VS

What?

What if you called it "Basic DCC - the house ruler's toolkit"? It could be the first few chapters from the core book softbound and half-sized (like the size of the crawl fanzine - 4.25x5.5?) Then, you include a pamphlet on creating your own spells, patrons and monsters; toss in the zocchi set of dice, character sheets, a special CD single with a couple appendix n style metal bands (the sword, gypsyhawk, etc) and a basic Judge's screen (yay artwork and tables)....it becomes a must buy for dcc fans and newbies alike!

I'd much rather they produced more supplements and modules than the same rules I already have. Sorry, it's a neat idea but nothing I'd be interested in buying.

do you think that's feasible? It's hard for me to look at the book and say this section can exist in isolation from another section.

Wouldn't it fall neatly into:

1 - Players Section
2 - Spells
3 - Judges Section

I just want my DCC RPG annual!

It would need to be limited to 3 or so levels. Otherwise the Spells book would weigh about 40 pounds. If spells only had to include a sampling of 1st and 2nd (maybe a few 3rd) level spells, I think it would be doable to produce a significantly scaled down introductory product.

Agreed. The thing that kills most RPGs is not enough (well-written) adventures.

I think DCC RPG could use a good "Basic Set", I've mentioned it a few times before (here and G+). It could go until 3rd level. Hell, my campaign of 1.5 years has only 1 (one) 3rd level character, everyone else are from 0 to 2. It would only need the more popular 1st (maybe 10-15 of them) and 2nd level spells (maybe 10.) It could be a really tight "intro" to DCC RPG and RPG gaming in general. The Pathfinder Beginner Set showed how well it could be done, and affordable too, and that there is a market for such things.

It'd be smaller than the DCC RPG beta.

I'd get James Raggi to write it, he wrote the best "Intro" to "D&D" I've ever read, the Tutorial in LotFP. I'd buy it for all my friends who don't play, it's way less intimidating the wonderful tome that is the DCC RPG core rules book.

Sure, who doesn't want more. However, there's so much fantasy RPG material available in 2013 that you could run a session every week and still have fresh modules to go by the time you're 80 years old.

What I'd really love to see are several notices up at my FLGS looking for DCC players!

VS

Well, yes, you've got me there!

And trust me, if I was anywhere near you I'd be one of those players looking for a group.

I'm STARVED for RPG action, like a meth-head drooling over inhalers at the pharmacy.

Agreed. I remember the TSR era boxed sets but prefer hardback books... especially my gold foil DCC hardback.

Yup! Got me one of those too. My wife got it for me for father's day. Best. Wife. Evar!

Thems fightin' words...!

*rolls d20+1d5*

But what about the childrens! Consider the newbs and never ever playeds! DCC RPG is a great game to get someone started in RPGs, but that lovely 480 page tome might be intimidating to those trying to get started. $40 is big investment, but $20 or $25 might be appealing. Not you, or me, but the beginners.

I've played tons of "organized" play, and ran the first season of Encounters for 4e at my FLGS, and there were lots of newbies that were "sold" on giving it a try at the weekly Encounters game. (Un)fortunately the only "entry level" products were the Rules Compendium and that lame "Red" Box. I got my start playing the Holmes Edition, then moved to the real "Red Box" before obsessing, and getting into AD&D. It would have been nice if there was a proper "beginner's" set or book.

Is DCC for beginners or those who have never played? It doesn't seem so.
In the end it's their game, so they can do what they wish, I just stated it wouldn't be something I would buy, and I'd rather have supplements and modules. Sorry. If you want to buy a beginner's box more power to you, but I don't want one.



What box set is gonna cost less than $40?



I never moved to AD&D because it didn't do anything we weren't already doing with Basic, and what it did do was overly complicated. I don't see Basic D&D as a newb game at all.

But as I said, it's just my opinion...I wouldn't buy it. Sorry.
IMO a better idea would be a quick start guide PDF that had some characters, an adventure and the basic rules need to play the adventure.

Some of you guys are making it sound like a "Basic Set" would replace your Core Book. How? Like the Core Book will become expired, or obsolete, in some way? Probably some bad taste left over from when 4e got replaced by the 4e Essentials line. I know that feeling.

The hypothetical and anecdotal is all that's happening here. Keep that in mind. As far as I can tell, there is no official talk for new rules, revisions, basic or otherwise. But I like teaching RPGs. Most of the players in my campaign have never played D&D. I never thought I'd be interested in "Basic" sets, but success of the Pathfinder Beginner Set really changed a lot of thinking about that stuff. Also entry level stuff makes really good tools for teaching. On that note, compared to Pathfinder or D&D 4e, DCC RPG is about as beginner friendly as it gets. Maybe not as friendly as Swords and Wizardry, or any other OSR game based on the BECMI or pre-supplement Original Edition, but pretty friendly in practice (I ran many demos last year), this is quite contrary to what it says in the forward.

And please, Basic D&D was designed to be a gateway drug, how successful it was in doing so is fair to debate, I know I played it wrong for quite a while. But we didn't have anyone to teach us, nor were there videos of actual play as there is now. Once a "real" DM showed up, my mind was blown.

The Pathfinder Beginner Box is $30 street. DCC RPG doesn't need any of the cardboard figures, whatever is in that box that makes it so heavy. A DCC RPG "Basic Set" could probably be a total of 128 pages, about the size of the Dragon Age RPG Set 1, and that was everything you needed to play until 5th-level. While the D&D 4e "Red Box" was essentially a "Quickstart Guide" with all those things in mind, and it sucked. It was a terrible introduction to D&D 4e, and the hobby in general. The stuff in that Red Box should have been given away free on Free RPG Day.

Why? Because I said I wouldn't buy one? Not sure where you get that. I'm sorry I don't want one, and I don't see this game as needing to be newb friendly. I just don't. I don't know where you get your strawman tho.



I ain't raving against it even if it is. My point was "I don't want one." not "Gurffledurgleburglegrump!!! Tarnation this makes me mad!!! Grrrr."



Luckily since DCC is d20 you have a lot of options already.



Since it came out like 5 years before AD&D I highly disagree with that speculation. D&D was in no way an entry level game. It wasn't until much later that they set up that dynamic, and it didn't work because D&D wasn't designed to be that. Sorry, but this is just incorrect.


MSRP is $34.99 That's $5 difference from the whole book of DCC.

And there's a lot more to a box set price than the page count. In particular...the box is probably one of the most expensive components. What is so wrong with a quick start guide?


But like I said last time. If you want to spend money on a beginner level game, be my guest, but I don't have to want to, and I don't. I'm sorry if that translates to you that I hate the idea at a molecular level...I don't...I just have no use for it.

I think you guys just want this so you'll have something else to collect. NERDS!!!!!!

/ACAEUM'D

Sorry, my original reply [http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=95948#p95948] wasn't directed at you personally, just the thread. All I did was state my support for a Boxed Set (hypothetical), and backed it up with my personal (anecdotal) belief. You're the one that poked holes at my post, with inline replies and all, so I couldn't help but take it personally. My bad but I still think a Basic Set is a good idea.

Btw, Basic D&D was absolutely designed as an entry level game before "Advanced" D&D play. It might not have worked for you, and I know it didn't work well for me. But the evidence is pretty clear that it was designed with that in mind: Basic D&D "Holmes Edition" (1977) p. 6. states "...experience levels that high are not discussed in this book and the reader is referred to the more complete rules in ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS".

The original Red Box, the Moldvay (1981) and/or Mentzner (1983) editions, that's a different story. But I was already into AD&D by the time those books came out.