Elric's plate armor and Gandalf's sword

[mshensley]

Check it out when you get a chance to run it (w/ the beta rules or at a con) and see for yourself. Open to suggestions if it doesn't go as well as I'm describing.

Oh, I definitely will check it out. From most of what I read here, it will be worth it. I don't mind some complexity as long as it actually makes the game more fun.

[smathis]

True, but very few things could change your stats in pre-3e games. Whole levels could get drained which caused it very own flavor of math pain.

I agree. Attribute damage is not something I shy away from all that much. Especially with a good character sheet. It's really easy to track a temporary drop in a stat, as compared to Level Drain. Hence, I tend to have Undead in my game permanently drain CON instead of dropping PCs a level. The math is so much easier.

And I also agree with Joseph that spellburn likely won't be commonplace in a regular game. It takes a good, long while to heal. The math is only part of the suck. And the really minor part, IMO. It's the week to heal every point that really makes it an unhappy thing.

[DCCfan]

True, but very few things could change your stats in pre-3e games. Whole levels could get drained which caused it very own flavor of math pain.

Level drain and all the recalculating of character sheets always stopped my game cold. I hated it so much that I threw it out all together.

[geordie racer]

Interestingly, I'm working on a sandbox/setting at the moment that won't feature Halflings, Dwarves or Elves. Trying to line up some art now, already about 2500 words in. It will offer options for re-skinning those classes into different (mostly) human races to fit the setting. The traditional triumvirate of demi-humans doesn't work for the genre. But it would be a shame to let a Fightery-Wizard, Thiefy-Lucky Guy and a Stout Warrior type go to waste. Because, while demi-humans don't fit in the setting, those archetypes do. And I think, arguably, the "Elf" class will be far cooler in this setting than in the typical vanilla fantasy setting -- even though it's just (mostly) human. But that's probably just me being biased.

How's the writing going ?

[finarvyn]

I can't think of a single magic-user in pre-D&D literature that basically said, "No, I can't use that weapon or wear that armor because I can cast spells."

How will DCC RPG deal with spell-casters and arms and armor?

Back to the original question, there are a couple of key design elements:
1. Different classes have different critical hit tables, so fighters are better than wizards.
2. Fighters can get more attacks, which wizards cannot.

So, wizards with swords won't be nearly as good as fighters.

[JediOre]

Check it out when you get a chance to run it (w/ the beta rules or at a con) and see for yourself. Open to suggestions if it doesn't go as well as I'm describing.

Joseph, I too am fully ready to "check it out." We've finished our quest in DCC #43-The Curse of the Barrrens (even if I haven't finished the write up) and I want to transform my gang's PCs from Castles & Crusades into the DCC-RPG. I want to see how well such a transfer will work, attempting to keep the flavor of Nightwing, JediWife, and Ragnar1965's 5th level characters, and then run them through DCC 27: Revenge of the Rat King (the mrs. has asked me to include this module and I would not deny her the honor of running scared. Of course she also really wants to adventure in DCC #35-The Thief Lord's Vault, but I'm not sure they would have a prayer there). I'm looking forward to see how well I can run the RPG using a 3.5 module of Harley's. Since we've been using DCCs since they rolled their PCs up, I think it would be cool to continue to use the same PCs with the DCC-RPG.

(The sooner I get my hands on the rule set, the sooner I can begin determining how to convert the material; hint, hint! I promise to give good write-ups on the boards when they tackle it.)

[smathis]

How's the writing going ?

Thanks for the inquiry. I'm knee deep in charts at the moment. With the kerfluffle over the Levels thing in DCC, I had to step back and ask myself a few questions. After a lot of mental cage matches, I'm confident I can make this thing compatible with most all D&D clones. So it's likely to be support Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry and DCC, probably C&C too. There might be some extra massaging needed for DCC but we'll see when those rules are available. At worst, it'll be a sidebar or appendix.

Sadly, the "in-progress word count" hasn't increased all that much. Mainly because I went back over the content for a re-write about six weeks ago. And decided I would focus on the charts now and rules later. Problem is the charts are slow going for me. Probably because I'm over-thinking them, especially the encounter charts I'm working on now. Also the charts aren't counting against the word count (yet) because they're in a spreadsheet. Gut feeling is there's probably a healthy 1500 words in there (at least).

I'll have to gauge the impact of these charts on my page count too. Charts of the scope I've been creating tend to dominate a page. The goal is d100 charts for 4 Encounter tables. That might need to be scaled back (although the "Wilderness" Encounter charts are already about 75% there.

And these aren't "you run into 4 Gnolls, fight!" encounters either. These are kicker encounters that could potentially lead in a number of different directions. Some of them are fights. But the majority are a lot more, potentially leading to thematic "side adventures". Travel won't be boring.

At the moment, it doesn't appear like the book is going to have much "fluff" if any. But, on the plus side, I think it will be more useful. And, if nothing else, the various charts and rules hacks can be stripped out and used in almost any existing D&D clone.

Thanks for asking, though. I don't think it's going well right now. But, bit by bit, it's coming together. I'll be happy when these charts are at least done. Only about 300 more entries to go...

[goodmangames]

There's a reason the cover art features an ambiguous guy with both a sword and a magical staff...

[nanstreet]

There's a reason the cover art features an ambiguous guy with both a sword and a magical staff...

Off topic here, but I just wanted to say how much I love that cover. When I saw it for the first time it made me want to look more into the DCC game, because it represents what I want out of an RPG: The thrill of the unknown, that pause on the cusp of adventure. I just really want to go down those stairs and open that door....

[Stainless]

Hang on a minute, his cloak is blowing one way, his/her hair is blowing another way and the tassels on the staff are blowing slightly in between the two. Must be magic around!

[GnomeBoy]

Hang on a minute, his cloak is blowing one way, his/her hair is blowing another way and the tassels on the staff are blowing slightly in between the two. Must be magic around!

Or the wind is blowing toward the viewer, and the cloak, hair, etc. are whipping back and forth...

[mythfish]

Hang on a minute, his cloak is blowing one way, his/her hair is blowing another way and the tassels on the staff are blowing slightly in between the two. Must be magic around!

Or the wind is blowing toward the viewer, and the cloak, hair, etc. are whipping back and forth...

The wind is blowing his hair and the tassles, and his 0-level hireling is just off the edge of the picture holding his cloak so he doesn't trip on it.

[jmucchiello]

Probably because I'm over-thinking them, especially the encounter charts I'm working on now. Also the charts aren't counting against the word count (yet) because they're in a spreadsheet. Gut feeling is there's probably a healthy 1500 words in there (at least).

I'll have to gauge the impact of these charts on my page count too. Charts of the scope I've been creating tend to dominate a page. The goal is d100 charts for 4 Encounter tables. That might need to be scaled back (although the "Wilderness" Encounter charts are already about 75% there.

Yawn. Never look at encounter charts and can't imagine needing a d100 encounter chart. The adventure supplies its own encounter charts and as DM I know what is in "the area" and can just decide what the player encounter if I think a "random" encounter is warranted. Maybe the is an artifact of long experience and newer DMs need charts but I can't remember really using the DMG charts very often compared to charts in modules I ran.

[Ravenheart87]

Probably because I'm over-thinking them, especially the encounter charts I'm working on now. Also the charts aren't counting against the word count (yet) because they're in a spreadsheet. Gut feeling is there's probably a healthy 1500 words in there (at least).

I'll have to gauge the impact of these charts on my page count too. Charts of the scope I've been creating tend to dominate a page. The goal is d100 charts for 4 Encounter tables. That might need to be scaled back (although the "Wilderness" Encounter charts are already about 75% there.

Yawn. Never look at encounter charts and can't imagine needing a d100 encounter chart. The adventure supplies its own encounter charts and as DM I know what is in "the area" and can just decide what the player encounter if I think a "random" encounter is warranted. Maybe the is an artifact of long experience and newer DMs need charts but I can't remember really using the DMG charts very often compared to charts in modules I ran.

In my Wilderlands sandbox, I always use encounter tables for the wilderness. It shakes up the game a bit, since even I don't know who or what the party will meet on the road and how. I even use them in larger dungeons, city ruins - writing a table for these, with a couple possible encounters, that they can meet in a ruined house or room requires far less time, than working everything out, and gives a good base for improvisation.

[smathis]

Yawn. Never look at encounter charts and can't imagine needing a d100 encounter chart. The adventure supplies its own encounter charts and as DM I know what is in "the area" and can just decide what the player encounter if I think a "random" encounter is warranted. Maybe the is an artifact of long experience and newer DMs need charts but I can't remember really using the DMG charts very often compared to charts in modules I ran.

Fair enough. I tend not to use encounter charts as much during the game as I use them during prep. Even then, there are very few encounter charts that I like. The ones I'm writing I do like.

Sorry it doesn't appeal. I'm doing my best and can't expect my efforts to meet with everyone's style of play.

The reason I felt the encounter charts were important was because they are the primary way I'm conveying the "feel" of the genre to readers. Instead of inundating the reader with tens of thousands of words about theme, mood and atmosphere, I've made charts.

So instead of reading a 300-page book, a DM can read a fraction of the page count, roll on a couple of tables and -- voila! -- instant adventure, challenge or conflict that fits the flavor and atmosphere of the genre. There will still be some content focusing on theme and mood, etc. But nothing like the treatises we've seen over the last couple of decades.

In my Wilderlands sandbox, I always use encounter tables for the wilderness. It shakes up the game a bit, since even I don't know who or what the party will meet on the road and how. I even use them in larger dungeons, city ruins - writing a table for these, with a couple possible encounters, that they can meet in a ruined house or room requires far less time, than working everything out, and gives a good base for improvisation.

I'm trying to create encounters that do just that -- provide a good base for improvisation. The idea is to give each encounter hooks that a DM could tie back into their adventure/campaign or provide a springboard for a new adventure. But that's why it's such a hindrance at the moment. They're not just encounters of fight this many monsters for this many XP. They're actual hooks/kickers/bangs. Only a small percentage of them involve monster fights.

I'm trying not to give away too much at this stage. The tables could be up for serious revision. No telling how they'll wind up in the end.

But I think it's a worthy enterprise.

[Machpants]

My main reason for liking random encounters is that is becomes a challenge for me as DM. I know exactly what is waiting for the players (although not what they will do) a random encounter forces me to think on my feet. I enjoy that as a player and it is nice to have it as DM too.

[Ravenheart87]

My main reason for liking random encounters is that is becomes a challenge for me as DM. I know exactly what is waiting for the players (although not what they will do) a random encounter forces me to think on my feet. I enjoy that as a player and it is nice to have it as DM too.

+1

[GnomeBoy]

Hang on a minute, his cloak is blowing one way, his/her hair is blowing another way and the tassels on the staff are blowing slightly in between the two. Must be magic around!

Or the wind is blowing toward the viewer, and the cloak, hair, etc. are whipping back and forth...

The wind is blowing his hair and the tassles, and his 0-level hireling is just off the edge of the picture holding his cloak so he doesn't trip on it.

Hireling -- or wyvern with a keen appreciation of fine silk: You make the call!

Probably because I'm over-thinking them, especially the encounter charts I'm working on now. Also the charts aren't counting against the word count (yet) because they're in a spreadsheet. Gut feeling is there's probably a healthy 1500 words in there (at least).

I'll have to gauge the impact of these charts on my page count too. Charts of the scope I've been creating tend to dominate a page. The goal is d100 charts for 4 Encounter tables. That might need to be scaled back (although the "Wilderness" Encounter charts are already about 75% there.

Yawn. Never look at encounter charts and can't imagine needing a d100 encounter chart. The adventure supplies its own encounter charts and as DM I know what is in "the area" and can just decide what the player encounter if I think a "random" encounter is warranted. Maybe the is an artifact of long experience and newer DMs need charts but I can't remember really using the DMG charts very often compared to charts in modules I ran.

I think maybe j is just thinking these are random monster charts(???).

I think they're sounding mighty cool, myself.

[geordie racer]

But I think it's a worthy enterprise.

Me too, good luck with it !

[finarvyn]

There's a reason the cover art features an ambiguous guy with both a sword and a magical staff...

When do we get to see a larger version of the cover art? I'd like to make it my desktop background, but when I try to enlarge it the image gets blurry...

[jmucchiello]

The reason I felt the encounter charts were important was because they are the primary way I'm conveying the "feel" of the genre to readers. Instead of inundating the reader with tens of thousands of words about theme, mood and atmosphere, I've made charts.

There's another thread where this was discussed. I was on the side saying that if there is to be "no default setting" then random encounter charts should not exist since by definition they provide setting information, exactly as you say here. If I need a random encounter chart, I should be looking in a setting or adventure book, not a core rulebook. That is why I don't like the sound of this in a book already short on page space.

So instead of reading a 300-page book, a DM can read a fraction of the page count, roll on a couple of tables and -- voila! -- instant adventure, challenge or conflict that fits the flavor and atmosphere of the genre. There will still be some content focusing on theme and mood, etc. But nothing like the treatises we've seen over the last couple of decades.

There must be a thousand mini-books on RPGNOW/e23/yourgamesnow where I can get "ideas" like this at literally dimes per dozen. I have many of those 300-page books on the shelf to my left that I can look through any time I want to make an encounter chart. I'm not saying your encounters won't be interesting or even unique. But do they belong in a core rulebook? A rulebook I have to carry around to every game session? All I can say is I'm not in favor of it.

I'm trying to create encounters that do just that -- provide a good base for improvisation. The idea is to give each encounter hooks that a DM could tie back into their adventure/campaign or provide a springboard for a new adventure. But that's why it's such a hindrance at the moment. They're not just encounters of fight this many monsters for this many XP. They're actual hooks/kickers/bangs. Only a small percentage of them involve monster fights.

Less interested now. I really don't need hooks in a core rulebook.

I think maybe j is just thinking these are random monster charts(???).

I think they're sounding mighty cool, myself.

No, there are worse than random monster charts. Do you really think hooks belong in a core rulebook with NO default setting material? Will these hooks and seeds apply in a Harold Shea style game? Elric style game? LotR style game?

[Ravenheart87]

Jmucchiello: smathis was talking about a setting he's writing...

[finarvyn]

if there is to be "no default setting" then random encounter charts should not exist since by definition they provide setting information

I should point out that the 1974 OD&D little books (the boxed set, not even having to go to the supplements) didn't include any default setting information, yet they had encounter charts.

From The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures:
Pg 10-11: Monster determination for 6 levels of dungeon
Pg 18-19: Wilderness wandering monsters (for several environments -- clear, woods, river, swamp, mountains, desert, city, along with optional alternates for Barsoom)

That's 4 pages of a half-page-size booklet, which could correspond to two pages of an 8.5x11" rulebook. (Maybe slighly more due to organization and layout.) In other words, it's certainly possible to include stuff like this in a thin rulebook.

The secret would have to be that the charts would be kept generic. The OD&D tables stick to the "classic" monsters, as does the main rulebooks. The question of if the DCC RPG rulebook "should" have such tables is another matter. I don't see any reason why they couldn't be included as an example.

On the other hand, I believe that 2E AD&D (the black book version) includes rules for how to build your own encounter tables. They suggest so many "common" monsters, so many "rare" monsters, and so on.

[smathis]

There's another thread where this was discussed. I was on the side saying that if there is to be "no default setting" then random encounter charts should not exist since by definition they provide setting information, exactly as you say here. If I need a random encounter chart, I should be looking in a setting or adventure book, not a core rulebook. That is why I don't like the sound of this in a book already short on page space.

There's no default setting for DCC. What I'm writing is a "setting" insomuch as it's a hexmap with some rule tweaks to cover the differences between it and a standard fantasy setting as presented in DCC, OSRIC, C&C, AD&D, etc. Also plan to do a short sample adventure.

It has nothing to do with the DCC core book, though. Other than I'd like it to be playable using DCC.

I don't think anyone's started a thread on the "thing" I'm writing. I'd rather not do so until it's further down the road and I can give concrete details of what's in and what's not. Right now, I have an outline. A cornucopia of ideas -- some of which will need playtesting. A map. About 5000+ words. A bunch of charts. And the email addresses of some artists who haven't laughed at me (yet).

I'm not even in the same league as DCC. And, while I'd love to tackle this project on behalf of Goodman Games (if only to get access to their stable of artists), I'm not advocating the DCC corebook include anything I'm writing. Geordie was nice enough to ask me how it was going. Things kinda went sideways after that.

There must be a thousand mini-books on RPGNOW/e23/yourgamesnow where I can get "ideas" like this at literally dimes per dozen.

This is what I'm doing. So make that 1,001 mini-books. I hope people like mine enough to pay fifteen cents for a dozen. I'm planning to pay for the art out of my own pocket. I'd like to (maybe) break even. At least on the interior art. I have no illusions that I'll be able to make the $$$ back on the cover art.

Less interested now. I really don't need hooks in a core rulebook.

At first, I was offput by these responses I was reading. Now that I understand that you think I'm advocating for these encounter charts to be in DCC, I think I get it.

I don't want these encounter charts to be in DCC. I'm doing my own thing here. Hopefully this misunderstanding gets cleared up.

Thanks to all those who've been supportive.

[jmucchiello]

Jmucchiello: smathis was talking about a setting he's writing...

If I'd known that.... nevermind.