Goodman Games

(post removed by me)

I don't normally quote an entire post (I usually snip it down to the essentials), but....

Hear, hear. Bravo, and well said.

(post removed by me)

(Removed by me as no longer relevant to discussion)

(posted removed by me)

Now... wouldn't this be a good time to cast "Calm Emotions" ??

(Removed by me as no longer relevant to discussion)

My apology for previous discourtesy stands however. I hope it will be accepted.

I genuinely was not trying to appear hostile in my posts, but I've removed them because I can see there's opportunities to misinterpret my intent.

Pleasant gaming!

Wow whats your caster level?

Blimey, I go to sleep and wake up the next day to find the thread a wasteground of deleted posts.

Colin

I shall use a scroll

I think this is a situation where you invoke the "Note that a character’s occupation need not be determined randomly" rule from page 14 of the beta document and move this character into an occupation more appropriate for his stats.

The bolded part is the most important one to me. Stat Attrition in DCC is eminently present. With just a few playtest games, I saw 3-4 permanent stat drops at the table. Permanent. Stat. Drops.

Some way of ameliorating that which did not involve the DM pulling a rabbit out of a hat would be appreciated. I don't much care whether the PCs get a 14 or higher in their "primary attribute". But some way of tailoring the Occupation to the stat array would be nice, IMO. I've pitched to Joseph that he note a variant for "rolling up to three Occupations and picking the one that best fits the character". It's a bit more dice-rolling but, if you don't like dice, charts and randomness, DCC probably isn't the best fit.

One thing I'd like to comment on, however, is a bit of an "I Told You So". I've been harping for a long time now that DCC should have some variant rule addressing these issues that's officially supported that appears in a sidebar or appendix or somewhere.

I think we're seeing a couple of things here.

First, we're seeing people do EXACTLY what they did with early editions of D&D. 3d6 down-the-line works for some but not everyone. D&D quickly realized it wasn't a one-size-fits-all thing and offered official variants for determining stats in AD&D. DCC isn't reinventing the wheel here. It's reliving pain and failing to learn from the past. That's the I-Told-You-So.

Second, we're seeing a lot of good ideas. But we're also seeing the relatively meager fanbase for this project splinter into a lot of different directions on this issue. Which is bad, IMO. I'm not saying that there needs to be a Unified Theory of All Things DCC. But this is stat generation -- basic stuff. And it appears that almost everyone on this thread is going to do it a different way. That is an inauspicious augury.

I would rather DCC meet the community halfway with some well-reasoned (and supported) variant options. We all know that a lot of people are going to be doing some things differently from each other once the game comes out. Andy may have DR. I might be switching up how Hit Points work. But when it comes to the basics, I'd prefer it if at least the high points of variance were acknowledged.

So that way I can say to the community, I'm running DCC using [blah]. Instead of just everyone branching off before the ink has dried on the character sheet.

If people are seriously diverging on house rules before they even get past the second page in the first real chapter, I think it's a sign that the game may not be delivering as promised.

+d14 I fear you may be right...

An Official set of variations I think is the way to go here as well. Along with the official encouragement to house rule your own campaign from the get go (not that we needed much encouragement there I know..)

I think it is right and proper that Mr G and team have a "strongly recommended variation" that is always promoted but one thing is very clear to me if they want DCC Rpg to be a commercial success they have to allow for the 25+ years of feelings and development in RPG's in general with "official optional rules"

Stats do go down in DCC more so than in D&D I think from my early impressions. Something to compensate for this is needed Mr G. really needed!!

I think this is an excellent system overall. I am glad to support it and want it to be a big success. That I suspect is why so many post their thoughts here. Coz we want this one to be a winner!

No doubt.

It could also be a winner if the optional rules are included in side notes, and then given an index number. This way a DM could tell his players "we're going to play with optional rules 12, 14, and 21." The players can then easily jump to the right page to find out he's talking about "Shields shall be splintered", "two weapon fighting variant 1" and "max HP at level 1"
(just random examples!!)..

Too many options is a terrible thing. I don't want players to keep having to refer back to the book to check which rules are being used and their specifics. You may as well just write your own house rules rather than cluttered up the rulebook with more rules.

But there need to be rules for starting characters above 0 level. Not all campaigns will start at 0 level.

Obviously not all campaigns will start at 0 Level - we played sessions at all levels, mostly 5th Level (because we are actually playtesting the damn game instead of wallowing in the funnel for how many months ?)

But we didn't demand magic items because we were higher level, and to be honest, that's how rules on starting higher get used - by the players of Non Casters in an attempt to make them as good in Combat and Exploration as the Spellcasters.

We agreed on wizards making a corruption roll per level to account for past failures, with extra starting cash for everyone. Simple. Game on.

I think that GUIDANCE rather than RULES is more appropriate for such options in a core book.

Sadly the Reply delete button disappears after a certain amount of time.

Let's just say I added utterly irrelevant discussion to the thread, which was thereafter replied to by another poster, and both parties decided to remove the irrelevancies.

Since then we've hugged, made friends and baked cookies together.

Ogrepuppy, it's been a long time since you shared cookies with the rest of us old timers! Don't hog the homemade cookies!

I think that's jumping to the conclusion that what people are asking for on the forum constitutes "too many" options.

There are only a handful of pain points that Joseph has decided not to address with DCC. Of those, at least two can be solved with a simple sidebar that constitutes no rule change whatsoever. Beyond that, there are around 7 rule variants up for consideration that, if presented in an official format, could give those who run/play DCC the opportunity of turning up/down dials to make the game their own.

As it stands, the "house rules" crowd seems to have metastasized those 7-8 rule variants into seemingly twice or three times as many separate house rules. I think it's a mistake for real pain points to be handwaved away. GG didn't do it with Thief percentile abilities. Nor with the Cleric's death spiral of incompetence.

So what about the incongruence between DCC Paper Heroes and Appendix N? Or the blacksmith who isn't strong enough to, you know, actually work as a Blacksmith? Or the precipitous decline of an Adventurer's aptitude in anything to which they can't apply a class bonus due to stat point attrition?

Enough people are butting up against those that I think it's a pain point. And I'd rather see DCC offer 3-6 suggestions on the topics than have 50 or so random variants lurking around the forum.

+d24 A nice summation of the feelings of many of us I feel! Bravo

While I understand people's desire to play super powered murder machines, there are systems for that (4e).
People keep forgetting the "you're no hero" bit.
That being said, this game, unfortunately, won't be for everyone. I'm trying to get my 4e group interested, and those that gave played old editions are intrigued, those who play video games want to play werewolf monks (I'm know as the dm who always says yes; if you can explain and/or roll right)
this game is for the former, not the latter, and the sooner we all know that, the better

That being said, stats still need to scale with the player. You can only stay at 6 str for so long

Generous stat rolling methods have been around since the early days of 1e AD&D. Look at Gary and friends' characters from the Rogue's Gallery and you will see 17s and 18s galore and very few single digit stats.

I contend that D&D has been designed with the expectation of high stats since the 1e AD&D days.