Goodman Games

A small one, monster alignment is listed on the 9 alignment system rather than 3: LE, NE etc.

Also monsters are listed with Act 3d20, now does this mean 1x3d20 action or 3 x1d20 actions? I guess the second.

As you guessed, this would be the second option:
d20, d20, d20

Basically three attacks, each with d20.

I'd prefer the attacks written out fully. It really doesn't take up that much extra room. Also, d20/d20/d20 takes up less room than comma and space. I'd also like to some of them with d16 and d24. Just because D&D monsters are always d20/d20/d20 doesn't mean DCCRPG monsters can't be d20/d20/d16 or d24/d20/d20.

And I realize this is the beta but a very prominent note should exist to remind the DM that just because it says d20/d20/d16 doesn't mean the 2 claws are d20 and the bite is d16, it means the first two attacks are d20 and the third is d16.

if you include opposed rolls and examples of Orcs trying to break down doors that are held by player characters, don't monsters need a stat line? The stat block atm has just enough room for it and will not increase its size at all.

That direction lies madness. Think about it. What is the strength of a giant? The current ability scores go from 3-18 and THAT'S IT. There's no reason to give the monster an opposed roll for such things. Just pick the DC that equals (stuck door held by 3 orcs) and have them roll Strength to overcome that DC. (Or vice versa)

Yeah I know if I was DMing I'd just make something up anyway... and if I were a player I'd hate the GM to have to look up a number to make sure we were rolling the right DC... I'd rather he just made something up.

Roleplaying back in the day involved almost no book thumping. I think we played for a solid decade without ever looking up anything but spell effects.

I agree with you 100%!

But then the game shouldn't include an example like the one it does under opposed rolls. Opposed rolls should just be removed and everything be based on DC's, (which is the way i think it should be by the way), but not a combination of both if GM's aren't then provided with the appropriate tools to use the RAW.

My comments on this forum are based on what i'm reading, not what think is ideal...well in most cases anyways.

Hope that makes more sense.

You need opposed rolls when PCs squabble.

I'm of the mindset that monsters need stats as well. One of the selling points of DCC is PCs being able to "improv" and having monster stats will help DMs determine success rate, imo.

In the end i don't mind which way they go, as long as they go one way or the other.

For me so far this applies to a lot of the game system i've read so far. There seems to be a lot of a "bit of this, bit of that" going on, which in the end just makes the game harder to digest and enjoy.

Please no monster stat blocks.

Things like that, bit by bit, number by number, make everything so dry and robotic. The mechanics of the game start to become transparent, the numbers and rules bloated, and the mystique and magic of the game is slowly sucked away.

If you really need to know the strength of an orc for a player that just won't relent: since the Orc is typically stronger than mankind, why not roll 3d6 and add 1? Now do an opposed check as needed. I I imagine 95% of us don't need our books filled with these sorts of numbers though. Other d20 books out there already have this information if you want it anyway and could be relatively easily slotted in here for those that must have it.

I'm not asking for stat blocks, actually i'd prefer everything to just be a GM creating DC's for tasks based on what he thinks is required. What i am saying (again), is that if you include Opposed Roll rules, which then give an example using Orcs, that Orcs should then have a Strength statistic. Otherwise if the GM just has to make it up, then let him make up DC's instead of Statistics on the fly. Again, for me, it comes down to DCC choosing1 method and sticking with it instead of walking a tightrope.

Does what i'm saying make sense?

Makes sense to me, which is why I believe monsters need their own stats if you're going to have Opposed Rolls. I'm digging the DCC system and the fact that it encourages players to play the game instead of just continually make checks, but sometimes (with a STR check against a monster, for example) you just need to throw the bones and see who wins.

Not sure if I missed something, but one thing I noticed was that none of the monsters actually have an xp value. Yeah, I can wing it, still trying to get people together to play it. But, just pointing out that all of the monsters have XP Value:XXX

The XP system is not really a key concern for playtesting. So it was left out.

I humbly disagree. I think XP, how quickly it's given out in a "standard" game, how quickly players level, how the different xp requirements for each class affect the game, how the game plays at different levels with characters who started at 0 versus characters who started at 5, etc. IS a concern for playtesting.

I respectfully disagree. It is not really something that an uncontrolled beta can test. Opinions about what is "the right speed of advancement" are as plentiful as people with heads on their shoulders.

Thank you very much jmucchiello. It does make sense for such a thing. Thank you.

Individual monster's Strength is 3d6 +/-(whatever you as DM think is appropriate). Same for their other stats.

If it's in the stat block, they become more 'clone-like' and that's fairly dull. When the event occurs that you need a number, drop some dice.

There was a time when I rolled d8's for monster hit points at the moment a monster was encountered, and then just tracked the hp loss from the fight by eliminating the hit dice as we went. I may be doing it again, soon.

[/2¢]

100% agree.

Back when I played Holmes D&D the DM had to roll DEX stats for monsters for initiative. We didn't record them + it worked fine as another way to give the goblins some variety - one could be a fast hit&run type, another plodded into battle. No need to formalize it - just a sentence to the effect that if monsters need stats, roll 'em.

Too abstract for me. Using that logic, you can just make up what you need "on the fly" including damage, saves, special attacks, etc. and do away with a monster section altogether.

I understand that DCC wants to eliminate a lot of the "crunch" and focus on the game but, as a DM, my opinion is that if I have to stop every time and figure out stats when I need them then that's taking away from actually playing the game.

How often do you expect to need their stats? I'm not trying to make that question a challenge, I'm just thinking that for myself, as the sole guy DMing for my group the last 2-and-a-half years, I look up a monster's stat maybe once in 8 or 9 encounters, and even then it's for one ability.

I'd expect it to take about as long to roll 3d6 as it would to pinpoint the number in a stat block... If you feel more comfortable having them in advance, you could roll them up and jot them down ahead of time.

Honestly, I want DCC to be the system that makes me refer to monster stats more than I ever have. That's because I want to encourage "out of the box" thinking and cinematic adventures. If the thief wants to scale the wall behind the rat king and leap down to try and grab the magic scepter from his hands, then I want to know what his Intelligence (for Perception) and Agility scores are.

I'll do my own stats beforehand or refer to the SRD if necessary. It's not a deal breaker for me, but I don't understand why they would be omitted in the first place, since it's just one line of text in a monster block.

Fair enough, muherd -- I like where you're coming from.



The Basilisk has a C for Alignment. I'm going to guess that the first page got touched up in that regard at some point, but the rest of the critters just got lost in the editing shuffle.

I've played in games with monsters totally statted out and disliked the experience, or ignored the stats.

I tend to let the characters make an action roll (ability check, whatever) and toss in a "gut call" modifier for the monster rather than having to have all of the exact monster specifics. If he's just a basic grunt monster I want the character to have a decent chance to succeed, but if he is a major villian I want the player to have a decent chance to be caught.

Anyway, just the way I do it.