Goodman Games

Hamatko's reasons don't line up with the OP so how are his reasons valid for why you don't like it. As I said, only use different dice in permanent situations. Charging is not a permanent situation. So it is just a modifier. Hamatko's main concern was also stated by me: You never want a situation where the player is constantly asking "what die do I roll now?"

jmucchiello wrote:Hamatko's reasons don't line up with the OP so how are his reasons valid for why you don't like it. As I said, only use different dice in permanent situations. Charging is not a permanent situation. So it is just a modifier. Hamatko's main concern was also stated by me: You never want a situation where the player is constantly asking "what die do I roll now?"

...at least in part because half of them will be asking that ANYWAY, even if they've been playing for years (at least IME)...

jmucchiello wrote:Hamatko's reasons don't line up with the OP so how are his reasons valid for why you don't like it. As I said, only use different dice in permanent situations. Charging is not a permanent situation. So it is just a modifier. Hamatko's main concern was also stated by me: You never want a situation where the player is constantly asking "what die do I roll now?"

I guess I should have been more specific about what Hamatko said but I was in a rush. I fail to see how his reasons aren't valid though. Afterall some of them are just as much a concern for dice used in permanent situations. For example:

Hamakto wrote:For each +1 you need to drop the die by two die slots to keep the same progression. (i.e. d20->d18->d16->d14->d12->d10->d8)... so a -6 is really a d8 roll and not a d14. That keeps the same average chances of success for the mid-line numbers (i.e. average goes from 10.5 to 4.5). The problem with using that progression is that rolling with rolling a d8 and adding bonuses you will ALMOST never achieve a result of 15 or above.

Where if you roll a d20-6+bonus, you still have a good chance to make a DC of 15 or higher.

Remember shifting dice down causes a bell curve change on the probabilities of success and makes a major change to the chances of success. Where leaving the dice at a d20 keeps the + and - modifiers to be a linear change the the probabilities.

So just because a modifier is -4 doesn't mean you can drop from a d20 to a d16 and it all equals out smoothly. The math is not that simple as Hamakto points out and it leave it open to unintended balance issues (and players abusing them). Is that not valid to what you, the OP said?

Hamakto wrote:A warrior uses a d20/d14 already (point of concern).

If they go two weapon fighting, that can further change to d16's, etc.

I am pretty much against adjusting the action dice because of complexity and the possibility to introduce further chances to min/max abuse the system.

The example of using a d24 for a charge... while sounds cool only works if you are using one weapon. What die do you now use if you are using two weapons? Using over sized weapons? Right now you need to know two sets of dice (if you are using two weapon fighting). --- one for using one weapon and one for two weapons. That is pretty simple and on the character sheet. If you add charge? Now you have four sets of dice to write on the sheet.

I would like to avoid anything more than a simple (d20 if using one weapon or d16 if using two) type scenario. If you have to start to reach for different dice based on your actions (i.e. charge, etc) you are starting to create extra complications and you change the percentages around.

For example: on a d24 for a warrior... the crit range would be 22-24 (or about 12.5% for crits). At a d20, it would be 15%.

Again this is valid and furthers his point does it not? You may not agree with it but I fail to see how it's not valid even in permanent situations.

bholmes4 wrote:So just because a modifier is -4 doesn't mean you can drop from a d20 to a d16 and it all equals out smoothly. The math is not that simple as Hamakto points out and it leave it open to unintended balance issues (and players abusing them). Is that not valid to what you, the OP said?

There is nothing sacrosanct about a -4 modifier from one game system that means you must have a 20% reduction in effectiveness in a DIFFERENT game system for the same effect. Using a d16 vs d14 in place of a d20 because of some circumstance does not have to line up with modifiers in another game. That -4 penalty to initiative for two-handed weapon use is ENTIRELY arbitrary. Changing it from d20 to d16 is equally arbitrary. There is no math here, really there isn't. The balance for penalties and bonuses is "will players overuse this option because the bonus/penalty is too good/bad?" That's not math. Players might use math to figure out the best options, but I don't think you will find a circumstance bonus/penalty chart that has ever been mathematically determined. RPG authors just aren't that thorough.

So, my response is I don't care. If someone finds out that using an atlatl while standing on your head gives them a 3% advantage because of the dice and modifier stack, let them. I don't think DCCRPG will attract that kind of minmax player given the funnel.

Ultimately, I'm looking for a "Rule of Cool" concept where using different funny shaped dice for different major circumstances makes the game more interesting and not just another d20 clone.

jmucchiello wrote: So, my response is I don't care. If someone finds out that using an atlatl while standing on your head gives them a 3% advantage because of the dice and modifier stack, let them. I don't think DCCRPG will attract that kind of minmax player given the funnel.

Ultimately, I'm looking for a "Rule of Cool" concept where using different funny shaped dice for different major circumstances makes the game more interesting and not just another d20 clone.

Fair enough, I don't care about minor advantages either and I definitely don't play with min/max players so it's not an issue at all at my table. So I can understand what you are saying and agree on some level, just not enough to support it.

As for your last statement I guess that is where we differ. I don't want a d20 clone (in fact I skipped 3rd and 4th edition) and I don't want a game that uses funny shaped dice as a gimmick to be interesting. I want a retro engine, with old school sensibilities, and some "cool" gimmicks and concepts to keep it fun and fresh. Give me Labyrinth Lord or Lamentations of the Flame Princess and throw in some MDoAs, some funky dice, mercurial magic, luck burn, dual wielding halflings, corruption, long sword wielding wizards and variable spell charts and I have my perfect game. Let combat fly by in a matter of minutes, seconds even (just roll your d20s and let's do this!) so we have lots of time for all the other parts of the game as well.

Shouldn't DCCRPG be more than just be Labyrinth Lord with a couple of house rules? I can already add these ideas to Rules Encyclopedia/BD&D or OD&D or 1e. Why should we bother with DCCRPG if it is just a new coat of paint on a car most of us have been driving for 20+ years?

This doesn't mean we should change everything for change's sake. But I can get old school feel just by using the books already on my shelf. I want a game designed for Sword and Sorcery from the ground up. I don't really see getting what I want but I can hope.

The irony that is DCC RPG: A pre-D&D Sword & Sorcery Roleplaying Game built on d20, i.e. D&D.

reverenddak wrote:The irony that is DCC RPG: A pre-D&D Sword & Sorcery Roleplaying Game built on d20, i.e. D&D.

But if you use d20 or d16 or d24 or d30 or d14 or d10 for actions, it is no long a d20 game. The hallmark of d20 (from 3e and d20 Modern to 4e and Pathfinder to all the other clones is the singular mechanic: Roll d20 add modifier compare against DC. True20 and Mutants and Masterminds takes that mechanic to the extreme, eliminating hit points in favor of a knockout "save" that relies on a standard d20 roll eliminating all other dice, including the d6.

If DCCRPG embraced the action die not being d20 90% of the time, it would not really be a d20 game.

jmucchiello wrote:

reverenddak wrote:The irony that is DCC RPG: A pre-D&D Sword & Sorcery Roleplaying Game built on d20, i.e. D&D.

But if you use d20 or d16 or d24 or d30 or d14 or d10 for actions, it is no long a d20 game. The hallmark of d20 (from 3e and d20 Modern to 4e and Pathfinder to all the other clones is the singular mechanic: Roll d20 add modifier compare against DC. True20 and Mutants and Masterminds takes that mechanic to the extreme, eliminating hit points in favor of a knockout "save" that relies on a standard d20 roll eliminating all other dice, including the d6.

If DCCRPG embraced the action die not being d20 90% of the time, it would not really be a d20 game.

I also like the idea of shifting this game away form being a d20 game. the d20 system is rather generic and, has been played for a long time. I really like how the funky dice, the action dice types, special dice for two weapon fighting, precentile dice rolled for thief skills, all help pull the game away from "d20+mod vs DC" mechanic. I even wish saving throws were based on the funky dice. The better your save 'bonus' from level, the bigger die you get to roll to make your save, for instance, instead of just a +1 level bonus. Inititiative bonuses from level could also be in the form of funky dice.

I have not read the previous threads in great detail here, but some of the examples I think can be handled fine with funky dice instead of normal dice just by having a well written rule with it. For example, a charge attack could allow you one attack with a d24 action die, regardless if you are dual whielding. It could read "When making a charge attack you only get one attack, even if dual whielding, using a d24 in place of your highest action die. Then, you may use remaining action dice as normal..." those kind of issues are just a matter of writting the rules to go along with it.

And I have to agree that comparing the d16 to a d20-4 in other systems is a bit of a moot point as the space between success rate with one style vs another in real life would be difficult to quantify, and so don't worry about it. I mean, no one has a proble with shadowrun being a d6 system and WFRP (the good editions) being d% instead of d20, so there shuldnt really be a problem with DCCRPG being a dfunky system.

moes1980 wrote:...with DCCRPG being a dfunky system.

+1 on the dFunky System.

I think DCC is going to stay a "d20" game, because it uses the OGL as it's basis. This keeps it somewhat compatible with numerous products already in existence, and keeps DCC RPG products (i.e. modules) somewhat compatible with other d20-ish games already in existence.