First Impression DCCRPGBeta060811

[oncelor]

My day job involves software development of computer games, and as part of that we've produced almost 750 pages of documentation over the last 7 years. One thing we've found very useful when beta testing the manuals for our games is to have testers skim the manuals (which is the way that most people actually read these things), then summarize that which is clear and unclear to them, and for those items that are unclear, describe how they think the unclear item is intended to operate.

I'm excited about the release of DCC, and am grateful for the opportunity to beta test it. I don't know whether the sort of feedback we find useful for our computer game manuals might be useful feedback for the DCC manual, however, if it may be, here is my feedback based on a quick skimming of the beta rules.

By way of background information, I've played most all versions of D&D, from the blue book through 4e, more or less continuously over the last 30 years or so. I've spent most of this time as DM.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was hooked by the tone on page 4, particularly by the use of "pandect." I found the art on page 5 (huge dragon laying down a massive wave of fire) to be a nice compliment to the tone on page 4 (Mr Goodman laying down the law?)

I liked the pure black background for the chapter page for "Characters." My next thought was, "better remember not to print this page."

Under "Abilities" at first it wasn't clear whether each ability score was to be exhaustively described by the rules associated with each ability. Sometimes the descriptions are very particular, "Characters with an intelligence of 7 or less speak only common;" in other places, the descriptions are very general, "Your agility modifier affects Armor Class..." I came away with the conclusion that the ability score rules were not intended to be exhaustive, but I found this mix of general and specific rules to be just a tiny bit confusing.

I found the Occupation table particularly compelling. Even though I was attempting to skim the rules only, I found myself reading every word of that table.

Under "Weapon Training," I was confused by the addition of the non-proficiency penalty for only 1st level characters on page 16. I had to reread it several times to make sure I understood that 1st level characters are indeed supposed to be worse than 0th level characters with non-proficient weapons, but it all eventually made sense, thanks to the note about play-testing. It did leave me wondering whether or not 1st level characters might have bonuses high enough to offset the -4 such that they'd be better than non-proficient 0th level characters despite the penalty (that is, I was left wondering whether 1st level fighters had a +5 hit bonus or something.)

The "Trade Goods" section talks about starting equipment for 0th level characters, but didn't mention the random starting equipment on page 59. When I got to page 59, I found myself flipping around to find how the random equipment table is supposed to be used, including flipping back to the Trade Goods section. My impression now is that every 0th level character gets one roll on the table (or is it Judge's discretion...?) but I am unclear on this.

When I got to the "Alignment" section the burning question in my head was whether I was going to find L-N-C, LG-LN-LE-etc, or something completely different. When I found out it was L-N-C, I decided I could skip most of the text under the assumption that it would be familiar material.

Under "Level Advancement" I noted the split XP table, and decided I could skip most of the rest of that as well.


Under "Cleric," I found the wrap-around art very pleasing. I started to read the section, but found I had to stop reading and ponder the artwork.

I found myself wondering at the "Choosing a god" section, unclear as to whether or not choosing different deities had an effect on game mechanics. I later decided after reading the "Divine Aid" subsection that the effects of one's deity is a matter of Judge's discretion, but that was still a bit unclear.

It was also here that I noted that the bold-face used to delineate sub-sections was a little difficult to parse; in particular, that it was difficult to glance at the page and see what or where all the sub-sections are. Perhaps that is just my monitor.

I was confused by the text describing the spell check penalty; it was unclear at first that much of the text in that section is part of an example and that the actual rule is very short and simple. There are other places in the rule that segregate the example into its own paragraph with an italics "for example;" perhaps something like that would make this section easier to scan.

Under "Sacrifices" I found myself wondering about the 50 gp sacrifice threshold, wondering whether the gp scale in DCC was going to be familiar -- whether 50 gp represented a month's wages or what precisely.

At this point I began to skim most of the rest of the Cleric. I ascertained that there is different healing based on alignment, and that "Lay on Hands" is the basic cleric healing power, guessing that it would replace the bevy of "Cure X Wounds" spells. I developed the impression that "Divine Aid" is a sort of very limited wish subject to Judge's discretion.

Again with the "Gods of the Eternal Struggle" section I was left wondering whether these god fellows would have additional mechanics / rules post-text, or whether this was all a matter of Judge's discretion. (In reading through the whole rules, in the back of my mind is the burning question, "How much work is it going to be for me to Judge a DCC campaign." I'm a man of little free time these days, so every rule raises the question, "How much extra work for me?")


Under "Thief," I first checked to see whether Lawful thieves would be allowed. They are. I skimmed to the weapon list to see whether anything unusual (garrottes, shuriken, and such) were included and noted the blackjack. I felt the thief section was fairly clear, though I was left wondering whether the thief skills would be expanded upon later ("handle poison," for instance.)


Under "Warrior," I found myself wondering whether warriors were proficient in every weapon in the system, or whether the list under training had any important omissions. It was not clear to me that the MDoA mechanic would have an expanded rules section under "Combat," and I was left with the impression that this was more a matter of Judge's discretion than it is in actuality. I also thought that bullet points might be better for the uses of MDoA than italic headers: it would seem more consistent with the cleric formatting that way. (And other sections seem to number these sorts of rules.)

I was left wondering about the warrior's use of Luck: if a warrior chooses a Luck bonus for, say, longsword, but later his Luck changes and he acquires a Luck penalty, does the warrior then just keep the longsword in a sheath and fight with his axe until his luck improves? I suppose so. Is a warrior who begins his 1st level career with a luck penalty supposed to choose a weapon such as "dart" that he'll never expect to use? Or, is the Judge's discretion on Luck such that as a 1st level warrior with a Luck penalty I should put my Luck in a good weapon and then hope that the Judge will give me enough Luck to get a bonus later? I imagined myself creating a new 1st level warrior, unclear what to do should I happen to have a Luck penalty. (One thing we've found with our computer game manuals is that sometimes players want the rules to give them hints on strategy tips when the game requires a stark, irrevocable choice like this, and the player may not have enough information to make these choices. I think I found myself in that situation thinking about the warrior's Luck ability.)


Under "Wizard" my initial impression was that I wished there were more wizards in the art work, similar to the art for the other classes. A small, rather petty point, but there it is. I had questions with respect to "Supernatural Patrons" similar to those in the "Choosing a god" section under cleric, but concluded that this would be answered later, and guessed that it was mostly a matter of Judge's discretion / campaign particulars.


Under "Elf" I found myself wondering whether wizards also get "patron bond" and "invoke patron:" I didn't remember reading this in the wizard section, and wondered whether these spells were essential bits of game mechanic.

"Luck" for the elf induced the same question as the warrior's lucky weapon, described above. I tentatively concluded that one ought to pick a favorite spell / weapon even when starting with a Luck penalty.


Under "Halfling" I'd been expecting halflings to get some thieves' skills and to have their own percentile table, and was mildly surprised they did not. It was all very clear otherwise.


I found the "Skills" section mostly very clear. The "Difficulty Levels" are very intuitive in their descriptions. I think perhaps the formatting here could be changed to make it more clear that the paragraphs are organized around DC. I found the formatting used in the MDOA section to separate the die results to be clearer.

I was left wondering about healing with respect to skill checks, in particular, and thought maybe an expanded list of examples might have been more useful in stoking the imagination here. (I did notice there was no flavor quote on the chapter page unlike the chapter page for characters; I'd enjoyed the first flavor quote, was looking forward to see whether the next one would live up to it.)

I came away guessing that the two-page skill section might just be a matter of the beta rules, somehow thought that there might be more to say in the way of how the skill system could be used, but was unsure.


Under "Equipment" I started skimming more aggressively, guessing that I already must have a good idea of how gold pieces and armor check penalties work. (I was a little surprised to see that no weapons -- excepting the blackjack -- use the funky dice! I'd been guessing that we'd have 1d7 axes and 1d5 clubs and so forth.)


"Combat," I decided from a quick skim through the critical hit tables, was mostly like a streamlined 3rd edition set of rules. That was my mental bracket for this, you might say.

"Mighty Deeds of Arms" surprised me as I did not know it was going to have its own section. I skimmed most of this, looking at the progression in power from the 3 results to the 7 results in an attempt to gauge in an estimate-fashion the power progression of MDOA's.

I was confused at first that the rules under "Performing a Deed" were numbered; similar rules in other sections are presented without numbering, so I wondered whether the enumeration indicated that the order of the rules was important.

I was confused when the "MDOA" section ran into the "Damage and Death" section: at first I thought there was an MDOA use called "Damage and Death;" it was unclear to me (though I see it now) that the script 'I' at the top of page 78 is to present a new section.

The remainder of "Combat" was fairly clear and I found it to be straightforward. I looked specifically to see whether there were any forms of healing mentioned apart from the magical and daily rest. I was also surprised to see additional combat action options introduced after the morale section. I was not certain how sections such as "Damage and Death," "Healing," "Burning Luck," et al. were intended to be organized. For instance, "Withdrawal" gets a major sub-section header but "Charge" a minor one. I came away thinking that I understood these rules well upon reading them, but that they might be hard to find if I needed to refer to them during play.


I skimmed the "Spell Duels" section, forming the general impression that it's some sort of counter-spell mechanism with a D20 counter that tracks the advantage one caster has over another. It was unclear to me whether the spells cast as part of the duel actually have their normal effect, or whether the effect of the spells cast is subsumed into the duel system (which then gives the spell a new effect.) I dimly remember a spell duel system from one of the 2nd edition D&D books, and perhaps this was coloring my perception of the DCC duel system. For instance, can one have wizards dueling by casting Comprehend Languages back and forth at each other? Though I'm sure this is answered in that section, I remained unsure of the answer to this after skimming the Spell Duel section.


The "Magic" section all seemed very clear. It was a little confusing at first glance as to which sections were for wizards and which clerics (and which for both.) I think I had been expecting wizards and clerics each to have their own particular magic and spell section, so that things like "Corruption" and "Mercurial Magic" would be in the wizard section, and "Deity Disapproval" in the cleric section.

The particular spells were very clear, though my eyes kind of glossed over when I got to page 116, the patron spell. I realized at that point that this spell might hold answers to the questions that I'd had about patrons earlier in the book, but the chart on 116-117 was impenetrable to my skimming. I came away thinking that it must be something like calling on Arioch in Moorcock, or something, and that to get the gist of it I'd have to break down and actually read it later (at that point it was 3am and my head was feeling heavy.) The other spells were easy to understand with a quick glance at the 12-13 row.


"Judges Rules." First impression was that there were going to be many more rules for patrons after all. I did a quick scan over these pages and came away with the impression that it's mostly a matter of Judge's discretion, and that the particular patrons in-game are campaign-specific things. I ended this section wondering whether DCC was going to offer a thick campaign book, or whether Judges would have to put a lot of time into patron creation.


"Monsters:" I just looked to see if there were any surprises -- "primeval slime"! -- then read a couple special abilities, perused the intriguing skeleton table.


I found the artwork very compelling, a strong motivator to continue reading late into the night.

[Ogrepuppy]

I ended this section wondering whether DCC was going to offer a thick campaign book, or whether Judges would have to put a lot of time into patron creation.

Something to consider while reading most of the BETA rules is that Joseph had to cut a ton of stuff out, and/or there are sections still in development.

This document isn't intended to be "all that you get" when you buy the DCC RPG in November. (Ferex, Joseph has mentioned that there will be a substantive DM's section.) If your impression included a "Gee, there's stuff missing" kinda feeling...you're right, there is.

[finarvyn]

One thing we've found very useful when beta testing the manuals for our games is to have testers skim the manuals (which is the way that most people actually read these things), then summarize that which is clear and unclear to them, and for those items that are unclear, describe how they think the unclear item is intended to operate.

Nice feedback. Thanks!

An excellent point about people skimming rulebooks. I suspect that most people do this because learning something new is hard, and it's easier to find a few key ideas and then fill in around it with things you already think you know. I fell into this trap early with DCC and it took a while to break out of it. The old "but other RPGs do it another way" trap can be a problem for playtesting something new.

[goodmangames]

Thanks for the very detailed feedback...this is one of those posts I'm going to print out and review point-by-point as I keep working on the manuscript and layout.

[oncelor]

You're welcome. Taken by itself a report like this is just anecdotal data, but I hope it might be useful in consideration with the other feedback that you get.

Nothing I wrote is intended as a comment on or criticism of the actual game mechanics, nor even really does it pertain to the proper content of the beta rules; it's just a skimming report, a list of the impressions and questions that popped into my head on my first quick pass through the document.

[finarvyn]

Nothing I wrote is intended as a comment on or criticism of the actual game mechanics, nor even really does it pertain to the proper content of the beta rules; it's just a skimming report, a list of the impressions and questions that popped into my head on my first quick pass through the document.

This is exactly what I did a few weeks ago, only I e-mailed my comments directly to Joseph instead of posting them here. I think that this is useful feedback because it gives a feel for which topic are the most confusing. Most rules can be figured out if a person expends enough brainpower deciphering what is written, but many players won't take the time to do this so getting on-the-fly reaction like this is a good thing.