Goodman Games

I did like the suggestion of a DCC RPG.

Considering the setting is already in place it might not be a bad idea ... tho' admittedly you would most likely face stiff competition in this arena from Pathfinder, True20, etc. unless you truly have something unique to offer. Perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere between a minimalist system like Microlite20 and the rules bloat exhibited by the final incarnation of 3.5E.

On a tangent ... where's the love for Broncosaurus Rex or Etherscope? While the DCC line proved quite interesting under 3rd Ed, expanded support of all product lines might not be a bad idea considering how many other companies are developing their own systems separately from D&D in general. While some may consider this to be blasphemy, an expanded product line might not necessarily be a bad idea.

Personally, I also wouldn't mind seeing someone pick up the rights to Silver Age Sentinels now that Guardians of Order is out of business and breathe new life into this system. HERO/Champions has way too much bloat in it at present, and I have never been much of a fan of GURPS or Marvel Super Heroes when doing supers.

Steve

I would LOVE to buy adventures like that. I run a number of different systems, and a great storyline is the hard part for me to come up with. I wouldn't even need to download the pdf stats, as I can do those close enough on the fly.

One thing to consider is including both 4e and Pathfinder stats in the back of the book for the major encounters. I don't know if that is economically feasible, since that could be a chunk of pages depending on how many stats you do (you wouldn't need to do every goblin and orc, just the bosses and main NPCs).

Do the current WOTC 4e agreements allow 3rd party publishers to make 4e adventures for multiple systems?

I couldn't have said it better myself. I can't stand 4E and I miss Goodman Games. I abandoned Goodman Games when you changed to 4e. Which was pretty hard and sad for me. I have a bunch of the DCC's you had put out including some of the original art work I had received in a holiday grab bag. I have stopped by the booth at Gencon and purchased the $100 CWR box and talked to Joe, Harley, and the gang. I started the suggestion for a T-shirt design contest and purchased the winning version at the next Gencon. I guess what I'm saying is that I was way into GG 3.5 and now... I think this is the first time I have checked this web site in the last six months. In the 3.5 days I was on here all the time.

I'll offer an opposing viewpoint. I was attracted to Goodman Games because of the 4e DCC's. If they went away, so would I. They are miles above what other people are churning out (War of the Burning Sky is pretty cool and I'd love to see Goodman come out with a level 1-30 mega campaign set).

Don't change a thing!!!

Well, if you keep it printed as a 4E module, then you won't be alienating your biggest customer base. IF you then support various other systems with supplemental DL's you will only gain buyers who are interested in such a product.

So I don't see how your going to lose anyone, only gain them.

I had a long post on this but the boards ate it.

This is a slightly condensed version:

1. When I run adventures, I like the combat statistics in a separate section of the book or a downloadable section anyway. So, putting both sets of stats in the books or in a downloadable section would work pretty well for me.

2. I don't think rules-lite would work. Orc, 6hp, axe, chainmail is not enough information to run an orc in pathfinder or 3.x. And it is meaningless in 4e. (What powers does he have? 6hp, what the heck? He's not a minion but first level standard monsters have five times that many hit points. Weapon and armor really have very little to do with monster attacks or defenses, so what are his AC, NADs, and attack bonus?). In short, it wouldn't be usable in either system.

3. I think there are some fundamental gameplay differences that would restrict the flexibility available to authors writing multi-system mods.
A. In both pathfinder/3.x and 4e, there is a limit to how big you can make an encounter before it becomes unwinnable for the PCs, but 4e demands that most encounters be clear and distinct with a 5 minute rest in between them. Pathfinder/3e does not demand that. A 30 second rest or no rest at all depending upon the encounters in question can be just fine. Fighters can still cleave, power attack, and whirlwind attack and wizards don't have any fewer fireballs (or haste spells) because they only rested for 30 seconds instead of 300. Likewise, clerics don't run out of healing just because they only had 2 rounds of rest. In 4th edition, on the other hand the time between encounters is a much bigger deal. This calls for different adventure structures that can ensure short rests between most encounters.

B. I don't think skill challenges work well in 4e, but they wouldn't work at all in 3.x/pathfinder since PC skills vary far more dramatically by build. You might be able to use the mechanic for specialized areas such as disarming traps (I think that 3.5 spell turrets were one of the prototypes for 4e skill challenges) where pathfinder/3.x skill bonuses are more predictable, but in general, you would want to keep to static skill checks connected to specific challenges rather than skill challenges in such a game. (The checks would need one DC for each edition, but that wouldn't take much space to write).

C. Pathfinder/3.x non-combat magic is FAR more powerful than 4e's rituals. A 7th level pathfinder mage, for instance, can attempt to scry anyone he has even heard of and, if successful, keep it up for 7 minutes (potentially more depending upon feats and items). On the other hand, the equivalent 4e ritual only works within around 100 feet and only lasts for seconds--even with incredible arcana checks. (Also, it costs a lot of money each time you attempt it). A successful multi-system adventure would have to be one where pathfinder style useful non-combat magic did not have a game-changing effect upon the adventure, and could not be one where it is required.

Based on that, I think that it would be possible to write a multi-system module, but you would have to do so within more strict constraints than you could write either a native 4e adventure or a native pathfinder adventure. You couldn't just write a 4e adventure and write some Pathfinder stats for it and call it a day. You would have to write the adventure with both systems in mind from the ground up.

This may not be as "grand" an idea as some presented here, but if you wanted to support multiple systems perhaps the model provided in T4 Treasure Hunt might be an idea. I'm specifically referencing the "stat block" sheet at the back of the module. I've DMed that module a bunch and always photocopy that sheet and use it thoughout to reference the stats. You could do that while providing minimal quantitative information in the main body text.

Just a suggestion.

first is to keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
second, make genre specific modules. I don't think conversion would be that terrible. maybe reprint the more popular modules in different systems?
third, keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
fourth, keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
fifth, keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
sixth, keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
seventh, keep Erol Otus around. as well as Dee, Roslof and Halloway (among others).
.....

Agreed and add Jason Edwards to that list. His art stands out when I think of DCCs.

Any plans to do more C&C stuff? I'll be available for translation should the need arise.

I suggest that you continue publishing for 4th edition simply because it is a popular game system. Do publish more Call of Cthulhu modules as well since there are only a few publishers for this. I would suggest to focus on pathfinder system rather than the 3.x that WOTC does not support anymore. Retroclones are on the rise and you may also want to get in that market. I'm also snapping up old D&D modules from online sellers and wouldn't mind getting a few from you. Have you considered non system specific games or products to get your hands in different rpg systems without having to invest in creating a brand for one? These are my suggestions and it may be biased to what I like playing and collecting. Good luck!

I'm not sure 4e default modules translate very well to 3X, so I don't think I would buy them and then seek out the conversion document. I did buy a few of the 4e GG modules, but I haven't used them in my continuing 3.5 campaign and likely will not. I would truly love to see Goodman Games give some support to Pathfinder, even if it were only 4 or so modules a year, as there is likely a large group of us who did not move to 4e and who formerly dropped consistent money in support of the DCC line who would buy them. Basically, I miss being a Goodman Games customer, and I would buy product that harkened back to the DCC line's 3X beginnings.

Also, on my wish list is more C&C support. So, I guess I would rather see you expand to different games with different products, not try to pigeonhole 4e into everything else. IMO, Goodman could do great things with Pathfinder.

I'm afraid to say that when 4e came out GG went belly-up for me, too. It was a painful separation, but I had little choice after reviewing 4e. For me the system just doesn't work. Instead I jumped on the Pathfinder bandwagon and my group is in the midst of conversion from 3.5 to that system right now.

I would love to be able to incorporate more DCC stuff into my campaign again, so anything that you could do in that regard would be wonderful. I've tormented my players with The Mysterious Tower, Volcano Caves, Dungeon Interludes, and bits and pieces of Whiterock. I'll continue to use the adventures I have, and with Pathfinder the conversion work should be minimal, but I would be overjoyed to be able to add onto this list. I mean, I still use the 1st edition modules, ferchrissakes!

Being entirely selfish, I would give Pathfinder conversion stats priority.

Personally, my preference would be for GG to support RuneQuest, but I know I'm in the minority there.

Downloads too much work.
Double stat to Pathfinder or do separate line - most retro-clones and D20 derivatives could easily convert Pathfinder.

Re the Pathfinder/4E wars: You people may have a mild form of autism known as Asperger's Disorder or perhaps Schizotypal personality disorder - both are marked by oddities of behavior and rigidity of thinking. Please see your local mental health professional.

I realize I'm a little late to this party, but I'd like to toss in my $0.02...

DO WANT: Pathfinder modules.

WILL ALSO AT LEAST CHECK OUT: 4E modules.

DO NOT WANT: "Goodman Spinoff RPG" (Sorry guys, nothing personal, but I'm just not going to follow yet another variation.)

MY SUGGESTION: Do a Pathfinder line and a 4E line a la Kobold Quarterly. Don't try to dual-stat, that's just not going to work. And don't go "rules-lite," that removes all the utility from the adventure.

Thanks.

-The Gneech

Just to add my two cents worth also...

4e split our group into three groups. (liked, hated, did not care).

I am definitely in the hated category, but our entire group did play enough 4e to participate in the DCC tourney the last two years. So we did get some solid experience with it.

Since I am the DM, I sorta brought people in our group into Pathfinder. I am actually running Castle Whiterock (we started in January) and converting it the Pathfinder as we go along.

So from my point of view, I would love to see modules for Pathfinder/3.5e and 4e. I do agree with earlier peoples posts, that the system are far enough apart, that a simple stat block download would not work for one module.

I would think it would be feasible to do two versions of the modules that would have some subtle differences to mange the PF/3.5 vs 4e issues.

Our group has bought 4e modules from GG, but we will probably never play them. We bought them to support our favorite gaming company and as a thanks for putting on the best tourney at GenCon!

So to summarize my ramble...

I would love to see:

The same module published twice:

1. 4e
2. 3.5e/PF (separate stat blocks at the back of the book)

But then I want it all!

I agree. This would be a simple and awesome solution for a tricky problem. If there is interest, this could even be extended to other games like RQ. An awesome idea!

If GG did not put out such a good product, this would be a non-issue. But since you put out a very good product and people are very passionate about their gaming, GG does have an impact on RPG world.

I do not want to see you get stressed out or get involved in the edition wars. But I do want you to produce a product that I can purchase or use. That is why I would be interested in getting more Pathfinder/3.5e modules published. I would actually prefer the stat blocks to be in the back of the module in a card format so they could be copied (or printed from PDF) and cut out for encounters.

Little things like that would be a wonderful plus to the GG modules and really enhance the marketability and acceptance of the modules. But that will only work if the base maps and stories can survive the translation from edition to edition.

Been thinking more about this.

I have no problem philosophically with dual-stats in modules, although that means that part of the space would be wasted for each consumer. In many ways the "edition specific" PDF downloads would be a great fix for that problem.

The real issue I see is that various editions don't convert that easlily and the stat-blocks for monsters, etc, are so different. A 4E stat-block is totally different from that from other editions.

Not only different, but stat blocks for 3e and 4e EAT LOTS OF SPACE!
If a reduced stats system were in use, we could either have the same material at a lower price, or have additional material at the same price. Besides, it's not that reduced stats are useless for 3e and 4e. Just let the additional (and expanded) information be available as download.
For example I recently bought Death Dealer for 4e. Well, the stats eat up about 1/5 of the book, without counting repetitions (which amount to 5 pages). And I will never use the module for 4e, so for me, all those pages are really wasted.

One challenge I can see for supporting Pathfinder modules is the different levels for earning experience. I am currently reading through the Castle Whiterock module and converting to Pathfinder for an upcoming set of sessions. The group would like to use the medium advancement path but the module is designed to better fit the fast experience level. Using the medium path means that the characters may not have leveled up enough when they move down through the dungeon. I am coming up with ideas to mitigate this but I thought I would mention it as something to consider for Pathfinder modules. I suspect a section like the scaling part of each level would help in this area.

I remember a ton of options for side quests in the town itself. I also remember an adventure in DCC#48 that was set in Cillamar. These could help level the group up in between levels of the dungeon. Hope this helps.

Whenever I get to run Castle Whiterock (eventually I hope), I planned on PFs medium advancement track as well. I also have a ton of great DCC modules that Ive always wanted to run, and these will become the sidetreks (beginning with Harley's CW Prequel). The trick is to watch the party's advancement closely early on and adjust some encounters downwards as most of these 3.5 modules were written for level groups like 1-3, 4-6, 3-5, etc.
I want to focus on CW as the main story, so Ill have to keep an entire level 3-5 module's encounters (for example) limited to level 3, 4, or 5. Otherwise they might be too high for a specific level in CW.

Side Note about CW--- Im not a fan of pocket planes in general, so the woodland levels (I forget which they were atm) will likely happen out of CW and in one of the woodlands in Cilamar.

Late to the party, but:

I like the downloadable stat block idea. I've been running Sinister Secret of Whiterock with the 1e conversion doc found right here on this site. It's a blast, and I might even tackle Castle Whiterock this way.

The Dungeon Alphabet is also my favorite RPG purchase in a very long time, and I will buy every old school or classic gaming-oriented product that Goodman Games produces. I also really prefer the look of the 3e DCCs to the 4e DCCs.

And I've heard rumors of a DCC RPG being played at Garycon. I need this. Like, NOW.