A few questions

[Thane]

What do you think of these skill check house rules:

Class Based Skill Actions
If the action being attempted falls under the jurisdiction of the character’s class (for example, a warrior looking to choose the best place on the field of battle for an ambush), add the character’s level to the d20 roll.

Non Class Based Skill Actions
If the action being attempted falls under the jurisdiction of another class (for example, a cleric trying to pick a lock), deduct -8 from the d20 roll.

A natural 1 is always a success

A natural 20 is always a failure

[reverenddak]

The standard rule is that if it's related to their background, they can attempt to do it. If not, they can't. There is some vague rules about -4 if they have "used the skill somewhat but not regularly". I personally wouldn't bother with that. It might seem restrictive that some characters can't even try but it's a trade-off for having a list of specific "skills" and ranks, etc. It's not their place. Someone with the background of picking locks, such as a locksmith, or even a jeweler, can have a chance making the attempt. But it's really the Thief's area of expertise.

re: Class Based Skill Actions: It's pretty much the Old-school default to add Class Level to checks related to class. I honestly wouldn't do a skill check for positioning in an ambush, just apply common sense. Avoid using rolled checks as much as possible. Focus on Occupation and Class, and factor in Ability Scores. In general, use their ability score as a passive check, and move on.

re: Non Class Based Skill Actions: Don't do it. (I wouldn't) I don't think it's their place. Picking Locks and Climbing Sheer Walls is the job of a Thief. Clerics and Fighters have to come up with some other way to get past a locked door. A hammer or Axe works pretty well. Whatever the DC is for the lock, make that the HP for it. And let them bash their way through that door. (Actually I think it's also a Warrior's job to Open Doors using Strength.) Don't forget to check for wandering monsters.

Keep in mind that every class is a specialist in what they do, occupations determine what they can do outside of their class. Magic-users cast spells, Warriors are the muscle, Thieves go places no one else can. Former Jewelers can appraise a gem, Nobles understand local etiquette and Gong-farmers can recognize a goblin camp from pack of gypsies.

If there is no place for a thief in your game, and everyone is a "thief" that's different. You probably should come up with a sub-system for "thief-like" skills that everyone has access to. Thieves have a place in my game, and if party doesn't have one, and they need one, it means they have to hire one. It's part of the game. If you're the Judge, don't put a door in their way that they can't get past without a Thief if they don't have a one. That's just mean. If they need to hire a thief, make it part of the game. Make that thief a double agent of some sort. Or hide the key somewhere in the room, with a puzzle they have to solve before they get crushed by a falling rocks, that the Warrior has to hold-up until everyone gets out of the room or they all die. It's pretty standard practice to make a well rounded party if you're going to put them through a "standard" dungeon. If the party wants to play nothing but Wizards & Warriors, that's fine too. But sneaking around shouldn't be part of their standards of operations, i.e. unless all classes have access to "thief-like" skills. It's do-able, but clearly not the focus for DCC. It'd be an easy hack though, give everyone thief skills (use Table 1-9 in BETA) of the same level and ditch the Thief class (basically everyone is a multi-classed thief.)

On that note, a simple hack to get ride of Clerics would be to use something similar to 4e healing surges, and give characters a daily pool of HD they can use to restore HP between encounters.

[Thane]

I hear you, and I understand about the class niche protection. But I tend to look at it like this; adventurers are 'adventurers' after all. Sure some (thief) are much better than others (cleric) and performing certain actions (lock picking), but these are a special bunch, a cut above the rest, and thus I allow them things that overlap into other classes. albeit at a heavy -8 penalty.

And that has to be one of the longest sentences I've ever typed

[Aplus]

Why did they leave out the Ranger class?

If you want a ranger, I wrote one up for a Pathfinder game that I converted to DCC a while back: DCC Ranger

You could use it as-is, or as a starting point for designing your own.

I have some other stuff I made for DCC on this page: DCC RPG Resources

Hopefully you'll find a thing or two to be of use.

[Thane]

Why did they leave out the Ranger class?

If you want a ranger, I wrote one up for a Pathfinder game that I converted to DCC a while back: DCC Ranger

You could use it as-is, or as a starting point for designing your own.

I have some other stuff I made for DCC on this page: DCC RPG Resources

Hopefully you'll find a thing or two to be of use.

Thanks but, I quite like the idea of a player having to play a ranger because that's how he envisions his character, and not because he has the rules. I think it will enhance roleplaying.

Another example would be a player with the fighter class deciding to play a 'bounty hunter'.

Should be interesting.

Nice list of spells there too. Do we know if those spells are going to be inthe main rules? I'd have hoped so because they're like the default ones you'd expect.

Thanks again

EDIT: I downloaded the Ranger for future perusal, nice one.

[Thane]

We're in a Pathfinder game right now, and I'm quite fond of feats. Will there be anything in DCC that resembles them?

I'm talking about when you go up in level you choose a power/feat/advantage/talent or something.

Thanks.

[Ravenheart87]

We're in a Pathfinder game right now, and I'm quite fond of feats. Will there be anything in DCC that resembles them?

I'm talking about when you go up in level you choose a power/feat/advantage/talent or something.

Thanks.

Nope, you get your class abilities, the stuff you roll for birth augur and lucky roll, perhaps some patron stuff, and that's all. It's not hard to put in feats from other games if you want them, but I still see them as unnecessary bloat that's only good for character optimization instead of customization (which was the original goal when 3e came out), and they don't really fit the mood of DCC RPG.

[Thane]

We're in a Pathfinder game right now, and I'm quite fond of feats. Will there be anything in DCC that resembles them?

I'm talking about when you go up in level you choose a power/feat/advantage/talent or something.

Thanks.

Nope, you get your class abilities, the stuff you roll for birth augur and lucky roll, perhaps some patron stuff, and that's all. It's not hard to put in feats from other games if you want them, but I still see them as unnecessary bloat that's only good for character optimization instead of customization (which was the original goal when 3e came out), and they don't really fit the mood of DCC RPG.

I was just reading all those Warrior 'Deeds' options. They'll do!

[Thane]

Unless I'm mistaken, a thief and an elf can kill someone with their crit table at level 1, but a warrior and a dwarf cannot kill someone with their crit table until level 3 for warriors and level 4 for dwarves?

[Harley Stroh]

Unless I'm mistaken, a thief and an elf can kill someone with their crit table at level 1, but a warrior and a dwarf cannot kill someone with their crit table until level 3 for warriors and level 4 for dwarves?

There is good deal of granularity to the crit tables, though some of it can be fairly subtle. A few different factors play into a crit:

• the critical hit table
• the character's crit die
• the character's threat range (applicable only to warriors)

A thief or elf refer to Crit Table II their entire careers. The "insta kill" results on table II (all thieves and elves) only occur with a roll of 20 or better. But it isn't until 5th level that a thief gets to roll 1d20 or better on the table, and the best an elf can ever hope for is 1d16. So while the table itself doesn't change, some of the results are entirely (intentionally) out of reach until the elf or thief reaches a moderately higher level or has a very unusual set of circumstances.

By contrast, the dwarf does indeed need to rise to 5th level (like the thief) before getting kill results, but while the thief needs to roll a 20 to get the kill, the dwarf has more chances at 5th level, and the scope of his non-kill results are all fairly brutal.

Similarly, the warrior also has to wait to 5th level before having a shot at regularly killing foes with crits. But, like the dwarf, he has better odds than the thief *and* the warrior has a broader threat range, meaning whereas other PCs crit on a 20, a 5th level warrior crits on an 18-20.

Short version: just because the result exists on the table, it doesn't necessarily follow that low level PCs are going to be able to hit that result. Some of the more brutal crits (on the same table) are reserved for higher level PCs.

Hope that helps. Let me if it still doesn't make sense.

//H

[Harley Stroh]

I was just reading all those Warrior 'Deeds' options. They'll do!

Mighty Deeds of Arms are one of my favorite part of the game. In the hands of the right player they can be just as creative and game changing as a well-cast spell. It's the chance for someone playing a warrior to be creative, dramatic, and something more than a "roll another d20" machine.

//H

[Thane]

That helps, and it confirms what I thought.

Those warrior/dwarf types are dealing out some serious hurt on a regular basis.

Thank you

[Harley Stroh]

BTW, great thread, Thane. You're not the only one with these questions, and it has been nice having a place to come to ask (and hopefully get answers) to nagging DCC questions.

//H

[Thane]

BTW, great thread, Thane. You're not the only one with these questions, and it has been nice having a place to come to ask (and hopefully get answers) to nagging DCC questions.

//H

Thanks, I really am enthused about this game and can't wait for it to come out. I've not been this excited about a game for a long time.

I was wondering if anyone is going to use DCC to run the classics like 'Tomb of Horrors',, the 'Temple of Elemental Evil' and so on?

[Harley Stroh]

I was wondering if anyone is going to use DCC to run the classics like 'Tomb of Horrors',, the 'Temple of Elemental Evil' and so on?

That's a great idea. I think Wizards still hosts free conversions of the originals. At some point when things slow down (ugh, maybe this summer?) it would be fun to write DCC RPG fan conversions for the same.

White Plume: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20051207a
Tomb of Horrors: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20051031a

There might be others hidden in the archives ...

//H

[Thane]

Them's the ones!

Having said all that, it looks like GG are going to be doing what they do best - putting out great adventure modules.

[reverenddak]

I am glad you're getting in the spirit of the game! you pretty much can run old edition modules straight out of the book. simple conversions might need to be done, like flipping AC (just subtract the descending AC from 19) all the traps can be run as is, converting Saves to the most appropriate ones with a base DC of 18. etc.

I've been doing a lot of conversions on the fly, and I've been compiling my systems (which i plan to make available soon) if you need help converting things, let us know. i have a ssystem for using OSR spells too.

[Thane]

I am glad you're getting in the spirit of the game! you pretty much can run old edition modules straight out of the book. simple conversions might need to be done, like flipping AC (just subtract the descending AC from 19) all the traps can be run as is, converting Saves to the most appropriate ones with a base DC of 18. etc.

I've been doing a lot of conversions on the fly, and I've been compiling my systems (which i plan to make available soon) if you need help converting things, let us know. i have a ssystem for using OSR spells too.

Thanks for that, but I'll probably do it as I've usually done it, and that's to 'eyeball' it all and go with the flow.

Like you said, it shouldn't be too hard.

[Thane]

Spell duelling.

That's a lot of dice rolling going on there.

How does it work in play?

EDIT: I just heard on a podcast that GG were rebooting all the DCC modules for the DCC Rpg. Is this true?

[shadewest]

My understanding is that the DCC module line going forward will be for DCC RPG, but I don't think the older modules will be reissued.

Deeds are a great way around a huge list of complex combat feats. In fact, that's how I explain them. A successful deed is like a 3.x feat going off, or everything that a 4e encounter power does besides basic damage. Yes, one rule does all that and more. Other kinds of feats are handled in different ways, but that, too is covered in various ways for various classes. With looser, more versatile rules, massive lists of narrow tweaks to get the effect you want just aren't necessary.

[Mortimer]

Hello, I'm posting here because I have some questions and I wasn't able to make my own thread. If a moderator sees this and is getting annoyed at my attempts, please send me a PM on these forums to let me know and I'll stop.

1. How do you deal with phase spiders and other creatures with flyby attacks? The D&D rules of course have the Ready Action, but I was wondering if other people have a more elegant solution?

2. Are ability scores supposed to stay the same as you level? So no one gets stronger? And only thieves get better at skill checks?

[shadewest]

Hello, I'm posting here because I have some questions and I wasn't able to make my own thread. If a moderator sees this and is getting annoyed at my attempts, please send me a PM on these forums to let me know and I'll stop.

1. How do you deal with phase spiders and other creatures with flyby attacks? The D&D rules of course have the Ready Action, but I was wondering if other people have a more elegant solution?

2. Are ability scores supposed to stay the same as you level? So no one gets stronger? And only thieves get better at skill checks?

1. I haven't seen the final monster rules yet, so I can't speak with authority, but the gridless nature of combat means that flanking, move by attacks,and attacks of opportunity really aren't much included. I expect that monsters that can do that sort of thing will be described on a case by case basis, or better yet, by good Judge narration.

2. Ability scores do not increase automatically. Luck can increase by doing great deeds in the service of the gods and your alignment. Otherwise, training for ability increases is between the player and judge. Effectively, only thieving skills increase with level, but on the other hand, DCs don't slide higher to match pc level either. Really, though skills are pretty minimal in DCC RPG. If you're clever, and describe your actions carefully, you might even succeed without a skill roll. IE, if you look in the right place for a certain treasure, you find the treasure, regardless of any sort of Search check. I follow Dave Arneson's lead when judging: Tell me what you want to do; I'll tell you if you need to roll to succeed. It's an almost necessary approach in old school games but I try to do it like this even for modern games like 3.5.

[reverenddak]

1. How do you deal with phase spiders and other creatures with flyby attacks? The D&D rules of course have the Ready Action, but I was wondering if other people have a more elegant solution?

The 3e Readied Action works perfectly fine in DCC, and you can find the rules online for free from a d20SRD. 3x just formalized it in writing. Declaring that you're going to wait and attack it when it pops up is totally a legit action, the only disadvantage is that's the only thing you can do until you're turn comes back up again.

2. Are ability scores supposed to stay the same as you level? So no one gets stronger? And only thieves get better at skill checks?

Any info on this hasn't been released yet, there aren't any rules in the BETA, and Thieves only get better at Thief things, so it's not really the same. I'd go Old-school for skills. Add their Class Level if the "skill" is related to their Class. Default rules are if the "skill" is related to their Occupation, they can do it. If it's not related to their Occupation, they either can't do it at all, or get a -4. Pretty simple, but works extremely well, and way better (in my opinion) than fiddly 3x & 4e skill systems.

[Thane]

How many spells will the wizard/cleric have, are we talking ad&d, basic, or something in between?

[Thane]

Not wanting to start another thread, and not even sure if I've asked this (that's old age for you), do we have a general release date?