RAW

For DCC RPG rules discussion. Includes rules questions and ideas, new rules suggestions, homebrews and hacks, conversions to other systems, and everything else rules-related.

Moderators: DJ LaBoss, michaelcurtis, finarvyn, Harley Stroh

Post Reply
bookish
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:54 pm

RAW

Post by bookish » Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:55 am

Hey all. I am looking for opinions on interpreting the DCC rules 'As Written' when so much of the manual implies things based on the tradition from which it is made. The manual assumes there is a familiarity with the d20 system, and it is a stripped-down version of d20 with its own extras and flavor. Seeing as there is a lot of wiggle room, do you see a problem writing crunchy rules where no specific example in the manual covers a thing you want to rule on?

I am asking because I am working on some projects and I received criticism that crunchy rules should not replace good role playing, or dictate role play. However, I think that the judge having a clear idea about what events need to happen to achieve a specific outcome in game is not necessarily a bad thing. And, railroading doesn't always come from tight rules. So, I do not see crunchy rules as being the natural enemy of role playing. Nor do I see tight rules as being the natural enemy of simplicity. I see them as a continuum with their various balancing points.

So, when it comes to rules as written, when do you tighten up to fit a goal in game, and what do you think the balance is between role play and rules? Do you have any personal adages or approaches to this?

Any videos with good examples of role play would be nice to see as well.

Thanks!

User avatar
Raven_Crowking
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:41 am

Re: RAW

Post by Raven_Crowking » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:20 am

The RAW for DCC assumes either that you are familiar with d20-based rpgs, or pre-WotC D&D. Many of the things left vague in the RAW allow you to "fill in" the material from either ruleset. I use a combination, personally, using some 3.0 and some AD&D 1e.
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.

User avatar
GnomeBoy
Tyrant Master (Administrator)
Posts: 3624
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:46 pm
FLGS: Bizarro World
Location: Left Coast, USA
Contact:

Re: RAW

Post by GnomeBoy » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:45 am

My personal preference is that the rules are there when you need them, and can be used as the basis for an on-the-fly ruling. I want rules to be the man behind the curtain.

But I know some players want that absoluteness -- that when you say something is concealed, that "concealment" works a certain way, so they know mechanically how to circumvent it (or employ it, if that's what they are doing).

But shuffling pieces on the board is not my preferred style. I'd make rulings for "concealment" that are different every time, because the circumstances are different. In one case it might push your attack down the dice chain, and in another it might take a Luck check to be able to get an effective shot off (with your normal action die).

If breaking down a door requires the same mechanics every time, then to large degree all doors are the same. Meanwhile, narratively, they are not -- so why not have a different mechanical requirement to bust them down...?

But if your group has come out of playing, say, Pathfinder, then run the game as Pathfinder with DCC rules subbed in as appropriate. If your group is coming from or wanting something looser and more improv-ed, then run it as is, and make stuff up in the moment to cover new situations the rules don't expressly cover. You can fall back on what you know, if you're stuck for an idea.

I'd always much prefer my players playing on the level of the narrative ("I want to do this because of [situation or story reasons]") than to be playing the game on the level of a board game or war game, with some story pieces tacked on. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :wink:

If you've got story goals that require game mechanical events to get to them, well, that's not a game design I can totally grok. But maybe a fuller description would get me to understanding...
Gnome Boy • DCC playtester @ DDC 35 Feb '11. • Beta DL 2111, 7AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since '77 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters.

Link: Here Be 100+ DCC Monsters

bygrinstow.com

Kuruz, Mendicant, N • AC 8, 4 hp • R-1, F0, W0 • S9 A8 S9 P11 I16 L8
Zend, Grave Digger, L • AC 9, 3 hp • R-1, F0, W1 • S14 A6 S9 P13 I13 L6
Mercer, Outlaw, N • AC 12, 2 hp • R0, F-1, W1 • S7 A9 S6 P13 I8 L13
Dejah, Ropemaker, C • AC 10, 2 hp • R0, F1, W-1 • S8 A12 S15 P7 I11 L7

User avatar
Buttmonkey
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:17 am

Re: RAW

Post by Buttmonkey » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:54 am

It would be easier to give you a practical response if you (the OP) could give examples of the sort of situations you want to resolve with rules crunch, but are getting feedback saying that is bad/wrong.

bookish
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:54 pm

Re: RAW

Post by bookish » Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:08 am

Well, I don't want to get bogged down by details right now, I am asking for principles and opinions based on people's judging styles. When I have a second revision of this project to offer up for suggestions, that woiuld be a good time to talk about the details of my intentions and goals. Basically, I just want people to tell me how they view the DCC rules, what assumptions there are or might be on the part of Joseph Goodman about what knowledge and approach people should have with his rules, and how detailed you all as judge's approach rules not expressly written into the RAW of DCC.

bookish
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:54 pm

Re: RAW

Post by bookish » Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:13 am

GnomeBoy wrote:If breaking down a door requires the same mechanics every time, then to large degree all doors are the same. Meanwhile, narratively, they are not -- so why not have a different mechanical requirement to bust them down...?

But if your group has come out of playing, say, Pathfinder, then run the game as Pathfinder with DCC rules subbed in as appropriate. If your group is coming from or wanting something looser and more improv-ed, then run it as is, and make stuff up in the moment to cover new situations the rules don't expressly cover. You can fall back on what you know, if you're stuck for an idea.

I'd always much prefer my players playing on the level of the narrative ("I want to do this because of [situation or story reasons]") than to be playing the game on the level of a board game or war game, with some story pieces tacked on. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :wink:

If you've got story goals that require game mechanical events to get to them, well, that's not a game design I can totally grok. But maybe a fuller description would get me to understanding...
So, you basically say whatever fits the narrative is the right approach, and rules bend to make the narrative better is your primary guiding principle. Right?

User avatar
Ravenheart87
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:34 pm
Location: Győr, Hungary
Contact:

Re: RAW

Post by Ravenheart87 » Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:21 am

The rules of DCC RPG are neither rigid nor hard so I don't understand why people worry about them much. I use them as guidelines, when they don't fit the situation I make sh*t up instead.
Vorpal Mace: a humble rpg blog with some DCC-related stuff.

User avatar
Buttmonkey
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:17 am

Re: RAW

Post by Buttmonkey » Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:49 am

bookish wrote:Well, I don't want to get bogged down by details right now, I am asking for principles and opinions based on people's judging styles. When I have a second revision of this project to offer up for suggestions, that woiuld be a good time to talk about the details of my intentions and goals. Basically, I just want people to tell me how they view the DCC rules, what assumptions there are or might be on the part of Joseph Goodman about what knowledge and approach people should have with his rules, and how detailed you all as judge's approach rules not expressly written into the RAW of DCC.
Fair enough. Unfortunately, your question(s) is/are too broad for me to give you an answer. Maybe the other posters can give you a useful response.

User avatar
GnomeBoy
Tyrant Master (Administrator)
Posts: 3624
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:46 pm
FLGS: Bizarro World
Location: Left Coast, USA
Contact:

Re: RAW

Post by GnomeBoy » Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:35 am

bookish wrote:
GnomeBoy wrote:blah blah blah blah blah
So, you basically say whatever fits the narrative is the right approach, and rules bend to make the narrative better is your primary guiding principle. Right?
That's my take, yeah. If whatever they are doing seems fairly easy with a small chance of risk, I use a method or make up a method that's easy. If they're doing something insanely crazy, I use something with a lower chance of a clean success. What's happening 'now', and what came before 'now', and all the stuff that the player's haven't discovered yet feed into the decision.

I use a lot of roll-under-your-Ability checks. This tends to make things easy (easy on me, easy on players, easy to understand), since the 'strong-guy' is going to be the one to try to do feats of strength. He'll make that roll most of the time, and thus will in actuality be the strong guy. But if he single-handedly wants to punch down the iron doors of the Giant's stronghold, well, I may need him to make that roll by a LOT.

Also, some things don't require a roll or a rule at all: "You're the strong guy and you want to do the strong thing? Okay, that's your wheelhouse, 'tis done."
Gnome Boy • DCC playtester @ DDC 35 Feb '11. • Beta DL 2111, 7AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since '77 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters.

Link: Here Be 100+ DCC Monsters

bygrinstow.com

Kuruz, Mendicant, N • AC 8, 4 hp • R-1, F0, W0 • S9 A8 S9 P11 I16 L8
Zend, Grave Digger, L • AC 9, 3 hp • R-1, F0, W1 • S14 A6 S9 P13 I13 L6
Mercer, Outlaw, N • AC 12, 2 hp • R0, F-1, W1 • S7 A9 S6 P13 I8 L13
Dejah, Ropemaker, C • AC 10, 2 hp • R0, F1, W-1 • S8 A12 S15 P7 I11 L7

User avatar
beermotor
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: RAW

Post by beermotor » Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:52 am

GnomeBoy is wise, you should listen to him.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules discussion”