Goodman Games

Geoffrey wrote:I strongly support the idea of the entire rules being in a 64-page book.

I agree, but wonder how well it can be done.

Consider, if you will, the 1974 OD&D plus Greyhawk supplement (I'm assuming that the added stuff would be roughly equivalent in scope to that of Supplement I):

• Men & Magic = 36 pages
• Monsters & Treasure = 40 pages
• Underworld & Wilderness Adventues = 36 pages
• Greyhawk = 68 pages

Keeping in mind that two "pages" of the little books is roughly one standard page (for a regular 8.5"x11" rulebook), so the three original books (no thieves) cover roughly 56 standard pages and the three original books plus Greyhawk cover roughly 90 standard pages. This all covers character creation, spells, monsters, magical items, and wilderness campaign information. Everything one might need to play!

Castles & Crusades, another "3E lite" game with similar philosophy, is even wordier:

• Player's Handbook = 128 pages
• Monsters & Treasure = 128 pages

That's 256 pages, total. I think some of the "flavor" could be taken out of C&C to conserve space, but it's not like the books are just filled to the brim with artwork.

As another example, Matt Finch's Swords & Wizardry (Core version with thieves, etc) weighs in at 82 pages, at least for the PDF version I have. OSRIC (an AD&D "clone") is a whopping 400 pages!

I think that 64 pages would be a tough volume to write.
(1) The OD&D books are pretty high-density in rules. An author would have to be pretty tight with word count. Not impossible, but a worthy task indeed.
(2) Each DCC spell is supposed to have its own effects chart. That in itself will consume quite a bit of space.

Just my two cents.

Ogrepuppy wrote:

Geoffrey wrote:Those non-standard dice are expensive.

Wouldn't including non-standard dice that are expensive....uhh, make the entire boxed set more expensive?!?

What I'm wondering is if Goodman could buy the dice in bulk ("Hey, how much if we buy 2,000 each of your weird dice?") and thereby get them for considerably cheaper than if only a single set were purchased. Then Goodman could include them in the boxed game at cost plus a nickel.

A good point. I keep thinking as a lone consumer, not as a larger company. I'd think there would be an "in bulk" price.

finarvyn wrote:I'm sure this is waaaaay early to know for sure, but I'm curious as to how much thought has been put into the way the DCC RPG will be packaged.

Thoughts so far, questions, and a wishlist for the game:

• I assume a boxed set. My guess is that the rulebook will be a standard 8.5x11" size, but it would be cool to have a "digest" size box and rulebook similar to the '74 game.
• I know that many modern games try to "wow" you with glossy paper, fancy fonts, and color pictures, but my concept of "old school" is basic B&W artwork and plain fonts on white paper. (Actually, a lot like the DCC modules, where the outside may be pretty but the inside is useful.)
• Many intro sets come with an intro module -- would it have a special one or would it be assumed that a player would just buy a regular DCC module?
• Has thought been put into some sort of logo? While I like the Goodman Games logo, I think that something specific to the RPG would be neat for product-identification purposes.
• Rumor has it that it would come with funky dice to match the tables in the rules. The Zocchi dice I've seen are not super high quality; it would be nice to have high quality dice that all match, etc. It would be neat if the dice matched the color of the logo.
• I'd like to see a GM screen included in the boxed set if it's a large box. Not as useful if it's a "digest" box.
• Do we know the level range covered by the set? Is there a "basic" (levels 1-3) and "advanced" (levels 4-12) kind of thing planned, or is it intended to be a one-shot rules set that covers all levels?

Just me thinking out loud. What would others like to see?

8.5"x11" softcover, full-color cover with b/w interior art, sealed in plastic. On back cover, need for dice (and links, if necessary, to purchase them), paper, pencil, friends, yaddayadda, then links for freebies like PC sheets, spell charts and critical tables, and any additional adventures (which, of course, links to DCC mods....)

To be honest, I think the inclusion of some of the weird dice (d3, d14, d16, d24, d30) are just going to cause more delay and headache than it will help with a cool appeal.

While experienced gamers can do a d3 (1-2, 3-4, 5-6), d16 (d8 w/ high low), etc...

It does slow the game down further because there is more math that needs to be done. I will have to say a d3 is on my list of dice to purchase, so I guess that one can be crossed off.

I guess if I can ask, what is gained by using a d14 in the game? Is it worth the extra time to calculate (or even find the d14) die?

Not trying to be critical here, but I am looking for what is the gain beyond the 'cool' factor.

The dice actually introduce some interesting mechanics. For example: in 3E and its variants, fighting with a weapon in both hands has typically been accomplished by rolling two d20's and subtracting a different number from each. You then have to do math. If your BAB is +6, you've got a Str modifier of +2, and a +1 weapon, your total modifier is +9. Then with your first attack you roll 1d20, add +9 for your melee attack modifier, and subtract -4 for using your primary hand, so you end up with 1d20+5. With your off-hand, you subtract -6, so you end up with 1d20+3. Lots of math to get to that result! But another option, using d16 and d14, is to just roll 1d16 + your melee modifier...then roll 1d14 + your melee modifier...and you've accomplished the same effect! Instead of 1d20-4 you just use 1d16, and instead of 1d20-6 you just use 1d14. There are places where introducing an alternate die eliminates some of the math.

Plus they're just COOL! Every time I reach for my d5 or d7, I'm reminded of the first time I saw a d4 and said, "How do you read this??"

The basic format for DCC RPG will be a hardback book. I'm in talks with suppliers to also provide a dice set as a separate product. Based on feedback in this thread and other places, I will also investigate releasing some sort of limited-edition boxed set for those who are interested.

goodmangames wrote: The basic format for DCC RPG will be a hardback book. I'm in talks with suppliers to also provide a dice set as a separate product. Based on feedback in this thread and other places, I will also investigate releasing some sort of limited-edition boxed set for those who are interested.

Any hints on how GG will support the new rpg? New module line? I think you hinted about rule supps once a year or so as well?

goodmangames wrote:The dice actually introduce some interesting mechanics. For example: in 3E and its variants, fighting with a weapon in both hands has typically been accomplished by rolling two d20's and subtracting a different number from each. You then have to do math. If your BAB is +6, you've got a Str modifier of +2, and a +1 weapon, your total modifier is +9. Then with your first attack you roll 1d20, add +9 for your melee attack modifier, and subtract -4 for using your primary hand, so you end up with 1d20+5. With your off-hand, you subtract -6, so you end up with 1d20+3. Lots of math to get to that result! But another option, using d16 and d14, is to just roll 1d16 + your melee modifier...then roll 1d14 + your melee modifier...and you've accomplished the same effect! Instead of 1d20-4 you just use 1d16, and instead of 1d20-6 you just use 1d14. There are places where introducing an alternate die eliminates some of the math.

Plus they're just COOL! Every time I reach for my d5 or d7, I'm reminded of the first time I saw a d4 and said, "How do you read this??"

Thank you for that excellent answer to my query. I had not through about how those additional dice types would play out in combat. The could actually work out really well in most areas of combat because that would allow all non-monk (not sure there will be a monk in the books?) characters to use a different die for each attack roll. Makes it far easier and faster for combat.

Excellent idea. That has an extra interesting effect to the game.

1. After the first attack, it is no longer possible to score a critical. Because you cannot roll a natural d20
2. No longer a chance to get an automatic hit on 2nd die roll (i.e. no natch 20 to hit)
3. The second and subsequent dice rolls have increasingly higher changes of rolling a 1 (for automatic or critical miss).

You then have a natural 20 do an automatic critical of (2x or 3x) damage with no confirmation. Because you only have a chance to get it on the very first die roll. Speed up combat even more!

I would have to see how that works out with other skills in the game.

I'm looking forward to using the new dice in a game. They sound like so much fun.

Hamakto wrote:Excellent idea. That has an extra interesting effect to the game.

1. After the first attack, it is no longer possible to score a critical. Because you cannot roll a natural d20
2. No longer a chance to get an automatic hit on 2nd die roll (i.e. no natch 20 to hit)
3. The second and subsequent dice rolls have increasingly higher changes of rolling a 1 (for automatic or critical miss).

You then have a natural 20 do an automatic critical of (2x or 3x) damage with no confirmation. Because you only have a chance to get it on the very first die roll. Speed up combat even more!

I would have to see how that works out with other skills in the game.

You've hit on a lot of the things I'm still toying with and playtesting.

Another implication is for magic. DCC RPG has a randomized results table for every spell. Just as attacks utilize a BAB, spells utilize a spell check modifier. But I like magic to be MAGICAL. So in addition to the randomized table for each spell, every wizard has unique traits associated with their own casting of a spell. Without getting into too much detail, this is where one mage can be inherently more powerful at casting magic missile than another. Both mages might get a +2 on their spell check...but one rolls the standard d20 and the other rolls d24...

goodmangames wrote:But I like magic to be MAGICAL. So in addition to the randomized table for each spell, every wizard has unique traits associated with their own casting of a spell. Without getting into too much detail, this is where one mage can be inherently more powerful at casting magic missile than another. Both mages might get a +2 on their spell check...but one rolls the standard d20 and the other rolls d24...

Oh! That's different from the demo's you ran...!

goodmangames wrote:The basic format for DCC RPG will be a hardback book. I'm in talks with suppliers to also provide a dice set as a separate product. Based on feedback in this thread and other places, I will also investigate releasing some sort of limited-edition boxed set for those who are interested.

Sounds like the best of all worlds! That way folks can go with the dice or not, depending upon their preference. (Hopefully there will be some pretty color options for the dice!)

And of course, I'm in on the boxed set!

Hamakto wrote:

goodmangames wrote:The dice actually introduce some interesting mechanics. For example: in 3E and its variants, fighting with a weapon in both hands has typically been accomplished by rolling two d20's and subtracting a different number from each. You then have to do math. If your BAB is +6, you've got a Str modifier of +2, and a +1 weapon, your total modifier is +9. Then with your first attack you roll 1d20, add +9 for your melee attack modifier, and subtract -4 for using your primary hand, so you end up with 1d20+5. With your off-hand, you subtract -6, so you end up with 1d20+3. Lots of math to get to that result! But another option, using d16 and d14, is to just roll 1d16 + your melee modifier...then roll 1d14 + your melee modifier...and you've accomplished the same effect! Instead of 1d20-4 you just use 1d16, and instead of 1d20-6 you just use 1d14. There are places where introducing an alternate die eliminates some of the math.

Plus they're just COOL! Every time I reach for my d5 or d7, I'm reminded of the first time I saw a d4 and said, "How do you read this??"

Thank you for that excellent answer to my query. I had not through about how those additional dice types would play out in combat. The could actually work out really well in most areas of combat because that would allow all non-monk (not sure there will be a monk in the books?) characters to use a different die for each attack roll. Makes it far easier and faster for combat.

Excellent idea. That has an extra interesting effect to the game.

1. After the first attack, it is no longer possible to score a critical. Because you cannot roll a natural d20
2. No longer a chance to get an automatic hit on 2nd die roll (i.e. no natch 20 to hit)
3. The second and subsequent dice rolls have increasingly higher changes of rolling a 1 (for automatic or critical miss).

You then have a natural 20 do an automatic critical of (2x or 3x) damage with no confirmation. Because you only have a chance to get it on the very first die roll. Speed up combat even more!

I would have to see how that works out with other skills in the game.

After thinking about this, I am not sure the funky dice will work for combat. And here is why...

Lets use your example above... +6 Bab, +2 enchanted weapon, +1 str = +9 bonus

fighting two handed (-4/-6)

1st attack: d20+5 (average roll = 15.5)
2nd attack: d20+3 (average roll = 13.5)

'using funky dice'

1st attack: d16+9 (average roll = 17.5)
2nd attack: d14+9 (average roll = 16.5)

The math to get to calculate funky dice is weird.

So even if we get tot he same average rolls:

(i.e. d20+5 = average 15.5)

15.5 - 9 = 6.5 = d12

so to get the same average number to hit over time you would have to roll a d12. The problem with rolling a d12 is that your max roll is a 21 (12+9) where with a d20+5 it is 25.

Cool concept, but I am not sure it will work for combat.

Good points, Andy. Your numbers seem pretty solid, but consider this:

1. Nothing says that the number range for combat has to be the same as standard d20 combat tables. The DCC rpg will be its own system and doens't need to match mathematically to any other game.

2. I'm not certain about the natural 1 vs natural 20 issue for critical misses and critical hits. Certainly this would have to be considered since you can't roll a natural 20 on a d16. While I agree that it's easier to roll a natural 1 on a d16 than on a d20, it's possible that "natural 20" would be replaced by "natural highest number on the die" so that a natural 16 could be a critical on a d16.

Joseph has said that there would be critical hits but hasn't (to my knowledge) said just how they would be derived...

joela wrote:

goodmangames wrote:But I like magic to be MAGICAL. So in addition to the randomized table for each spell, every wizard has unique traits associated with their own casting of a spell. Without getting into too much detail, this is where one mage can be inherently more powerful at casting magic missile than another. Both mages might get a +2 on their spell check...but one rolls the standard d20 and the other rolls d24...

Oh! That's different from the demo's you ran...!

Yes, the game continues to evolve. The mercurial magic tables allow variation in spellcasting from wizard to wizard -- one wizard's magic missile could be slightly different from another's. Some of the possible results on that table are that you roll a lower die for your spell checks (d12, d14, d16) or you roll a higher one (d24, d30)...a high Luck score definitely helps!

Hamakto wrote:The math to get to calculate funky dice is weird.

So even if we get tot he same average rolls:

(i.e. d20+5 = average 15.5)

15.5 - 9 = 6.5 = d12

so to get the same average number to hit over time you would have to roll a d12. The problem with rolling a d12 is that your max roll is a 21 (12+9) where with a d20+5 it is 25.

Cool concept, but I am not sure it will work for combat.

Great points and this is why I'm allowing a lot of time for playtesting! The math does work out slightly differently. Depending on how things evolve, that may or may not be a reason for "go/no go." There is such inherent variability in the game to begin with that it may be one of many factors combining toward a conclusion.

Besides, gaming dice are flawed to begin with -- check out this interesting study of 144,000 dice rolls:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/That% ... is_of_Dice

Besides, averages on uniform dice are meaningless (in terms of frequency) unless cumulative effects enter the game.

Rounded corners = lots of 1's. Crap all of my dice have rounded corners.

Count me in for the super deluxe premium price box set.

I love box sets.

Interesting to note that due to the vagaries of tax law, here in the UK a rulebook in a box is subject to sales tax (VAT), but a free standing rulebook is not.

A little suggestion for keeping funky dice and not turning anybody out

1) use all the dice you want

2) include a table (or a table for each dice) to generate numbers by mixing 2 or more dice

d16
roll d6 and d8;
d6:1-3->+0; d6:4-6->+8

d24 (d6(to add 0 or 12)+d12)

and so on for most of them

EDIT
the best would be to give indication table using only d6 or cards (normal poker cards), AND a table that suppose that you have the normal array of dungeon dice (d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20)

e.g.
d8
***1-2*3-4*5-6
1-2...1.....2.....3
3-4...4.....5.....6
5-6...7.....8....roll again

d16
***1-2*3-4*5-6
1.....1.....2.....3
2.....4.....5.....6
3.....7.....8.....9
4....10...11....12
5....13...14....15
6....16...roll again

goodmangames wrote:Yes, the game continues to evolve.

Really? I kind of figured it was done and set-in-stone, but that Goodman Games wasn't going to release it for 11 months just to annoy us all!

It's working!