Goodman Games

We've been pestering Joe for details -- and speculating wildly about -- fighters, clerics, thieves and magic-users.

But did we ask about what makes the 'dwarf' or 'elf' classes special? I don't think we did...

So are there any hints to be had in the last 30 days before the beta rules?

Has anyone played those classes in a public play-test anywhere?

Dwarves can boost any attack roll or save on a one-for-one basis according to how many alcohol beverages the player can down in 60 seconds. The kiddos can substitute Mountain Dew. There's a licensing deal waiting to happen somewhere in there.

Players with Elf characters get to be the Dwarf players' Designated Driver.

And they sparkle.

Actually, I don't know any of this. Just having fun.

But that Dwarf rule could stand some playtesting. It might be a little overpowered.

So, I echo Gnomeboy's question. What's the awesome with Dwarves and Elves?

So far we saw the character sheet for an elf. It was written months ago, that the chart on you roll for 0-level occupation has demihuman ones too. It was also hinted, that it might be possible for demihumans to take other classes, but then they won't get their racial abilities. So, what's the final verdict? How will demihumans work? I don't need a design diary, a few sentences would be enough to satisfy my hunger for information.

Michael 'Chgowiz' Shorten's Elf charsheet:



Immunity to magical sleep and paralysis, infravision 60', bonus to detect secret doors, spellcasting

Then compare it to Jeff Rients' Wizard character:



The Elf and Wizard roll on different Crit Tables, with a different die type too.

Detective work at its best.

Stainless wrote:Detective work at its best.

Thanks, I try

Infravision - looking forward to all the old arguments we had back in the 80s with this.

geordie racer wrote:

Stainless wrote:Detective work at its best.

Thanks, I try

Infravision - looking forward to all the old arguments we had back in the 80s with this.

Now tell me this- from what source in Appendix N works do things like infravision and immunity to sleep and ghouls come from? Or was this stuff just made up for D&D?

geordie racer wrote:Infravision - looking forward to all the old arguments we had back in the 80s with this.

I remember those well; everything from hide in shadows should be worthless to recent footprints should be visible.

I just ruled in my campaign that infravision didn't exist; instead some characters got Dark Adaptation, which allowed them to see well as long as there was at least a little light, but not in complete darkness and certainly not heat signatures.

I admit, I'm rather indifferent to the existence of elves and dwarves and other fantasy races, especially when they have everything humans have, plus extra powers. I hope they end up coming across as "different", not "better".

Good questions, guys. Here's the short version.

Halflings have evolved a bit over the months and now they're a lot of fun for the whole group. They are like weak fighters with modest thief skills, but have a Luck-driven ability that has played very well (and has direct provenance in Tolkien). While all characters can burn Luck to modify any roll (at a consequence - get a low enough Luck score and your character will find himself tripping over loose flagstones in the dungeon), a halfling can burn Luck to modify OTHER PLAYERS' rolls. Additionally, it burns at a 2:1 ratio (so every point of Luck grants a +2 bonus), and halflings recover Luck at the rate of 1 point per day. As Gandalf pointed out, there is luck to having a halfling in the group. Halflings also have an improved ability to fight with two weapons -- which, if you like funky dice, is lots of fun. Instead of traditional D&D where you add different "pluses" to separate dice rolls for left and right hand attacks, in DCC RPG you roll different dice (for example, a d16 and a d14) and add the same modifier to both (depending on Agility and such).

Elves are wizard-warrior crossbreeds. Their long lifespan grants them improved relationships with supernatural patrons, as they have spent centuries working with them. They can't bear the touch of iron and have select other unique traits, such as infravision.

Dwarves are modified warriors. They are adept at fighting "sword & board" and receive an extra shield bash attack whenever fighting with a shield (d14 attack die, d3 damage -- won't do much against a dragon but is effective against hordes of lower-level attackers). Plus they have an ability that is lots of fun for role-playing and dungeon design: they can smell gold and gems. "Dwarf player, you smell the strong scent of gold coming from the northern passage..."

P.S. These smilie icons are not big enough sometimes.

GnomeBoy wrote:




P.S. These smilie icons are not big enough sometimes.

I agree!

I too was curious about how the 'Elf' played...and so I grabbed the available character sheet at Genghis Con.

My impressions (which were in February...lots of design water under the bridge since then) were such:

1. Infravision: Didn't play much of a role. And quite frankly, I can say that it never really has. Unless everyone in the group has infravision, it's a moot point. Someone has a light source, and therefore that infravision is usually worthless. Now, I'm not certain if it's being ruled that way in the DCC RPG, but in play, it wasn't much of a factor.

2. Resistance versus paralysis: That's a throwback from long ago when legions of ghouls (in Chainmail) could chew up nearly anyone due to that paralysis attack. The answer? Elves. And that's where the ability came from. An equalizer. In play? Again, unless it's a very special situation, it's not much of a factor either. But in that situation, it could be a lifesaver I suppose.

3. Ability to wear armor and cast: I'm a bit torn on this one. For some reason, the elf seemed to be a mediocre fighter and a mediocre caster. Kind of a middle of the road character that doesn't do any one thing extremely well, but lots of things well enough to get by. I remember thinking that the armor was a PITA when casting and was sorely tempted to take it off. (Wearing it hampers casting w/ a negative modifier) But I had such low hit points (7 at 3rd level) that one hit could have easily taken me out. So I kept it on.

4. Relationships w/ Patrons: This wasn't something that had been introduced yet when I played. I don't remember anyone saying anything about this, so I would imagine that it's been a recent addition?

5. Weakness to Iron: Again, not something that came up during our play test. So I'm not sure about this one. Maybe it was also a recent addendum?

All in all, elves seemed to be a flavor really. Window dressing you might say. I didn't get the feeling that they were all that "alien" in play. But that might have been my fault. Maybe I wasn't playing the character correctly?

Bottom line though, I had a LOT of fun playing the game. I'm sure it would have been the same w/ any class.

smathis wrote:Dwarves can boost any attack roll or save on a one-for-one basis according to how many alcohol beverages the player can down in 60 seconds.

I'm going to use this as a house rule.

It occurs to me, happy as I was to see the info, that it still doesn't answer anything about the classes of elf and dwarf and halfling. Something must go on from levels 1 to 10...

Do dwarves smell gold at a further range as they go up in level, or get to where they can estimate the total value at a distance, for example?

Halflings also have an improved ability to fight with two weapons

Hmm... where have I seen this before....

oh yeah-

mythfish wrote:

smathis wrote:Dwarves can boost any attack roll or save on a one-for-one basis according to how many alcohol beverages the player can down in 60 seconds.

I'm going to use this as a house rule.

That's a playtest report I'd like to read.

mntnjeff wrote:1. Infravision: Didn't play much of a role. And quite frankly, I can say that it never really has. Unless everyone in the group has infravision, it's a moot point. Someone has a light source, and therefore that infravision is usually worthless. Now, I'm not certain if it's being ruled that way in the DCC RPG, but in play, it wasn't much of a factor.

I agree with the point about Infravision in general. Even in 4e, "Low Light Vision" is pretty useless.

I think a better "vision" ability for an Elf is the ability to see clearly much farther away. So they can see twice as far as humans with the same light source. Making it harder to surprise them or something. And offering them the chance to see something sooner than other members of the party.

I also like Elves to be unhindered by terrain. Like Legolas in the movie walking on top of the snow while everyone else is trudging through it. So maybe terrain effects that penalize movement don't affect them. Allowing Elves to do things like hop up a pile of rocks that other characters would only be able to ascend at 1/2 Movement?

I like that DCC is bringing the Iron thing into the game. I've always used a houserule to that effect (Iron weapons do more damage to Elves). Nice to see it made official!

smathis wrote: I like that DCC is bringing the Iron thing into the game. I've always used a houserule to that effect (Iron weapons do more damage to Elves). Nice to see it made official!

Doesn't that mean pretty much every weapon besides the club and staff? Or if you treat the majority of weapons as being steel and being different from iron, then doesn't the effect become so rare as to be not worth mentioning in the game?

mshensley wrote:Doesn't that mean pretty much every weapon besides the club and staff? Or if you treat the majority of weapons as being steel and being different from iron, then doesn't the effect become so rare as to be not worth mentioning in the game?

Depends. IIRC, the distinction was "cold iron". So they could be treated as separate "bane" weapons that really mess up an Elf.

Or... it could just be that Elves take a damage die higher when taking damage from a metal weapon that isn't made out of silver or wood.

So a short sword does d8 against Elves, d6 against everyone else.

A great inspiration for elves in DCC is Poul Anderson's The Broken Sword.

I would caution against moving the depiction of elves, dwarves, and halflings away from their LoTR counterparts. 99.9% of the fantasy audience expects them to be just like Professor Tolkien wrote.

mshensley wrote:I would caution against moving the depiction of elves, dwarves, and halflings away from their LoTR counterparts. 99.9% of the fantasy audience expects them to be just like Professor Tolkien wrote.

Why? The mainstream (ie.: D&D, WoW, Warhammer) is already quite far from the tolkienian counterparts. Even O/BD&D elves had more to do with Elric than with Legolas.

mshensley wrote:I would caution against moving the depiction of elves, dwarves, and halflings away from their LoTR counterparts. 99.9% of the fantasy audience expects them to be just like Professor Tolkien wrote.

I think that Joseph's concept of elves already uses non-JRRT elves. Dwarves seem pretty universal overall (except for the Disney "heigh ho" chaps) and most of us see the word "halfling" and mentally replace it with 'Hobbit" anyway.

So, Elves seem to be the biggest issue. I'm not sure that the JRRT version of elves has to be the model in question. There are several Appendix N books that use elves, and most of them seem to gravitate toward the sidhe or fae types. And olther than the "cold iron" thing, Tolkien's Noldor are a lot like the other elves in Appendix N. It's D&D that tends to deviate from the source literature, IMO.

This all sounds good, just extra crazy differences... I have never wanted to play a halfling before, until now. The latest PFRPG halfling book has a prestige class based on luck, so that tickled my fancy too.