Goodman Games

Ok the more I read about this game the more I fall in love with it. It drips atmosphere and I really like what's been done with the rules. I have a few questions.

What's the default setting for DCC, is there going to be one?

When is the hard copy going to be released?

Will DCC be supported by DCC module type adventures?

Thanks

Thane wrote:What's the default setting for DCC, is there going to be one?

Nothing officially announced, but I'm sure it'll be in some take on Aereth. A few centuries ahead or behind in the timeline would be my guest.

When is the hard copy going to be released?

Spring is the official release, but sometime in April is the best guess:
http://www.goodman-games.com/5070preview.html

Will DCC be supported by DCC module type adventures?

Yep, a whole bunch are already announced: http://www.goodman-games.com/dccrpg.html

Good news, thanks

If they do the Aereth rejig, I hope they don't use the grey shade background, made it really difficult to read.

reverenddak wrote:

Thane wrote:

Will DCC be supported by DCC module type adventures?

Yep, a whole bunch are already announced: http://www.goodman-games.com/dccrpg.html

Just want to underscore this last one. We have some *great* adventures coming. I'm really pleased to see how they are turning out.

(And the 3pp releases are looking pretty sweet, too!)

//H

Yup, so far all the noises I'm hearing are very encouraging. I'm old school (whatever that really means) and I've not been so stoked about running a game for a long time.

Hurry up April I say.

I've been running my home campaign using the BETA as my core-rules-set since it was released. Best gaming I've had in a long-long time. I've been pacing the campaign at about 1 level every 10 sessions. I've TPKd the zeroes twice and I've killed about three level-1 characters so far. Some are almost 2nd level now. Other than that, they're doing really awesome. There are enough rules to take them through 5th, and it's compatible enough with OSR, I will never run out of material. Players are mix of newbies (DCC being their first RPG, and some with up to 2e D&D experience, and a couple with tons of 3x & 4e experience. By the time of the Full Release, they should be ready for 2nd level spells and magic items.

Moral of this story, the BETA have been plenty enough rules for over 6 months now.

reverenddak wrote:Players are mix of newbies (DCC being their first RPG, and some with up to 2e D&D experience, and a couple with tons of 3x & 4e experience.

That's a really cool mix of experience. Sounds like a fun bunch.

//H

I've got Paizo's 'Kingmaker' path as well. I'm thinking DCC could fuel that too.

How do you create a character when a character of a current adventuring group dies? I'm assuming you don't create another bunch of '0' levellers.

Thane wrote:How do you create a character when a character of a current adventuring group dies? I'm assuming you don't create another bunch of '0' levellers.

Whatever you and the player feels is fair. I tend to let new characters start at the same level as the lowest level person in the party. Right now everyone is only level-1, and so I give them an option of making a level-1 guy, or 3 zeros. If they choose a level-1, I make them role 3 zeroes, and pick one to be leveled to 1st. The remaining zeroes will become NPCs, that either become innocent victims to slavers, cultists, or sacrifices or can possibly be hired as retainers (I use standard OD&D rules.)

Thane wrote:How do you create a character when a character of a current adventuring group dies? I'm assuming you don't create another bunch of '0' levellers.

Our preferred method is to allow the player to create a new PC with the same experience points of the dead character. The player earned the XP and it keeps the PCs on an even keel.

Ok thanks all

Does rolling for damage follow the exact same rules as 3.x/4.0 or is it tweaked in some/any way?

Thane wrote:Does rolling for damage follow the exact same rules as 3.x/4.0 or is it tweaked in some/any way?

Not sure what you're asking. Long Swords still do 1d8 by default, and Magic Missiles do 1d4+level damage (typically.) It's done exactly as D&D has done it for decades.

Are there plans for a free version of the rules? The two standards seem to be either a no-art PDF or an SRD site (like this one or this one)

Of course I plan to buy the books, but these types of resources are indispensable for getting new players into a new game.

Thanks all for the replies

How does the game handle skills? Magic apart, can anyone try anything or are some skill attempts only available to certain skills? For example, could my Warrior roll to appraise the value of a gem? What would a Dwarf roll if he attempted to bluff a guard? Could a Wizard attempt a tracking roll?

Also, what if the above Dwarf wanted to increase his chances if successfully bluffing? What if he wanted the skill 'Bluff'? How would the game accomodate this?

What classes will be available in the main rules?

Skills are in page 52-53 in the BETA rules. They done ad-hoc. There arent any formal skills like in 3x-4e. They're basically just d20 style ability checks, -4 if the task is unrelated to your character's background. DC 10 is the base, 15 if the task is tough and DC 20 if the task is really hard. Personally I do it slightly different and I add character level if the task is related to their class. In general, you do it old-school style, you try to role-play non combat encounters.

There's a philosophy being applied here that is hard to explain on paper that some old-schoolers take for granted, and it's really way beyond the scope of a forum reply. To answer those specific questions, it'll all depend on character background or occupation. If the Warrior's former occupation wasn't a jeweler or something related, like a merchant, then the warrior would probably get a -4. Bluffing is lying, and not related to an occupation, so I'd take in consider alignment. I'd give the dwarf a -4 if he was Lawful, but your milage may vary. Not everyone will agree with specifics. To improve the dwarf's bluff? Let them add their level if they make a career of lying, or increase their Personality/Charisma when they have an opportunity. Again, this emphasizes that there aren't any formal skills systems except for the thief.

Warrior, Wizard, Cleric, Thief, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling.

Have you seen the rules at all? I don't want to come off mean, but these questions could have been answered if you read the BETA rules. You really should download the BETA, it's free.

reverenddak wrote:Skills are in page 52-53 in the BETA rules. They done ad-hoc. There arent any formal skills like in 3x-4e. They're basically just d20 style ability checks, -4 if the task is unrelated to your character's background. DC 10 is the base, 15 if the task is tough and DC 20 if the task is really hard. Personally I do it slightly different and I add character level if the task is related to their class. In general, you do it old-school style, you try to role-play non combat encounters.

There's a philosophy being applied here that is hard to explain on paper that some old-schoolers take for granted, and it's really way beyond the scope of a forum reply. To answer those specific questions, it'll all depend on character background or occupation. If the Warrior's former occupation wasn't a jeweler or something related, like a merchant, then the warrior would probably get a -4. Bluffing is lying, and not related to an occupation, so I'd take in consider alignment. I'd give the dwarf a -4 if he was Lawful, but your milage may vary. Not everyone will agree with specifics. To improve the dwarf's bluff? Let them add their level if they make a career of lying, or increase their Personality/Charisma when they have an opportunity. Again, this emphasizes that there aren't any formal skills systems except for the thief.

Warrior, Wizard, Cleric, Thief, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling.

Have you seen the rules at all? I don't want to come off mean, but these questions could have been answered if you read the BETA rules. You really should download the BETA, it's free.

Yes I've got the Beta rules but they didn't answer my questions. For example, they didn't tell me if a 'Ranger' might be included in the full rules. Also, with it being a Beta, there may have been a more detailed skill system in the main rules.

Thanks for clarifying though

That's cool. Also note that I don't have the full rules either. And those with them aren't allowed to disclose any specifics. But im pretty sure Skills arent going change and neither will the Classes. On that note, it's looking like 5e is going the same direction with loose skill checks, or as they really should be called, Ability Checks.

Ok thanks for the heads up

Why did they leave out the Ranger class?

Thane wrote:Why did they leave out the Ranger class?

You're looking at it backwards. It's not a matter of "leaving out" the ranger, illusionist, bard, paladin, monk, etc, classes.

1. It's a "back to the basics" type reboot. Let's go back to the roots of the game and tweak the flavor a little. Back in the early days there weren't so many classes to pick from, so if you wanted to be a ranger (for example) you would be a fighter and act like a ranger. The game was more about attitude than bonuses.

2. Goodman Games is encouraging 3PP to create optional add-on races, classes, and so on for folks who like them. I would anticipate someone coming up with variants for most of the AD&D classes in the near future. Heck, many of them are probably done and just waiting for the rulebook to be released.

3. Just because there isn't a ranger class doesn't mean you can't say "hmmm ... now what do I think a ranger should be able to do...?" and make one that fits your own campaign. There just isn't a "standard" ranger for everyone to defalut to and part of the rationalle here is that ranger is somewhat campaign specific (Tolkien) whereas fighter would be more universal.

Remember: DCC is about expanding your imagination, not artificial limits to the game. If you like an element that isn't in the rules, put it in!

Thanks for that finarvyn

Very old school, I like it

Now to do away with the thief and cleric

It's easy enough to ignore those two classes, but I suggest you give them a shot. The cleric feels a lot different in this game than the tradition Medieval Christian "cleric" with crosses and maces. They don't have a those restrictions, and when Disapproval comes into play (and it does frequently) it really feels like the cleric is dealing with a higher being, and healing becomes a lot less certain and scary. The thief feels like a thief from Conan (I just read The Tower of the Elephant) and really feel like specialists & sneaks, unlike the more forward Warrior who wants to bust down doors and heads. DCC really encourages you to play up the iconic classes and add whatever flavor you want.

There's an Elven Forester in my party, she's the Ranger. And there's a Nobel Warrior whose undoubtedly the knight.

This style of play, though not for everyone, works so well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm old school through and through. I first 'delved' 31 years ago (mad!). It's going to be a refreshing change to 3.X.

I'd say this though is required reading: Old School

Heartily recommended.