Goodman Games

joela wrote:Joseph, is there a particular supp you'd like see covered by fans and 3PP? I'm thinking, for example, psionics would good such supp.

Well, let me put it this way: there are subjects I don't specifically plan on addressing (psionics being one of them), and if there is interest in those subjects, they would certainly be a good candidate for coverage by fans/3PP. Most of the GG support for DCC RPG will be "the basics" (like a DM screen and a dice pack) and then lots of modules.

goodmangames wrote:Most of the GG support for DCC RPG will be "the basics" (like a DM screen and a dice pack) and then lots of modules.

Good, the last thing I want is an encyclopedia set of rulebooks.

mshensley wrote:

goodmangames wrote:Most of the GG support for DCC RPG will be "the basics" (like a DM screen and a dice pack) and then lots of modules.

Good, the last thing I want is an encyclopedia set of rulebooks.

Seconded.

mshensley wrote:

goodmangames wrote:Most of the GG support for DCC RPG will be "the basics" (like a DM screen and a dice pack) and then lots of modules.

Good, the last thing I want is an encyclopedia set of rulebooks.

Also, having only a single rulebook helps ensure that the DCC RPG remains a game based on Appendix N, rather than becoming a self-referential game about itself. Referees will continually find inspiration in Appendix N rather than in Rulebook #9's awesome new Underdark race (or whatever).

Geoffrey wrote:

mshensley wrote:Also, having only a single rulebook helps ensure that the DCC RPG remains a game based on Appendix N, rather than becoming a self-referential game about itself. Referees will continually find inspiration in Appendix N rather than in Rulebook #9's awesome new Underdark race (or whatever).

+1!!

And to add to that... A logical and easy-to-use framework of rules that would lend itself to this type of action. (e.g. in 3E one of the biggest concerns was trying to create your own "Whatever"...there were far too many rule constraints that just ended up making the entire process daunting and frankly, futile.)

mntnjeff wrote:

Geoffrey wrote:

mshensley wrote:Also, having only a single rulebook helps ensure that the DCC RPG remains a game based on Appendix N, rather than becoming a self-referential game about itself. Referees will continually find inspiration in Appendix N rather than in Rulebook #9's awesome new Underdark race (or whatever).

+1!!

And to add to that... A logical and easy-to-use framework of rules that would lend itself to this type of action. (e.g. in 3E one of the biggest concerns was trying to create your own "Whatever"...there were far too many rule constraints that just ended up making the entire process daunting and frankly, futile.)

+2!!!

I totally agree with this. Appendix N covers such a breadth of tone, ideas, outlook and imagery that would fire up the referee's own imagination whereas splatbooks just increasingly define a game until it becomes limited as a rules-based canon develops that cannot hope to encompass all the nuances of the source literature.

geordie racer wrote: And to add to that... A logical and easy-to-use framework of rules that would lend itself to this type of action. (e.g. in 3E one of the biggest concerns was trying to create your own "Whatever"...there were far too many rule constraints that just ended up making the entire process daunting and frankly, futile.)

+2!!!

I totally agree with this. Appendix N covers such a breadth of tone, ideas, outlook and imagery that would fire up the referee's own imagination whereas splatbooks just increasingly define a game until it becomes limited as a rules-based canon develops that cannot hope to encompass all the nuances of the source literature.[/quote]

It'll also be easier to sell to my gaming groups, especially newbies, without having them thrashed by optimized PCs built from dozens of supps.

joela wrote:It'll also be easier to sell to my gaming groups, especially newbies, without having them thrashed by optimized PCs built from dozens of supps.

Or thrashed by other players whose characters are optimized to the Nth degree. In our group, we have about 50% char-opters and 50% not. The ones who aren't tend to feel less effective in play and it really drags on them. I had to learn how to char-op just to keep up because the DM kept throwing more and more difficult monsters our way to "challenge" the party. Mainly because half of them were optimized to the hilt.

I helped the other guys in the group out with their characters. But it's really quite insane.