DCC game announcement - the non-retro-clone retro-game?
Edit: So this post got nuked when I was editing some posts to play around with the templates. I think I need to look into how to archive a blog. Sorry all!
Here was the gist:
In the meantime, I've had the chance to visit the discussion board over there a few times and see that they've got some pretty interesting ideas for the magic system; although it won't be a retroclone, I think this game will be super interesting to check out, especially in light of my own Appendix N reading goals this year.
- Goodman Games is publishing a game inspired by Pulp Fantasy
- They're claiming the game won't be compatible with D&D or the retro-clones
- That made my head explode
Incompatible? Doubt it.ReplyDelete
Basically, any fantasy RPG using 20-sided dice that has lots of fighting and monsters built into it is going to be compatible enough with other FRPGs that any DM sufficiently -into- the hobby to be even using this off-brand system to begin with will be able to convert in seconds.
I mostly agree - I could take any 3x or 4E product and run it on the fly in an older game; I probably couldn't run an older module in 3x or 4E without effort.ReplyDelete
But I find it interesting that this publisher is staking their product identity on compatibility with the OGL and disavowing the old games.
Why would someone do that?
Thanks for taking the time to check out Joseph's post. Zak has the right of it, regarding compatibility. (I'm running a playtest right now with the DCC RPG rules and B2, which is yielding interesting results.)
But re: Disavowing the old games. My time at Goodman Games has largely been about trying to capture the joy and sense of adventure I felt when I was a kid playing D&D. So many of the adventures I've written are in homage of the classics. (Into the Wilds being the most obvious.)
The DCC RPG breaks from this mindset in that it isn't trying to imitate old school D&D. We have OD&D, BECMI, and AD&D and they all do their job very well.
Rather, the DCC RPG goes back to the source texts that informed D&D (ala Appendix N) and builds a game out of those sensibilities.
I know it is a subtle nuance, but the DCC RPG is a d20 game based on Appendix N, rather than a d20 game based on old school D&D.
Hopefully this will be borne out once the beta rules are released.
Usinf the rules of 3.x -.5 and doing things a little different sounds like a better idea to me than competing with Paizo over D&D 3.x and a whole bunch of free (or darned inexpensive) RPGs.ReplyDelete
I'm re-reading Appendix N type books myself, right now, filling in some gaps in my 'education' - it seems to be going around.
From that perspective, the DCC game is *very* intriguing - I'll look forward to the open playtest and seeing how you guys have improved on the perfection that is Moldvay basic...
Okay, tongue is in cheek - that's not meant to be snarky. I saw that there will be race-as-class in DCC rpg, and that made me smile.
:) And that's the rub. I don't think we can out-Moldvay Moldvay. But I do think we can hew closer to Appendix N.ReplyDelete
I'm sure the feedback from the open playtest will be loud and opinionated. At the very least, we'll be told where we went astray. :)
I'll get some thoughts over on the GG forums - to me, the D&D magic system is a big disconnect from guys like Lovecraft, or REH, or Clark Ashton Smith. Those works call for rituals and sorcery and demon summoning.ReplyDelete
Where did Shield spells and magic missiles and lightning bolts come from, anyway? Doctor Strange comics?
To be fair, I haven't read the Harold Shea stories (yet).
Don't get me started on the cleric.
"But I find it interesting that this publisher is staking their product identity on compatibility with the OGL and disavowing the old games.ReplyDelete
Why would someone do that?"
I don't think they are disavowing the old games, just re-platforming some rules.
Like they said, they'd do it to leverage all the d20 and SRD stuff out there while simplifying 'the game' so it plays more like old school. Heck I'm doing it too.