Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
research:dcc [2025/06/08 15:56] – Ron Helwigresearch:dcc [2025/06/22 16:39] (current) – Ron Helwig
Line 1: Line 1:
-Here's my thoughts on the notable features of Dungeon Crawl Classics (DCC).+# Dungeon Crawl Classics (DCC)
  
-====== The Good ======+Here are my thoughts on the notable features of *Dungeon Crawl Classics*.
  
-===== Spell Check Rolls ===== +## The Good
-Having an alternative to Vancian spell slots is a good idea. You have spells you know, and you roll a D20 test. If it succeeds you look up the result in the spell's description. The better the roll, the cooler the result, which is a nice idea but makes the spell descriptions larger than seems wise. And a roll that is too poor can result in that spell not being available until the next day or a long rest has been taken.+
  
-I think something like this, properly modified, could be a good choice for a type of magic that a character could have as an option; alongside 5e Warlock Pact Slots, 5e Wizard-like Vancian slots, and Sorcery/Spell/Mana points.+### Spell Check Rolls
  
-====== The Bad ======+Replacing Vancian spell slots with a **spell check roll** is a great idea.
  
-===== Too many dice ===== +- You cast spells by rolling a d20. 
-The idea of moving dice size up and down seems pretty cool, but many players already have a hard time selecting the right die from the standard D&D dice set. Confusing a D10 and a D12 happens all the time in my experience. Adding a D16, D24, or a D30 has got to cause more confusion, slowing down the game as players have to more carefully search through their dice to find the correct one.+- The higher the result, the **cooler** the effect. 
 +- A poor roll may prevent reuse of that spell until a rest.
  
-===== Randomizing Character Creation ===== +This creates an engaging tension and flexibility that’s absent from rigid slot systems. The downside is that spell descriptions become **longer and more complex** due to needing results for multiple thresholds.
-This is probably fine for experienced players who know their game inside  out, but for newer players it just means they won't get to play what they desire. That means they won't learn it as well, nor will they enjoy it as much when their character isn't the one they were envisioning.+
  
-===== Classes ===== +Still, this could be a great foundation for a modular magic system. It might even work alongside: 
-First, mixing classes and races together is just dumb. It is very racist to assume that all members of a race are the same.+ 
 +- **Pact Slots** (like Warlocks) 
 +- **Vancian prep slots** (like Wizards) 
 +- **Mana/Spell points** (like Sorcerers) 
 + 
 +Multiple casting styles can give players more narrative and tactical freedom. 
 + 
 +### Zero-Level Characters 
 + 
 +I’ve always liked the idea of **zero-level characters**. 
 + 
 +- Lets players **roleplay the transition** into adventuring life 
 +- Supports stories like: 
 +  - Calling on a patron and gaining Warlock powers 
 +  - Earning knighthood after a village defense 
 +- Makes growth feel **earned and personal** 
 + 
 +It’s an excellent character arc mechanic that enriches low-level play. 
 + 
 +## The Bad 
 + 
 +### Too Many Dice 
 + 
 +DCC’s dice chain system introduces dice like d16, d24, and d30. While conceptually cool, it’s often a **practical problem**. 
 + 
 +- Even standard dice (d10 vs. d12) are frequently confused by players. 
 +- Adding more types slows things down, especially during combat. 
 + 
 +Most groups will find the novelty wears off quickly when **clarity and speed suffer**. 
 + 
 +### Randomized Character Creation 
 + 
 +This might be fun for **experienced players** who already know what they like. 
 + 
 +But for new players: 
 +- It removes the ability to **create the character they envisioned** 
 +- Leads to less investment and **weaker learning curves** 
 +- Feels arbitrary and potentially frustrating 
 + 
 +Freedom in character creation is important for both learning and enjoyment. 
 + 
 +### The Funnel 
 + 
 +The idea of running **multiple zero-level characters** and keeping only the survivor is interesting—but problematic. 
 + 
 +Issues include: 
 + 
 +- **No guarantee** the survivor is one the player enjoys 
 +- Running several characters is **too demanding** for new or younger players 
 +- May result in early disinterest if the “fun” character dies right away 
 + 
 +It’s a cool concept in theory but not ideal for broad or casual audiences. 
 + 
 +### Classes (and Race-Class Blending) 
 + 
 +DCC blends race and class (e.g., "Elf" is a class). This is both **problematic and reductive**. 
 + 
 +- It implies **all members of a species are the same** 
 +- Limits player expression by forcing identity into narrow archetypes 
 + 
 +More broadly, the existence of rigid classes itself is limiting. No finite list of classes can represent all player concepts. That’s why classless or hybrid systems are worth exploring. 
 + 
 +### Too Many Tables 
 + 
 +Random tables are great for GMs: 
 + 
 +- Spark creativity 
 +- Provide inspiration 
 + 
 +But when **core gameplay** relies on constant table lookups, it becomes: 
 + 
 +- Slower 
 +- Less immersive 
 +- More about crunch than story 
 + 
 +Tables should **support the game**, not dominate the play experience.
  
-Second, classes are too limiting. I've written about this before, and that is the heart of the reason why I am even exploring alternative systems and desiring to create my own system. But the short explanation is that no finite set of classes can encompass all the character ideas that players might want, which leads to endless homebrewing.