Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
research:dcc [2025/06/18 20:31] – Ron Helwig | research:dcc [2025/06/22 16:39] (current) – Ron Helwig | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ====== | + | # Dungeon Crawl Classics |
- | Here' | + | Here are my thoughts on the notable features of *Dungeon Crawl Classics*. |
- | ===== The Good ===== | + | ## The Good |
- | ==== Spell Check Rolls ==== | + | ### Spell Check Rolls |
- | 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' | + | |
- | 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/ | + | Replacing Vancian spell slots with a **spell check roll** is a great idea. |
- | ==== Zero level characters ==== | + | - You cast spells by rolling a d20. |
- | I have long been a fan of zero level characters, which allows you to role-play the character' | + | - The higher |
+ | - A poor roll may prevent reuse of that spell until a rest. | ||
- | ===== The Bad ===== | + | This creates an engaging tension and flexibility that’s absent from rigid slot systems. |
- | ==== Too many dice ==== | + | Still, this could be a great foundation for a modular magic system. It might even work alongside: |
- | 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 | + | |
- | ==== Randomizing Character Creation ==== | + | - **Pact Slots** (like Warlocks) |
- | This is probably fine for experienced players who know their game inside | + | - **Vancian prep slots** (like Wizards) |
+ | - **Mana/ | ||
- | ==== The Funnel ==== | + | Multiple casting styles can give players more narrative |
- | Along with randomized character generation, playing several zero-level characters | + | |
- | First is that, just like with randomized creation, there is no way to ensure that the player gets a character that they like. Even if the randomization process makes one they do like enough to play long term, there' | + | ### Zero-Level Characters |
- | And secondly, unless they are an experienced player, having them run more than one character is too demanding for many players. | + | I’ve always liked the idea of **zero-level characters**. |
- | ==== Classes ==== | + | - Lets players **roleplay the transition** into adventuring life |
- | First, mixing classes | + | - Supports stories like: |
+ | - Calling on a patron | ||
+ | - Earning knighthood after a village defense | ||
+ | - Makes growth feel **earned and personal** | ||
- | Second, classes | + | 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 | ||
+ | |||
+ | ### Randomized Character Creation | ||
+ | |||
+ | This might be fun for **experienced players** who already know what they like. | ||
+ | |||
+ | But for new players: | ||
+ | - It removes | ||
+ | - 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., " | ||
+ | |||
+ | - 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 | ||
+ | |||
+ | ### 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 | ||
- | ==== Too Many Tables ==== | ||
- | Game masters find a lot of value in tables that allow them to randomly determine all kinds of things, and they also enjoy simply seeing a variety of options they can choose from or use to inspire them. But when playing the game requires making a bunch of table lookups just to handle routine actions, that slows things down and takes players minds out of the story and into mechanics. |