DCC Level 0 Character Funnel is a Bad Concept

[Swanosaurus]

I looked at it, but it was a little too lightweight for me. OSR/NSR style games tend to feature the idea of diegetic progression much more so than most other games, but they generally shy away from the medium complexity and player authority over starting character concept that I'm looking for.

Really sounds a lot like BRP to me, where progression usually is pretty much all diegetic (go into a temple and pay to learn a spell, raise skills if you use them or pay a teacher ...).

 

[overgeeked]

I looked at it, but it was a little too lightweight for me. OSR/NSR style games tend to feature the idea of diegetic progression much more so than most other games, but they generally shy away from the medium complexity and player authority over starting character concept that I'm looking for.

That’s too bad. How you’re describing character build options and progression is almost exactly how Index Card RPG characters work.

 

[Retreater]

I am confused... People have no qualm whatsoever about buying dice sets by the bucket, until they are funky that is. Then, suddenly its like that 12 dollar dice set is asking them to take out a second mortgage.

If they're like me, it's not about the cost. It's about the design.
First, they're gross. They look nasty, imbalanced, and cheap.
Second, they're confusing. Many of the dice look close to existing dice. (The d16 and d24 look almost like a d20.)
Third, they're basically unnecessary. Mathematically, what's the point of a d5 when you have a d4? A d7 when you have a d8? Is the mathematic probability changes important enough for the added complexity?
Fourth, some of them just roll badly. The edges are too smooth or too small. Some of them roll clear across the gaming table, don't stop on a good edge.

 

[CapnZapp]

I am confused... People have no qualm whatsoever about buying dice sets by the bucket, until they are funky that is. Then, suddenly its like that 12 dollar dice set is asking them to take out a second mortgage.

People that like dice will be buying dice. Yes, in the context of having a collector hobby dice is pretty cheap.

But I'm not assuming every prospective DCC customer is in this mindset.

Instead, this game had the, I'm asserting, questionable idea to (more or less) ask everyone to be like a dice hoarder. At least if you're like many gamers that want physical dice and will not stand for replacements.

I'm questioning the soundness of the idea to add wholly unique dice to just one specific D&D clone game. I'm postulating that the way these dice makes DCC stand out from the crowd (good) is overshadowed by the way having to bother with extra unique dice just for this specific game makes prospective customers go elsewhere (not good).

I trust this clears up the confusion!

 

[CapnZapp]

I looked at it, but it was a little too lightweight for me. OSR/NSR style games tend to feature the idea of diegetic progression much more so than most other games, but they generally shy away from the medium complexity and player authority over starting character concept that I'm looking for.

This, yes.

Part of the attraction of D&D is that you get to engage with your character's build. Light-weight D&D clones lose most of this - there just isn't much to do (build-wise) after initial chargen.

Of course, the question (as stated earlier) then becomes: how to reconcile the "OSR want" with the players' natural inclination to protect that investment?

The more hours you spend on minmaxing your hero, the less attractive it becomes to play a game where this effort can be lost. On the other hand, the more hours you spend on minmaxing your hero, the more exposure you get to this corroding and destructive influence we call "player entitlement", where you start to treat NPCs as just pawns there to further your power trip, and where you forget that the primary reason to come together to play is to weave a common story - the primary reason is not to grant you the power-ups you so clearly "deserve", not because you actually put your hero's life on the line, but merely for showing up and collating your bonuses.

 

[CapnZapp]

If they're like me, it's not about the cost. It's about the design.
First, they're gross. They look nasty, imbalanced, and cheap.
Second, they're confusing. Many of the dice look close to existing dice. (The d16 and d24 look almost like a d20.)
Third, they're basically unnecessary. Mathematically, what's the point of a d5 when you have a d4? A d7 when you have a d8? Is the mathematic probability changes important enough for the added complexity?
Fourth, some of them just roll badly. The edges are too smooth or too small. Some of them roll clear across the gaming table, don't stop on a good edge.

There's a common theme going through this discussion thread, already from your initial post. And that is your inability to discern your personal experience from objective fact. Over and over again, you fail to make it clear you're taking about your experiences, and here, your crappy dice.

I don't know what dice you purchased. I purchased dice that looks just fine. I opted for readability so no fancy colours. Yes, the d14 and d16 aren't immediately obvious, but since I bought two sets, the solution was obvious: use the white d14 with the red set, and the red d14 with the white set.

tl;dr: Goodman sells DCC dice that I would say are average or perhaps even above average. They are not gross. They are not nasty. They roll well, or rather, they roll as well as can be expected for their shape.

There absolutely are gross and nasty dice out there, and in fact one of my friends purchased some garbage dice (containing the odd shapes required by DCC) from a supposedly reputable outlet. Perhaps the solution here is don't buy your dice where Retreater buys his?

 

[CapnZapp]

Let me know if you ever find it. I've also been looking for years for a game that marries deep, customizable character generation with random, diegetic progression and OSR sandbox exploration, and it simply does not exist, as far as I can tell.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of OSR fans appear to not be super interested in game development.

DCC for instance. Lots and lots of creativity and writer's joy and pure gaming passion. Much, much less of the analytical, "boring", part - the thorough play-testing and rebalancing, the repeated editing passes, the killing of darlings, the standardization of terminology. In fact, some at Goodman (and their forums) appeared to be proud of badly written, ambiguous, ill-defined rules.

I know plenty of gamers don't want to hear this, but I'm convinced a large part of D&Ds success is because WotC writes games to a level of quality that very few other publishers can even come close to matching.

Many OSR games substitute quality with "metal" awesomeness. The OSR scene is basically amateur hour in comparison to the PHB, although there are exceptions. (Exceptions that don't cater to my needs, but exceptions nonetheless).

 

[CapnZapp]

Really sounds a lot like BRP to me, where progression usually is pretty much all diegetic (go into a temple and pay to learn a spell, raise skills if you use them or pay a teacher ...).

I've played a lot of BRP (the Swedish rpg scene basically started from BRP) and it definitely is a functional game foundation.

Except there is no structure to guide (and restrict) your experience. Part of the allure of D&D is that the limitations on how you progress makes for interesting choices.

Skill-based games (that is, rpgs where your character identity is defined by what collection of skills you're good at more than your class or archetype identity) usually just say "here are the skills, how you combine them as you gain more experience is entirely up to you and maybe your GM". Basically, nothing prevents you from just picking the skills you perceive you have the most use for, except your own sense of what feels right for your character.

There's nothing equivalent to the concepts of, say, "you need to be 9th level to learn this" or "if you learn this you can't also learn that". Concepts that are restrictions. Restrictions that provide welcome texture to your character progression. D&D provides lots of such texture. And many "light-weight" clones are not interesting to me precisely because they shed this texture.

For example, WFRP added a convoluted net of which "career" leads to what other careers. This didn't just add an element of "building skill", it also enforced semi-realistic restrictions on what social progression you could expect living in a faux-historical Renaissance-ish European country. But it definitely made the aspect of charbuild more fun and engaging.

 

[Lanefan]

If they're like me, it's not about the cost. It's about the design.
First, they're gross. They look nasty, imbalanced, and cheap.

If you want balanced dice, get them from Zocchi...though I'm not sure he makes all the DCC sizes.

Second, they're confusing. Many of the dice look close to existing dice. (The d16 and d24 look almost like a d20.)

The ones I've seen don't look like a d20 but they do look like each other, and a bit like a d10.

Third, they're basically unnecessary. Mathematically, what's the point of a d5 when you have a d4? A d7 when you have a d8? Is the mathematic probability changes important enough for the added complexity?

Here I'd have to say yes; and D&D could take some notes here where more varieties of small ranges are required. Having d5 and d7 and d9 as options for weapon damage, for example, is great to help differentiate weapons...though I don't bother with the fancy dice themselves, instead just rolling the next size up and rerolling the highest number if I have to.

Fourth, some of them just roll badly. The edges are too smooth or too small. Some of them roll clear across the gaming table, don't stop on a good edge.

So, just like d12s then. Nothing new there.

 

[Retreater]

There absolutely are gross and nasty dice out there, and in fact one of my friends purchased some garbage dice (containing the odd shapes required by DCC) from a supposedly reputable outlet. Perhaps the solution here is don't buy your dice where Retreater buys his?

Got mine from Goodman themselves.
And yes, it's purely subjective. I don't like the dice. They seem off-putting and gross to me.
Regular dice are basically normal shapes - these are weird and look misprinted. I've not met anyone in person who thinks they look good, roll normally, etc.
Rolling physical dice is one of the most important tactile parts of in-person gaming. If that feels weird or unsatisfying, it's not good for the game experience.
However, I know it's something I can get around. I can "get over it" or use an app.
Other stuff with the system, I'm unsure about that