DCC Level 0 Character Funnel is a Bad Concept

[eyeheartawk]

Got mine from Goodman themselves.

Those are just the Impact Miniatures dice in a different tube sleeve.

They are the most common iteration.

There are also the Zocchi versions, which I prefer. And were the only game in town when I started. If you don't like the shapes of the Goodman/Impact ones try the Zocchi ones as they are differently shaped.

It looks like their D7 is hard to find at the moment though.

 

[Mannahnin]

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.

"Regular" and "normal" are pretty interesting terms here, and I think strongly indicative of the subjective perspective involved, as you've acknowledged but really underscore with these word choices.

Now, I think there is a physical reality informing this aesthetic preference, though. Most of the original polyhedrons are platonic solids, with the exception being the d10. And I've actually seen people object to the d10 on this basis, preferring to use an Icosahedron numbered 1-10 twice, as the original twenty sided dice were.

Of course, Lou Zocchi popularized the d10 we're all used to so long ago that folks who object to its aesthetics at this point are vanishingly rare.

As you've noted, dice are part of the aesthetic and tactile appeal of most RPGs, and they genuinely contribute to the experience. Goodman has indeed made a divisive choice with the DCC dice. Accepting the tradeoff of turning off some folks for the value of enchanting others, evoking that weird, unfamiliar and magical feeling we pretty much ALL had when we first experienced the polyhedrals we NOW view as "regular" and "normal".

 

[Retreater]

Now, I think there is a physical reality informing this aesthetic preference, though. Most of the original polyhedrons are platonic solids, with the exception being the d10. And I've actually seen people object to the d10 on this basis, preferring to use an Icosahedron numbered 1-10 twice, as the original twenty sided dice were.

Thanks for giving me a better vocabulary to use instead of just "bad" and "weird." That explains why they feel "off" to me and my players (and friends group).

 

[Mannahnin]

Thanks for giving me a better vocabulary to use instead of just "bad" and "weird." That explains why they feel "off" to me and my players (and friends group).

Yeah, while I think it's still a matter of personal taste, I can get how the greater symmetry of the platonic solids can make them feel more "normal" to some folks.

Do you have some of the same aesthetic distaste for the d10 / Pentagonal trapezohedron?

 

[payn]

One thing I noticed is that folks often use D&D as their lens for everything. If the game doesn't use standard dice, its instantly going to have detractors. If the game isn't designed to be balanced with modern sensibilities, it wont have longevity. If it strays too far from the trad experience, it isn't a good RPG. On and on.

DCC isnt trying to be D&D, and certainly not trying to beat it. Its ok for games to be niche, bespoke, singular in their RPG experience!

 

[TwoSix]

One thing I noticed is that folks often use D&D as their lens for everything. If the game doesn't use standard dice, its instantly going to have detractors. If the game isn't designed to be balanced with modern sensibilities, it wont have longevity. If it strays too far from the trad experience, it isn't a good RPG. On and on.

DCC isnt trying to be D&D, and certainly not trying to beat it. Its ok for games to be niche, bespoke, singular in their RPG experience!

Eh. I would agree that different and novel is a general good, but that doesn't mean that every flavor of novel and different is equally good.

I like lots of game that aren't D&D, and there are lots of games that aren't like D&D that I don't particularly care for. For DCC in particular, I like quite a bit of what it offers, but some its design decisions like using the non-standard dice hold it back (IMO).

 

[payn]

Eh. I would agree that different and novel is a general good, but that doesn't mean that every flavor of novel and different is equally good.

I like lots of game that aren't D&D, and there are lots of games that aren't like D&D that I don't particularly care for. For DCC in particular, I like quite a bit of what it offers, but some its design decisions like using the non-standard dice hold it back (IMO).

Well, I gotta disagree. I think the no-nstandard dice give it personality and a flair for uniqueness that allows DCC to stand out in a crowd of clones and garden variety RPGs. This idea its "held back" is sort of what im talking about. What exactly should DCC be doing?

 

[TwoSix]

Well, I gotta disagree. I think the no-nstandard dice give it personality and a flair for uniqueness that allows DCC to stand out in a crowd of clones and garden variety RPGs. This idea its "held back" is sort of what im talking about. What exactly should DCC be doing?

Ideally (for me, and this is of course just my personal preferences), it wouldn't have used the oddball dice, and just kept to the usual polyhedral die progression. I don't think they should have used race-as-class either, I would have rather seen then their take on a druid or bard or barbarian, a few of the classic OD&D/AD&D classes.

The strong point that should have been leaned into is the game's overall presentation, some of its innovative class design, the use of Luck as a stat/metagame currency, and its super crazy magic system, which makes just the act of learning and casting spells its own procedurally generated experience.

 

[payn]

Ideally (for me, and this is of course just my personal preferences), it wouldn't have used the oddball dice, and just kept to the usual polyhedral die progression. I don't think they should have used race-as-class either, I would have rather seen then their take on a druid or bard or barbarian, a few of the classic OD&D/AD&D classes.

The strong point that should have been leaned into is the game's overall presentation, some of its innovative class design, the use of Luck as a stat/metagame currency, and its super crazy magic system, which makes just the act of learning and casting spells its own procedurally generated experience.

I understand what you are saying, however, I think it would have had the opposite effect. DCC would be like a thousand other OSR clones and nobody would ever talk about it.

 

[TwoSix]

I understand what you are saying, however, I think it would have had the opposite effect. DCC would be like a thousand other OSR clones and nobody would ever talk about it.

You might be right! All I can speak to is my own anecdotal experience, where some players were interested in trying it out but found the odd dice off-putting enough that we tabled the idea and tried a different system.

And these were players (3 different players!) that were open to new systems, with plenty of OSR-type experience, and liked several other aspects of the system.