Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 9352007" data-attributes="member: 12731">I just wish they didn't go all out with the mechanical explosion of details.They wanted magic to be less predictable than in D&amp;D. Fine.But changing EVERY parameter, for all spells, for all castings? Buries all the fun under a mountain of niggling detail <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />If you're okay with the game coming to a complete stop each and every time the caster character decides to cast a spell, and the player desperatedly tries to make heads and tails over which options are actually useful to cast... actively helping the party more than it hinders (or melts!) them......unfortunately our wizard players ended up not casting spells much at all, which is definitely not the definition of &quot;magical and scary&quot; I hoped to get out of the system.In short, rational-minded math-savvy players simply couldn't make DCC spells work, because they realized the rational case in almost every case is NOT to cast the spell. I got quoted Wargames to my face as the explanation why my Wizard player didn't seem to enjoy himself or his character.I would absolutely love a 2nd edition of DCC where they specifically rein in the variables of spellcasting. Adding some kind of skill check where spells in D&amp;D succeed automatically? Yes, please! Randomizing two dimensions where D&amp;D randomizes only damage? Absolutely! Three? Okay, but is that really necessary...? FOUR? No, please stop...ALL OF THEM WITH A UNIQUE HIGHLY CHAOTIC AND IMPOSSIBLE TO LEARN BY HEART TABLE FOR EVERY SINGLE SPELL!!?? Get outta here... (we had to go back to 5E to &quot;cleanse the palate&quot; as it were...)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 9352007, member: 12731"] I just wish they didn't go all out with the mechanical explosion of details. They wanted magic to be less predictable than in D&D. Fine. But changing EVERY parameter, for all spells, for all castings? Buries all the fun under a mountain of niggling detail :( If you're okay with the game coming to a complete stop each and every time the caster character decides to cast a spell, and the player desperatedly tries to make heads and tails over which options are [I]actually useful[/I] to cast... actively helping the party more than it hinders (or melts!) them... ...unfortunately our wizard players ended up not casting spells much at all, which is definitely not the definition of "magical and scary" I hoped to get out of the system. In short, rational-minded math-savvy players simply couldn't make DCC spells work, because they realized the rational case in almost every case is NOT to cast the spell. I got quoted [I]Wargames[/I] to my face as the explanation why my Wizard player didn't seem to enjoy himself or his character. I would absolutely love a 2nd edition of DCC where they specifically rein in the variables of spellcasting. Adding some kind of skill check where spells in D&D succeed automatically? Yes, please! Randomizing two dimensions where D&D randomizes only damage? Absolutely! Three? Okay, but is that really necessary...? FOUR? No, please stop... ALL OF THEM WITH A UNIQUE HIGHLY CHAOTIC AND IMPOSSIBLE TO LEARN BY HEART TABLE FOR EVERY SINGLE SPELL!!?? Get outta here... (we had to go back to 5E to "cleanse the palate" as it were...) [/QUOTE]

Verification