How does the DCC RPG compare to OD&D?

[archersix]

This is really groovy. So, since I'm really not familiar with DCC, how close is it to OD&D?

[Red Baron]

Not at all.

[Finarvyn]

Jul 31, 2015 18:29:00 GMT -6 archersix said:

This is really groovy. So, since I'm really not familiar with DCC, how close is it to OD&D?

Jul 31, 2015 19:46:57 GMT -6 Red Baron said:

Not at all.

Sort of a vague response to an honest question, so I'll say a bit about DCC.

DCC RPG is built off of the 3E SRD, which is to say that its origins are based in part on 3E, but Goodman Games' premise is that they wanted to "go back to 1974" and use updated mechanics to see how OD&D "might have been written" had it been based more strongly on the literature listed in Gygax's Appendix N of the AD&D DMG. So it's kind of an alternate universe D&D.

You have the same six stats in DCC, although a few of them are named differently. You have base classes similar to OD&D, although a few of them are racial (elf, dwarf, halflling) a la B/X D&D. You have levels and hit dice and AC and other elements very similar to OD&D, or in the case of AC more like some of the clones which use ascending AC instead of descending. There are no skills. Monster stat blocks are relatively short. Most of the base elements of DCC and OD&D are similar enough where hopping back and forth in conversion isn't so hard at all. (At least, I've used some DCC modules in my OD&D campaigns and haven't had much problem with it.)

So where do they differ? Magic is the biggie. As you know, OD&D uses a spell system where you have a select number of spells at a given level. In DCC you can cast as many spells as you like, but you have to roll for each of them and if you fail then bad things happen. Spellcasters can have Patrons, like Elric or Fafhrd or the Mouser had. Another difference is that a level in DCC is a bigger jump in power than a level in OD&D, but that never bothered me because I don't get all hung up on that kind of thing much. (My rule of thumb is that two OD&D levels is roughly one DCC level.) Also, part of the Goodman Games concept is that there shouldn't be "just another orc" or similar monsters, but instead that monsters ought to be unusual and unique, so the modules tend to have all sorts of wacky critters in them instead of the traditional ones you see in monster books.

I think that philosophically they are similar, even if there are some mechanical differences. Each is sort of a free-wheeling game system that encourages players to be innovative and think outseide the box rather than looking at skills on a list. The DCC modules are short, well written, and the artwork rocks! They remind me a lot of the old monochrome D&D modules but with cool maps and neat imagery.

Now, what we really don't know is how this will translate to DCC Lankhmar. As you can surmise, DCC Lankhmar will have to be based at least somewhat on Leiber's Lankhmar so some of the wackiness may be altered. Goodman Games has been a little vague so far on how some of the elements of DCC will be blended with Lankhmar so we'll be guessing, but the two products they have released so far have been awesome in terms of content and presentation. I have very high hopes for the whole product line.

Does that help?

[waysoftheearth]

The DCC RPG appears to be available in a 480 page hardcover edition for $39.99.


edit: Not sure how up to date it is, but there is also a 168 page PDF (a public beta from June, 2011) available here.

And also a 58 page PDF of reference tables (August 2014) here.

[Red Baron]

I see them as mechanically very different, but attempting to recapture a ad&d gygax wierd-fun vibe.

The modules are thematically cool and play as arcade hack&slash. Their stat blocks are stupidly long, and take a second to fully grasp and translate in your head from 3e mumbo-jumbo.

For example, mummified toads are an awesome idea which I'm definitely stealing

Mummified Toads (2): Init +1; Atk bite +3 (dmg 1d6+2) or tongue choke +5 ranged (1d4/2d4/3d4/etc., 15’ range); AC 13; HD 8d12+8; HP 60 each; MV 20’ or hop 30’; Act 1d20; SP damage reduction 5, toad mummy rot (DC 12 Fort save or take 1 Personality damage each day), vulnerable to fire, un-dead traits; SV Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +10; AL C.

to

Mummified Toads [AL C; MV 6", 9" hop; HD 8; AC 7; D 1d6 bite; SP 3" tongue choke, mummy rot, undead, vulnerable to fire.]

[archersix]

Thanks for the explanation Finn. Sounds like it could be fun to play, but I don't think I'd want to run it personally(480pg rulebook!!)


Will definitely have to check out some of this new Lankhmar goodness. And those Mummy Toads sound fun.

[Finarvyn]

Aug 1, 2015 19:29:15 GMT -6 archersix said:

Thanks for the explanation Finn. Sounds like it could be fun to play, but I don't think I'd want to run it personally(480pg rulebook!!)

Glad to help. By the way, the 480 page rulebook is a little misleading. Most of that is spells, since each spell has its own casting chart and takes up a page or more of the rulebook. And artwork. The book is full of all sorts of awesome B&W artwork.

Intro and how DCC RPG is different from 3E. (1 page)
Character creation steps and character creation funnel (1 page)
Funky dice and the dice chain (1 page)
Ability scores and saving throws (3 pages))
Zero level and Occupation (1 page text, 2 page table)

Cleric class (4 pages plus examples of gods)
Thief class (4 pages, plus 1 page table of skill percentages)
Warrior class (2.5 pages)
Wizard class (2.5 pages)
Dwarf class (2.5 pages)
Elf class (2.5 pages)
Halfling class (2 pages)

Combat (roughly 3 pages, plus 7 pages of critical and fumble charts)
Mighty Deeda -- fighter "feats" (5 pages)
Magic and spellburn (3 pages)
Wizard corruption and Diety disapproval (6 pages of charts)

That's around 9 pages of intro, 20 pages of class stuff, 24 pages of combat and magic rules (mostly charts, not rules). You get the idea: lots of pages of rulebook but not many actual rules to learn.

So, what else is there? Spell charts begin on page 127 and run through page 303 (That's 177 pages, or roughly a third of the rulebook!) Supernatural patrons begin on page 320 and run through page 356 (37 pages). Magic items go from 364 to 375, and are mostly charts. Monsters go from 378 to 434 (57 pages). Two sample adventures span 452 to 460 (8 pages).

Honestly, if you removed all of the artwork, used a single crit table for everyone, and came up with a universal spell results table, this rulebook would be pretty thin.

[waysoftheearth]

Shouldn't the publisher do that for us?

177 pages of spells is outta control! M&M does what many consider to be a fine job in around 10 digest-sized pages.

[kesher]

Well, to be fair, DCC's aim with the spells is completely different than ODD's. It's pretty much apples and oranges...

[Lorgalis]

DCC nearly begs the reader/DM to DIY. It presents the reader with a clear template/snapshot and basically says go ahead make it your own.

I think the upfront time and effort investment for a DCC DM can be very high if they go about creating patrons and spells but the game plays fast and many find the zero to hero trope it embraces to be highly entertaining.

[Finarvyn]

Aug 2, 2015 8:47:36 GMT -6 kesher said:

Well, to be fair, DCC's aim with the spells is completely different than ODD's. It's pretty much apples and oranges...

Agreed. DCC wants each spell to be as unique as possible, so they have an individual spell effects chart for each spell.

My point with the 177 pages of spells was mostly to make sure that folks realized that there aren't as many rules as you'd think. What I do is print off only the spell pages that a particular character needs so they don't have to thumb through pages and pages to find the effects of a particular spell. In effect, each wizard creates his own spell book for play purposes.

[kesher]

THAT is an awesome idea...

[Zenopus]

I've played the DCC RPG twice at local mini-cons. Each time it was a 0-level funnel, four characters each, and it was a blast. At that level there are no spells which keeps it very simple, OD&D-esque. The character sheets we used were about 2 by 4 inches in size. Each 0-level character has basically one piece of equipment and maybe one weapon. And each character has a background like Turnip Farmer, etc that encourages role-playing.

I recently bought the rulebook and it has *so much* awesome artwork, both by Doug Kovacs who does their module covers and by former TSR artists like Roslof and Easley.
I believe it's the thickest rulebook I've ever owned.

[kesher]

Yeah I just played through my first funnel, too, helping play-test an adventure to be run at Gen Con. It really was fun--like mentioned, when I got handed an urchin with a begging bowl and a stick, well, I became immediately invested in seeing what sort of adventurer he might become...

[cadriel]

I've also played DCC at conventions, mostly in funnels. I kind of agree with the assertion that it doesn't compare much to OD&D.

DCC is an odd duck. At its core, it's a light version of the D20 system (D&D 3e), with some simplifications (race as class, bell curve instead of linear stats) borrowed from B/X D&D. It's bulky mostly by accretion: it adds on critical hits, arcane duels, spellcasting tables, patrons – all kinds of crunchy bits intended to change the flow of the game.

The end result talks about "1974" and "Appendix N" a lot, but it's .... well, it's got several things going on. First, aesthetically it's really a cross between early first edition AD&D and old Warhammer Fantasy, taken to eleven with a heavy hand on the "weird" factor. The whole thing about starting off at level 0 and becoming a hero later is fun, but it's much more Warhammer than anything we find in Gygax's Appendix N. And with its predilection for lots of charts atop a straightforward system it has more than a touch of Rolemaster to it.

Second, Appendix N tends to make it into DCC in weird ways. DCC is no stripped-down Conan, or high fantasy Tolkien. It tends to steal elements from authors like Dunsany or Moorcock and then adapt them to its aesthetic. Peril on the Purple Planet, a recent sword-and-planet adventure/setting, is to me a great example of this. No way would you ever mistake it for ERB's Mars, but you can tell where the inspiration came from.

I guess the best way to explain it is that DCC uses nostalgia to rope gamers in, and then encourages them to go over-the-top and have gonzo fun adventures with it. If OD&D was aimed at wargamers in Minnesota and Wisconsin who literally had nothing to do (outside of school or work) for months on end and tons of time to create and play, DCC is aimed at somewhat older (I'd say over-30) gamers with disposable income* and a chunk of nostalgia for AD&D, but limited time for play and prep. It's very much a "make your gaming time count" type of system, which makes it really good for convention play.

When I've played DCC, I had a good time. I tend to think their modules have good writing, art and ideas, but the adventure design of some of them is far more linear than I really like. I thought about trying to put together a DCC megadungeon at one point, but it was just not an aesthetic match. I prefer OD&D at the end of the day, but I also understand why people like DCC.

* Joseph Goodman is a hell of a businessman, and has created a dedicated following of gamers.

[EdOWar]

Off topic, I've downloaded and read the beta rules for DCC, but I've never played. The funnel concept sounds intriguing, though. I've toyed with the idea of an all-funnel, all-the-time campaign (i.e. "advancement" comes primarily from material gain rather than XP and levels). For those with experience playing DCC, do you think an "all-funnel" campaign could be viable? Or would the constant replenishing of the ranks, so-to-speak, loose its charm?

[kesher]

I have at least one player who'd love it...

[Finarvyn]

Aug 3, 2015 11:24:17 GMT -6 EdOWar said:

do you think an "all-funnel" campaign could be viable? Or would the constant replenishing of the ranks, so-to-speak, loose its charm?

My gut feeling tells me that such a campaign would get old fast, but honestly I've never tried it. I compare to OD&D and similar games where I think levels 2-5 are the "sweet spot" and try to rush my players out of level 1 fairly quickly, and with that context I can't imagine keeping them at level zero forever.

On the other hand, I can see certain key elements:
(1) You never get attached to a character.
(2) There is lots of variety in character types.
(3) There is never reason to be complacent; anyone can die at any time.

Whether those are strong enough to carry a campaign, well I guess that comes down to the players involved. There aren't that many good "funnel" adventures out there, however, and I can't imagine throwing zeroes into a high-level module.

Interesting to ponder...

[EdOWar]

Aug 4, 2015 5:47:56 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

My gut feeling tells me that such a campaign would get old fast, but honestly I've never tried it. I compare to OD&D and similar games where I think levels 2-5 are the "sweet spot" and try to rush my players out of level 1 fairly quickly, and with that context I can't imagine keeping them at level zero forever.

On the other hand, I can see certain key elements:
(1) You never get attached to a character.
(2) There is lots of variety in character types.
(3) There is never reason to be complacent; anyone can die at any time.

Whether those are strong enough to carry a campaign, well I guess that comes down to the players involved. There aren't that many good "funnel" adventures out there, however, and I can't imagine throwing zeroes into a high-level module.

Interesting to ponder...

The idea may work better with a post-apocalypse setting rather than traditional fantasy. Maybe I can put something together after MCC is released. I'm picturing level 0 funnel characters running around the wasteland with laser pistols and atomic hand grenades. Fun times for all.