|
Joseph Goodman of Goodman Games has posted his company's intent to use the OGL to make a "1st Edition" style game over the next year.
Read his post here:
Goodman Forums
Lofty goals.... I thanked them for their work and apologized for not purchasing any of their products after they went 4e. I wish them well.
Prediction: Trailblazer/Fantasycraft route: too different from 3E and too different from free old school clones. Result: bomb, Joseph Goodman lights another candle in his "Why oh why did I go 4E and ignored Pathfinder" chapel.
I name thee Troll!
|
Prediction: Trailblazer/Fantasycraft route: too different from 3E and too different from free old school clones. Result: bomb, Joseph Goodman lights another candle in his "Why oh why did I go 4E and ignored Pathfinder" chapel.I name thee Troll!
I resent that remark ! I am the Bag of Devouring, it is my duty to bite ! The reason behind my existence ! Also, I don't live under a bridge and my name isn't Frank ! *hops around and bites Xabulba on the ankles*
Prediction: Trailblazer/Fantasycraft route: too different from 3E and too different from free old school clones. Result: bomb, Joseph Goodman lights another candle in his "Why oh why did I go 4E and ignored Pathfinder" chapel.
The quality of the product will pale in importance next to Goodman's ability to market the game. Just ask Bill Gates.
Goodman already has a fantastic repoire with a lot of brick and mortar stores. If he releases it at just the right time - say, when 4E reaches the end of its life cycle - it could end up being a big hit.
Look at Pathfinder RPG. Paizo tapped into their built-in fanbase coupled with an audience looking for an alternative to WotC and D&D to launch a successful product. Quality was nearly irrelevant in the short term.
I for one am interested in seeing his offering. I may like pathfinder for my longer campaigns, but I do like having a lighter system I can use for one-shots.
He's actually learning from Paizo. A) Don't rely on another company's product or brand and B) Run a public open playtest of your rules. I'm curious to see how that works out for him. It may make me purchase a Goodman Games product for the first time since Monte Cook wrote a module for them. (OK, I also picked up Castle Whiterock when it was on clearance after 4E was released.)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I for one am interested in seeing his offering. I may like pathfinder for my longer campaigns, but I do like having a lighter system I can use for one-shots.
He's actually learning from Paizo. A) Don't rely on another company's product or brand and B) Run a public open playtest of your rules. I'm curious to see how that works out for him. It may make me purchase a Goodman Games product for the first time since Monte Cook wrote a module for them. (OK, I also picked up Castle Whiterock when it was on clearance after 4E was released.)
Ditto on the buying. Well the buying of PDFs at least.
|
|
Prediction: Trailblazer/Fantasycraft route: too different from 3E and too different from free old school clones. Result: bomb, Joseph Goodman lights another candle in his "Why oh why did I go 4E and ignored Pathfinder" chapel.The quality of the product will pale in importance next to Goodman's ability to market the game. Just ask Bill Gates.
Goodman already has a fantastic repoire with a lot of brick and mortar stores. If he releases it at just the right time - say, when 4E reaches the end of its life cycle - it could end up being a big hit.
Look at Pathfinder RPG. Paizo tapped into their built-in fanbase coupled with an audience looking for an alternative to WotC and D&D to launch a successful product. Quality was nearly irrelevant in the short term.
Not really. Pathfinder is a direct continuation of 3.5 and so everybody could expect to jump into the "good old shoes" and feel familiar with the system.
Major reworks (and it seems like this is one of them) didn't do as well as Pathfinder did, because they moved too far from the familiar territory.
|
Prediction: Trailblazer/Fantasycraft route: too different from 3E and too different from free old school clones. Result: bomb, Joseph Goodman lights another candle in his "Why oh why did I go 4E and ignored Pathfinder" chapel.
seriously?
WIth the growing popularity of the old school versions and Goodman Games history of good quality products I think this would be a perfect fit. If anything I would expect GG to corner the market on the old school style games.
Isn't frog god games doing something similar already?
Isn't frog god games doing something similar already?
Yes, although they are releasing an expanded version of Swords & Wizardry, which is already out now. There are a number of old-school games already available, like Dark Dungeons, Labyrinth Lords, and Castles & Crusades. The main thing the DCC RPG will have going for it is that Goodman will continue to pump out DCC modules to go with it. Some of those other systems don't have much, if any, new material coming out for it. Although S&W Complete + S&W Complete Tome of Horrors sounds like it will be a very nice set.
I don't think having a major re-write that is different from 3.5 is a big problem, since you already have 4E and pathfinder as a guide. It just has to be a simplified 3.5, without going to the length 4E did. The system itself is not the selling point, but instead the supporting material that is released with it in regards to electronic tools, supplements and adventures. Introducing new mechanics that seem foreign like 4E powers, or some of the features from fantasy craft, have a greater risk of turning established old school players away.
Play testing should sort all the above out, and I for one am looking forward to a solid alternative.
Races as classes is top of the list...
The horror. :)
Someone pointed out this post where Mr. Goodman claims that "DCC RPG is impossible to power-game" and "there's no way to min/max this system". Making that claim takes a pair of big brass balls, in my book. :-)
|
Major reworks (and it seems like this is one of them) didn't do as well as Pathfinder did, because they moved too far from the familiar territory.
I don't know how much it affects sales/popularity, but this rings true for my preferences. The "retro" games that I prefer are Swords & Wizardry, OSRIC, and Dark Dungeons. They all cling about as close as possible under the OGL to the original rulesets they emulate (0E, 1E, and BECMI/RC; respectively). As such they have a good bit of support pre-existing, even if they didn't get any modern support. With the release of Swords & Wizardry: Complete Rulebook, S&W is getting pretty good support in the here and now, as Frog God Games seems to be releasing pretty much everything they do in both Pathfinder and S&W flavors. More "modernized" games don't quite ring the nostalgia bell in the same way, either.
Someone pointed out this post where Mr. Goodman claims that "DCC RPG is impossible to power-game" and "there's no way to min/max this system". Making that claim takes a pair of big brass balls, in my book. :-)
I wonder if that is an appeal to those who criticize 3.0+ for being exploitable.
And does anyone else get a sense of Chart Master from the mention of all those crit tables?
The more I read that article, the less it sounds likes old D&D.
The more I read that article, the less it sounds likes old D&D.
He specifically calls it "pre-D&D" fantasy gaming, doesn't he?
The spell system sounds like you roll, look up on a chart and then roll again. That kind of puts me off, but then I was not really looking for old school gaming to begin with. So I was never a target demographic.
I just wonder if he is going to alienate those who really were.
I'm just hoping it's sufficiently far along to have some demos going at GenCon. I'd give it a go out of curiosity if nothing else.
He ran some playtests at a nearby game store (slightly too far away for me to make it though) so I'm fairly certain it has a solid draft ready. We'll call that Alpha. So I'm sure Beta will be widely available by GenCon.
|
I played in one of the playtest. Definitely took a bit of shift from playing 3.x/4e. Case in point: not looking for a skill to search for secret doors. (Unless you were a rogue). Had to, instead, rely on the GM's description of said room and describing how our PCs searched the room based on said description. Oh, and playing non-optimized/min-maxed PCs. Being creative using a chicken(!) to escape/distract monsters...!
I'm interested in general. Some signs are good and some are bad - I personally think 3.x got too rules heavy and I wouldn't mind the lighter, no-minis approach. Some of the elements seem a little too old school in the bad sense, like "races as classes." It does seem like there are a few too many retro-clones now (and he can call this not a retro-clone, but it sounds close enough for government work) - a lot of fragmentation and work on the frankly not that fun parts of the game. Maybe if he comes up with a new core to the rules that's compelling enough that other folks rally around it...
|
|
I played in one of the playtest. Definitely took a bit of shift from playing 3.x/4e. Case in point: not looking for a skill to search for secret doors. (Unless you were a rogue). Had to, instead, rely on the GM's description of said room and describing how our PCs searched the room based on said description. Oh, and playing non-optimized/min-maxed PCs. Being creative using a chicken(!) to escape/distract monsters...!
So in other words, not interacting with the rules at all. Explains the 'impossible to powergame' claim.
|
|
Being creative using a chicken(!) to escape/distract monsters...!
Game Towne San Diego? Or did someone else throw a chicken at the bad guys too?
From my perception, the game is not trying to be a Retro-clone of the early D&D rules, so much as the playstyle and genre. While Gary Gygax tented to pontificate about his new game, Joe knows he's one of us, and knows we're in on the inside jokes.
|
|
I played in one of the playtest. Definitely took a bit of shift from playing 3.x/4e. Case in point: not looking for a skill to search for secret doors. (Unless you were a rogue). Had to, instead, rely on the GM's description of said room and describing how our PCs searched the room based on said description. Oh, and playing non-optimized/min-maxed PCs. Being creative using a chicken(!) to escape/distract monsters...!So in other words, not interacting with the rules at all. Explains the 'impossible to powergame' claim.
GM's imput is important. But randomness plays a greater role in the DCC RPG than, for example, the Pathfinder RPG or, especially, DnD 4e. There are few snippets over at the Goodman Game forums if you want to check it out.
|
|
Being creative using a chicken(!) to escape/distract monsters...!Game Towne San Diego? Or did someone else throw a chicken at the bad guys too?
Our game was in Anaheim. Apparently creative minds think alike.
From my perception, the game is not trying to be a Retro-clone of the early D&D rules, so much as the playstyle and genre.
That's the impression I got, too.
|
|
GM's imput is important. But randomness plays a greater role in the DCC RPG than, for example, the Pathfinder RPG or, especially, DnD 4e. There are few snippets over at the Goodman Game forums if you want to check it out.
I will probably pick it up when it releases, because I do like Goodman Games, and I enjoy studying rules. I'm not sure if my group would be interested in playing it however.
|
|
Spell effects also have a random factor as well. Same with critical hits.So in other words, not interacting with the rules at all. Explains the 'impossible to powergame' claim.That and the fact that PC creation is totally random.
I really like that way spells were done. A better roll gives you better or broader effects. it keeps low level spells from becoming obsolete, with no need for metamagic or "preparing high".
So in other words, not interacting with the rules at all. Explains the 'impossible to powergame' claim.That and the fact that PC creation is totally random.
Is your class randomly selected?
|
|
Is your class randomly selected?So in other words, not interacting with the rules at all. Explains the 'impossible to powergame' claim.That and the fact that PC creation is totally random.
I don't know. I haven't gotten enough XP to get to 1st level yet. My 0 level professions were rolled randomly though.
Is your class randomly selected?I don't know. I haven't gotten enough XP to get to 1st level yet. My 0 level professions were rolled randomly though.
I'm confused -- I thought some "classes" were actually races. So you don't know whether you're an elf or not until you get enough XP?
(I suspect I've gotten some misinformation somewhere along the line.)
|
|
Is your class randomly selected?I don't know. I haven't gotten enough XP to get to 1st level yet. My 0 level professions were rolled randomly though.I'm confused -- I thought some "classes" were actually races. So you don't know whether you're an elf or not until you get enough XP?
(I suspect I've gotten some misinformation somewhere along the line.)
Yes, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling are classes, if you rolled one of those races with your zero-level profession, that's it. If you're human, you get to pick one of the classic four at first level. I really don't want to say much more, since it's still being developed, and because I promised I wouldn't.