DCC: How lethal should your character funnel be?

Fiasco · March 07, 2013, 02:23:20 AM

With DCC RPG the expectation is you are doing pretty epic deeds from level 1 and the rules support this. For one thing you add your 0th HP to your 1st level roll.

So the funnel adventure is the 'forge of heroes' where only the tough or lucky survive.

My issue is the time disconnect between the farmer surviving the funnel and becoming a highly trained warrior at 1st level.

In many ways the funnel can be seen as an 'origins' adventure but its complicated by the fact it's for a group and not an individual.

So it's like a bunch of peasants survive a harrowing adventure, go their separate ways to train up on their various professions and then meet up at some indeterminate time later to adventure as 1st level heroes.

Spinachcat · March 07, 2013, 03:40:13 AM

Quote from: Haffrung;634880However, I've never understood Goodman's thing for 0-level characters.

It's a reaction to the marketplace. Most RPGs today are designed to create very robust starting characters and DCC bucks the trend by creating the funnel to offer a different playstyle. It's counter-marketing and it works for them.

Bill · March 07, 2013, 09:01:41 AM

Quote from: Spinachcat;635036It's a reaction to the marketplace. Most RPGs today are designed to create very robust starting characters and DCC bucks the trend by creating the funnel to offer a different playstyle. It's counter-marketing and it works for them.

Many people seem to like it, but I have played fifty or more farmboy/baker/blacksmith/etc... novices in my 35+ years of rpgs.

I prefer my starting characters to have some minimal degree of competence now.

Haffrung · March 07, 2013, 11:07:53 AM

Quote from: Spinachcat;635036It's a reaction to the marketplace. Most RPGs today are designed to create very robust starting characters and DCC bucks the trend by creating the funnel to offer a different playstyle. It's counter-marketing and it works for them.

Why not just make 1st level characters in his game as weak as AD&D 1st level characters? And if the PCs are all pretty much generic peasant at 0-level, I don't see the fun in the winnowing out some from others.

I dunno, it seems to be another strain of the 'walked to school five miles through snowstorms uphill both ways' meme that circulates among old-school players of a certain temperment, where they exaggerate the things that were genuinely different about TSR-era D&D to gain crotchety-old-grognard cred.

Bill · March 07, 2013, 12:57:58 PM

Quote from: Haffrung;635106Why not just make 1st level characters in his game as weak as AD&D 1st level characters? And if the PCs are all pretty much generic peasant at 0-level, I don't see the fun in the winnowing out some from others.

I dunno, it seems to be another strain of the 'walked to school five miles through snowstorms uphill both ways' meme that circulates among old-school players of a certain temperment, where they exaggerate the things that were genuinely different about TSR-era D&D to gain crotchety-old-grognard cred.

It also is a method to prevent builds and power gaming.

Allthough I tend to agree with you.

Fiasco · March 07, 2013, 04:48:24 PM

Quote from: Bill;635138It also is a method to prevent builds and power gaming.

Allthough I tend to agree with you.

This. It's about play balance through randomization.

It's also about making the characters about more than stats. Maybe it's your crappest 0th level that survives but you love it all he more for having beaten the odds.

RPGPundit · March 08, 2013, 05:43:00 PM

Quote from: Haffrung;634880However, I've never understood Goodman's thing for 0-level characters. Aren't 1st-level TSR D&D characters wimpy enough?

I had my doubts, but the thing is 0-level PCs in DCC aren't like what you'd assume from 0-level NPCs in AD&D; they're a fantastic way to create a background for the character. Like I've said elsewhere, my players made up a total of 18 0-level PCs and from the very start every single one of them had a unique personality from the get-go. It was amazing.

RPGPundit

Eisenmann · March 08, 2013, 05:51:43 PM

Quote from: Haffrung;635106Why not just make 1st level characters in his game as weak as AD&D 1st level characters? And if the PCs are all pretty much generic peasant at 0-level, I don't see the fun in the winnowing out some from others.

I dunno, it seems to be another strain of the 'walked to school five miles through snowstorms uphill both ways' meme that circulates among old-school players of a certain temperment, where they exaggerate the things that were genuinely different about TSR-era D&D to gain crotchety-old-grognard cred.

By the book (generic notion of D&D), classed characters are exceptional in the game world. But in practice, that's really not the case at most tables. 0-level characters that make it through the funnel really do feel exceptional.

RPGPundit · March 09, 2013, 12:46:46 PM

Quote from: Eisenmann;635513By the book (generic notion of D&D), classed characters are exceptional in the game world. But in practice, that's really not the case at most tables. 0-level characters that make it through the funnel really do feel exceptional.

I can clearly see now that they would.

Bill · March 10, 2013, 06:03:31 PM

Quote from: Fiasco;635188This. It's about play balance through randomization.

It's also about making the characters about more than stats. Maybe it's your crappest 0th level that survives but you love it all he more for having beaten the odds.

More than STATS!!! WHAT!!!!!

Seriously though, a billion times that. Trillion even.

I don't mind playing a character with low or unusual stats. I prefer it.

But I dont think the 'beating the odds' matters to me at all.

I tend to bond with a character because of quirks, personality, and events that just seem to 'click'

RPGPundit · March 11, 2013, 04:30:14 PM

By the end of a 0-level adventure, everyone has some serious personality going, at least if they're anything like mine were.

RPGPundit