Meh.  If I want to play a tactical ttrpg with fiddly combat rules, I already have Pathfinder 2e.  I don't know what this does that's worth $65. 

The author delivered a great marketing, this beats Shadowdark for me for the sheer number of youtubers I heard comment on it. Huge success.

I'm not personally interested - it looks somewhat better than MCDM and CR stuff for me, and it has some neat ideas (that are not as new as people seem to assume), but sounds too crunchy for my tastes (it is the opposite of Shadowdark, that feels flimsy to me).

Still, I might check a free SRD if there is one and try to mine some ideas. DC 20 does LOTS of things I LIKE: fixed damage, mana points, no HP bloat, etc.  While I'm not currently looking for a new game (that is not compatible with anything else I already have, apparently, which is a huge issue for me), I'd check this one if I were.

I mostly like the mechanical pitch. I think it sounds to be slightly mechanically superior at the core to MCDM RPG, Daggerheart, or Pathfinder 2E. However, I doubt the execution will actually live up to that.

The biggest downside is almost certainly going to be game balance. "Taking advances from any class" and "multiattack as a core feature," and "you may combo attack with other characters" are each gameplay features which tend to exaggerate balance problems. Putting them together makes me think this game will never be balanced. I can live with an imbalanced game, but this system looks to provide quite limited gameplay before the community discovers many ways to break it. Once that happens it will probably be a dead game.

So...promising, but I predict it will at most be a flash in the pan. And quite likely one which burns the groups which adopt it without realizing that the game will have balance issues.

If I want a lot of crunch then GURPS is still available. I am happy with simpler systems that just get out of the way. Right now I am fiddling with OSE to make it what I want. The way I handle weapon damage is that damage is determined by general weapon size and training of the wielder. So as a fighter levels up, he does more damage on a hit. One of the problems I wanted to address was getting rid of the concept of "loser" weapons no one uses because they do less damage than others.

Quote from: Chris24601 on June 16, 2024, 08:37:22 AMIn theory, five attacks for 4 damage each should take longer than one attack for 3d6+2 and the average result will obviously be different... but in practice... "I rolled a 7, 12, 15, 15, and 17 for 4 damage" and the GM saying "three hits. 12 damage." is just as fast or faster and makes the results more of a bell curve as well.

This is what I want from the RPGs I play, thought into the actual flow of the rules at the table and does mechanic X or Y really change the game enough to justify another step or two in combat resolution.

I remember running into this reading Tales of Valiant and seeing their luck rules: https://rpgbot.net/tov/transition-guide/#inspiration-gt-luck

I was like, wow, hey, something else to track round to round... so awesome. DC20 to me seems like it's full of similar "cool" mechanics that will just bog down play or be a PITA to manage/track round to round.

Quote from: Ruprecht on June 16, 2024, 07:36:31 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on June 15, 2024, 08:39:55 AMBasing a game on Pathfinder is not a selling point to me.  That game is bloated and a pain.  I am truly floored that it ever became popular. 

I think back to the 80s when my group played Space Opera and Harnmaster and complexity didn't phase us. I don't know if it was a gradual build up of complex game after more complex game or if it was just youth and time. Either way I bet the Pathfinder fans are young and/or came from an nearly as complex game.

I'm curious if the bulk of the rules-light fans are lapsed gamers returning to the table top with no tolerance for time wasting nonsense anymore.

That's certainly the case for me. We played 3.5 quite happily for almost a decade, and a friend of mine was a serious book collector, so we played it with literally dozens of supplements. If I hadn't dropped out of the hobby around the time, I probably would have been a huge Pathfinder 1 fan.

Nowadays I've got a more than full time job and a family to support, and I just don't have the time and energy to get my head around a rules-system with that kind of complex character-building and meta. I can learn the rules to a complex game and show up to play, but I don't run them, and as soon as I get a whiff of the system requiring intimate rules knowledge to make or play an effective character I lose interest.

EDIT: At least for me, there is also a question of rising standards. Part of the reason why my friends and I ran 3.5 so happily for all those years is because we weren't all that bothered about running it well. We didn't care much if we were running the rules wrong, or if the PCs were overpowered or how long the campaigns lasted or anything like that. We got together largely at random and were happy to just roll dice and drink Mt. Dew all night.

Now I not only hold myself to higher standards as a DM, but I also play with people who aren't my childhood friends. Flubbing my way through the rules and letting PCs get away with anything is a lot less acceptable than it was back then. I know I still occasionally get tempted to answer one of those "new players need a DM for 5e/Pathfinder" postings, but I never do. The chief reason why is that I don't really know all the ins and outs of 5e (and even less so for Pathfinder 2), and I know myself well enough to know I won't bother to learn them properly.

I can pick up something like Dragon Warriors or By This Axe I Hack and learn the system well enough to run it in maybe two read-throughs of the book. Becoming a proficient Pathfinder 2 DM would probably take me months.

Quote from: ForgottenF on June 18, 2024, 11:51:20 AMI can pick up something like Dragon Warriors or By This Axe I Hack and learn the system well enough to run it in maybe two read-throughs of the book. Becoming a proficient Pathfinder 2 DM would probably take me months.

I very much feel this! I never played 2e thru 4e D&D. Moved from 1e to Hero and GURPS, dabbled in a handful of other games, then 5e, then back to playing OSR stuff, dabbled in Savage Worlds...

Coming from 1e I found 2014 PHB 5e to be a more cohesive, better written version that was fast to pick up. But just going through character creation in Pathfinder 1 made me want to set the book on fire. Coming from Hero made Savage Worlds seem familiar and easy to master. But I've bounced *hard* off of the PbtA games I've tried.

It's as if I burned some RPG neural pathways into my brain in my teens and 20s and any game adjacent to those is easy to GM. But GMing anything more than one step removed from B/X, 1e, Hero, GURPS requires more time, effort, and patience than I'm willing to commit. I can do it, but it isn't *fun*.

I'm interested in it, but at the end of the day Pathfinder 2 is my go to "Dungeons and Dragons" game, and there isn't any third party game that's going to be supported nearly as well as that.

Quote from: Rhymer88 on June 14, 2024, 02:34:45 AMThis is one of the best videos I've come across regarding the whole "D&D killer" thing. The video not only addresses DC20, but also Shadowdark. The Dungeon Coach also left a comment.

Thank you! I appreciate it.

I would like the game if new rules replaced old rules. 

DC20 sounds like a game that has all the old rules, and then even more tacked on as well. Unfortunately, I'm not interested in complexity. 

I am a big fan of elegant, efficient, and low page count rules. 

I actually like it.  Am purchasing and won't be playing 5e for anything but nostalgia (if a friend asks me to run that instead of DC20), moving to DC20.  People say its crunchier than 5e, but not sure what you mean, specifically, but willing to hear ya out.

Some of you fall under the "I'd rather play X" crowd.  Okay, but if that's all ya got without why, you're just offering lip service in a vacuum. 

Or you're biased to your favorite game.  I know that deal, bc that's how I was with PF being offered as the D&D Killer before.  I looked at PF.  Now that's crunchy, as was 3.5, which is why I took a huge break between AD&D 2e and 5e - I liked 3e destroying THAC0, but then 3.5 added so many numbers with it that by the time you were done calculating your to hit, you had a physics equation on a wipe board.  I'm not about that crunch-life, bro, but to each their own (you like what you like, I like what I like too).

As far as direct to DC20 as a game:

• The By-5s rule is how you get the better numbers in combat.  The base damage is mostly 1, some are 0, some are 2.  Beat by 5 = +1, by 10 = +2, Nat 20 = +1.  So with a 1 base weapon, possibly 4 damage, but you can throw Action points into maneuvers and techniques to add more damage, or spell/ smites to do even more.  But the real magic is in your attack roll.  That's where all your Damage also comes from.  That's kinda cool.  The same is true of healing; you roll the d20 and, by 5s, it increases.  Like maneuvers and techniques, pump more mana into the spell for more/ better effects.
• Death Saves that a nat 20 brings you back with 1 hp?  Not really.  So theirs (Deaths Door) lets you continue to fight with just 1 AP, as you hold your innards in and swing the weapon wildly.  Get to -3 (for level 1) and you be dead dude; Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.  Each round on Deaths Door, you're going to lose 1 more hp, if you don't get killed from battle, then you'll die from holding those innards.  So those who like a more perma-death type game, enjoy.  Resurrection mechanics are prob going to be just as difficult.  And healing isn't going to be the merry-go-round of 0 hp - 5hp - 0 hp - 4 hp bc a cleric is standing behind you feeling you up all the while.
• The balance between casters and melee is almost square - though I don't think we'll ever have the same balance as we did with 1e/2e AD&D, or OD&D.  But, tbf, that balanced was achieved by .... BANG.  You're dead.  Roll a new character.  Yeah, no background/ backstory back then.  Alignment was all you needed - Adventuring was a tough life bro!  Ya didn't have a long life expectancy!
• They eliminate the INT/ WIS thing altogether.  WIN.  Just INT, no WIS.  CON is done totally differently, and the Primary Attribute is nicely done, allowing some very basic things like perception to be based in just being an adventurer to begin with.  BC are you telling me in your game that a Fighter isn't going to have his head on a swivel because he doesn't feel the presence of a goddess in his life (lack of a high WIS)?  It's good, well thought out mechanics.
• The game is in development directly with the community (I have offered things to the mix as well, like contacting the Bicycle Card company to make Spell/ Feature/ Maneuver/ Technique/ Condition cards for the game, which Alan received very positively and is getting to work on)
• I find the initiative a bit crunchy, having to beat an Encounter DC is kind of weird.  Then the DM gets to alternate the NPCs without having to roll anything more than the Encounter DC challenge.  Also ... weird, but cool, as it means no dog-piling, for PCs or NPCs.  But it seems to be arbitrarily in favor of the DM planting initiatives wherever he wants as long as he weaves them alternately among the PCs.  If I'm an Evil DM, I let the big-bad go first in the NPC order with an AOE, then use the others as cleanup crew.  My PCs, your welcome.  I'm not an Evil DM.  While I do feel the mechanics are crunchy, I know Collville likes you to roll a new initiative every round, discuss and roll what you are going to do, then processes it.  When I compare those apples, I'll take DC20 any day!  And MCDM LOVES - absolutely LOVES - math and crunch; so I won't be backing the MCDM RPG at all.

But there is no other place I feel the crunch. Seems like D&D to me, with all the stupid bits worked out.  I tried to like Daggerheart and Candella bc I love CR/ Mercer & Co, but it's not for me for the same reason as MCDM.  Crunch.

The other commentary I see here a lot is the "Who's THIS guy?!!", or "He's just a YouTuber who did a lot of D&D Homebrew".  Yup, and Unlike the one commenter, I actually find him humble bc of it.  He did a $2M Kickstarter for this game; that's actually something. And yeah, fellow YouTuber's came out to play and talk about it (Colby from d4, Chris from Treantmonk, Fermin of Mr. Rhexx, Bob Worldbuilder, and Will from D&D Shorts were the ones I recognized); paid?  Maybe?  IDK, does anyone?  But far better that he pays them and they support him than the company that laid off a huge section of it's workforce before Christmas and was later found to be producing content from AI and charging $75 for it.  Am I right?

---

Now, there is a total thing mentioned here in this post that I can relate to.  Dang rite a chicken or a housecat SHOULD NOT be able to kill even a 1st level fighter, whether that's a 20 on the die or 1000.  If so, please, hang up the sword before an ostrich or a stray dog find you!  Personally, I think they can stat these things for familiars and summons, but none should be able to do enough damage to even get 1 hp.  Maybe a spider can poison you, but then you'd be poisoned for at least 6 hours before taking 1 hp from a Recluse, Widow, or Tarantula (not counting Shelob, that stinger looked painful).  D&D gave you 1 piercing from that spider.  Really?  Just seems dumb that a spider bite would hurt as bad as a wizard's punch to the face.

My gaming group has tried out DC20 and we like it - certainly much better than D&D 5e. One benefit is that you have a range of possible reactions you can take and are thus not completely inactive when it's not your turn. Combat also becomes much more unpredictable because of the wide variety of maneuvers that can be combined with an attack and, in some cases, saved against. However, certain maneuver-spell combinations are overpowered and need to be addressed as playtesting continues. Some of the creature stats have to be changed as well. Why does a wolf have a claw attack, for example?

My 2c:

Overall, it looks interesting, but not enough for me to try a new system.

I WILL check it if there is a free version, out of curiosity.

The name "DC 20" is great and the guy did superb advertising because I've seen it all over YT.

Now, to the specifics.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on June 13, 2024, 07:25:08 PM1.  Four attributes.  Strength, Agility, Intelligence, and Charisma. 
2.  Any of the four attributes can be your primary attribute, and helps you do your class's main thing.  If you want to be a Charismatic Fighter, go for it.  You just RP that your fighter is good at shit-talking and making the other guy flub their attacks, or drop their defenses so you can hit them back.
3.  Damage is fixed by weapon type (it isn't a roll), but you do more damage by beating the enemy defense number.  Roll super high to hit, you will do more damage.
4.  Fighting type characters have stamina points to power their super moves.  Not a lot, though, like 1-5, starting with 1.
5.  Magic users use Mana points, not spell slots.  You can even pump more mana into a spell to make it do more (so will beating the target number by a lot, just like a fighter's sword attack).
6.  You get 4 action points per round.  If you spam the same move, each one gets disadvantage.  AKA, your 4th attack in a row means you roll 4D20, take the lowest result.
7.  Combo moves with other players is a common thing, and can be done when it is NOT your turn.  Want to boost your buddy's attack by launching him in a leap off of your shield?  Do it.  It costs you one of your action 4 action points.
8.  When you level up you can take abilities from any of the other classes rather than just stick to your own.  This is how you customize your characters.  I think it does cost you more to do so.

Overall DC20 has been described as a halfway point between 5E and Pathfinder 2E.

1. Fine.
2. I do not think this is a good idea, but I'd try it. Notice that old school D&D usually allows for a smart fighter, etc. I do not like the idea that the fighter is not at least encouraged to be strong and quick. It weakens the archetype, like a MU with bulging muscles or the book-smart barbarian.
3. I really like this idea but from what I've seem the weapons look too similar in practice.
4. Cool.
5. I like that much better than spell slots, currently using spell points in my OSR campaign.
6. Sounds complicated, lets see how it works in practice.
7. Nice.
8. That's fine too.

BTW, I do not need a halfway point between 5E and Pathfinder 2E, but I'd love to see a "halfway point between 5E and B/X". There are a few good options out there and some of them are free.

EDIT: I just realized I had already replied to this thread...

Quote from: weirdguy564 on June 13, 2024, 07:25:08 PMDC20 by the Dungeon Coach.

It is a fantasy game, with these features.

1.  Four attributes.  Strength, Agility, Intelligence, and Charisma. 
2.  Any of the four attributes can be your primary attribute, and helps you do your class's main thing.  If you want to be a Charismatic Fighter, go for it.  You just RP that your fighter is good at shit-talking and making the other guy flub their attacks, or drop their defenses so you can hit them back.
3.  Damage is fixed by weapon type (it isn't a roll), but you do more damage by beating the enemy defense number.  Roll super high to hit, you will do more damage.
4.  Fighting type characters have stamina points to power their super moves.  Not a lot, though, like 1-5, starting with 1.
5.  Magic users use Mana points, not spell slots.  You can even pump more mana into a spell to make it do more (so will beating the target number by a lot, just like a fighter's sword attack).
6.  You get 4 action points per round.  If you spam the same move, each one gets disadvantage.  AKA, your 4th attack in a row means you roll 4D20, take the lowest result.
7.  Combo moves with other players is a common thing, and can be done when it is NOT your turn.  Want to boost your buddy's attack by launching him in a leap off of your shield?  Do it.  It costs you one of your action 4 action points.
8.  When you level up you can take abilities from any of the other classes rather than just stick to your own.  This is how you customize your characters.  I think it does cost you more to do so.

Overall DC20 has been described as a halfway point between 5E and Pathfinder 2E.

It sounds good to me, and has been popping up in my YouTube feed a lot lately.  I like what I see.

I hadn't really paid much attention to this so far, it seems like there are a few good ideas to the game worth checking out. At least it merits further looking into.

I highly suggest Nimble as an altrernative: https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/nimble-co/nimble-2-your-best-5e-combat-ever

It has all these innovations in a much lighter and faster package.  It is also cheap!