Quote from: The Butcher;785496Yeah, I know, super original. It's not like anyone else here has ever stated a setting design rule about calibrating system to setting expectations and/or vice-versa.

love you, man.
You get it.

It is rarely a 'system x vs system y'.
Just a conversation which system does what you want to game better.

Quote from: VectorSigma;785536Interesting that you say that, as I'm considering using 5e for my next Wampus Country campaign.

Touché.

Quote from: VectorSigma;785536I like both DCC and 5e.  5e has a certain neutrality to it - or rather, the implicit assumptions are so de rigeur that it doesn't _seem_ to have assumptions, if that makes any sense; while DCC has its own voice which is awesome but unavoidable.  "Let's play DCC, but without the gonzo" is a goofy thing to say, right?  There's also that (possibly unfair) perception-baggage that DCC is great for one-shots but not great for campaign play.

DCC has a lot of personality and so does Wampus Country and I see how the two might clash. But since I've filed Wampus under "weird D&D", if I was running it with I'd use DCC for additional "not in [strike]Kansas[/strike] Karameikos anymore" feel.

As for the idea that DCC is a one-off game, I suspect some of DCC's mechanics, especially magic (Corruption, item creation, patron pacts), only really reach their full potential in a longer game.

Quote from: LibraryLass;785542So you're a hipster, then.

Is that what hipsters are about? Around here they seem to only go to what's new and trendy and overpriced.
I guess it does come off as pretentious... I just don't like corporate crap.

Not that I won't PLAY 5e. I just got done with a run of it on Roll20... had fun.

Quote from: Simlasa;785480I think that will always be an issue for me. It's just a preference I have for that DIY end of the pool... could be anything. I try not to eat at chain restaurants, I prefer smaller indie movies and 'auteur' films, college radio stations, music that isn't Top 40... Youtube channels over most mainstream TV.
It seems to me that as soon as things get too 'professional' and start involving more money, more people sticking their noses in... and content generally gets watered down in favor of pleasing a wider audience.
Even at the micro-niche level of RPGs, 5e has that air of wanting to be a bit 'all things for all people' while DCC and LotFP definitely do not.
 
I guess that's a 'bad attitude' but it keeps things interesting.

It's not just as long as you understand and accept those that prefer a more mainstream approach and forms of entertainment. I'm not 18 anymore but I am neither dead or have rejected my nerdism or rebel roots. And I LOVE Dragonlance, especially with a twist.

I tried DCC at a con recently.  The game I was going to play wasn't going to happen for lack of players, so I got pulled into a DCC game with Harley Stroh.

I'm not entirely sure what's really cool about DCC, having played it.  You have stats, you have skills, you roll the d20 plus your skill and see what happens, which I've been doing since 3rd edition.  I did rather like it when the wizard-guy put someone to sleep forever, but I wasn't playing a wizard, and the wizard was immediately killed, so although it was cool, it wasn't a ton of fun, really.  The idea of the adventure was amusing and fun, sure, but that didn't depend on DCC, it was just a fun fantasy adventure.  And being disemboweled by a teammate because I rolled a 1 on initiative was really lame.

So, I'm willing to try DCC again... but between that and 5th edition, I'm much more interested in playing 5th.

There's a difference of trying lots of things and knowing what you prefer... vs. never ever stepping outside of the comfort zone to explore... "That place looks dirty!"... "Those people look weird!"... "That game looks like it has too many charts!"

Quote from: jcfiala;785563I'm not entirely sure what's really cool about DCC, having played it.  You have stats, you have skills, you roll the d20 plus your skill and see what happens, which I've been doing since 3rd edition.

As the Butcher mentions, I think there are things about DCC (and most games) that won't seem distinctive until after you've played for a while.
The 5e games I've played in haven't seemed much different at all from my weekly Pathfinder sessions ("You have stats, you have skills, you roll the d20 plus your skill and see what happens")... so far.

These 'vs.' threads implying it's one or the other, when obviously it can be both. There are plenty of settings/flavors I wouldn't pick DCC for... Magic World/Openquest would my choice for a more stable fantasy setting.

Quote from: The Butcher;785373This is how I see it:

I'd use D&D 5e for a game that feels like post-Dragonlance, middle-to-new-school D&D. Forgotten Realms, Eberron, your favorite TSR AD&D 2e-era setting or Paizo adventure path, or that homebrew setting you came up with when D&D 3.0e came out and you returned to D&D after years of playing White Wolf or GURPS or whatever.

I'd use DCC for super-gonzo, old-schooler-than-old-school D&D from TSR, Judges Guild and the OSR. The first D&D setting you created, Greyhawk with the 1982 World of Greyhawk book, the First Fantasy Campaign, your favorite TSR or Judges Guild module, Anomalous Subsurface Environment, Vornheim, Dwimmermount, Rob's Majestic Wilderlands and Blackmarsh, Aos' Metal Earth, Jack Shear's World Between, VectorSigma's Wampus Country and of course, the very evocatively named and illustrated adventures from Goodman Games.

Nice analysis!

I like both games and both have very different flavors to them. DCC is more like OD&D in feel, only with a kickass spellcasting system. 5E is more like "what AD&D 3E should have been" if sanity had been maintained in 2000 when WotC released their 3E version.

Different games for different feel, both great!

Quote from: jcfiala;785563I tried DCC at a con recently.  The game I was going to play wasn't going to happen for lack of players, so I got pulled into a DCC game with Harley Stroh.

I'm not entirely sure what's really cool about DCC, having played it.  You have stats, you have skills, you roll the d20 plus your skill and see what happens, which I've been doing since 3rd edition.  I did rather like it when the wizard-guy put someone to sleep forever, but I wasn't playing a wizard, and the wizard was immediately killed, so although it was cool, it wasn't a ton of fun, really.  The idea of the adventure was amusing and fun, sure, but that didn't depend on DCC, it was just a fun fantasy adventure.  And being disemboweled by a teammate because I rolled a 1 on initiative was really lame.

So, I'm willing to try DCC again... but between that and 5th edition, I'm much more interested in playing 5th.

Suddenly and unexpectedly super jealous!  That kind of sounds like the best con session ever.  Did each player start with multiple characters?

VS

Quote from: jcfiala;785563I tried DCC at a con recently.  The game I was going to play wasn't going to happen for lack of players, so I got pulled into a DCC game with Harley Stroh.

I'm not entirely sure what's really cool about DCC, having played it.  You have stats, you have skills, you roll the d20 plus your skill and see what happens, which I've been doing since 3rd edition.  I did rather like it when the wizard-guy put someone to sleep forever, but I wasn't playing a wizard, and the wizard was immediately killed, so although it was cool, it wasn't a ton of fun, really.  The idea of the adventure was amusing and fun, sure, but that didn't depend on DCC, it was just a fun fantasy adventure.  And being disemboweled by a teammate because I rolled a 1 on initiative was really lame.

So, I'm willing to try DCC again... but between that and 5th edition, I'm much more interested in playing 5th.

Yeah, I just have Warhammer for that, thanks.

Quote from: VengerSatanis;785599Suddenly and unexpectedly super jealous!  That kind of sounds like the best con session ever.  Did each player start with multiple characters?

VS

No, they didn't.  Everyone started with 3rd level characters.  I'd heard of this player funnel thing, and was curious to try it, but no.

Quote from: Simlasa;785560Is that what hipsters are about? Around here they seem to only go to what's new and trendy and overpriced.
I guess it does come off as pretentious... I just don't like corporate crap.

Dude, commercial success and popularity are anathema to hipsters. The whole points of hipsterism is to display a discernment for authenticity and quality (filtered through a lens of ironic nostalgia) that the average schmuck mindlessly following popular culture cannot grasp. You think you're cool with your MacBook labtop? Well the true hipster uses a manual typewriter. Like that catchy folk band Mumford and Sons? The hipsters liked them before they were popular, and hate them now. You ride a $1,400 urban cruiser bike? The hipster refurbishes vintage bicycles. Enjoy expensive whiskey? The hipster drinks cheap blue-collar beer brands and cut-rate bourbon because of the aura of authenticity (and irony) they evoke.

If hipsters ever take an interest in RPGs, they'll play first edition Traveler and Paladium Fantasy.

So yeah, you might be a hipster.

Quote from: Haffrung;785656Dude, commercial success and popularity are anathema to hipsters. The whole points of hipsterism is to display a discernment for authenticity and quality (filtered through a lens of ironic nostalgia) that the average schmuck mindlessly following popular culture cannot grasp.

    Kind of like people who prefer the more subtle, challenging ways of old-school D&D instead of the corporate pap churned out by WotC?

   (No, I don't think the OSR is a bunch of hipsters. I think it's a bunch of people who like what they like and would do so regardless of popularity, but who sometimes drift into hipsteresque rhetoric when trying to either defend themselves or establish some perceived superiority over modern D&D. The way 'nostalgia' has become a poisoned term on either side of the debate probably contributes some to this.)

Quote from: Haffrung;785656So yeah, you might be a hipster.

OK, I like classic Traveller... so either I liked Classic Traveller to begin with, waybackwhen... and it's still my preferred version, in which case I'm a 'Grognard'.

OR

I just discovered Classic Traveller and I like it... in which case I'm a 'hipster'.

Quote from: RabidWookie;785335Which one would you prefer to run or play right now and why?  It seems like DCC is in some ways more crunchy and in others almost free form compared to 5e.

i am currently judging a DCC campaign based on PF kingmaker AP (loosely) and set in gray boxish forgotten realms (phlan, moonsea and northern parts). it has lasted for almost year and the half with almost regular, weekly, sessions. this is of course entirely anecdotal but can give you some insight into the fact that dcc is not really only for one shots but has robustness to sustain longer campaigns.

as far as the dcc gonzo volume is concerned i must say that it is a matter of fine tunning. you certainly could judge dcc in a vein similar to the rpgpundit's dcc games but it can also, and does, cover more regular appendix N inspired adventures without a glitch. it is just incapable of being boring. you can also make it more serious, if you want that, pretty simply by trimming down magical misfires and mercurial magic and maybe also toying a little with fumbles. i have a feeling that harley stroh (one of DCC authors) is thinking about that for his punjar (fantasy city a la lankhmar) games.

you could also check out this actual play report from jason lutes that reads more like navigator: the medieval odyssey and less like dark ages paranoia.

one thing that you should be considering is that DCC is more of a gambling and less of a resource management game. you have to trust dice and to believe in their 'oracular' properties to fully enjoy it. results can be a little swingy with spellcasting, critical and mighty deeds but i suppose that it is part of a beauty of DCC.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;785659(No, I don't think the OSR is a bunch of hipsters. I think it's a bunch of people who like what they like and would do so regardless of popularity, but who sometimes drift into hipsteresque rhetoric when trying to either defend themselves or establish some perceived superiority over modern D&D. The way 'nostalgia' has become a poisoned term on either side of the debate probably contributes some to this.)

I dunno, I think we kind of are a little bit.