Is blogger giving anyone else hassle this morning? This is my third attempt to get a post up today.Anyway, over the weekend I re-read the free download version of Jim Raggi's Lamentations of the Flame Princess rpg. I was keen to re-examine LotFP in light of the shine I have taken to the Dungeon Crawl Classics beta. Both are grade A examples of post-retro-clone design and I would play either.
Aside from the obvious differences (DCC rpg wants you to use funky dice, LotFP's art will creep up your soul) I made two basic observations.
1) DCC rpg is designed with a lot of razzle-dazzle. This is most obvious in all the new tricks the various classes can do and the spell charts. Heck, running a magic-user with all the extra rules (the spell charts, mercurial magic, spellburn, corruption, spell duels, demonic patrons) could push the play experience completely outside what you consider normal D&D. I've got no great problem with MUs as written in earlier editions, but if you want weirder and less Vancian magic then DCC is your huckleberry.2) Assuming you aren't weirded out by the artwork then LotFP shines as pretty much the tightest version of D&D ever. This virtue comes across most clearly in the section devoted to what I call "operations", i.e. how to open a door or check for traps or crap like that. Most reviews of most D&D descendants (and many whole games!) completely skip this stuff because it's usually boring to read, but in actual dungeoneering play these mechanics are crucial. LotFP delivers the best, most coherent set of operations rules I've ever seen.
Again, I like both these games. It's really a matter of what best fits your particular game scene. If you've got players who like to wrestle with new mechanics and you don't mind risking that maybe the game will fall apart under the weight of a bunch of new-fangled widgets, then DCC rpg looks like a rip-roaring good time. If you want a rock solid design that isn't going to trip up the players with too many moving parts, then go with LotFP. DCC rpg appeals to my inner adolescent, with lots of imagined explodey noises and splattering blood. LotFP comes off as the more grown-up option, working efficiently so I don't have to work hard. Of course, the latter feeling might be muted if I had the fullblown version in front of me with all the tits-and-gore artwork.
Part of me wishes I could just cut and paste together a hybrid between the two games, but I'm not sure that really work for me. Each has been designed with its own ethos and I don't think they would ever blend smoothly.
%202.png)
.JPG)
.png)
.gif)
Posts
OH NO! The profound awesomeness of each has obliterated the other! Woe onto our folly in pitting these two juggernauts against each other.
ReplyDelete... or maybe this post is just blank right now because you are in the middle of editing it. I'm curious to see what you have to say on the subject.
Blogger seems to be giving me the business at the moment. It published without me hitting the button, just as I started the post. Then it deleted the completed entry.
ReplyDelete"postretroclone" goddamn. new jargon for everybody to assimilate.
ReplyDeleteRight now feel like DCC is D&D with a few selected Rolemaster-lite-type options on top whereas LAmentations feels like D&D with stuff removed for a more aerodynamic profile.
And, like you, I wouldn't wanna have to pick one over the other.
ReplyDeleteI like Zak S' comparison of some DCC elements to Rolemaster. What it reminds me of even more is D&D with parts of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay grafted on... and I like that.
ReplyDeleteI have generally steered clear of the reviews and info for these two buggers as neither really appeals to me but after reading this I am somewhat intrigued by DCC.
ReplyDeleteAt the point where you wrote, " could push the play experience completely outside what you consider normal D&D", I got a little excited.
If nothing else, it sounds like it might have some neat wizardy ideas I can add to my D&D-But-Not game.
What it reminds me of even more is D&D with parts of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay grafted on...
ReplyDeleteI got that vibe from some of the rules as well (you start off adventuring as rat catchers and cobblers). Although I think LotFP is more WHFRP in the style of art.
I would love to play DCC but will probably run
ReplyDeleteLotFP.
You're probably not the man to ask, but how easily can Lamentations's "operations" rules be bolted onto the Pathfinder implementation of the 3.x OGL?
ReplyDelete"Right now feel like DCC is D&D with a few selected Rolemaster-lite-type options on top"
ReplyDeleteI agree.
And while I continue to have great fondness for Rolemaster (at least the 2nd edition/Classic version), DCC's mechanics, at least in the beta version, leave me somewhat cold.
cappadocius, I think it would only work if you are prepared to ignore the Pathfinder skill system a lot of the time.
ReplyDeleteAw, damnation. Thanks Jeff. Any chance of a more in-depth review of how Lamentations handles operations in the future?
ReplyDeleteGood review, especially for Lamentations. Absolutely beautiful cover art, but the system seems to have nichified itself into a small corner of the market with graphic, and I've heard, even pornographic artwork for some releases. The author was explaining the concept of the game on website forum and its anti-heroic setting and basis for play seemed both brutal and naive, but as you mention the actual mechanics or 'operations' were only lightly touched on in that review and conversation.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Goodman version has strong possibilities for reaching both the older players and the younger. It may be the first mainstream version of a retroclone D&D to appear on store shelves and thereby reaching players who know only the latest incarnations of D&D.
I'm psyched about DCC, it looks like a lot of fun. I look forward to some goofy level-0 adventuring.
ReplyDeleteLotFP, on the other hand, has a weird pseudo skill system and three pages of drivel on grappling copied from the 3.0 SRD. The controversial art doesn't appeal to me either.
Maybe I need to go reread it but LotFP seemed anything but streamlined to me. So many rules! Seemed like bunch of finigally from AD&D without any of the cool classes. Great art though.
ReplyDeleteSo far, DCC seems--for me--something to play on occasion and maybe steal a few bits from. LotFP, on the other hand, is a worthy contender for becoming my default version of D&D. (At least, the free, artless version of LotFP.)
ReplyDeleteI'd venture that the operational bits of Pathfinder and LotFP may be the core of what separates them from each other. You could certainly graft bits of one onto the other, but I'm not sure there's a general method to that madness. It would depend on exactly which details you like from each.
Great post.
ReplyDelete