Meanwhile, elsewhere on the internet...

[Morthrai]

Looks like some of the RPGnet crowd are taking a trip down Memory Lane

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=448285

[Linden]

Bit depressing that the Shadowrun comparison keeps coming up when the games are very different. Always found Shadowrun too ridiculous for words...whereas parts of DC seem to be coming more true with each passing day.

[Morthrai]

I think that what similarity there is between the two games still gets over-emphasised due to both of them having the great Mike Stackpole play a part in their development.

The way I see the difference is that Dark Conspiracy is a cross between dystopic science fiction and Hollywood B-movies, whereas Shadowrun is basically cyberpunk mated to AD&D

Both can be fun but I know which I prefer!

[Linden]

I'm all in favour of genre cross pollination and I think Dark Conspiracy is a good example. But...I think there has to be some compatibility between the genres you're trying to mate. Shadowrun doesn't do it for me. The cyberpunk meets D&D hybrid is just too jarring: Elves and hobbits should be gambolling through the woods and fields of some Tolkienesque fantasy land, not stalking the mean streets of a future city armed to the teeth with assault weapons and as much cybertech as their bodies can stand. I feel same way about WH40k and some of the D20 Modern campaigns I've seen. Dark Conspiracy is accused of being a "kitchen sink" rpg but there are far more egregious offenders out there. Adding the contents of the Monster Manual (or whatever it's called these days) to a modern game creates a sprawling cross genre pudding and just serves as proof that more is less.

[ReHerakhte]

While I have no major problems with most fantasy RPGs I agree with Linden that the trend for mixing fantasy with another genre is really nothing more than a "we can't actually think of anything original so we'll just throw elves and orcs into the future" approach.
I have played ShadowRun and enjoyed my time with it but the campaigns where never long and it was more a break from our regularly scheduled gaming than the regular game. At the time I liked it also because it was actually something new and different from the mainstream.

D20 Modern - the less said about it the better as far as I'm concerned. I don't mind a level-up/PC class-based system of rules for a fantasy game, I despise it for any modern or future setting because it is such a lousy & crap portrayal of modern people's jobs and experiences. I've personally had four completely different types of jobs and for the last type I've worked for three different companies plus I spent a decade in the Australian Army Reserve (i.e. Territorials). That just cannot be replicated using D20 OGL rules although it is a fairly common experience amongst a lot of people these days.
(rant over!)

I've seen a lot of people criticize the DC rules for being too clunky or too complicated or too weak or too (insert negative comment here) and some of those people have used other rules but kept the game background. Personally, I've found the GDW D20 rules some of the fastest to adjudicate and the easiest to tinker with. You can add to them and the entire system doesn't collapse because you remove part of it. I personally have no desire to use some of the rules the other people used specifically because I do not want the overly complex/complicated systems they preferred.

Okay so obviously I'm a fan but there are some legitimate criticisms, the game is not lethal enough for my liking but I solved that by drastically reducing the number of hitpoints PCs have (my current game, one of the PCs suffered 12 points of damage to the abdomen in one hit and he's now running off to the hospital - he's not taking any chances to take more damage). There was never an effective horror ruling like in comparable games but again that can be inserted easily enough - one of my friends designed a set of Sanity rules at one time for his DC game as he was an avid Cthulhu GM and liked the concept a little too much!

I have no problem with DC being a 'kitchen sink' rpg because I think its execution was done far better than most of the other offenders. DC never set any barrier on how spartan or how saturated the individual GM could have the weird stuff in the game but the 'weird' was drawn from common myths and the tabloids not some wacky 'elves with cyberwear meet amped up orcs with smartguns' shtick. Don't get me wrong, I like ShadowRun well enough but the trend to throw fantasy elements into a modern or future setting has been done enough.
ShadowrRun got it right and did it pretty much first, everybody else should stop the blatant ripoffs and get some originality. It's like every damned post-apoc game (of any sort, computer, table top etc. etc.) having mutants - enough already you boring game designers, think of something else you bunch of lacklustre, money-grubbing, dumb-arse, unthinking, wannabe Gary Gygax imposters!
(end of another rant!)

Kevin climbs off his high-horse

[Zvezda]

Bit depressing that the Shadowrun comparison keeps coming up when the games are very different. Always found Shadowrun too ridiculous for words...whereas parts of DC seem to be coming more true with each passing day.

I allways liked ShadowRun but I liked Cyberpunk better. Because it was a lot more evil. Whan I first came across DC I though: damn, that game makes the Cyberpunk world look like EuroDisney! I really do not understand what DC has in common with ShadowRun. Supernatural beings. That's probably it.
Well,not everything was bad under the SPP. You could just send people to re-educationcamp for comparing DC to Shadowrun for example...or just make them disappear...you know what I mean. I personally always liked the rules of DC a lot. I remember when playing ShadowRun with people who also played DC the PC tend to buy their arms in the antiques store because coud get the most advanced weapons there. But besides having good equipment I also think the game mechanics are not that bad. I don't like the task resolution. That average/difficult/formidable stuff does not work too well. But combat in GDW systems is brilliant. I was amazed to see that someone dared to make a game where a trained soldier would very likely defeat a journalist in combat. In all the other games I played it was just a matter of how you arrange your character points. I totally go with Kevin if it comes to the lethality but than I must say I don't want my games to be too leathal. I just halved the hitpoints.
On the Sanity however I totally disagree. I liked DC way better than CoC because it did not bother me with rediculous sanity rules which are based more in the realms of magic than psychology. I remember once playing a Mongolian monk in the Civil War who lost some sanity because it turned out that his religious belives are actually true...we had some arguing that a 1920's Mongolian monk actually knows that monsters exist but unfortunatly in this game you can only paly PC from the US west coast.
The greatest thing about DC is that you can play it every way you like it. If you want insanity, well no problem. Rules are eayily made and you have it. You can even stop using magic in the game and it still would be fine.
Finally what is 'kitchen sink' rpg supposed to mean?

[Morthrai]

Finally what is 'kitchen sink' rpg supposed to mean?

Ah, that wonderful thing called the English language again

There is a saying that dates back to the mid-19th century, "everything but the kitchen sink". Originally referring to the old British habit of taking literally everything with you when you moved to live in another place, its meaning has changed a little and now means anything that has almost too much included.

Can also be used as a way of saying that you have brought everything you need if someone asks you

[Linden]

On the Sanity however I totally disagree. I liked DC way better than CoC because it did not bother me with rediculous sanity rules which are based more in the realms of magic than psychology. I remember once playing a Mongolian monk in the Civil War who lost some sanity because it turned out that his religious belives are actually true...we had some arguing that a 1920's Mongolian monk actually knows that monsters exist but unfortunatly in this game you can only paly PC from the US west coast.?

I think we've discussed the DC fear mechanic, which appeared in Challenge Magazine and then the Empathic sourcebook, before. It was an interesting idea, but wasn't fleshed out to any great degree and it struck me as something of an afterthought. I've never used it. The CoC SAN rules have their faults but the situation you describe with the Mongolian monk sounds just bizarre. Blame the GM for that one I think. Personally I think the main difference between DC and CoC when it comes to monsters and fear is perhaps summed up in the film Deep Rising. When faced with a huge Cthulhoid monster at the end the main character doesn't run away gibbering and screaming, he just shoots the ugly bastard in the eye with a shotgun. Surely any DC character would do the same?

Finally what is 'kitchen sink' rpg supposed to mean?

As Lee's explanation, but I think with Dark Conspiracy the specific meaning is that it throws in a load of monsters without any thought of how they relate to each other or the game as a whole. Not something I believe about DC although I think it is a charge that could be levelled at some D20 modern campaigns that feature D&D monsters wandering the streets of modern cities.

[Morthrai]

Apologies to Zvezda, I missed out a sentence in my post!

Yes, regarding DC the 'kitchen sink' reference means what Linden said, a lot of things were put into the books that did not relate to each other very well. Of course, this has to do with Lester's original 'pick and mix' ideas for the game.

Worst DC game I ever ran involved a rules lawyer type player who thought that because I had all the books, I was going to use everything just because it was there!

[Linden]

Apologies to Zvezda, I missed out a sentence in my post!

Yes, regarding DC the 'kitchen sink' reference means what Linden said, a lot of things were put into the books that did not relate to each other very well.

Just to clarify: Although that's an accusation levelled at the game I don't think it's true. As I've said there are far worse offenders out there.

[Morthrai]

Just to clarify: Although that's an accusation levelled at the game I don't think it's true. As I've said there are far worse offenders out there.

Definitely! In my personal opinion the worst ones are the later editions of "Underground Constructions And Fire-Breathing Reptiles" and "The One That Rhymes With Shifts"

[Zvezda]

Can also be used as a way of saying that you have brought everything you need if someone asks you

Thanks I'll use that next time someone askes me. I think I just increased my English skill by +1.

I think we've discussed the DC fear mechanic, which appeared in Challenge Magazine and then the Empathic sourcebook, before. It was an interesting idea, but wasn't fleshed out to any great degree and it struck me as something of an afterthought. I've never used it. The CoC SAN rules have their faults but the situation you describe with the Mongolian monk sounds just bizarre. Blame the GM for that one I think. Personally I think the main difference between DC and CoC when it comes to monsters and fear is perhaps summed up in the film Deep Rising. When faced with a huge Cthulhoid monster at the end the main character doesn't run away gibbering and screaming, he just shoots the ugly bastard in the eye with a shotgun. Surely any DC character would do the same?

I think that sums it up very good. Well in that game the GM was very stiff when it came to the rules. It was a pre-designed adventure and…anyways. I think for a modern setting the sight of monsters is hardly as disturbing as it might have been in the 20s. I really suggest the Night Watch books where some parts of the horror film business are controlled by vampires, werewolves and other monsters. If not outright attacked by such a being few people would go insane. Most would probably think nice PR Mr Craven.

As Lee's explanation, but I think with Dark Conspiracy the specific meaning is that it throws in a load of monsters without any thought of how they relate to each other or the game as a whole. Not something I believe about DC although I think it is a charge that could be levelled at some D20 modern campaigns that feature D&D monsters wandering the streets of modern cities.

I always thought that Protodimensions is what connects everything in DC. The possibilities are unlimited so there is no reason to try and make rules or a background for every possibility. If a new dimension is opened new creatures would pop out. If we are lucky oxygen is toxic to them if not…
What I mean is that since you can travel everywhere in DC you can encounter everything. Theoretically you could just send your PCs to a Fantasy kind protodimension and force the players to play "Underground Constructions And Fire-Breathing Reptiles" till they drop.

Yes, regarding DC the 'kitchen sink' reference means what Linden said, a lot of things were put into the books that did not relate to each other very well. Of course, this has to do with Lester's original 'pick and mix' ideas for the game.

I think that’s what I like best. I am running this game since it appeared on the marked and not a single time I used space aliens. I just don’t like them. They make up an enorumus part of the background but I am not interested and it was no problem at all to exclude them. Try that with ShadowRun. I am not to fond of Fire-Breathing Reptiles and tried to leave them out of my SR games but it just did not work.

Worst DC game I ever ran involved a rules lawyer type player who thought that because I had all the books, I was going to use everything just because it was there!

Okay? I am shocked. How was that supposed to work? Build a HeroQuest like dungeon where you can slay every creature in the books with different weapons?

[Linden]

I always thought that Protodimensions is what connects everything in DC. The possibilities are unlimited so there is no reason to try and make rules or a background for every possibility. If a new dimension is opened new creatures would pop out. If we are lucky oxygen is toxic to them if not…
What I mean is that since you can travel everywhere in DC you can encounter everything. Theoretically you could just send your PCs to a Fantasy kind protodimension and force the players to play "Underground Constructions And Fire-Breathing Reptiles" till they drop.

I've always avoided doing that. My take on the Proto-dimensions is that they are quite alien. I don't want them to be cosy environment for the players. Dropping them into a fantasy land where they can behave like they're in a D&D game would be counter to that. Although... I did use the Tir-Na-Nog proto-dimension from Demonground (by Norm I think?) and there were a few fantasy rpg jokes by the characters.

I think that’s what I like best. I am running this game since it appeared on the marked and not a single time I used space aliens. I just don’t like them. They make up an enorumus part of the background but I am not interested and it was no problem at all to exclude them.

I've used the Greys and Insects a fair bit but not the Energy or Tentacular ETs. Will probably use the latter at some point, as their robot creations have made an appearance in my campaign. Energy ETs I've never really found a use for. I don't like the multi-species mothership idea from the original game background. It's not set in stone, but in my campaign the ship was exclusively crewed by Greys who became corrupted after the Io event. Other alien species were inimical to humans from the get go.

I suppose all this does go to show how adaptable the game is, and that a paucity of canon background is a good thing i.e. you can do what you want.

[Zvezda]

I've always avoided doing that. My take on the Proto-dimensions is that they are quite alien. I don't want them to be cosy environment for the players. Dropping them into a fantasy land where they can behave like they're in a D&D game would be counter to that. Although... I did use the Tir-Na-Nog proto-dimension from Demonground (by Norm I think?) and there were a few fantasy rpg jokes by the characters.

In my game there are no limits to protodimensions. I ran dc like 10 or 12 years before I finally got the protodimensions book so I had to make up my own ideas. Theoretically everything is possible but most dimensions I use are similar to those form demonground or the basic rules. But there is not too much dimension travel in my campaigns anyways.

I've used the Greys and Insects a fair bit but not the Energy or Tentacular ETs. Will probably use the latter at some point, as their robot creations have made an appearance in my campaign. Energy ETs I've never really found a use for. I don't like the multi-species mothership idea from the original game background. It's not set in stone, but in my campaign the ship was exclusively crewed by Greys who became corrupted after the Io event. Other alien species were inimical to humans from the get go.

Actually I am not using too much of the real background since I did not like the ideas too much. I tend not to use the cars and car prices as well as the computers and all that because I did not like it. I also don’t like laser weapons so they where never available. Occasionally I use the combat statistics of the insectoid ETs though I never stated that these guys are from an other planet.

I suppose all this does go to show how adaptable the game is, and that a paucity of canon background is a good thing i.e. you can do what you want.

Unfortunately I think that is exactly what makes DC a commercial failure. This page is up for like 3 years and it has less than 100 members. Of these less than 10 actually do post once in a while. I am not a market analyst or something it just seems to me that games with a very dense background and not much room for individual modifications sell much better.

[ReHerakhte]

...I am not a market analyst or something it just seems to me that games with a very dense background and not much room for individual modifications sell much better.

Unfortunately, this is very true especially this decade. I've met a few younger gamers and they have an appalling lack of imagination when it comes to creating adventures. During the 1990s we were spoiled - the large companies kept pumping out material and all the small companies wanted to get a piece of the action. They made so many scenarios & adventures that you never have to think up one yourself.

Now we have a bunch of people who demand instant satisfaction, if you want to be entertained you just go and buy another adventure. I have seen many comments from people on this and other gaming forums, saying that they have rarely (and sometimes not at all) run a published scenario for their Players. They bought them for information or to collect the set but they always made up their own adventures.
With the latest group of people who are gaming, it's the other way around. They buy plenty of the published adventures and run them pretty much straight from the book and they rarely create anything of their own.