My point wasn’t that they even look alike. My point was I looked at the game, similar to how I did 4e, and said eh it’s great design but not for me. I don’t see how that’s hard to figure out or think I’m saying they are the same.
He summarized my exact feelings. Like I read 2024 and i want to like it but it’s a LOT like reading 4e to me. Like this is a great game but it is wildly different. Let’s say more like 3.0-3.5 really and how the game under 3.5 got really quirky and weird.
I’ve been revisiting 2e for a couple months now. Not running it but just reading the core rules and ya know I think it just might be my favorite edition. It streamlined some warts in 1e and fixed the Thief. My only grumble is Priest class. I have Legends & Lore now and Complete Priest and it...
Oh this is exciting. The one thing I disliked about OSE is the multiple options for buying the game. I have a friend who bought the advanced box and was mad it didn’t include the actual rules after he was told on Facebook it was all he needed. Ok that friend was me. I’ve since bought a couple...
Lankhmar is excellent. Dying Earth as well. It doesn’t have to be wild gonzo for DCC to work. You could even use The Old World for Warhammer as your setting.
See for me, DCC is more dark fantasy ala Elric than high fantasy. But then you slap Lankhmar on it and it immediately goes into Sword & Sorcery. It's definitely not Kane though.
I have the Rules Tome, the Player's Book and the advanced box and when I run OSE it worked well because I have 3 rules references during character creation and then the big book and the monster & treasure book for me during play. The rest are for the players use.