How would YOU change Shadowdark?

[darjr]

Oh that is hilarious.

What level were they?

1st. All guantlet survivors, they would have made 2nd level after this adventure.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Why is this ok in OSR, but when it's done in 5E, people say it's a flaw of the game -- despite the designers saying that this is the intent.

Because two different sets of people are commenting, maybe?

D&D players (seem to) want everything spelled out very explicitly. So in those forums people are nitpicking over rulues.

In OSR discussions people have a different viewpoint.

 

[Aldarc]

Why is this ok in OSR, but when it's done in 5E, people say it's a flaw of the game -- despite the designers saying that this is the intent.

I suspect that it may be one of holistic coherence. Such an approach feels consistent in the framework of OSR where other rules operate in this fashion. However, in 5e D&D, such a rule can stick out like a sore thumb when other rules/rulings don't seemingly quite operate this way. 5e D&D initially touted "rulings not rules" but it also increasingly seemed to rely on "rules over rulings." What the game said versus what it did sometimes felt at odds.

 

[Xenolith234]

I suspect that it may be one of holistic coherence. Such an approach feels consistent in the framework of OSR where other rules operate in this fashion. However, in 5e D&D, such a rule can stick out like a sore thumb when other rules/rulings don't seemingly quite operate this way. 5e D&D initially touted "rulings not rules" but it also increasingly seemed to rely on "rules over rulings." What the game said versus what it did sometimes felt at odds.

I haven’t been much a part of this thread, but I’d say it doesn’t seem as easy to bolt subsystems onto 5e because there are quite a few interrelated parts, like proficiency bonus (one of my particular dislikes). It takes much more system design than it would’ve in OSR due to its modularity.

 

[Fenris-77]

Bolting things on to a system can be done well or poorly with just about any game. Some people, IMO anyway, seem too eager to make up entirely new mechanics and subsystems for things when leveraging existing ones is often a better, more natural fit with the existing game. I find brand new systems and mechanics far more likely to be jarring and out of place.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I would probably do away with the torch timer. I like it, so I may not do away with it, but when it goes off it's usually at a time when it doesn't matter and we just light another one. However, it does supply some tension just knowing it's there. I guess I'll keep it, maybe not.

When I ran it light always matters. The second it goes out, things start slithering out of the dark and lighting a torch can be hard (DC 12 int or dex at disadvantage). For me it’s a fantastic way to add tension.

 

[Umbran]

You don't understand the meaning of the word "important":

Mod Note:
You understand the meaning of the word "civil", yes? Maybe even "polite" and "kind"?

Practice those things with your fellow posters, please and thanks.

 

[TwoSix]

Why is this ok in OSR, but when it's done in 5E, people say it's a flaw of the game -- despite the designers saying that this is the intent.

I would imagine because the game experience I'm anticipating in an OSR game is different than the structure I (and others) are anticipating from a modern D&D game.

There are plenty of things I encourage in OSR play that I don't think should be a part of 5e. They're different games.

 

[TwoSix]

I haven’t been much a part of this thread, but I’d say it doesn’t seem as easy to bolt subsystems onto 5e because there are quite a few interrelated parts, like proficiency bonus (one of my particular dislikes). It takes much more system design than it would’ve in OSR due to its modularity.

I liked proficiency bonus when 5e first came out, but I've evolved into hating it.

 

[NN]

Ok so im a wuss who likes average hitpoints instead of rolling. What to give dwarves in lieu of hitpoint advantage rolls?