Shadowdark Unless I am wrong

[Scribe]

I'm still trying to parse what "a nod to balance where player ingenuity can matter within a rules framework" actually means.

If one watches 'hours and hours' of supposed Game Design Pros, I'm sure the potential for confusing overly technical jargon with actual insight increases exponentially.

 

[Retreater]

I'm still trying to parse what "a nod to balance where player ingenuity can matter within a rules framework" actually means.

Sorry if that's unclear. I wrote it while getting ready for work this morning.
Let me try to elaborate on the point...

When rules are balanced and the game has a sense of "fairness," I think that put players on an even playing field where they can test the abilities of their characters and their own skill. For example, in baseball we don't start the St. Louis Cardinals up by 10 runs or say that in hockey the Penguins need to score two goals for each point. I think that TTRPGs are games that need structure, balance, etc.

While no game is perfect and none can account for every situation that players can create, some games are purposefully under-designed. These rely on GM fiat and houserules that can be inconsistent. This is not a good basis for skilled play. Some GMs use "vibes" or "rule of cool" or whatever. Players require consistent rules to be able to have agency and make their decisions.

Shadowdark is too hand-wavy for my liking. It's too imbalanced for players to have a reasonable expectation of the play experience. ("Are we fighting the level 7 monster that has AC 12 or the one with AC 17 and takes half damage from all our attacks?")

 

[Mannahnin]

Sorry if that's unclear. I wrote it while getting ready for work this morning.
Let me try to elaborate on the point...

When rules are balanced and the game has a sense of "fairness," I think that put players on an even playing field where they can test the abilities of their characters and their own skill. For example, in baseball we don't start the St. Louis Cardinals up by 10 runs or say that in hockey the Penguins need to score two goals for each point. I think that TTRPGs are games that need structure, balance, etc.

While no game is perfect and none can account for every situation that players can create, some games are purposefully under-designed. These rely on GM fiat and houserules that can be inconsistent. This is not a good basis for skilled play. Some GMs use "vibes" or "rule of cool" or whatever. Players require consistent rules to be able to have agency and make their decisions.

Shadowdark is too hand-wavy for my liking. It's too imbalanced for players to have a reasonable expectation of the play experience. ("Are we fighting the level 7 monster that has AC 12 or the one with AC 17 and takes half damage from all our attacks?")

This is a more reasonable comment. I think those two monsters are an aberration, though, rather than representative. We saw with the caster math that the odds of getting spells off under normal conditions are way more favorable than you ballpark estimated. Your comments about SD being generally imbalanced are not supported, IMO.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It's the dunning-kruger effect in full force. Some people think that because they roleplay one game (often 5E, but not always) that makes them experts not only other RPGs of all sorts, but also RPG design theory.

It was kind of funny when Shadowdark first launched how many 5e players showed up in the Discord making pronouncements about what absolutely wouldn't work and had to be house-ruled.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The poster in question (who I have blocked) refers to "skilled game play", which is kind of interesting.

Traditionally "skilled game play" often meant avoiding dice rolls completely. You listen to the description, think about your environment, ask questions, explore that environment, make plans, and then hope it all works so you don't end up rolling dice fighting a Beholder, or making a save-or-die saving throw. (Or not even get a saving throw...Sphere of Annihilation in the original Tomb of Horrors, I'm looking at you...).

And, yes, there was/is a LOT of DM fiat in that style of play.

It seems what this poster means by "skilled play" is system mastery: knowing what buttons to press on your character sheet to overcome a challenge (i.e., defeat a monster) that is tuned to provide a challenge to your party, but through execution of deterministic rules.

If so, it's unsurprising that Shadowdark doesn't scratch their itch.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's too imbalanced for players to have a reasonable expectation of the play experience.

No, they do. And that expectation is, "don't start any fights unless we absolutely have to." It's not a game about getting into fights -- there's no XP for doing so! -- it's an RPG about getting home with the treasure, by any means necessary.

 

[Scribe]

that is tuned to provide a challenge to your party

Meaning, at least a 70% chance of success, in certain other systems.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Meaning, at least a 70% chance of success, in certain other systems.

What? Only a 30% chance of dying? Catering to casuals!

Kids these days, I tell you....

 

[Retreater]

No, they do. And that expectation is, "don't start any fights unless we absolutely have to." It's not a game about getting into fights -- there's no XP for doing so! -- it's an RPG about getting home with the treasure, by any means necessary.

Ok. And just let me play devil's advocate for a minute.
What is the bulk of the page content? Rules about fighting monsters.
So I've got my hard copy of the SD rulebook right here. Monster stat blocks for about 1/3rd of the page count. Weapon and armor stats. Class descriptions with level up Talents that give bonuses to hit, damage, etc.
So if the game was actually designed to support this style of play, what might we see? If we're trying to get treasure home, how about equipment that aids in that? Maybe the carrying capacity for a horse or cart? How much does a barrel weigh? What about some information about the value of trade goods?
Let's say we want to shatter a door to get to the goods? What might be the difficulty of that? Maybe the strength of the rope bounds to free the captive prince who is being held for ransom by the ogre warlord?
No. We get none of that. But we do get the combat stats for 70 pages of monsters. That's a lot of wasted space for a part of the game it doesn't want you to interact with.
The fans and designer of SD might claim it's not about fighting monsters, but the book says otherwise. The reward cycle of making characters better at fighting (but strangely not better at recovering or carrying loot) also betrays this design.

 

[Scribe]

Ok. And just let me play devil's advocate for a minute.
What is the bulk of the page content? Rules about fighting monsters.
So I've got my hard copy of the SD rulebook right here. Monster stat blocks for about 1/3rd of the page count. Weapon and armor stats. Class descriptions with level up Talents that give bonuses to hit, damage, etc.
So if the game was actually designed to support this style of play, what might we see? If we're trying to get treasure home, how about equipment that aids in that? Maybe the carrying capacity for a horse or cart? How much does a barrel weigh? What about some information about the value of trade goods?
Let's say we want to shatter a door to get to the goods? What might be the difficulty of that? Maybe the strength of the rope bounds to free the captive prince who is being held for ransom by the ogre warlord?
No. We get none of that. But we do get the combat stats for 70 pages of monsters. That's a lot of wasted space for a part of the game it doesn't want you to interact with.
The fans and designer of SD might claim it's not about fighting monsters, but the book says otherwise. The reward cycle of making characters better at fighting (but strangely not better at recovering or carrying loot) also betrays this design.

What is the difficulty to shatter a door? To break some ropes? You struggle with such things after all the systems you've played?

Open the cover of your book. The answer is there.