Shadowdark Finally Played Shadowdark

[Retreater]

Do you really think everyone who's run SD without a solid grounding in the texts you mentioned has suffered "TPK after TPK"? Do you believe your personal experience with the game is "that" universal?

I think if they don't have a solid grounding, that you're going to have the experience I had at the convention. Maybe they watched a lot of YouTube videos and not read the books. But playing the game as written with the assumption of play it entails will lead to many character deaths.

I don't see how it's possible to play it with the probabilities of RAW to not end most combats with a TPK. Sure, if you avoid them you can live. With stealth or diplomacy, you can survive. But when rubber hits the road, I don't see how it's possible to survive with the abilities the game gives the characters.

 

[Scribe]

But playing the game as written with the assumption of play it entails will lead to many character deaths.

This is where you get lost.

Sure, if you avoid them you can live. With stealth or diplomacy, you can survive.

Because THIS is the assumption of some of the play. You use stealth, you use diplomacy. You'll note that in the adventures by Arcane Library there are factions to interact with. You are not there to 'kill them all'.

Now obviously combat can, and likely will happen, but if you are just blithely running around oblivious to the clues and tells your DM is leaving (they do that right? like the book says?), making noise, crashing down doors, attacking everything in sight?

You deserve to die, because you are playing poorly.

Will characters die? Absolutely. You have single digit HP! Is every fight a TPK? Absolutely not.

I mean just be honest. You misrepresent the math, you misrepresent or misunderstand the game, you had trash tier DM's for your games who did not even play by the rules of the book and even a cursory reading of the book makes it clear, and you by your own admission do not even like OSR style games, with all the 'assumptions of play' which that style assumes.

I don't see how it's possible to survive with the abilities the game gives the characters.

And yet....many people are playing and enjoying the game.

 

[Retreater]

you by your own admission do not even like OSR style games

I don't think I fully understood that until my string of bad sessions. I had a nostalgia for how I played old TSR D&D, but that's not what the OSR does. I'm guessing it's more in narrative games like Daggerheart. And honestly, those styles of play couldn't be more different.

oblivious to the clues and tells your DM is leaving (they do that right? like the book says?)

I have to say I've never had a character die in SD to anything that was telegraphed. It was all just monsters who "appeared" and couldn't be escaped, tricked, bribed, or sneaked past.
Or ... you literally can't go anywhere else, so I guess you quit the adventure?

there are factions to interact with.

My experience with factions are that you might avoid fighting one group, but the other group will still kill ya. You can't make friends with everyone. And if it were that kind of game, SD would be better suited by offering diplomacy rules instead of weapon charts.

You misrepresent the math

Regarding the spell failure, I attest that it's still too high. At 1st level, with an average wizard character with a 14 Int, you still have like a 45% fail rate. When in the other games it was modelled upon, you had a 0% fail rate to cast many spells. Even the ones that allowed saving throws, many enemies had like a 15% chance to save.

you misrepresent or misunderstand the game

You're right. I don't understand it. I think there should be more guidance for exploration and diplomacy than combat and combat stats for enemies.

you had trash tier DM's

Agreed.

And yet....many people are playing and enjoying the game.

I'd say that's due to avoiding interaction with the game: fudging, spending entire sessions shopping or talking in a tavern, coming up with plans that are so "genius" that a GM just handwaves the adventure. In those cases, I'd say people aren't even playing the game.

 

[Scribe]

I don't think I fully understood that until my string of bad sessions. I had a nostalgia for how I played old TSR D&D, but that's not what the OSR does. I'm guessing it's more in narrative games like Daggerheart. And honestly, those styles of play couldn't be more different.

I thought the same, but after digging into Daggerheart a bit, I think its actually more OSR, than 5e is.

I have to say I've never had a character die in SD to anything that was telegraphed. It was all just monsters who "appeared" and couldn't be escaped, tricked, bribed, or sneaked past.
Or ... you literally can't go anywhere else, so I guess you quit the adventure?

Bad DMing for sure. Have you read the actual Arcane Library adventures?

My experience with factions are that you might avoid fighting one group, but the other group will still kill ya. You can't make friends with everyone. And if it were that kind of game, SD would be better suited by offering diplomacy rules instead of weapon charts.

Why do you need rules? "I want to make friends with this faction that hates this other faction." "OK, play it out." You do not need rules, you need a good DM.

Regarding the spell failure, I attest that it's still too high. At 1st level, with an average wizard character with a 14 Int, you still have like a 45% fail rate. When in the other games it was modelled upon, you had a 0% fail rate to cast many spells. Even the ones that allowed saving throws, many enemies had like a 15% chance to save.

A wizard character at level 1 with 14 Int.

Elf +1
Talent +1 (odds are).

You are now at +4. Its literally the truth. The basic math does not support you.

You're right. I don't understand it. I think there should be more guidance for exploration and diplomacy than combat and combat stats for enemies.

Cursed Scroll 4 has a bit more on Exploration as do I believe Scrolls 2 and 3, and diplomacy is coming I believe but again you dont need rules for that, you play the game with a good DM.

That said, you do not need more than the core book. Pages 90, 132 cover the basics.

I'd say that's due to avoiding interaction with the game: fudging, spending entire sessions shopping or talking in a tavern, coming up with plans that are so "genius" that a GM just handwaves the adventure. In those cases, I'd say people aren't even playing the game.

You would be wrong.