How would YOU change Shadowdark?

[Aldarc]

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

How about simply +2 HP per level? So dwarves get Average HP + 2.

 

[TwoSix]

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

An extra 1 or 2 HP a level? Advantage on HP rolls works out to be about a ~1.5 point boost to the result.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

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

Max hit points at level one?

Or advantage on Constitution checks.

 

[Bill Zebub]

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

One can still compute the average using advantage...

 

[TwoSix]

One can still compute the average using advantage...

2d6 keep highest = 4.47
2d8 keep highest = 5.81
2d10 keep highest = 7.15

 

[NN]

ahah . +1 for d4/d6 classes
Alternating +1/+2 for d8

Im coming round to no saving throws.
Slowly

 

[overgeeked]

One edge case I can see where losing your spell if you fail the casting roll is a bit goofy is cover. Someone hides behind something therefore it’s harder to hit them with a spell, makes total sense. If you miss that target you’re then locked out of that spell for the rest of the day, makes no sense. That’s where separating them would make sense. But, as I said, an edge case. Otherwise a lot to really like about Shadowdark.

 

[Bill Zebub]

One edge case I can see where losing your spell if you fail the casting roll is a bit goofy is cover. Someone hides behind something therefore it’s harder to hit them with a spell, makes total sense. If you miss that target you’re then locked out of that spell for the rest of the day, makes no sense. That’s where separating them would make sense. But, as I said, an edge case. Otherwise a lot to really like about Shadowdark.

Huh. I don't think spell casting checks are "to hit" rolls, so partial cover would be irrelevant. If they were, then even without cover a failed check would sometimes mean an actual failure, but sometimes it would mean a "miss" (the fire bolt went off, it just didn't hit its target) and therefore it wouldn't make sense to lose the spell for the day.

And if the target has full cover and can't be hit, then the player should be informed of that.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

ahah . +1 for d4/d6 classes
Alternating +1/+2 for d8

Im coming round to no saving throws.
Slowly

If you don't have the quickstart rules, I would download them and, ideally, play a simple game with a friend. (It could be simple as Orc & Pie or the Delian Tomb, if you feel more ambitious.)

 

[overgeeked]

Huh. I don't think spell casting checks are "to hit" rolls, so partial cover would be irrelevant. If they were, then even without cover a failed check would sometimes mean an actual failure, but sometimes it would mean a "miss" (the fire bolt went off, it just didn't hit its target) and therefore it wouldn't make sense to lose the spell for the day.

And if the target has full cover and can't be hit, then the player should be informed of that.

Under Terrain on page 89.

“Attacking or casting a spell on a creature that is hiding at least half its body behind interposing terrain has disadvantage. If you can't see a creature at all due to terrain, you can't target it.”

You lose a spell if the roll fails. Targeting someone behind partial cover gives disadvantage. Hence losing your spell for the day because of cover. Like I said, it’s an edge case and one reason for separating casting and resistance rolls. But it just doesn’t make sense as it stands.