Shadowdark Shadowdark Discussion Thread [+]

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That said, there also aren't rules for "heroes leading armies". The GM needs to improvise that stuff. The same with...

Mass combat rules are coming in the Western Reaches GM's Guide.

 

[Mannahnin]

Cursed Scroll #2 has rules for mounts, and #3 has rules for boats, right? Did I hear that Western Reaches will also have rules for other vehicles?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I am a total newb regarding shadowdark.

However, skills are essentially ability check dc

If it makes sense for the background, give advantage. Seems this would lend itself to application in most novel situations including piloting a ship if you are a sailor?

If it was the this shadowdark novice, I would just say no need to overcomplicate it

 

[Scribe]

Sieging a castle, firing a ballista at a dragon, or the rhythmic beating of of drums to build up to ramming speed as the distance to an enemy ship closes may be outside the scope of a typical dungeon crawl, but I do not feel that those things should be outside of what is possible in a medieval-ish fantasy adventure story.

Missed this one. I think you really need to look over the SD book and if the above is what you want mechanics for, you'll realize pretty quickly the current core book isn't the right tool for the job.

Maybe Western Reaches gets there, but that's going to be 2 full books on top of the core.

The scrolls don't really get there, even if Scroll 3 has boats.

 

[Scribe]

Aetherdark has crew and ship combat. For what it's worth.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I am a total newb regarding shadowdark.

However, skills are essentially ability check dc

If it makes sense for the background, give advantage. Seems this would lend itself to application in most novel situations including piloting a ship if you are a sailor?

If it was the this shadowdark novice, I would just say no need to overcomplicate it

Yeah, that's how I handle it, and it works fine. Backgrounds, classes and sometimes races can justify advantage on a roll, IMO.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, that's how I handle it, and it works fine. Backgrounds, classes and sometimes races can justify advantage on a roll, IMO.

Because of how swingy it is with no proficiency, I make a real effort to limit calling for rolls in SD. A lot of time, maybe even most, "your background gives you advantage" is better served with "you do it, now what?"

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Because of how swingy it is with no proficiency, I make a real effort to limit calling for rolls in SD. A lot of time, maybe even most, "your background gives you advantage" is better served with "you do it, now what?"

Yeah, I am more and more in the camp of only calling for rolls in very specific circumstances (the three-part test rule). Rolling all the time in 5E, as the game designers seem to want to happen, feels pretty silly as a result.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Yeah, I am more and more in the camp of only calling for rolls in very specific circumstances (the three-part test rule). Rolling all the time in 5E, as the game designers seem to want to happen, feels pretty silly as a result.

I guess my question is does it really simulate more effectively? Especially for a fantasy game?

How did I not notice the guy walking around the perimeter. I said I was looking in his exact location!

Oh yeah. I rolled a one. Guess my shoe was untied?

It’s sometimes like saying a person who know how to drive forgets how to start their car. Some things should just “be” hence those rules for when to roll.

 

[Mannahnin]

Yeah, I am more and more in the camp of only calling for rolls in very specific circumstances (the three-part test rule). Rolling all the time in 5E, as the game designers seem to want to happen, feels pretty silly as a result.

...doesn't that three part test come from the 5E rules? I feel like "roll for everything culture" is like a self-reinforcing meme, growing out of jokes about how 3E handled skills.