Shadowdark Shadowdark General Thread [+]

[BryonD]

I don't think the fighter is much more interesting mechanically speaking though? In general SD classes have not that deep, intriguing mechanics. The game is not about character builds. Warlock feels fine compared to fighter for me. Sure, why not give some additional bonuses based on the patron like you suggested, thats fine, but that still doesn't make the mechanics more compelling just because you now have some static bonus on some patron related skills.

I think you have taken a generalization regarding SD and stretched it beyond reason.
I mean, first, you can simply list the fighter "things" alongside the Warlock "things" and demonstrate the difference.
Almazzat is the melee destruction theme.
At 5th level a human warlock will have 5 boons. If they got lucky and rolled a 2 or 12 then they get advantage 3 rounds a day (which for this lucky character is unique and cool)
Assuming a typical luck character they will have 5 total bonuses of +1 to melee attack / melee damage / HP (possibly including other perks for +2 STR or CON). And maybe one of those is traded for a weapon prof or adv on init.

At 5th level the human fighter has 4 perks
The same standard luck fighter will get 4 total bonuses. He can't increase damage but he can increase attacks with melee and ranged together.
For simplicity call it +4 to melee and ranged attacks vs +5 to melee only.
For the cost of that +1 fighter gets all weapons (the warlock might give up that +1 edge for ONE).
The fighter also gets ADV on all STR or Dex checks
The fighter also gets Hauler. Hauler is huge in the SD system.
Oh, and the fighter gets +3 to hit AND +3 to damage with his main weapon.
So really the warlock is comparing his "+5" worth of bonuses to "+10" total for the fighter when it counts.
And if the you look at the lucky warlock who rolled a 2, then you have to give the fighter that +3/+3 with their backup weapon on choice.

Objectively it just doesn't compare.

Now, we can back up and go to the "its not about power" position. I agree.
Power isn't nothing. But for SD, I agree.
But everything that expresses the warlock as "the warlock" is captured in the above.
When comparing one class to another your statement "The game is not about character builds" falls flat. The warlock class is just that, an alternative character build. full stop.
As noted already, nothing is stopping a player from running a fighter and proclaiming that character is a warlock of Almazzat. I suspect it would be a pretty common opinion that this is completely in the spirit of SD. And the GM and player could happily agree that grit and hauler and +3/+3 are all boons. The "why" of the fighter class abilities are not hard coded, for exactly the reasons people have stated for theme over min/max.
Why does the Warlock class exist other than to offer a "build" that creates a more fulfilling representation of the patron devotion / boon concept?

We don't need the paladin or the ranger. The fighter could be skinned as either. The Thief could skin as a ranger.
In my opinion the ranger and the witch and the bard and most every other class provide opportunities represent different concepts in a way that the players will enjoy more than just reskinning the fighter or wizard.
They are "character builds" which push the flavor to a desired outcome.

In the end, a lucky roll on stats will make a "more powerful" character. And that character will be slightly more survivable. But the nature of SD is that the range from slightly weak to high power is small.
But I'd rather play a weak ranger whose class "build" came through at the table than a well rolled warlock with a few +1s and stat perks and nothing that expresses "Warlock".

 

[BryonD]

and now I'm picking on it.

To be clear, a few years ago I would have been highly skeptical that I'd be fired up for any rules light system.

Shadowdark is completely awesome. There is so much great to see. The game I'm running (no warlocks) is a blast and a big hit.

I just came here hoping to get some insights to help with this one particular thing because I want to make it more thematic and fun at the table.

 

[Retros_x]

I think you have taken a generalization regarding SD and stretched it beyond reason.

I didn't generalized anything or took one. You were talking about "fun mechanics" and I said that the fighter has not much more fun mechanics. As a answer you now compare their mechanical power. Thats math, not fun, at least for me. I guess we have a different understanding of fun.

When comparing one class to another your statement "The game is not about character builds" falls flat. The warlock class is just that, an alternative character build.

I said the game is not about character builds, not that there are no classes. The meaning: The focus of the game is not on the build. You don't theorycraft a build like you might do in D&D 5e. You take the class that sounds fun to you and has a thematic resonance with you as a player and than you roll for talents, hoping for good rolls. Your build is mainly random and/or defined outside of the mechanics on your sheet aka what loot and boons you get in the adventure. Thats what I mean by this. And that is the main reason I really don't care about these numeric comparisons between possible build. I already did not care about white room balance discussions in D&D and even much less in Shadowdark.

I just came here hoping to get some insights to help with this one particular thing because I want to make it more thematic and fun at the table.

This is a very understandable hope. As other commentators and me already said, thankfully SD is an easy to homebrew game, and your suggestions like giving additional static bonuses won't make anything broken. I can't really help with more sophisticated ideas because for me the warlock is thematically complete and fun enough, so I am at loss for ideas because I have no intrinsic motivation or needs regarding this class. But I also never played one or had a player at my table. Maybe if that happens I have more input.

 

[BryonD]

Shrug I don't see much you have offered here to actually make a point.
But it seems that you are really more interested in collaborative storytelling. And thats great.
But you don't really need SD for that. SD adds mechanics.
I think the comparison to 5E is a red herring.

If that is really 100% true that you just want the storytelling then I think my prior statement should apply to you.
You don't need rangers or warlocks in the first place. Just describe your core four classes however you want.

To me SD ADDS to the storytelling by providing just enough consistent mechanics to enforce ideas and concepts.
I claim that those "math" things are there exclusively because they create fun in mechanically making the character manifest itself in the way expected. It is fun when the fighter is much better at feats of strength and the fun manifests when the mechanics make that true.

In the end SD is still a mechanical game. We can all just sit around and do collaborative storytelling with no "builds".
For me, I love SD because it is a book full of mechanics that enhance my storytelling. And, still, the classes are purely mechanics. All of the "character" of every character comes from the player. The book doesn't provide that. The book provides the mechanics.
That's why the question exists.

And clearly there are people who also see the warlock not hitting the table. As you say, for some reason that haven't called out for actual play with anyone in your group either.
The class doesn't need more power to make people go "Awesome, I want to be that". But it does need something "fun" in the same way that fighters being great at feats of STR is fun.

I absolutely LOVE the minimalist heart of SD. But I think ignoring and blanket hand waving away the simple whiteboard assessment is just a flawed as trying to be a whiteboard min/max payer in a SD game.

 

[Retros_x]

But I think ignoring and blanket hand waving away the simple whiteboard assessment is just a flawed

I'll ignore everything else you said because you seem to be focussed in asserting my playstyle and personality or being rude in general and I am getting annoyed by that. I just want to add to the quote: Hand waving away whiteboard assessment might be flawed in your world, but I am having great fun with the game while ignoring these modifier comparison meta discussion people like you enjoy. So clearly your point is not that objectively true as you so hard to try to assert.

Since you seem more concerned with persuading other people here that your opinion is an objective truth, I'd recommend giving your feedback to Kelsey to maybe change the printed version of the warlock in the upcoming expansion.