Shadowdark Unless I am wrong

[Warpiglet-7]

after thinking about this further:

I am ok with 3 strength meaning nearly bedridden weakness or 3 int meaning just shy of my Chihuahua’s comprehension…

IF

I am not rolling for stats without mulligans or some way to mitigate this. In theory I am not against the old Gygaxian 18 int is “genius”or 3 str can’t lift X weight…but being forced to roleplay this when you are trying to be an adventurer is unfun generally.

I don’t mind mechanical penalties, but the meaning of these things does not square with adventuring.

And I am. Or against penalties, nor a power gamer to my mind.

There is a reason for point buy, standard array, 4d6 and assign etc.

Games like shadowdark seem to have none of these…that could be unsatisfying if I want to pretend to be minimally capable bonuses or penalties notwithstanding.

 

[Reynard]

I'm pretty sure they're characteristics.

Right. I'm saying they should not be. It isn't a measure of how smart the character seems. That's up to the player. It is a concrete measure of the character's aptitude for learned facts and arcane magic. Better to call it "Scholarship" or even just use it as an Approach aka "Intellectual." That's way Conan can dump stat it and still be clever and wiley.

 

[GMMichael]

I am ok with 3 strength meaning nearly bedridden weakness or 3 int meaning just shy of my Chihuahua’s comprehension…

3 INT would be a compliment for my chi!

Games like shadowdark seem to have none of these…that could be unsatisfying if I want to pretend to be minimally capable bonuses or penalties notwithstanding.

Rolling a 3 or 4 isn't - statistically - a big problem. But hey, you could roll one. Just don't put it in an attribute that you like. Maybe Shadowdark requires assigning down the line . . . then own it. Why play Shadowdark if you don't like the rules?

Right. I'm saying they should not be. It isn't a measure of how smart the character seems. That's up to the player. It is a concrete measure of the character's aptitude for learned facts and arcane magic. Better to call it "Scholarship" or even just use it as an Approach aka "Intellectual." That's way Conan can dump stat it and still be clever and wiley.

Gotcha. There's no wrong way to play. But there are wrong ways to use rules.

 

[Celebrim]

One of my major turnoffs about low ability scores is not winning per se.

For me playing an int 4 character precludes good problem solving. Similarly, a 3 con character would pass out walking down stairs before getting into the dungeon.

I hear all these (fake) stories from "back in the day" about how they played what they rolled and how this guy they played with played despite having two sub 5 scores (but 3 18's, it was a legitimate roll, really), and my first response is always, "You realize you weren't allowed by the rules to be an adventurer if you had two sub 5 scores, right?"

Low ability scores are such a fake "I'm nerdier than thou" thing.

If I could go back and do it all over again, I'd endorse method III for chargen. It would have saved so much hassle and drama and everyone would have been happier about it. The fake machismo around low ability scores and using harsh methods for generating them just needs to die a death and be unmourned.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

3 INT would be a compliment for my chi!


Rolling a 3 or 4 isn't - statistically - a big problem. But hey, you could roll one. Just don't put it in an attribute that you like. Maybe Shadowdark requires assigning down the line . . . then own it. Why play Shadowdark if you don't like the rules?


Gotcha. There's no wrong way to play. But there are wrong ways to use rules.

I don’t have a problem with the rules as written.

I rolled a character with a 4 dex…and was going to play him as an overweight but strong fighter. No problem.

I don’t have a problem with a penalty like o intelligence rolls either. What I don’t want is to roll 3-4 intelligence and ‘in addition’ to the penalty be considered barely self aware, unable to communicate effectively or contribute without meta gaming.

The rules only specify a penalty to a roll.

Decades of D&D suggest other meaning and roleplay requirements.

 

[Reynard]

, "You realize you weren't allowed by the rules to be an adventurer if you had two sub 5 scores, right?"

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Low ability scores are such a fake "I'm nerdier than thou" thing.

Or this.

iThe fake machismo around low ability scores and using harsh methods for generating them just needs to die a death and be unmourned.

Or this. I wonder if you are universalizing something that was very specific to.your gaming circle?

 

[Lidgar]

One thing I love about SD is how flexible it is. For example, we roll 3d6, but don’t assign the rolls in order. We also use the option to reroll the stats if you don’t have a stat of at least 14. Lastly, we go with max hp for first level. None of this breaks the game, and allows for a better fit to our tastes.

 

[Retreater]

after thinking about this further:

I am ok with 3 strength meaning nearly bedridden weakness or 3 int meaning just shy of my Chihuahua’s comprehension…

IF

I am not rolling for stats without mulligans or some way to mitigate this. In theory I am not against the old Gygaxian 18 int is “genius”or 3 str can’t lift X weight…but being forced to roleplay this when you are trying to be an adventurer is unfun generally.

I don’t mind mechanical penalties, but the meaning of these things does not square with adventuring.

And I am. Or against penalties, nor a power gamer to my mind.

There is a reason for point buy, standard array, 4d6 and assign etc.

Games like shadowdark seem to have none of these…that could be unsatisfying if I want to pretend to be minimally capable bonuses or penalties notwithstanding.

This was my beef that I couldn't get over with Shadowdark. It's using old school ability generation with the modern modifier chart and DC system.
In the old era, I don't think it was possible to have a +4 or -4 in an ability modifier. With Shadowdark, it just basically copies stuff from Hasbro-era D&D without really caring how it fits with an OSR design ethos.
Which I guess is fine. It's making bank and folks love it. It's "won" the OSR. It's not my favorite or what I think is the best designed (I prefer Swords and Wizardry).

 

[Warpiglet-7]

This was my beef that I couldn't get over with Shadowdark. It's using old school ability generation with the modern modifier chart and DC system.
In the old era, I don't think it was possible to have a +4 or -4 in an ability modifier. With Shadowdark, it just basically copies stuff from Hasbro-era D&D without really caring how it fits with an OSR design ethos.
Which I guess is fine. It's making bank and folks love it. It's "won" the OSR. It's not my favorite or what I think is the best designed (I prefer Swords and Wizardry).

I hear you…I think starting max hp is a fine idea for your preferences…or at least half or something.

I may look at swords and wizardry too…though did really like the quick start rules a lot. I really liked the talents and spell failure rules along with the equipment slots.

I still like 5e but crave a little more grit. I can easily be a two system dude for fantasy play