OOG Chatter

[Tiglath]

When beefing up melee and/or missile combat MU always get the raw deal, but since in everything else they get the advantage so be it.

Sort of. Every time I cast sleep there is a small, but not insignificant chance that I put some or all of our team to sleep instead (and thus get everyone killed), straight up kill myself, start screaming loud enough to bring every denizen of the dungeon down on our heads...

And I don't even *know* what kind of horrific backlash we might endure if I were to get high enough level to miscast fireball...

I don't think there's a "oops you done stabbed your friend in the chest" mishap table if a fighter rolls a nat 1.

Now that is why Mages need to be nice to Bards!

Arguably everyone needs LUCK but as you rightly pointed out not everyone "explodes" (apart from Spinal Tap's drummer).

On our last jaunt we managed to "kill" our loaned City Guardsman twice over (on deleted HP if not actually) and "explode" our Ordian priestess into a gibbering wreck.

If mages seem underpowered (which I'm not sure they are) then maybe add some Arduin Grimoire spells (which were always just somehow "edgier" if not more powerful) just to make magic a sharper and less controllable double edged... er... chainsaw.

[archolewa]

If mages seem underpowered (which I'm not sure they are) then maybe add some Arduin Grimoire spells (which were always just somehow "edgier" if not more powerful) just to make magic a sharper and less controllable double edged... er... chainsaw.

Oh, I don't think mages are underpowered. Not in the slightest. The whole magical mishap thing is a great way of limiting wizards without making them boring in my opinion. I'm just saying that I don't necessarily buy Rex's assertion that in Shadowdark they're better than everyone else at everything that doesn't involve stabbing things with sharp bits of metal.

[Rex]

When beefing up melee and/or missile combat MU always get the raw deal, but since in everything else they get the advantage so be it.

Sort of. Every time I cast sleep there is a small, but not insignificant chance that I put some or all of our team to sleep instead (and thus get everyone killed), straight up kill myself, start screaming loud enough to bring every denizen of the dungeon down on our heads...

And I don't even *know* what kind of horrific backlash we might endure if I were to get high enough level to miscast fireball...

I don't think there's a "oops you done stabbed your friend in the chest" mishap table if a fighter rolls a nat 1.

You are probably right for Shadowdark. My favorite fantasy game systems are currently Hyperborea and HarnMaster. Spells are very dangerous in HarnMaster and killing yourself or others by mistake is actually easier than in Shadowdark. Both systems have critical failures in combat (melee and missile) that can result in killing yourself or a friend so my default think on it is that is normal (as it should be). Combat should always be very dangerous to my mind. We have actually been thinking about introducing a spell mishap system into Hyperborea.

[Rex]

If mages seem underpowered (which I'm not sure they are) then maybe add some Arduin Grimoire spells (which were always just somehow "edgier" if not more powerful) just to make magic a sharper and less controllable double edged... er... chainsaw.

Oh, I don't think mages are underpowered. Not in the slightest. The whole magical mishap thing is a great way of limiting wizards without making them boring in my opinion. I'm just saying that I don't necessarily buy Rex's assertion that in Shadowdark they're better than everyone else at everything that doesn't involve stabbing things with sharp bits of metal.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply MUs were better than everyone else out of combat, they aren't. Thieves, Bards, Rangers, clerics etc all have their place too. Situationaly more important than MUs. But Fighters are by far the weakest class outside of combat, which background can help with but often doesn't. Why I like that my fighter rolled Acolyte for a background. But just as the fighter is strongest in combat and weakest out, the MU is strongest out and weakest in, as long as the MU doesn't just end up with combat spells, which I never saw the point in. I don't run MUs very often, particularly in online games but when I do I prefer mostly non-combat spells with a minority of combat spells. And I stay out of the way in combat if at all possible. In our current weekly Hyperborea game I am running a 1st level Magician. Yesterday in the biggest combat of the night he never cast a spell, held the torch high, dragged a fighter that went down out of the melee so that a Purloiner could heal them and shouted out when the orcs tried to flank us through some other rooms. Then I tossed a flask of incendiary oil into the doorway the orcs would be coming through to slow them down. In the end I never attacked anything directly and never took any damage, only one in the group unhurt. No one complained because they all know that is how I think MUs should be run in combat but it seems to be no longer the norm anymore. Why I rarely run one online.

[Tiglath]

The thing I like about the system is all PCs have their individual talents plus their background giving them a "kinda sub class" but also under the "everyone can do anything" approach Mages (since we were considering them) aren't one and done spell launchers. Leaning into their stats (as any PC can) they are the "clever" PCs who can work stuff out, leverage their Int bonus on searches, etc.

Crossposted but I'm agreeing with Rex as above.

Maybe Fighters are the closest thing in game to a niche/over specialised type who need the rest of the party as their escort/delivery system?

[archolewa]

To be fair, I don't generally run mages either. I'm a fighter guy at heart, but the dice roll as the dice roll.

I'm sympathetic to the idea of running a wizard as primarily a utility character, and Elizabeth will indeed mostly be keeping her head down in combat. But in a game where every spell can blow up in your face, I question the utility of being utility at level 1 (maybe higher level utility spells are more useful, Invisibility for example is probably worth the risk due to how much less risky it'd make scouting). Like, if the dice aren't going our way and a fight is dragging on, or characters are injured or down, then risking a miscast sleep is *absolutely* worth it to save the team. But is it really worth the risk of getting my character killed, or making a crap ton of noise, or wiping out all our light to get a vague sense if something is magical or not? Or setting an alarm that can be duplicated almost as well but without the risk by having people on watch?

Ehh....

The floating disc one I'll give is probably worth a mishap risk in certain situations, especially if "twenty slots" means "can support a body."

Magic in Shadowdark really feels like a "break glass in case of emergency" sort of thing to me, and the only non combat level 1 spell I see that can be at all useful in an emergency is Feather Fall. It also just so happens to be the non-combat spell I know.

[Rex]

To be fair, I don't generally run mages either. I'm a fighter guy at heart, but the dice roll as the dice roll.

I'm sympathetic to the idea of running a wizard as primarily a utility character, and Elizabeth will indeed mostly be keeping her head down in combat. But in a game where every spell can blow up in your face, I question the utility of being utility at level 1 (maybe higher level utility spells are more useful, Invisibility for example is probably worth the risk due to how much less risky it'd make scouting). Like, if the dice aren't going our way and a fight is dragging on, or characters are injured or down, then risking a miscast sleep is *absolutely* worth it to save the team. But is it really worth the risk of getting my character killed, or making a crap ton of noise, or wiping out all our light to get a vague sense if something is magical or not? Or setting an alarm that can be duplicated almost as well but without the risk by having people on watch?

Ehh....

The floating disc one I'll give is probably worth a mishap risk in certain situations, especially if "twenty slots" means "can support a body."

Magic in Shadowdark really feels like a "break glass in case of emergency" sort of thing to me, and the only non combat level 1 spell I see that can be at all useful in an emergency is Feather Fall. It also just so happens to be the non-combat spell I know.

Some good points that are sort of unique to Shadowdark. Detect magic probably just isn't worth it in most cases, floating disc can be great when needed and feather fall is a life saver. Going to need to think outside of the box I think.

[Tiglath]

I'm interested to see how having more mages turns out.

However, maybe there's a reason so many get "exported" to Slateholm...

However, Eris runs a great game with a very smooth style so the minutiae shouldn't get in our way. See "When to Roll" pg 43 Quickstart but Mages under no time pressure will deduce magic (just as Thieves will find traps) with no test so I found there's a slight shift of mindset required from the traditional D&D methodology.

So, as quite rightly pointed out above, "Combat Magic" (and, as we've discovered, Healing! ) are those "flashpoints" where disaster can strike but that's why a Mage PC salts away a Luck roll. Don't leave home without it!

As for floating disc - that's why Team Sewer's* MU drives the "Battle Barrow!"

* Maybe "The Company of the Brown Boot" might get us more work with the nobility...

I believe that Luck is a fantastic mechanic (which might be reflected in my play style and entirely baseless accusations of "spamming" Luck Tokens ) but that's my personal take on "Barding"! No one can really put a finger on what these "Jack (or Jill) of all Trades" actually do but they're good for morale (and great at a party!) and everything just seems to go better when they're about. Equally they can play into the utility field, act as a scout or roll out (in extremis) as second string fighter - better AC than a Ranger!

[archolewa]

I believe that Luck is a fantastic mechanic (which might be reflected in my play style and entirely baseless accusations of "spamming" Luck Tokens ) but that's my personal take on "Barding"! No one can really put a finger on what these "Jack (or Jill) of all Trades" actually do but they're good for morale (and great at a party!) and everything just seems to go better when they're about. Equally they can play into the utility field, act as a scout or roll out (in extremis) as second string fighter - better AC than a Ranger!

Obviously eldritch horrors from beyond space and time are allergic to winks and kisses, so they steer well clear of any mages with a bard along...

[Eris]

If, and I say IF, we try the house rules for Combat Actions I posted, it would be a playtest for sure! I'd want to evaluate them and see if they unbalanced the game and mostly if they are fun.

I have seen similar ideas floated on Shadowdark forums and put these together from those ideas. I had a couple of goals, first it seemed to me that if PC's can move twice they should be able to do some other things twice as well, maybe not a second attack, but something, and second was the idea of defensive reactions.

See, what really interested me were the two reactions: Dive for Cover! and Block/Parry. I would like there to be some sort of defensive stances that a PC can take in combat that don't unbalance or slow down the game....and that can be fun, entertaining, and memorable.

The idea of dodging or diving out of the way of an attack is cinematic and a common trope and shouldn't slow things down. There is an advantage to it, you escape a hit, but that is offset by the disadvantage of the PC going prone and needing an Action, next round, to get back up, and all further attacks against them during a turn are at Advantage. I see this is a desperation maneuver to escape what might be a killing blow and the PC had better have allies that shield them until they can stand and recover (or run away) or they're just delaying the inevitable.

Blocking, or parrying, melee attacks (and it should only be melee attacks is accurate historically, but is also a great way to slow a game's combat down...attack, no I parry, attack, no I parry, ad infinitum...and I really don't want that! However, a PC leaping in to protect a downed ally, a weakened Wizard, or a defenseless NPC is sooooo juicy an idea I simply can't resist! I'm wobbling on whether to only allow this to redirect the melee attack from the ally and not to be used on the PC themselves, though.

Here's the thing, though, Kelsey is right in limiting actions during a round to keep the pace of the game up and in a forum game, slow as it is, slower combat is game death!

Hum...another idea! Next post!

[archolewa]

I'll admit, I'm very much in the "rules are limiting" camp. So, I'm totally biased, but my thought on that then is, why bother formally codifying it? If you like the idea of players interposing themselves between a wounded ally and the monsters just let that fall under "miscellaneous actions." If a player decides that they want to interpose themselves between an ally and the monsters, you can adjudicate it on the fly and let the state of the game guide your monster targeting decisions or whatever. Only codify it if players start abusing it or something (though I really don't think there's a way to "abuse" such a thing in Shadowdark. We're all pretty fragile and it does consume your action).

Seems a lot simpler than trying to come up with a whole suite of new rules everyone needs to keep track of, and make sure is balanced. Especially since mucking with a game's action economy is rather dangerous.

[Eris]

How about giving the LUCK token another use? Leave the RAW Combat Actions as written, ie. a PC gets a Move and an Action per round (or move twice...which still bothers me), but expand what LUCK can do. In the player's description of their round they can include use of their Luck token as normal to cause a re-roll of any one die, but they can also use Luck to gain an extra reaction for that round.

This example is the sort of gameplay I want to enable!

GM: Orc1 attacks Vesper!

Tiglith: Wait! I told you that if those two Orcs are going to attack Vesper, she'd use a Luck to react by Diving for Cover!, and shout "Help!"

GM: Right you did! Okay, Orc1 misses as Vesper dives to the ground, but she is prone and vulnerable to attacks now, and Orc2 is yet to go! Vesper shouts "Help!"

Player 1: Rowen, hears Vesper and rushes forward (move) and kneels next to Vesper laying hands on her while whispering a prayer to Ord! (action of casting Cure wounds [1d6]=1 hp). It's not much, but Vesper now has 2 hp.

Player 2: Durant, sees Rowen kneeling next to Vesper on the ground as Orc1 and Orc2 loom over them! He moves quickly across the hall to beside Rowen, close to the Orcs and stabs Orc1 with his spear (action). I want to use one of my Lucks to get Advantage on hitting Orc1 and a second Luck to use my shield to protect Rowen and Vesper from attack, too!

GM: Okay, but that could be all the Luck you have. Durant moves beside Rowen and holds his shield out to protect her while stabbing at the Orc1 ([1d20+2]=7+2=9, [1d20+2]=16+2=18) a Lucky hit for ([1d6+2]=4+2=6) points of damage, gurgling Orc1 falls to the floor!

GM: Orc2 roars in anger and swings its axe down at the kneeling Rowen, but Durant's shield Luckily interposes, redirecting the blow at himself ([1d20]=10) and absorbs it without it causing him harm.

GM: Orc3 moves up next to Orc2 and stabs at Durant with his short sword. Durant can't use his shield for defense as Orc3 strikes ([1d20]=10, and he is at a disadvantage right now [1d20]=17) and out of luck. Orc3's short sword pierces Durant's side ([1d6]=1 hp), but it's only a scratch! Sometimes the gods intervene!

Tiglith: Vesper is still badly hurt, so she rolls away, stands and runs behind the meat shield! That all she can do this round.

Rowen: Quickly standing, Rowen swings her mace at Orc2 [1d20]=14, bashing him for [1d6+1]=1+1=2 hp.

...and combat continues...

 
I like the way that flows. It's basically RAW, with Luck expanded to allow Dive or Parry reactions.

What does everyone think?

[Rex]

That should work just fine.

If the move twice in a round really bothers you just disallow it. You can move and attack or attack and move but you can't double up on any action type. So no double moves allowed. I am fine with that.

[terrymixon]

It seems like a waste of a LUCK use to sacrifice it for an action. I say make it a bit more. If someone is using LUCK to do an action, they can describe what they're trying to do and get the GM to cinematically do some cool stuff in the execution of that action. Need to dodge? How about the GM has to bounce/kick off the wall in a cool way and end up in a good spot? I'm not looking for much more than an action, but for a LUCK point, it needs to be better than just a straight action, in my opinon.

[Tiglath]

I believe that Luck is a fantastic mechanic (which might be reflected in my play style and entirely baseless accusations of "spamming" Luck Tokens ) but that's my personal take on "Barding"! No one can really put a finger on what these "Jack (or Jill) of all Trades" actually do but they're good for morale (and great at a party!) and everything just seems to go better when they're about. Equally they can play into the utility field, act as a scout or roll out (in extremis) as second string fighter - better AC than a Ranger!

Obviously eldritch horrors from beyond space and time are allergic to winks and kisses, so they steer well clear of any mages with a bard along...

They can also be abjured with double entendre and innuendo!

[archolewa]

I think I am ok with using Luck points. It encourages it to be dramatic rather than something you might do every round (an archer fighter who shoots and then blocks for the wizard standing next to him).

It can also be a huge life saver as your example shows, and it seems Luck is all about being a life saver.

Will it come up often? No, hopefully not. But when it does, it can be huge.

[Rex]

I think I am ok with using Luck points. It encourages it to be dramatic rather than something you might do every round (an archer fighter who shoots and then blocks for the wizard standing next to him).

It can also be a huge life saver as your example shows, and it seems Luck is all about being a life saver.

Will it come up often? No, hopefully not. But when it does, it can be huge.

I agree with this 100%. When you use them it should be for something very important.

[Tiglath]

The Luck mechanic could perhaps be viewed, if I may, not so much of a life saver as a game saver. In that situation where the Mage is about to save the day with Sleep but disastrously miscasts for me it's better if the fun continues than... just stops.

It is another slight "head change" and in game play may be something of a personal choice (indeed the "token's" activation is the player's call) so see how you go with them. For me (as well as being one of the ways Bards "work") it's that they just add fuel to role playing and the narrative (which is certainly why I'm here! ) so, for myself, I'm in the camp where "It's a kinda magic".

[trawets]

I am new to Shadowdark and would like to see how it plays. Using luck in that fashion doesn't seem like that major of a change so it sounds good to me.

[Tiglath]

I am new to Shadowdark and would like to see how it plays. Using luck in that fashion doesn't seem like that major of a change so it sounds good to me.

You remind me to make a distinction here. Luck to anyone else is a carefully hoarded resource for a "Do or Die" moment. Bards (dependent on play style) might seem to spend it like a levelling up Shadowdark PC gets through gold!

Unless you are familiar with the class (copy on my PC's sheet for interest) they make Luck as their "casting ability" (just like the various Magic User types make their individual spells).