Personally, I think the races (or "ancestry") choices seems incredibly skimpy compared to the roster 5E has. Also, I'm...so-so with the use of ancestry as a replacement for races; mainly because ancestry sounds more like a human thing and creatures like orcs, halflings, elves and so on are far from that
Great review. I'm sure she choose Thief as the class name instead of Rogue because Thief is what the class was called in D&D B/X and AD&D, so it harkens back to those old school vibes. Also, 5E treats the Rogue class as essentially a combat assassin, whereas the Thief class in SD has low hit points and so their focus is literally more on sneaking and stealth type activities.
Nice review. I read the beta version last year. It's a really solid game. Very similar to my own home brew, with WAY better art and random charts. Just a pet peeve of mine, I think "distilled" mechanics is probably a more accurate description than "dumbed down" for this game.
The core rule book actually has a number of "modes" that can be applied to change the play style, and "grinder mode" actually addresses this very point!
Recently picked up Shadowdark and it's one of my newest obsessions. Love how it boiled down 5e and gave it that classic DnD feel. Imagine 5e and DCC had a baby. It's simple mechanics, open roleplaying creativity, a sense of danger, and mortality.
As other people have mentioned, Thief was the original tile in older editions, and to my mind fits better for what a thief does in a dungeon crawler, pick locks and steal things. What's a rogue do? They changed the name to Rogue during the Satanic Panic of the 80s along with getting rid of any mention of demons or devils. For the most part, these rules aren't anything that hasn't been done before. Having to roll to cast spells is straight out of Dungeon Crawl Classics, along with the "funnel" or as she calls it the Gauntlet I think, where zero class PCs try to survive to be 1st level. What the author has done is take all the other ideas and put them in a very digestible form that is perfect for new players, or old players needing a change. That's why I backed the Kickstarter.
Being around then I can tell you that no one was worried about the name "thief" during the satanic panic. They were worried that children playing the game were worshiping Satan and being taken over by demons, casting evil spells and curses etc. etc (basically ridiculous nonsense). The thief wasn't changed to rogue until 3rd edition D&D in 2000.
I agree with you on the Dwarf hit points. It says, "hit points gains". Which could be considered different than "hit point recovery" from healing sources.
Nice breakdown! Regarding the Thief as the class name, not sure if you realize this, but that hearkens back to old school D&D which fits for the look and feel of Shadowdark. The classic D&D classes are cleric, fighter, magic-user, and thief. In D&D, the class was called Thief until 3e D&D. In 2nd Edition AD&D we saw the introduction of class categories (Warrior, Wizard, Priest, and Rogue), with Thief being a class of the Rogue, and Bard being the other class of Rogue. FWIW, the other breakdowns were fighter, paladin, and ranger being Warriors, mages and illusionists being Wizards, and clerics and druids being Priests. So the name Thief as a class is ABSOLUTELY a D&D class. From a 5e POV, just look at the Shadowdark thief class as the Rogue's Thief Archetype. If you look at the 5e free basic rules download by WotC, the only archetype option for the Rogue is the Thief. The 5e archetype is really the actual class of the character with the class name being more like the 2e AD&D categories.
@@MrTarrasque I totally respect you don't care for the name thief. Honestly I never have either. It's just old school I personally accept it as an old school class name. Thought not totally old school as the Thief wasn't a class in original D&D. Personally I'd prefer thief-like skills being available to the core classes of cleric, fighter and wizard. Perhaps from a Background like Urchin. In 5e I created a Fighter that was like a thief with the Urchin background and skill in lock picking tools.
I learned about Shadowdark a few hours after the Kickstarter campaign started. It only took a little bit of research to know that I wanted it and took back the project. I play and run mostly Numenera and 5E. I've been looking for the right old school game to add to the mix, and I think this is the one. It has the right feel, but uses simple, modern gameplay mechanics that make gameplay quick and easy. I look forward to running some gritty, deadly adventures with this.
Thief or Rogue? Fritz Leiber's The Gray Mouser is the primary inspiration for the class existing at all and he IS a thief by trade, so of course the original creators of the class(college students playing original D&D)chose the name Thief.
That's an interesting bit of trivia. But please don't read too much in to my opinion about that, I feel the class name doesn't suit the different styles you can play it. But that's just me.
About the same as you'd expect. But you only have one action and your movement. Spells are an action, attacking is an action. Doing anything really is an action.
Actually, the origin of the word "thief" does not mean one who steals, it means one who creeps about with stealth ("to crouch down"). Some well-known fantasy heroes referred to as "thieves" in fiction: Bilbo Baggins. Conan of Cimmeria (he may have been mighty, but he was a thief). It all comes down to how you play the class, not what it's called - isn't that kind of the point of OSR?
I didn't know the origin of the word, thanks! For me, the way something is called is tied towards how I immerse myself into that role, so I don't 100% agree with your last point.
Read through the comments where you've already responded to several things I might have mentioned. So I'll just say thank you for covering this. Full disclosure: I have no association with Kelsey or the game other than choosing to be a backer on KS and an old grognard gamer.
I feel you on the thief stuff, and that both thief and rogue are more specific terms that shoehorn a character of a sneaky, skilled class into a more specific archetype than what they necessarily need to be. Its a minor issue for me but it does bug me a little. I know some people are of the opposite mind that feel they should never be called anything but thief, I guess partly out of tradition.
Great game and great review, I have already supported it. I wanted to ask, does SD give me tools to run a campaign? I mean beyond a dungeon or a module?
Great review. It's ok not to like "thief" as the name of the class. I personally do, and that's life! People are different, and that's fine. Let the haters starve to death! The game is awesome! I could not back it, but I got the QS and I will buy it as soon as possible! Great game!
Because that says you are a burglar. While a Fighter just says you are good at fighting, not WHAT you do with it. That's kinda my problem with those names.
This feels like a baby's first steps from 5e towards the OSR. I personally think it's more cost efficient to go straight to something OSR like Old School Essentials or Lamentations of The Flame Princess for more simpler systems. It looks like it will be in a strange limbo where it isn't really OSR or 5e, thus it won't be able to take full advantage of the huge amount of content present in either medium.
Looking at the system it would work very well with any OSR type modules and you could adapt 5e modules fairly easily too. If you wanted the challenge to be the same level you'd adjust hp down for 5e modules.
@@andrewcavanagh3946 Yet it doesn't bring anything new or groundbreaking to the table. This books is something new only for someone than never played an OSR game or pre 3e D&D editions. For someone like me that owns multiple OSR systems (Hyperborea 3e, Old School Essentials Advanced Fantasy, Dungeon Crawl Classic, Stars and Worlds Without Number) It's not worth investing in. I'd rather use OSR systems for OSR modules and 5e for 5e modules. If I'd go for a NU-SR game, I'd rather go for something that does something unique like Mothership.
Exactly, there are so many systems that contribute new content to BECMI D&D and don't require any tweaking to make things compatible. I'm not wasting money on a system that has no third party support and would require retooling to shoehorn things into it. Hard pass for me as well.
@@m.a.packer5450 Well, this is not for people like you and me. It's for people that never played an OSR game or 2e, 1e, BX or BECMI. It's great that people are finally branching out and are trying to play other systems and if this game makes people learn about the OSR, I see it as a positive. The negative is that it's at the middle point that makes it require extra work from the DM to make it work with other old school content besides modules. In my opinion, those money would be better spent on something like the upcoming Dolmenwood books that promise a complete experience or an upcoming more modernized OSR game like Outcast Silver Raiders...or simply an already existing OSR game of the multitude of great ones out there. I also find the marketing campaign a little off-putting. It looks like all the D&D 5e and OSR TH-camrs are now part of the marketing team for this product. It's also presented as revolutionary and fresh when in actuality the creator took some ideas from 5e, some from OSR games and called it a day. It's really nothing revolutionary; it's something that I can tweak into an OSR game in 30 minutes of brainstorming if it already doesn't have some similar mechanics.
I completely respect that people who are knee deep in OSR content don't have a need for this. I did want Old School Essentials, but it wasn't in print - consistently. I also don't want to go near THAC0. It looks like SD ONLY does ascending. And I expect all other OSR content, and 5e content, will convert real easy.
Between Shadowdark and Cypher System, playing WotC D&D might as well be past tense! 😎👍 (PS: Totally agree that she should change the class name from Thief to Rogue in the final edition - no need to replicate that term from D&D B/X. Hopefully I'm not the only one provide feedback to her about this)
Thieves sneak and steal shit. Period. That is what every "Thief", "Rogue" and "whatever the hell you wanna pretend is a better name than Thief" type character does in EVERY. SINGLE. GAME. I have ever played. You doth etymologically protest waaay-TF too much.
It's mainly hype. Shadowdark is just another OSR clone. Every second TH-camr is making an OSR clone right now. And they are all the same. "Insanely good" is a bold claim. Let's see: is it better than d6, Warhammer FRPG or Ubiquity? Hell no, it's not even close. It's just another OSR clone, nothing more.
I happen to be the worlds leading expert in my own opinnion. And to me, this is really really good. That said, I don't know every RPG. So there light be others out there that I would find even better.
@@xavierp7658 Oh, I really do know better. I a) don't fall for hype and b) know enough systems to compare them to Shadowdark. And my verdict is: it's boring.
@@ratatatuff Some OSR fans are complaining that it’s not OSR enough (although 5E mechanics could be enough to account for that). What are the problems that you’re seeing?
@@steelmongoose4956 It's basically nothing. And very expensive at that. The rules fit on 2 pages and are just a blend of rules we've seen in hundreds of OSR publications with some 5e mixed in. The monsters are standard, we've see those in every other OSR game and the tables, don't get me started on those ... There are comparable tables for free on the net. Basic Fantasy is free and offers more. Have a look at eg. the Warhammer core book and compare it to Shadowdark. That comparison is devastating. One is a full rulebook, the other one's a heartbreaker like thousand others. And, just for the record, I don't care if it's OSR enough or 5e enough, I don't play any edition of DnD. They all suck.
Help me reach 10.000 subscribers in 2023!
Personally, I think the races (or "ancestry") choices seems incredibly skimpy compared to the roster 5E has.
Also, I'm...so-so with the use of ancestry as a replacement for races; mainly because ancestry sounds more like a human thing and creatures like orcs, halflings, elves and so on are far from that
Great review. I'm sure she choose Thief as the class name instead of Rogue because Thief is what the class was called in D&D B/X and AD&D, so it harkens back to those old school vibes. Also, 5E treats the Rogue class as essentially a combat assassin, whereas the Thief class in SD has low hit points and so their focus is literally more on sneaking and stealth type activities.
I got burnt out on D&D like a year ago but this game's getting me hyped to run some games again.
Nice review. I read the beta version last year. It's a really solid game. Very similar to my own home brew, with WAY better art and random charts. Just a pet peeve of mine, I think "distilled" mechanics is probably a more accurate description than "dumbed down" for this game.
Good word! Writing that down
Agree. I kind of look at it as an old school game where many of the mechanics have been updated with more modern (e.g. 5E) concepts applied.
The only real complaint I have with Shadowdark RAW is that a good night's sleep heals all wounds. That's not happening at my tables.
Good thing games like SD can be easily houseruled!
The core rule book actually has a number of "modes" that can be applied to change the play style, and "grinder mode" actually addresses this very point!
Lotta extra content in the zines too! she's doing a ranger and bard for stretch goals I believe.
Excellent news on the RnB!
Recently picked up Shadowdark and it's one of my newest obsessions. Love how it boiled down 5e and gave it that classic DnD feel. Imagine 5e and DCC had a baby. It's simple mechanics, open roleplaying creativity, a sense of danger, and mortality.
As other people have mentioned, Thief was the original tile in older editions, and to my mind fits better for what a thief does in a dungeon crawler, pick locks and steal things. What's a rogue do? They changed the name to Rogue during the Satanic Panic of the 80s along with getting rid of any mention of demons or devils.
For the most part, these rules aren't anything that hasn't been done before. Having to roll to cast spells is straight out of Dungeon Crawl Classics, along with the "funnel" or as she calls it the Gauntlet I think, where zero class PCs try to survive to be 1st level.
What the author has done is take all the other ideas and put them in a very digestible form that is perfect for new players, or old players needing a change. That's why I backed the Kickstarter.
🔥👊 Agreed. I don't know all systems so I don't exactly know what comes from where.
Being around then I can tell you that no one was worried about the name "thief" during the satanic panic. They were worried that children playing the game were worshiping Satan and being taken over by demons, casting evil spells and curses etc. etc (basically ridiculous nonsense). The thief wasn't changed to rogue until 3rd edition D&D in 2000.
Wait, kids were NOT casting evil spells?
I’m a backer, so excited for this game. Brilliantly designed
I agree with you on the Dwarf hit points. It says, "hit points gains". Which could be considered different than "hit point recovery" from healing sources.
TBH this game looks fantastic. A revision of old school principles in the best way.
This system takes me back to when I first played DnD with my brothers in 1980. I'm in.
Nice breakdown!
Regarding the Thief as the class name, not sure if you realize this, but that hearkens back to old school D&D which fits for the look and feel of Shadowdark. The classic D&D classes are cleric, fighter, magic-user, and thief. In D&D, the class was called Thief until 3e D&D. In 2nd Edition AD&D we saw the introduction of class categories (Warrior, Wizard, Priest, and Rogue), with Thief being a class of the Rogue, and Bard being the other class of Rogue. FWIW, the other breakdowns were fighter, paladin, and ranger being Warriors, mages and illusionists being Wizards, and clerics and druids being Priests.
So the name Thief as a class is ABSOLUTELY a D&D class. From a 5e POV, just look at the Shadowdark thief class as the Rogue's Thief Archetype. If you look at the 5e free basic rules download by WotC, the only archetype option for the Rogue is the Thief. The 5e archetype is really the actual class of the character with the class name being more like the 2e AD&D categories.
I know about that. I have found it to be a wrong term from the beginning. But that's just me, don't read in to that to much.
Yup.
?
@@MrTarrasque I totally respect you don't care for the name thief. Honestly I never have either. It's just old school I personally accept it as an old school class name. Thought not totally old school as the Thief wasn't a class in original D&D.
Personally I'd prefer thief-like skills being available to the core classes of cleric, fighter and wizard. Perhaps from a Background like Urchin. In 5e I created a Fighter that was like a thief with the Urchin background and skill in lock picking tools.
I learned about Shadowdark a few hours after the Kickstarter campaign started. It only took a little bit of research to know that I wanted it and took back the project.
I play and run mostly Numenera and 5E. I've been looking for the right old school game to add to the mix, and I think this is the one. It has the right feel, but uses simple, modern gameplay mechanics that make gameplay quick and easy.
I look forward to running some gritty, deadly adventures with this.
This game is brilliant. Kelsey's the real deal.
She's doing better than the Kobold Press Black Flag! So far
I just can't help thinking of that Penny Arcade line with this title. "In the dark shadow of the shadow dark."
All here for more Shadowdark content!
🔥🔥
Great review!
I backed this after seeing it on dungeoncraft.
I'm getting the top tier so I can teach four people at a time.
Thief or Rogue? Fritz Leiber's The Gray Mouser is the primary inspiration for the class existing at all and he IS a thief by trade, so of course the original creators of the class(college students playing original D&D)chose the name Thief.
That's an interesting bit of trivia. But please don't read too much in to my opinion about that, I feel the class name doesn't suit the different styles you can play it. But that's just me.
@@MrTarrasque Oh no worries, I get what you mean. I was just sharing for fun. Hopefully my tone didn't come off as snarky. Apologies though if it did😉
More Shadowdark! How does combat work, please.
About the same as you'd expect. But you only have one action and your movement. Spells are an action, attacking is an action. Doing anything really is an action.
Am so stoked for this game
reminds me a lot of the Games workshop Mordheim book from 1999
Your comment on old cars feeling bad to drive… My 1986 Volvo begs to differ. No ABS or anything but drives so smooth.
It’s a generalisation. I drive a 42 year old car and I wouldn’t trade it for the world.
Enjoying being a DM for ShadowDark RPG so much more than D&D 5e!
The analogy about the Shelby mustang was very good - this is OSR without all the things that make many OSR TTRPGs stink
😅 thanks
What are the things that make OSR games stink?
The definition of both words rogue and thief are different. Perhaps skulker would encompass both a little better
Actually, the origin of the word "thief" does not mean one who steals, it means one who creeps about with stealth ("to crouch down").
Some well-known fantasy heroes referred to as "thieves" in fiction: Bilbo Baggins. Conan of Cimmeria (he may have been mighty, but he was a thief). It all comes down to how you play the class, not what it's called - isn't that kind of the point of OSR?
I didn't know the origin of the word, thanks! For me, the way something is called is tied towards how I immerse myself into that role, so I don't 100% agree with your last point.
You da man! 10k on the way, my friend!
Thanks my friend!
Read through the comments where you've already responded to several things I might have mentioned. So I'll just say thank you for covering this. Full disclosure: I have no association with Kelsey or the game other than choosing to be a backer on KS and an old grognard gamer.
Thanks!
I feel you on the thief stuff, and that both thief and rogue are more specific terms that shoehorn a character of a sneaky, skilled class into a more specific archetype than what they necessarily need to be. Its a minor issue for me but it does bug me a little. I know some people are of the opposite mind that feel they should never be called anything but thief, I guess partly out of tradition.
Great game and great review, I have already supported it.
I wanted to ask, does SD give me tools to run a campaign?
I mean beyond a dungeon or a module?
Great review. It's ok not to like "thief" as the name of the class. I personally do, and that's life! People are different, and that's fine.
Let the haters starve to death! The game is awesome! I could not back it, but I got the QS and I will buy it as soon as possible! Great game!
❤️👌 appreciate your comment
I believe you add your CON at 1st level :)
Please go into more detail!!
What would you like to know?
Why not burglar?
Because that says you are a burglar. While a Fighter just says you are good at fighting, not WHAT you do with it. That's kinda my problem with those names.
Thief > Rogue
This is an OSR game, deal with it.
I want to know it all!
All the things!!!!!
This feels like a baby's first steps from 5e towards the OSR. I personally think it's more cost efficient to go straight to something OSR like Old School Essentials or Lamentations of The Flame Princess for more simpler systems.
It looks like it will be in a strange limbo where it isn't really OSR or 5e, thus it won't be able to take full advantage of the huge amount of content present in either medium.
Looking at the system it would work very well with any OSR type modules and you could adapt 5e modules fairly easily too. If you wanted the challenge to be the same level you'd adjust hp down for 5e modules.
@@andrewcavanagh3946 Yet it doesn't bring anything new or groundbreaking to the table. This books is something new only for someone than never played an OSR game or pre 3e D&D editions. For someone like me that owns multiple OSR systems (Hyperborea 3e, Old School Essentials Advanced Fantasy, Dungeon Crawl Classic, Stars and Worlds Without Number) It's not worth investing in.
I'd rather use OSR systems for OSR modules and 5e for 5e modules. If I'd go for a NU-SR game, I'd rather go for something that does something unique like Mothership.
Exactly, there are so many systems that contribute new content to BECMI D&D and don't require any tweaking to make things compatible. I'm not wasting money on a system that has no third party support and would require retooling to shoehorn things into it. Hard pass for me as well.
@@m.a.packer5450 Well, this is not for people like you and me. It's for people that never played an OSR game or 2e, 1e, BX or BECMI.
It's great that people are finally branching out and are trying to play other systems and if this game makes people learn about the OSR, I see it as a positive. The negative is that it's at the middle point that makes it require extra work from the DM to make it work with other old school content besides modules. In my opinion, those money would be better spent on something like the upcoming Dolmenwood books that promise a complete experience or an upcoming more modernized OSR game like Outcast Silver Raiders...or simply an already existing OSR game of the multitude of great ones out there.
I also find the marketing campaign a little off-putting. It looks like all the D&D 5e and OSR TH-camrs are now part of the marketing team for this product. It's also presented as revolutionary and fresh when in actuality the creator took some ideas from 5e, some from OSR games and called it a day. It's really nothing revolutionary; it's something that I can tweak into an OSR game in 30 minutes of brainstorming if it already doesn't have some similar mechanics.
I completely respect that people who are knee deep in OSR content don't have a need for this. I did want Old School Essentials, but it wasn't in print - consistently. I also don't want to go near THAC0. It looks like SD ONLY does ascending. And I expect all other OSR content, and 5e content, will convert real easy.
Please review this rpg!!!
Is that not what I'm doing?
In depth review.. I backed it the first day.. I believe I will switch all my games to SD here soon
Yeah I don't know how I could do that without making a hour long video and still only covering a few things.
You are from Belgium are you not?
I am
@@MrTarrasque dacht het al 😜
Bilbo was a thief.
So was Conan!
Between Shadowdark and Cypher System, playing WotC D&D might as well be past tense! 😎👍
(PS: Totally agree that she should change the class name from Thief to Rogue in the final edition - no need to replicate that term from D&D B/X. Hopefully I'm not the only one provide feedback to her about this)
Thieves sneak and steal shit. Period. That is what every "Thief", "Rogue" and "whatever the hell you wanna pretend is a better name than Thief" type character does in EVERY. SINGLE. GAME. I have ever played. You doth etymologically protest waaay-TF too much.
Not in my games
god this dude really is 90% fluff
Thanks
Lotfp: Thief/Rogue. Nah Specialist is best.
Specialist is a good word
It's mainly hype. Shadowdark is just another OSR clone. Every second TH-camr is making an OSR clone right now. And they are all the same. "Insanely good" is a bold claim. Let's see: is it better than d6, Warhammer FRPG or Ubiquity? Hell no, it's not even close. It's just another OSR clone, nothing more.
I happen to be the worlds leading expert in my own opinnion. And to me, this is really really good.
That said, I don't know every RPG. So there light be others out there that I would find even better.
Thank you random commenter. I’m sure you know better than everyone else who is excited for this
@@xavierp7658 Oh, I really do know better. I a) don't fall for hype and b) know enough systems to compare them to Shadowdark. And my verdict is: it's boring.
@@ratatatuff Some OSR fans are complaining that it’s not OSR enough (although 5E mechanics could be enough to account for that). What are the problems that you’re seeing?
@@steelmongoose4956 It's basically nothing. And very expensive at that. The rules fit on 2 pages and are just a blend of rules we've seen in hundreds of OSR publications with some 5e mixed in. The monsters are standard, we've see those in every other OSR game and the tables, don't get me started on those ... There are comparable tables for free on the net. Basic Fantasy is free and offers more. Have a look at eg. the Warhammer core book and compare it to Shadowdark. That comparison is devastating. One is a full rulebook, the other one's a heartbreaker like thousand others. And, just for the record, I don't care if it's OSR enough or 5e enough, I don't play any edition of DnD. They all suck.
I don't like the art work. Looks to me amateurishness... Love the 5e art work.
Subjective. I love it