Pages

Sunday, 20 January 2019

Echoes and Reverberations part 3: Shadow of the Demon Lord

Happy new year, everyone! The last of the Christmas brandy has now been drunk, so I guess it's time I got back into the habit of blogging...

This is the third in a series of posts about what happened to WFRP after the demise of 2nd edition. The first two covered the official third edition. The next few will deal with the various other systems which, directly or indirectly, tried to carry on the WFRP legacy.

In the case of Shadow of the Demon Lord, the connection was a pretty direct one. Robert Schwalb had been the developer for WFRP 2nd edition, and was one of its lead writers, but seems to have had nothing to do with 3rd edition. (Possibly there was some bitterness between him and FFG over their decision to kill off 'his' edition of the game.) He spent the 3rd edition years (2009-13) writing D&D books for WOTC: but in early 2014, perhaps as a response to the final decline of WFRP 3rd edition, he began work on a game of his own, called Shadow of the Demon Lord, which went on to be successfully funded via Kickstarter in 2015. Schwalb has always been pretty open about the fact that Shadow was, effectively, his own personal 'WFRP 2.5', and the game has never made much effort to conceal its Warhammer influences. But by stepping away from the actual Games Workshop brand, Schwalb gained the freedom to develop the same core concept in some rather interesting ways.

Image result for shadow of the demon lord

In many ways, I think that Shadow is WFRP 3 done right. Like WFRP 3, it aimed to marry together the old-school low-fantasy grimness of WFRP with both storygame-inspired mechanics and D&D-style fantasy heroics: but, unlike WFRP 3, the resulting mix actually worked. Let me explain:
  • From WFRP, Shadow took its early modern setting, its fantasy-horror themes and aesthetics, its focus upon cults, demons, and beast-men as the default antagonists, and its preoccupation with physical, mental, and magical corruption. 
  • From D&D - more specifically D&D 3rd edition - Shadow took its class-and-level based system and its emphasis on PCs whose rapidly increasing power was modelled via a la carte multiclassing.
  • From storygames, Shadow took the idea of the campaign as a scripted arc lasting a determinate number of sessions.
That third one looks small, but it's a real game-changer. For those of you unfamiliar with Shadow, this is how it works: a Shadow campaign lasts exactly 11 sessions. At the start of session 1, you pick an 'ancestry' (i.e. a race) and pick or roll for one or two 'professions' (i.e. a job): the professions are pretty WFRP-esque, so you might find yourself playing a human agitator, or an orc prostitute, or a goblin constable, or whatever. The titular Shadow of the Demon Lord is just starting to fall across the land, so you find yourself caught up in some kind of horrific one-session adventure, and hopefully survive. At the start of session 2, you advance to level 1 and pick a 'novice path' (i.e. a basic character class): there are four of these, and the choice of Magician, Priest, Rogue or Warrior should be familiar to anyone who has ever played any version of D&D. You're a bit tougher, now, a bit more of a D&D character and a bit less of a WFRP character - but the shadow is growing darker and the world is becoming more threatening, so your next one-session adventure will be more dangerous than the last one, and the one after that will be even worse.

Image result for shadow of the demon lord

Survive three one-session adventures and you can pick an 'expert path' like Ranger or Assassin. Survive seven and you can pick a 'master path' like Beastmaster or Inquisitor. All the ancestries, professions, and paths stack with one another, so that by level 7 you might be a Dwarf Charlatan Priest Scout Engineer, or a Changeling Murderer Warrior Witch Technomancer, or whatever. (The D&D 3rd edition influence is very clear, here.) One session = one adventure, surviving one adventure earns you one level, and gaining one level earns you exactly one new ability, so the power and complexity of the characters increases in a very straightforward and predictable way, and you only have one new thing to remember in each session. As the characters grow in power, however, so does the Shadow of the Demon Lord, so that in session 1 they are ordinary people in a world where some spooky things are starting to happen, but by session 10 they are full-blown fantasy heroes in a world rapidly collapsing into a full-scale apocalypse. At the start of session 11 the PCs unlock their final and most powerful abilities, the Shadow of the Demon Lord reaches its fullest extent, and the stage is set for one final, epic showdown with the forces of darkness. Then you turn the clock back to session 1 and do it all over again.

This is a very clever bit of design, for a number of reasons. It acknowledges that while gamers love daydreaming about epic, years-long campaigns, they seldom manage to actually play them, and so condensing your entire arc into 11 sessions means that you have a much better chance of creating a campaign which functions as one massive crescendo and goes out with a bang, rather than one that just kind of wanders around for a while and then peters out. It means that the adventures have to be punchy, tightly-designed affairs, a few pages long at most, because every adventure has to be something that can be played through in a single session. (This protects Shadow adventures from the bloat that plagued WFRP 2 and 3.) It means that you can invoke apocalyptic threats and actually follow through, trashing your whole campaign setting every eleven sessions and allowing the PCs to play roles of world-historical importance - unlike in, say, WFRP 2, where the big threat has already been and gone, and all the really important stuff was done offstage by NPCs. And it means that you can have the 'shopping list' mentality of a crunch-heavy game like D&D3, where players can spend hours thinking about how this ability from this class could be combined with that ability from that race to do something spectacular... except, unlike D&D3, you can actually put your ideas into practise. Getting the combination of abilities you want will only ever take a few sessions at most, and you get to try out a different 'build' every eleven weeks, rather than being stuck with the same one for years on end. 

As with most storygame-inspired design, however, its specificity is both its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. There's no room here for the kind of picaresque meandering that formed such an important part of both WFRP 1 and old-school D&D, for stories about mercenary adventurers exploring the wilderness in search of treasure, or about semi-criminal vagabonds roaming around the Empire on a barge. There isn't even room for big adventures like B4 The Lost City or Power Behind the Throne, neither of which could possibly be run in a single session. The hardwired zero-to-hero character progression means that campaigns will move swiftly from grimy low fantasy to something far more heroic and high-powered, which is great if you like both of those equally, but might be a turn-off if you'd prefer to linger at one end of the scale rather than having the system force-march you through it and out the other side. Players looking for a more traditional fantasy RPG experience, with longer campaigns, slower level progression, and large, sprawling adventures rather than a staccato rattle of one-shots, would probably be better off house-ruling advancement to one level every 3-4 sessions and slowing the spread of the Shadow to match.

Image result for shadow of the demon lord

The setting is a combination of WFRP and modern D&D fantasy. The main setting is a grimy early modern empire full of crime and corruption, very much in the vein of WFRP, with beastmen lurking in the woods and cults gathering in the shadows - but magic is commonplace, and orcs and goblins and changelings and clockwork robots are all playable races. There's less leftover Tolkien material than in Warhammer: Shadow uses creepy fae changelings instead of Tolkien-style elves, while its goblins are a disgusting race of fallen faeries rather than comedy cannon-fodder, and its orcs are a race of magically-created slave-soldiers who have just rebelled and deposed the emperor. (This last bit is a good example of the way that Shadow places the PCs right at the moment of crisis, rather than before it, as in WFRP 3, or after it, as in WFRP 2.) The titular Demon Lord is a bit of a let-down, being little more than a cosmic force of destruction who wrecks everything for no real reason. It's obviously Shadow's stand-in for WFRP's Chaos, but it feels rather flat and impersonal compared to the florid weirdness of the chaos gods.

The setting is very lightly sketched in, and large chunks of the map are given over to an evil desert full of undead, a frozen wasteland full of frost giants, an archipelago full of pirates, and other cliched CRPG-style adventure zones. In a nice OSR-style touch, however, Shadow communicates a lot of information about the tone of its setting via random tables in character generation. The fact that the dice can inform you that your changeling's current legal identity is that of someone they have murdered and replaced, for example, or that the soul animating your clockwork robot came from hell, or that your dwarf pounds nails into his own skull, or that your goblin has 'all the warts' and saves their bodily secretions in small bottles to give to people as gifts, tells you a lot about the the kind of world in which the game is set.

Schwalb Entertainment has adopted an interesting hybrid strategy in relation to supplements for Shadow of the Demon Lord. The game has seven traditional supplements which are available as physical books, as follows:
  • The Demon Lord's Companion: introduces new races, monsters, items, paths, etc.
  • Tombs of the Desolation: details the setting's 'undead desert' region. Includes rules for undead PCs, if you like that sort of thing.
  • Terrible Beauty: describes the setting's horrible, amoral faeries. Includes rules for fae PCs other than changelings. 
  • Exquisite Agony: details the setting's version of hell. (The twist here is that hell may be evil, but it's just as committed to fighting the Demon Lord as everyone else, because the Demon Lord brings not wickedness but annihilation.) 
  • Uncertain Faith: describes the setting's religions. Contains some good, weird cults and sects that could easily be adapted for use in other dark fantasy games. 
  • A Glorious Death: details the setting's 'ice waste of the frost giant vikings' region. 
  • Hunger in the Void: describes the cults and beastmen that serve the demon lord, although my favourite bit in this book was actually the discussion of the various mostly-but-not-quite-annihilated worlds which have continued to drift around in the Void after being eaten by the Demon Lord, and the weird things that inhabit them. 
Each book introduces new player options, which became increasingly eccentric as the line went on, allowing player character fauns, pixies, jotuns, vampires, and so on - not exactly traditional WFRP fare, although pretty tame by the standards of late 3rd edition D&D. They're all pretty short - 40-60 pages each, apart from Hunger, which was 80 - and a lot of the page-count of each book is given over to new monsters, races, adventures, etc, which means that they mostly cover their topics in a fairly cursory fashion. Their take on faeries, hell, cults, beastmen, and religion are all solidly horrible dark fantasy fare, but there's nothing here which is likely to especially surprise or impress anyone who's already familiar with WFRP and its ilk.

Image result for shadow of the demon lord

Shadow also has three 'campaign books':
  • Tales of the Demon Lord: A book containing 11 short adventures, intended for use as a complete 11-session SotDL campaign. 
  • Queen of Gold: Another 11-adventure book. 
  • Tales of the Desolation: Only 4 adventures in this one. You'll have to get the other seven from somewhere else.
In addition to these ten physical books, however, Schwalb Entertainment has released no less than ninety-two short pdf-only supplements for the game, most of which are just a few pages long and sell for a dollar or two on Drivethrurpg. Each of these mini-supplements provides one short adventure, or one new playable race, or new rules on one topic, or information on one more area of the setting. A decade ago these would probably have been bundled up and released as another nine or ten physical books, which is exactly the kind of bloat that helped to kill off WFRP 2: keeping them all as pdf-only releases seems a much more sensible option. I've only read the core book, the seven supplements, and the first campaign book, but in terms of sheer word-count, the total amount of material released for Shadow must now rival that of WFRP 2.

Taken on its own terms, I think Shadow is a fine and functional dark fantasy RPG. The system looks much better-designed than that of either WFRP 2 or D&D 3, and I'm sure I'd enjoy running or playing it. For me, however, it never quite managed to have the same bite as WFRP: it all just felt a bit too placeholderish, a bit too generic. It's not that it's sanitised, exactly: indeed, coming loose from the Warhammer franchise has allowed Schwalb to fill his game with all the sex and shit and horribleness that Games Workshop would never want to have associated with their IP. It's more that it feels... sort of... assembled by checklist, I guess? It felt to me as though it featured torture-demons and amoral faeries and murder-cultists because those are the sorts of things that you're supposed to have in a dark fantasy RPG, rather than because the authors had any especially compelling ideas about how to make their demons and faeries and cultists different from everyone else's. It's the opposite of the early GW approach, where they mostly seem to have started from art and ideas - 'Evil Assyrian dwarves with blunderbusses!' - and worked backwards from there. I read nine books worth of material for Shadow, looking for stuff worth borrowing for my own games, and at the end of the day all I'd come away with was one monster, a couple of ideas for cults, and a few set-pieces from the adventures in Tales of the Demon Lord. The rest is all just one big sub-WFRP blur.

If you're looking for something midway between modern D&D and WFRP (but more logically designed than either of them), or if you like the sound of its 'eleven sessions and done' campaign structure, then Shadow is probably the game for you. If neither of those applies, though, you might be better off just getting Tales of the Demon Lord and adapting the adventures for use in WFRP 1/2 instead.

Image result for shadow of the demon lord

23 comments:

  1. I agree, on the whole. I like the ease of the game's mechanics and setup (I tend to say it's better at being 5e than 5e is at being 5e), but the setting material as presented isn't very inspiring. I got really excited about the game initially, bought the core book and the adventure supplement, but never got around to really using it properly. There wasn't much oomph to inspire "yeah I want to make this my own!"

    But Shwalb did say in an AMA that he is planning on some sort of OGL deal after he's gotten all the supplements out of his system. That might help, letting other people play around with the really solid core.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's funny, isn't it? On the surface SOTDL and WFRP look so similar - same style, same genre, very similar settings - and SOTDL clearly has the better system. But all those little details add up to make WFRP feel so much more vivid and vibrant and *alive*. I can, at best, muster mild enthusiasm for the idea of playing a changeling vagabond battling the minions of the Demon Lord. But give me a chance to play an artisan's apprentice dying of Nurgle's Rot in the rain-slicked gutters of Nuln and I will be *there*.

      Delete
    2. Saddest thing is that I can't muster up the "Give me a moment and I shall FIX and REMIX!" response. it doesn't have enough flaws to inspire me to go on a rescue mission.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did I miss what happens if a character dies? There's a lot of talk about surviving X number of sessions to advance Y amount there, but given that the campaign lasts exactly 11 sessions, what happens if someone's character dies in session 9 or 10, for example?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You just bring in a new character at the appropriate level. The eleven-session structure doesn't really leave enough time for playing catch-up.

      Delete
  4. Sorry to be off topic, but what BX clone are you running Tsathogga with? I'm intrigued by the "encumbrance slot" system, and I'd like to check out the pdf it comes from on drivethrurpg.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just B/X with a bunch of house rules. The PCs usually have enough minions and pack animals with them that there's no point in tracking encumbrance, but if/when it becomes an issue I can use these rules:

      https://udan-adan.blogspot.com/2015/06/equipment-and-encumbrance-for-lazy-gms.html

      Delete
  5. I've skimmed through SotDL before but never really read it in depth. The setting, weird and gritty though it was (which I normally love), didn't really hook me, for some of the reasons you've described above - it sounded like a well-made thing that was not my style.

    However, the "every campaign is eleven sessions" idea... I absolutely love it. Maybe not strictly eleven sessions, but I've always had trouble stopping campaigns from either petering out or getting so grandiose I and my players can't handle it any more. Having a set end goal, even if not as specific as SotDL's, would solve that problem, as well as problems of when to let PCs level up and so forth.

    I wonder how well that campaign structure would map to Warhammer. Replace the Demon Lord with Chaos, or the Skaven or an Orc WAAAGH instead. One of my issues with all the Warhammer settings - WFRP, 40K, Age of Sigmar - is that because they're all focused on being wargames as well as RPGs and book series, they tend a bit towards making every faction psychotic, mindless, or so stupid they fight their allies and themselves constantly. But if the whole campaign is built around fending off an invading threat, the dearth of potential invaders suddenly becomes an advantage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, the ten-level, eleven-session campaign is the best idea in the game. The big problem with it is it's obvious artificiality: you're basically saying to the players that whatever they do, and wherever they go, they will *inevitably* have *exactly* ten short adventures of escalating difficulty followed by a climactic showdown. But if the players are onboard with it, I think it could provide a great sense of structure and direction, one that could easily be applied to virtually any setting or genre.

      If I was going to apply it to WFRP I'd do it with a classic chaos cult conspiracy. Each session, the PCs advance one step towards uncovering the cult and its plans, while the cultists advance one step towards fulfilling their agenda. In the final session the PCs finally know who the cult's leaders are, the cultists are finally in position to put their master plan into action, and the stage is set for the final showdown. Exactly the same structure used in the first three parts of the WFRP 3 version of 'The Enemy Within', in fact.

      Delete
    2. I think a good compromise between the rigidity of SotDL and the flexiblity of most old school games would be to go with a system more along the lines of fronts from PbtA games. The players would level up as normal (maybe after every adventure rather than by killing monsters/looting treasure), but each time they do the campaign's chosen disaster gets closer and more severe. Whether they want to be heroes, run away, or try to exploit it for their own personal gain is up to them, but as the game goes on the more pronounced and unavoidable it becomes.

      Tied to an impending doom or not, the idea of focusing a campaign on a set ending is something I wish more games would do. When I first started DMing the idea of a years-long campaign appealed to me, but now, I'd rather have more support for short, well-themed ones. If the players really want to keep it going, they can always "import" their PCs into another campaign - like a series of movie sequels, rather than a television series intended to go on for ten seasons.

      Delete
    3. "However, the "every campaign is eleven sessions" idea... I absolutely love it. Maybe not strictly eleven sessions..."

      I wonder if some sort of semi-random number of sessions could work, based on a die roll with increasing odds over time. E.g., roll a die after each session starting with session seven, and if the die comes up a 1, the next session is the showdown. The die type is a d12 to start with, moving to a d10 after session eight, d8 after nine, d6 after ten, d4 after 11, d3 after 12, d2 after 13, and automatic after 14, so all campaigns are 8-15 sessions long.

      Using that system, 8% of campaigns would be 8 sessions, 9% 9 sessions, 10% 10 sessions, 12% 11 sessions, and 15% each 12-15 sessions.

      Delete
  6. DMed a couple sessions in this and it petered out pretty quickly. I just felt like I was playing R rated 5e. Wasn't sure if I was doing something wrong, so I checked the podcast of Schwalb's home game. Nope.

    I dunno. It might just be the power curve. If there is one thing that made WFRP, it was the feeling that your character was decidedly mortal. Not just in a fight, but also in the sense that you are constantly low on cash, you aren't an expert in all things but a specialist whose expertise wasn't always guarenteed to come up, and even then it wasn't that good anyway.

    SotDL's Boons and Banes, aim for 10 system is fine, but it never really replicated the sense that you weren't a hero but the hired help. And that was what gave WFRP it's identity. Maybe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'R-rated 5e' was probably pretty much the objective, to be honest. The WFRP-y bit is concentrated right down into the lowest levels. By session 4 you're already supposed to be on what, by WFRP standards, would be a high-end advanced career.

      Was it the knowledge that the PCs had this onrushing heroic destiny that made a difference? The awareness of PCs and GM alike that this band of nobodies would be turning into powerful fantasy heroes - not at some point in the distant future, but in just 3-4 sessions time, guaranteed? Because I think I'd struggle to play my starving peasant as *just* a starving peasant when I knew that they'd be a fantasy hero by the end of the month...

      Delete
    2. More like...

      In the party's first session, the group was navigating a forest with a group of bandits, a werewolf, and other baddies about.

      The group tricked the bandits into fighting the werewolf and then slaughtered them to a man, and the tone changed from horror to typical badasses doing badass things because of the ease that they did it.

      I got more sweat out of my party in the first session of my 5e campaign (which is now nearing level 10), which also involved a forest of evil, a monster in the woods, and a group of mundane enemies (goblins) who hide the real threat.

      Delete
    3. Ah. I see. And I understand why the horror tone was hard to maintain after that!

      ('How to run horror with highly-competent characters and still have it feel horrific' would probably be a good topic for a blog post, actually...)

      Delete
  7. A very interesting read. The advertising suggested this was the "in your face with demons" version of chaos, rather than the Shadows over Bogenhafen type; accordingly I gave it a miss. The session limited campaign is indeed tempting, especially for those oldies amongst us: we could spend the time and energy to eventually confront Lolth in the Demonweb, but that was when we were young. To really deliver on this. however, there needs to be a campaign that makes the idea fizz. Your suggestion of a cult building to some great summoning, or Malcolm Svensson's suggestion of a short military campaign, are strong ones. Maybe the appointment/election of a political figure could also work. I like Stephen's suggestion of a small variations in the number of sessions.

    ReplyDelete
  8. My question is, how do you write a campaign-in-a-book (even a short one like Tales of the Demon Lord) without railroading?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You don't. But the adventures are so stripped down that the railroading is much less egregious than in, say, Pathfinder APs.

      A typical SOTDL adventure is 'A bad thing happens. Here's how the PCs can find out who did it. Here's the villain and where they live and how they might respond to attempts to apprehend them.' It's 'railroaded' in the sense that only one course of action is really supported, but aside from that it's pretty inoffensive.

      Delete
    2. What are the consequences for failing to catch the villain? Does the arrival of the Unspeakable One move forward a notch, or is he tougher when he arrives? Otherwise the PCs might as well spend the night in the tavern and level up as they emerge the next morning.

      Delete
    3. Well, one consequence of just spending the night in the tavern is that you didn't get to play the game. If your character is the route to sit and get drunk while there's an innocent Dragon in the clutches of an evil princess, maybe you should be playing a different character.
      More in the spirit of the question, in my game the party would be missing important resources that could have helped them in the climactic encounter. Like of you save the Dragon, he shows up to roast the Big Bad's minion army during the final battle. If you fail, however, no Dragon means you have to find a way to circumvent or distract 18000 rabid weasels on your own.

      Delete
    4. I completely agree, but my questions were more aimed at what do the published adventures do. I like the general idea, but without an example of a published campaign that makes the idea sparkle, I'm on the fence about its practicality.

      Delete