I only watched parts of the Critical Role stuff but I believe they never released a session zero?
Also, Daggerheart is newly released so it might be interesting just because of that.
I don’t have time to watch the video any time soon, but I’m very interested in how Daggerheart will work. If anyone takes a peek, let me know :P
I pre-ordered the book, and ran the Quick Start adventure for my family last week. I really liked it, and wrote up my impressions here: https://gist.github.com/sandyarmstrong/0503026016dbbb0aa6408ece020010fd .
It’s not a full review or anything. I don’t bother explaining the core mechanics. There are other folks doing that already.
FYI, the link doesn’t work.
I don’t know why it’s not working for you, it works fine for me even from a private browsing session where I’m not logged in. Are you using a Lemmy client that includes the trailing
.in the link or something?Anyway, I’ve copied it here as well: https://sandybox.neocities.org/dh
Are you using a Lemmy client that includes the trailing
.in the link or something?Oh, yeah, sorry, that was it.
It was an interesting review, thanks a lot for sharing!
I read the playtest a few months ago and felt the lack of initiative and the fear/hope mechanic didn’t quite work out for me, but I’m glad that it did for you!
Character creation and sheets are an easy win compared to the mess that is 5e (especially 2024). It’s the first thing that a player usually sees when approaching a new game, so I’m happy that they did it right.
For what it’s worth, there are definitely people using traditional initiative in Daggerheart. For one thing, the book has optional rules for an “action tracker” that limits how much an individual player can hog the spotlight. And I saw somebody on Mastodon who was borrowing a cool initiative system from Dragonbane.
Hope and Fear are more central, if that mechanic turns you off, it’s probably not the game for you. Personally I love it, it gives us all improv cues when we need them, and it makes rolls more dynamic than just pass/fail.
Last I heard (the playtest) Daggerheart was somewhat unpolished and lacked mechanical teeth to make it more than a narrative prompting experience. Recent reviews seem positive though, I’ll have to take another look.
lacked mechanical teeth to make it more than a narrative prompting experience
Anyone looking for a game like that is going to be overwhelmed by Daggerheart. It has plenty of crunch. But it does have an overall philosophy that “Everything you do at the table should flow from the fiction”.
My skim of the srd gave the impression of a crunchy exterior with a gooey center (which definitely is good for some tables). Hell, the first page has a header for “rulings over rules”! That phrase was a common GM pejorative for 5e; used as justification to offload balance from the system to the players. The core systems seem strong but with lots of asterisks to keep them backseat to player agency.
Loose turn structure, PC death only with player consent, GMs generally don’t get to make a move unless it’s explicitly available, spending meta-currencies to legally fudge dice rolls, etc… It seems like most of it was designed for players to have a strong control over narrative with lots of pressure valves to reduce the impact of unlucky dice. I like the Hope/Stress system, but Fear seems like it only exists to give the GM permission to do normal GM things.
At any rate I’ll be interested to see it in practice. It seems like the system Critical Role always needed, they’ll probably be able to do some cooler narratives without sanding down 5e’s rough edges.
The core systems seem strong but with lots of asterisks to keep them backseat to player agency.
I think it’s more that the mechanics take a backseat to the fiction, and largely the GM is more responsible for that than the players. It’s definitely not for everyone. I run a regular 5e game and I suspect half of my players would be into it and half would very clearly say “no thanks”.
lots of pressure valves to reduce the impact of unlucky dice
That’s an interesting interpretation, considering that success with fear is just as likely as failure with hope. I don’t see this as primarily existing to make things easier for the players. Rather it’s there to make each roll more interesting.
Fear seems like it only exists to give the GM permission to do normal GM things
The communication around Fear could be better in the book. GMs can do normal GM things whenever they want. Fear is used to up the stakes by using special adversary moves, taking more “turns” than they can naturally, or interrupting the players in ways that would likely seem unfair in 5e.
