Critical Role's 'Daggerheart' Open Playtest Starts In March

On March 12th, Critical Role's Darrington Press will be launching the open playtest for Daggerheart, their new fantasy TTRPG/

Using cards and two d12s, the system plays on 'the dualities of hope and fear'. The game is slated for a 2025 release.

Almost a year ago, we announced that we’ve been working hard behind-the-scenes on Daggerheart, our contribution to the world of high-fantasy tabletop roleplaying games.

Daggerheart is a game of brave heroics and vibrant worlds that are built together with your gaming group. Create a shared story with your adventuring party, and shape your world through rich, long-term campaign play.

When it’s time for the game mechanics to control fate, players roll one HOPE die and one FEAR die (both 12-sided dice), which will ultimately impact the outcome for your characters. This duality between the forces of hope and fear on every hero drives the unique character-focused narratives in Daggerheart.

In addition to dice, Daggerheart’s card system makes it easy to get started and satisfying to grow your abilities by bringing your characters’ background and capabilities to your fingertips. Ancestry and Community cards describe where you come from and how your experience shapes your customs and values. Meanwhile, your Subclass and Domain cards grant your character plenty of tantalizing abilities to choose from as your character evolves.

And now, dear reader, we’re excited to let you know that our Daggerheart Open Beta Playtest will launch globally on our 9th anniversary, Tuesday, March 12th!

We want anyone and everyone (over the age of 18, please) to help us make Daggerheart as wonderful as possible, which means…helping us break the game. Seriously! The game is not finished or polished yet, which is why it’s critical (ha!) to gather all of your feedback ahead of Daggerheart’s public release in 2025.

 

[Reynard]

I am legitimately curious if @Crimson Longinus and @Paul Farquhar have played DH yet, and whether their concerns are rooted in issues they found at the table.

Separately: this isn't 5E. Stop measuring it by that yardstick.

 

[FrogReaver]

I am legitimately curious if @Crimson Longinus and @Paul Farquhar have played DH yet, and whether their concerns are rooted in issues they found at the table.

Doesn’t matter 1 bit.

If you had played it and had a counterpoint for something emergent that only becomes obvious in play that mitigates their concerns then share it.

Separately: this isn't 5E. Stop measuring it by that yardstick.

I’d pushback on calling it ‘measuring’. 5e is usually common ground though and makes for some solid comparison points. So no, I won’t be stopping that.

 

[TwoSix]

Great point! Offensively it’s probably the best. Defensively it may not be.

I mean, the most degenerate case I can think of is one combat-focused ranged character acting as a sniper, and the rest of the party standing by the monsters and acting as meat shields.

If that's the dynamic the party wants, then go for it, I say. But I'm going to assume most tables will simply reject that concept, even if it is the combat-optimal choice.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean, the most degenerate case I can think of is one combat-focused ranged character acting as a sniper, and the rest of the party standing by the monsters and acting as meat shields.

If that's the dynamic the party wants, then go for it, I say. But I'm going to assume most tables will simply reject that concept, even if it is the combat-optimal choice.

In d&d terms it would most likely just lead to the dm to start throwing enough monsters at once to overwhelm the snipers capabilities. He might kill half, but there will be enough to engage the party.

Doesn’t have to happen that way but it’s definitely a possibility.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I am legitimately curious if @Crimson Longinus and @Paul Farquhar have played DH yet, and whether their concerns are rooted in issues they found at the table.

No, and that in itself is a problem. We only meet once a fortnight, and no one wants to give up their D&D to play something else. I expect a lot of people are in the same position. Which makes me feel this game is woefully undertested. And no one who has tested it has done it properly and tried to break the game.

Separately: this isn't 5E. Stop measuring it by that yardstick.

It’s very very similar…,

 

[TwoSix]

In d&d terms it would most likely just lead to the dm to start throwing enough monsters at once to overwhelm the snipers capabilities. He might kill half, but there will be enough to engage the party.

Doesn’t have to happen that way but it’s definitely a possibility.

It's going to get solved either by the DM adjusting encounters or by simple social dynamics. After a few combats like that, even the sniper is going to get bored.

 

[TwoSix]

No, and that in itself is a problem. We only meet once a fortnight, and no one wants to give up their D&D to play something else. I expect a lot of people are in the same position. Which makes me feel this game is woefully undertested. And no one who has tested it has done it properly and tried to break the game.

I've seen quite a few playtest reports on the Daggerheart subreddit, and a decent amount of them have been at high level. And the exact concerns you're raising have been brought up many times in those reports, with strong debates about the relative pros and cons.

This is Critical Role we're talking about, after all. I don't think a lack of playtesting will be an issue.

Just based on the feedback I've seen, my gut feeling is some kind of "turn regulator" will be added without adding an explicit turn order.

 

[FrogReaver]

I've seen quite a few playtest reports on the Daggerheart subreddit, and a decent amount of them have been at high level. And the exact concerns you're raising have been brought up many times in those reports, with strong debates about the relative pros and cons.

This is Critical Role we're talking about, after all. I don't think a lack of playtesting will be an issue.

Just based on the feedback I've seen, my gut feeling is some kind of "turn regulator" will be added without adding an explicit turn order.

Something like - Enemies get a free turn if any player hasn’t acted in the last 10 turns?

 

[TwoSix]

Something like - Enemies get a free turn if any player hasn’t acted in the last 10 turns?

Could be. Probably a little bit of carrot (like a player who hasn't gone yet gets a free Hope to spend on their action this turn) and a little bit of stick (if a player takes two consecutive turns, the DM gets a Fear or a free turn). Lots of ways to do it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Could be. Probably a little bit of carrot (like a player who hasn't gone yet gets a free Hope to spend on their action this turn) and a little bit of stick (if a player takes two consecutive turns, the DM gets a Fear or a free turn). Lots of ways to do it.

Yeah. The criticism doesn’t mean that the game must be changed to have a D&D style initiative system. There are many different ways to address this.