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.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I mentioned this upthread but I think it bears repeating:

One thing the CR cast does really well, that players could work to emulate, is being a fan of the other players when the spotlight isn't on them, to remain engaged and contributing to everyone's fun even when it isn't your turn or your character isn't there. A player that immediately turns to their phone when someone else is in the spotlight is a bad player and should be told so.

I think while that's a defensible attitude, its not necessarily a useful one. There are a lot of players who have problems with that, and your criticizing them isn't going to fix it. Among other things it can be extremely hard for those with ADHD to work around.

 

[Reynard]

I think while that's a defensible attitude, its not necessarily a useful one. There are a lot of players who have problems with that, and your criticizing them isn't going to fix it. Among other things it can be extremely hard for those with ADHD to work around.

And if your group has that situation, it is something your group should accommodate. That doesn't in any way mean that folks don't need to make an effort to engage and be positive and respectful, especially the ones that don't have ADHD.

 

[Stalker0]

That's a very good point. I think it depends on how razor thin the margin for error is in Daggerheart. I suspect it's more a combat is a game than combat is war. The test combats we've run didn't put us at risk of being downed.

So far from playtests I've heard DH is less swingy than 5e combat. Mainly because the damage variables boil down to 1,2, or 3 Hp of damage and even big crits can't really skew things wildly like they can in 5e.

 

[Fifth Element]

We're going around in circles here over a completely theoretical example that has almost no chance to occur in actual play.

Perhaps consider the possibility that your assumptions - which is all they are - about how likely it is to occur are simply wrong. Ignoring a potential issue because you assume it won't come up is a terrible way to do game design.

 

[SteveC]

So far from playtests I've heard DH is less swingy than 5e combat. Mainly because the damage variables boil down to 1,2, or 3 Hp of damage and even big crits can't really skew things wildly like they can in 5e.

This is a really good point. It makes me wonder how lesser combat characters will do in "real" terms, will they do less HP damage after factoring in the enemy damage thresholds? Not sure.

 

[Thomas Shey]

And if your group has that situation, it is something your group should accommodate. That doesn't in any way mean that folks don't need to make an effort to engage and be positive and respectful, especially the ones that don't have ADHD.

An effort, sure. I try to do that. I also fail pretty regularly. I even agree I'm a kind of bad player for that reason. But there's not much point making a repeated point about it to people who have trouble with it; after the first couple times, they know, so either let it go or suggest they go somewhere else.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Perhaps consider the possibility that your assumptions - which is all they are - about how likely it is to occur are simply wrong. Ignoring a potential issue because you assume it won't come up is a terrible way to do game design.

But it works for D&D!

 

[Reynard]

Perhaps consider the possibility that your assumptions - which is all they are - about how likely it is to occur are simply wrong. Ignoring a potential issue because you assume it won't come up is a terrible way to do game design.

Maybe you are right. Please explain to me how you think the example given will occur outside of it being done intentionally, over the course of a campaign.

 

[Fifth Element]

Maybe you are right. Please explain to me how you think the example given will occur outside of it being done intentionally, over the course of a campaign.

It's already been explained. The amount of pushback against raising a potential issue in a playtest is getting silly.

 

[Reynard]

It's already been explained. The amount of pushback against raising a potential issue in a playtest is getting silly.

No, it hasn't. And you must have joined the conversation without actually reading the discussion, because the issue was about white room theorizing rather than actual playtesting.