What do YOU plan on doing with Daggerheart?

[Retreater]

I ordered it to read, enjoy the art, and probably never play it (my group isn't that experimental). I am very curious about the character sheet design and card implementation, and may use it for teaching other RPGs.

 

[Vael]

I'm still trying to get a group together for a 5e campaign, I don't see myself playing Daggerheart anytime soon, unless a friend decides to run it. That said, I will probably watch the CR series, which will be my first. Currently I'm just playing around with the character generation, will probably build each class and level up a bunch of times.

 

[zakael19]

I'm getting a campaign frame together with a bunch of classic more "points of light" D&D tropes and adjustments to the Ancestries/Communities (plus adding in a couple of the missing origins; and could see adapting the Witherwild's mechanical adds into a Symbaroum campaign frame.

 

[Arilyn]

I get to be a player in a game my husband is going to run. We went through the starter adventure to get our feet wet. Went well. We're not sure what kind of world we want to adventure in yet. I've made a faerie ribbet druid but may not be my long running character.

 

[overgeeked]

I get to be a player in a game my husband is going to run. We went through the starter adventure to get our feet wet. Went well. We're not sure what kind of world we want to adventure in yet. I've made a faerie ribbet druid but may not be my long running character.

I really dig the mixed-ancestry rules. There's all kinds of fun combos to do. Add in how customizable the ancestries are by default and there's all kinds of nonsense you can do. The top/bottom traits thing seems a bit...arbitrary though. Are the traits at the top or bottom meant to be more powerful so having two top or bottom traits would make too strong of a character or something?

 

[Arilyn]

I really dig the mixed-ancestry rules. There's all kinds of fun combos to do. Add in how customizable the ancestries are by default and there's all kinds of nonsense you can do. The top/bottom traits thing seems a bit...arbitrary though. Are the traits at the top or bottom meant to be more powerful so having two top or bottom traits would make too strong of a character or something?

I actually cheated with my fae frog. He has wings and the long tongue. Table letting it slide because its not that big a deal. I didn't notice the rule till after my character was made.

I think it's meant to balance the traits and maybe some combos would be bit too tough?

 

[overgeeked]

I actually cheated with my fae frog. He has wings and the long tongue. Table letting it slide because its not that big a deal. I didn't notice the rule till after my character was made.

I think it's meant to balance the traits and maybe some combos would be bit too tough?

The one immediately thought of was a pseudodragon PC. Faerie and drakona. But both flying and breath weapon are the second traits. Seems like a silly limitation.

 

[aramis erak]

That's the one thing I don't love about Daggerheart - the way the book is organised. As you say, it makes sense, and it actually flows kind of naturally, but I found it annoying to reference or locate where stuff was. I know from long, long experience of RPGs that that's a temporary state - if it was a dealbreaker I'd never have survived the 1990s, nor played AD&D lol (hell, even in 5E is far from perfect there) - but it is, to me, an imperfection.

It's growing on me as I read it.

As someone who started out RPGs with playing those ducks — art was a bit more Disney back then — I approve!

It will need to be playtested and all that, but this is the raccoon card. (Placeholder sketch until I draw it proper. ) View attachment 406229

The usual shorthand in the PNW is a deep south denigration term for persons of African ancestry.

That's my concern as well. As mentioned at the tail end of Christian's Daggerheart review he mentions the split between the crunchy combat and almost freeform narrative elements. To get the most out of a game like this you need to find players who like both. That's going to be a huge ask. In my experience it's very much an either-or situation. Either a player likes the crunchy rules or they like super-lightweight freeform play. Finding a group of people who like both when that Venn diagram is effectively two separate circles is going to be hard.

That is 100% not my personal experience.

same; my groups don't mind that hybrid space. Several of my former players do.

it's becoming more commonly seen, with 2d20 systems all being pretty closely to the same location... crunchy narrativism. (Note that the narrativism is minimalized in Fallout, and maximized in Dune.)
Burning Wheel is notorious for its crunchy-like-peanut-brittle narrativism. Mouse Guard is, in some ways, BW-Lite, in others, very different... but still crunchy narrativism.
Fate can be, as well.
It's actually a rather common in rulesets.

 

[Reynard]

I don't know. Daggerheart has narrative tools, of course, but it isn't GMless magical story hour. I think Fate is more of a narrative game than DH.

 

[aramis erak]

I don't know. Daggerheart has narrative tools, of course, but it isn't GMless magical story hour. I think Fate is more of a narrative game than DH.

Fate isn't GMless. Nor are FFG Star Wars, Burning Wheel, Burning Empires, Mouse Guard, any of the 2d20 games... Daggerheart...

They're all in the same zone of the GSN graph...the corner of the center triangle along the GN line, a bit from the edge.