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

pemerton · Mar 16, 2024

Nikosandros said:
Well, that factorial of 2 in the denominator is exactly not to over-count the permutations of the 2 objects, since the order does not matter.

Sure. But nCr = n!/(r!(n-r)!) doesn't require thinking about rings! Just plug in the numbers.

Nikosandros · Mar 16, 2024

pemerton said:
Sure. But nCr = n!/(r!(n-r)!) doesn't require thinking about rings! Just plug in the numbers.

Fair enough...

Reynard · Mar 16, 2024

pemerton said:
This is pretty bizarre. I've done a lot of "play to find out" and it didn't require these things you say that it requires.

It's almost as if you run games a particular way and that way aligns with PTFO games.

And you assertion that D&D requires a huge amount of prep is just a precarious as my position. D&D requires exactly as much prep as the GM needs to feel comfortable. For me, that's "almost none." For others it is "hours and hours of work."

Gorck · Mar 16, 2024

I think if I ever run this game with my group I will institute the following houserule:

Initiative: At the start of combat, each player rolls their Duality Dice and adds their Agility modifier to determine the order of combat. If a player Rolls with Hope, they still mark a Hope slot. If a player rolls with Fear, the GM still collects a Fear. If more players roll with Fear, the enemies act first.

Reynard · Mar 16, 2024

Gorck said:
I think if I ever run this game with my group I will institute the following houserule:

Initiative: At the start of combat, each player rolls their Duality Dice and adds their Agility modifier to determine the order of combat. If a player Rolls with Hope, they still mark a Hope slot. If a player rolls with Fear, the GM still collects a Fear. If more players roll with Fear, the enemies act first.

This kind of thinking always strikes me as odd. Why would you house rule a game you haven't played yet?

TwoSix · Mar 16, 2024

pemerton said:
Sure. But nCr = n!/(r!(n-r)!) doesn't require thinking about rings! Just plug in the numbers.

Oh, for sure. I just noticed the “closed ring” thing because of the way they structured their design in the playtest.

It seemed pretty intuitive you could make (n-1)/2 “closed rings” for any odd n (assuming r=2 like this design) but I wanted to double check.

Gorck · Mar 16, 2024

Reynard said:
This kind of thinking always strikes me as odd. Why would you house rule a game you haven't played yet?

A) I said, " I think if I ever run . . ." It's not set in stone.
B) I know myself and my players, and I can see how a lack of initiative order would be utterly chaotic and disruptive to our play experience.

Gorck · Mar 16, 2024

Conversely, I was thinking about how this "non-Initiative" combat would port over to D&D. My initial thoughts were:

1) During combat, players can act at any time that makes sense for the story.
2) If a player makes an attack roll and the result on the d20 is <10, a random enemy gets to take a turn immediately after.
3) If an enemy makes a saving throw and the result on the d20 is 10+, that enemy gets to take a turn immediately after.

But, as I gave it more thought, I'm not sure it would work with the D&D framework

A) Things that grant bonuses to Initiative rolls (Barbarian's Feral Instinct, abilities that have you add your INT or WIS to initiative, Sentinel Shield, etc.) would be rendered pointless.
B) Class features that grant bonuses due to combat order (Assassin Rogue's Assassinate, Gloom Stalker Ranger's Dread Ambush, etc.) would all be affected
C) Existing mechanics like Reactions, Legendary Actions, Lair Actions, and Opportunity Attacks would complicate things.
D) The overall action economy would likely be dumped on its head. (The level 11 Fighter makes their 3 attacks. All three die rolls are 10+, so no enemies get to go. All the players at the table agree that the Fighter should take another turn, making 3 more attacks).

Atomoctba · Mar 16, 2024

Gorck said:
A) I said, " I think if I ever run . . ." It's not set in stone.
B) I know myself and my players, and I can see how a lack of initiative order would be utterly chaotic and disruptive to our play experience.

Sure, and while I am not disagreeing with B (very probably it would be equally chaotic for my group and would not work for their tastes), I have for principle always to attempt to play or GM a new system first by the book before starting to house rule it. Even if I do not like a specific rule or two of the new system when I read, I need to understand the role it has within all the mobile parts of the system while in an actual play before discard it as if it was an optional rule or a plug-and-play module to that system. Hint: very often it was not and its removal or substitution mess a lot with the rest of the game.

Gorck · Mar 16, 2024

Atomoctba said:
Sure, and while I am not disagreeing with B (very probably it would be equally chaotic for my group and would not work for their tastes), I have for principle always to attempt to play or GM a new system first by the book before starting to house rule it. Even if I do not like a specific rule or two of the new system when I read, I need to understand the role it has within all the mobile parts of the system while in an actual play before discard it as if it was an optional rule or a plug-and-play module to that system. Hint: very often it was not and its removal or substitution mess a lot with the rest of the game.

Oh, I would try to run it “by the book” at first. But I can foresee it quickly spiraling out of control as three 12 year old girls yelled over each other trying to take their actions all at the same time, and me trying to rein them in and discern what each of them was saying. Or, if I turn out to be a crappy Daggerheart GM, I would probably have to keep prodding them to do something as they sat around goofing off instead of paying attention.

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

pemerton

Legend

Nikosandros

Golden Procrastinator

Reynard

Legend

Gorck

Prince of Dorkness

Reynard

Legend

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Gorck

Prince of Dorkness

Gorck

Prince of Dorkness

Atomoctba

Adventurer

Gorck

Prince of Dorkness

Similar Threads

Related Articles