Daggerheart Review: The Duality of Robust Combat Mechanics and Freeform Narrative

daggerheart art.png


Daggerheart tries to simultaneously offer a robust set of combat tools driven by high fantasy while also encouraging a collaborative storytelling environment between the player and game master. Although it's too chunky of a game system to really appeal to narrative game enthusiasts, it does offer a unique enough system to stand out more than as just another game trying to out-D&D Dungeons & Dragons. The real question is whether the Critical Role effect will be enough to propel Daggerheart into a rarified space amongst D&D or if it will get lost in the shuffle similar to Darrington Press’s previous RPG Candela Obscura.

Daggerheart is a high-fantasy RPG influenced by the likes of D&D 4th Edition, FFG’s Genesys System, Blades in the Dark, and the Cypher System. It wears most of these influences proudly on its sleeves, calling out the various RPGs that influenced its mechanics in its opening pages. For veteran RPG players, a readthrough of Daggerheart will feel a bit like that one Leonardo DeCaprio meme, as many of the secondary systems in particular feel a bit like elements grafted from other game systems.

While this might sound like a criticism, it’s really not. Many DM have used pieces of various game systems to enhance their own games for decades. So, seeing a worldbuilding system influenced by The Quiet Year or DM interruptions guided by the Cypher System isn’t as much derivative as simply doing something that many of us have already been doing at our own tables. What I can say is that Spenser Starke, lead developer of Daggerheart, clearly has good taste in RPGs, as he’s distilled a lot of great parts of other RPGs and mixed them together for a game that will still feel fresh to a lot of the game’s intended audience.

daggerheart 2.jpg


At the heart of the Daggerheart system is the duality dice, a pair of differently-colored D12s. When making checks, players roll both D12s and add any relevant modifiers (which can be represented as tokens that are tossed alongside the dice). The two dice results are added together to determine success or failure, with additional narrative effects determined by which of the two dice (which are known as the Hope Die and the Fear Die) has the higher result. A roll with Hope results in a narrative benefit of some kind, even when the result is a failure. A roll with Fear results in a narrative setback of some kind, even if the roll is successful.

Hope and Fear also act as one of several kinds of resources players are expected to manage throughout the game. The Hope resource fuels several player abilities, including a new Hope Feature for each class that wasn’t present during playtesting. Players are also expected to track Stress, HP, Armor (which is both a type of equipment and a type of resource), gold, and equipment. Some classes also have additional meta-currency, which requires further tracking. The GM meanwhile uses Fear, which can only be generated by the players through their rolls, as a way to take extra moves or activate certain features. The result is a lot of resource management over the course of a game, in addition to whatever kind of storytelling tracking or mystery solving a GM may want to throw at their party.

Character creation, coincidentally, is a lot more in line with the newest version of D&D 5th Edition, with background, ancestry, class, subclass, and domain all coming together to create a character. All of the aforementioned character options have at least one feature that feeds into the character sheet. Daggerheart solves this immense modularity through the use of cards, which come with the game’s core rulebook in a nifty box and list various kinds of features.

The cards eventually play into the game design itself, with players having a limited hand of domain abilities that they can swap out as they reach higher levels. The cards aren’t technically necessary, as all the information from the cards can also be found in the core rulebook. However, the cards are a lot more handy than writing down all that information, and frankly, the way domains work mean that the cards are more of a necessity than a bonus.

daggerheart 3.jpeg


What will be interesting is how Daggerheart handles the eventual expansion of the game. Will new domain abilities or ancestries also get their own cards? And will they be included with the purchase of a physical book or left as a separate purchase? Given that the cards are one of the more unique aspects to Daggerheart, it will be interesting to see how Critical Role tackles this part of their game.

When playtesting the game last year, my players’ favorite part of the game was the way Daggerheart encouraged players to take an active part in worldbuilding. This starts from Session Zero when players are encouraged to name landmarks on a map (several pre-generated maps and location name suggestions are included in the book and are available to download) and continues through various story and idea prompts embedded into the adventures themselves. The game encourages the players to improvise upon the world, answering their own questions about what an NPC may look like or how the residents of a certain town behave. This in turn is supposed to feed story ideas to the GM to riff off of, building out a more off-the-cuff story that is built more off of vibes than meticulous planning.

At its heart, Daggerheart plays on two diametrically different game concepts. Its combat engine is a resource management system where players are encouraged to build broken character builds to live out overpowered fantasy fulfillment. However, the narrative system is built around a more freeform collaboration between players and GM, where the story grows without much impediment from rules. Much like its core dice mechanic, the duality of Daggerheart works well together, although I think this game will ultimately appeal to D&D players rather than those who enjoy lighter RPG fare.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer

Had my family make characters last night. My two sons, one who is autistic, took right to it. They are chomping at the bit to get into play. My wife, who has a learning disability (and I think is probably autistic like my youngest) bounced right off. She couldn't handle the open narrative bits and really dragged things down because she just "didn't get it" and wanted the more "precise" method of building D&D characters. This is going to be an uphill battle for me getting her to enjoy playing.

Also, although the cards are well-meant to help character generation/play, I find them annoying - as well as the class-specific character sheets. On the latter, it's a real pain to use the generic sheet (which I printed because I didn't know what my players were going to choose), and I see on the cards its going to take time to dig out the player's abilities unless you somehow set them aside (I ended up putting them "face down" in one of the pockets to easily retrieve). If you're running more than one game/campaign at a time, the cards are going to get in the way.

I'm hoping actual play goes well, but dealing with my wife making a character really cooled my enthusiasm for the game, unfortunately. This may have to be a game I play at the FLGS with strangers (not something I'm relatively comfortable with) instead of at home.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The vast majority of the millions of people who have taken D&D up in the past ten years have probably never read another rpg.
I strongly suspect that is true, yes, but I do wonder what the figures will look like in say, another ten years? I feel like a pretty significant minority at the very least will have tried other RPGs.
 

I strongly suspect that is true, yes, but I do wonder what the figures will look like in say, another ten years? I feel like a pretty significant minority at the very least will have tried other RPGs.
I wouldn't be surprised if a good number if those people aren't playing RPGs at all in ten years.
 

I strongly suspect that is true, yes, but I do wonder what the figures will look like in say, another ten years? I feel like a pretty significant minority at the very least will have tried other RPGs.
Maybe, but there is no way to know this outside of a well designed, totally public study. Which, by the way, I completely advocate for. Bring on the data!
 

While watcing Age of Umbra had something click for me with this system. I don't think it's a more 'narrative' version of D&D at all.

I think Daggerheart a more cinematic version of D&D.

Which makes a lot of sense, because Spencer, in talking about and running Candella, constantly emphasized setting up cinematic scenes for encounters.

And I really felt that emphasis in Age of Umbra. It isn't any less mechanically complex than D&D (in fact it reminds me quite a bit of 4e), and while the PCs contribute to the world building and such, the mechanics don't really push it that way.

But what Hope/Fear and the Duality Dice really do is set up for creating exciting, cinematic scenes, like Sam's opening run to the city while being chased, and I think it likely does that really, really well.

And that's been my style of DMing for over a decade. With that realization, I'm going to be giving DH a real try/test in the coming months.
 

It isn't any less mechanically complex than D&D
It's significantly less mechanically complex. I can demonstrate this at boring length if you would like! But I don't think that's very important.

However, what it isn't, is rules-light. It's a definitely a rules-medium game whereas 5E is rules-heavy.
I think Daggerheart a more cinematic version of D&D.
Yes that's essentially the main goal. It's influenced by a lot of other games and cites a couple of principles which might not always line with this, but I think that's what they're pursuing. And that's how we used to play DW I note, rather than going for the full "play to find out", which, in my experience, tends to create less cinematic scenes than if a GM is involved in shaping things (YMMV of course).

I wouldn't be surprised if a good number if those people aren't playing RPGs at all in ten years.
Oh I'm sure that will be true as well.
 

While watcing Age of Umbra had something click for me with this system. I don't think it's a more 'narrative' version of D&D at all.

I think Daggerheart a more cinematic version of D&D.

Which makes a lot of sense, because Spencer, in talking about and running Candella, constantly emphasized setting up cinematic scenes for encounters.
That's basically what most narrative games (almost all the GM'd ones) do. The old school narrative games are all about cutting the cruft that gets in the way for a light and fast experience then relying on players and GM to go cinematic. The new school ones add lightish rules that enhance the drama and cinematic nature. And Daggerheart basically borrowed from every influential cinematic narrative game of the past 15 years (which IMO is when the narrative games started getting genuinely good).
And that's been my style of DMing for over a decade. With that realization, I'm going to be giving DH a real try/test in the coming months.
Come to the dark side! We have chaos and anarchy!
 

My issue with those systems is that it kinda locks you into a « and » or « but » etc. Typically, these systems discourage you from just ignoring the « and » or « but » if you just don’t feel it. Also, it can create situations where the GM feels they need to justify themselves when they introduce something that goes against the result of the roll, or else the players feel cheated.
I'm replying two weeks down the road, but having actually played the game now, I wanted to address this. I've only played DG once, so I could be wrong, but here's my take.

First, the "yes, but" and "no, but" thing does not apply to every roll the players make. Combat rolls just succeed or fail without any of the complications. When you roll with fear during combat, the monsters usually get to take a turn, which is punishment enough without throwing in stuff like "Your attack hits, but you pull a muscle!" or whatever.

And even for the other rolls, the mixed result aspect seems pretty optional to me. Giving the GM fear is plenty bad in and of itself. Our GM largely skipped over the complications from rolling with fear (or maybe he just forgot, since we're all new at this!) and that was fine. Rolling a very high check but with fear still felt like a mixed blessing, as it is supposed to. So long story short, I don't think that mechanic is a handcuff. It's a storytelling tool that the GM can use a ton or just a little, as they please.
 

I'm replying two weeks down the road, but having actually played the game now, I wanted to address this. I've only played DG once, so I could be wrong, but here's my take.

First, the "yes, but" and "no, but" thing does not apply to every roll the players make. Combat rolls just succeed or fail without any of the complications. When you roll with fear during combat, the monsters usually get to take a turn, which is punishment enough without throwing in stuff like "Your attack hits, but you pull a muscle!" or whatever.

And even for the other rolls, the mixed result aspect seems pretty optional to me. Giving the GM fear is plenty bad in and of itself. Our GM largely skipped over the complications from rolling with fear (or maybe he just forgot, since we're all new at this!) and that was fine. Rolling a very high check but with fear still felt like a mixed blessing, as it is supposed to. So long story short, I don't think that mechanic is a handcuff. It's a storytelling tool that the GM can use a ton or just a little, as they please.
Thanks, I appreciate the feedback!

As others said it looks like they did a good job in having as system flexible enough to allow different playstyles. I’ve got plenty of games going on now but I’m keeping an eye open for DH
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top