Daggerheart General Thread [+]

[Imaro]

The incentive is an automatic crit success for the characters final action. The player decides if that is worth it or not, based on the context.

You can argue that it is a poor incentive, you can’t say it doesn’t exist.

I think it is a fine incentive personally.

How does that incentivize you to choose permanent death at a narratively appropriate time? That's an incentive to choose the move... not an incentive to perpetuate the recommended playstyle or play loop of the game.

 

[dbm]

For the final time: that is a player’s choice to make. The system supports this by actually making it a choice available to them.

 

[Imaro]

Some players may look for direct mechanical rewards for narrative choices, but that’s not the kind of contract Daggerheart is making.

It gives all this advice and then it's tip for a player having trouble picking an experience in a standard battle campaign is to select their first one to make them better in combat... how is that not pushing them quite clearly towards mechanical optimization? It's weird because I agree the advice is there but then the mechanical incentives as well as the practical examples sometimes just don't align.

 

[Imaro]

For the final time: that is a player’s choice to make. The system supports this by actually making it a choice available to them.

For the final time that doesn't answer my question.

 

[Imaro]

I think Daggerheart is a really good game and I am currently running a campaign for it. But fans of DH claiming they don't get why people don't necessarily play in what they consider to be the spirit of a narrative game, IMO, are ignoring the tension and dichotomy that some of DH's examples, advice and mechanics have going on.

 

[zakael19]

I think Daggerheart is a really good game and I am currently running a campaign for it. But fans of DH claiming they don't get why people don't necessarily play in what they consider to be the spirit of a narrative game, IMO, are ignoring the tension and dichotomy that some of DH's examples, advice and mechanics have going on.

Have you considered that what we see and understand and onboard from the structure and guidance of the game and you don’t may instead be a difference in perspective?

Like, if we’re saying “we’re simply not experiencing these issues” we’re not gaslighting you about your “concerns” but just not encountering the issue in play; or structuring the conversation in accordance with the GM guidelines in a way that works great at the table.

 

[Imaro]

Have you considered that what we see and understand and onboard from the structure and guidance of the game and you don’t may instead be a difference in perspective?

Yes I'm not saying anyone is wrong, and I'm not the one insinuating if you read the entire book you can only come to one interpretation... I preface alot with IMO...

Like, if we’re saying “we’re simply not experiencing these issues” we’re not gaslighting you about your “concerns” but just not encountering the issue in play; or structuring the conversation in accordance with the GM guidelines in a way that works great at the table.

That's not what some are saying though. If you're not experiencing that cool, again never said you had too or my way was THE way to interpret the book... but others in the thread (and or reddit) have said they are having some of these problems and I was offering why I think that might be.