Daggerheart General Thread [+]

[overgeeked]

I'm suggesting that if you take that at face value, it means you're rapidly declining to spend any further Fear. Consider that the book suggests a "standard" scene should see 2-4 Fear spent. You can blow that so quickly, especially doing the stuff the game suggests if you have a large amount of banked Fear (10+). Acting First + an extra spotlight is immediately "enough" Fear spend.

Yes. If you follow the terrible advice on fear spending limits you will be fear capped most of the game. And that’s why the fear spend by scene limit is terrible advice. Don’t do that. Spend fear freely.

 

[SteveC]

Yes. If you follow the terrible advice on fear spending limits you will be fear capped most of the game. And that’s why the fear spend by scene limit is terrible advice. Don’t do that. Spend fear freely.

I have no idea where this perspective comes from. Here's what the book says about spending Fear:

Here is a rough guide of how much Fear you might want to spend in a given scene depending on its role in the story:

That sounds pretty clear to me: it's a rough guide that you can take or leave. And, from my experience running and playing the game, I think it's reasonable.

The Fear you spend in a scene gives it narrative weight, and also increases the difficulty. Are you sure you want to be spending as much Fear as possible in a scene that isn't that important to the story? Because by doing so, you're making it more important. Maybe that's what you want to do, but pacing and building up tension in the course of a session is a very real (and good!) thing.

What I found, and the advice I gave to the GM who ran the campaign I played in with the beta rules, is that you can spend a basic amount of Fear in a scene (and the guildelines in there aren't terrible) but then you can adjust it based on how the characters are doing in comparison to the weight you want to give to the scene. If the group is being wrecked by a minor opponent, go easy with the Fear. If the climax of the adventure is going too fast, spend more. Effectively, it gives you mechanics that you'd have to fudge to get in other circumstances.

I don't know if the guidelines they give are accurate or need some more work, but the idea of not spending it all as you get it and damn the consequences ... I'd say that's a good idea.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I

What I found, and the advice I gave to the GM who ran the campaign I played in with the beta rules, is that you can spend a basic amount of Fear in a scene (and the guildelines in there aren't terrible) but then you can adjust it based on how the characters are doing in comparison to the weight you want to give to the scene. If the group is being wrecked by a minor opponent, go easy with the Fear. If the climax of the adventure is going too fast, spend more. Effectively, it gives you mechanics that you'd have to fudge to get in other circumstances.

I mean, this is clearly better advice than suggesting that you limit the Fear within the scene.

Recently, I ran a fight where the players were rolling on fire. 0 Fear generation and I had to use existing Fear to interrupt to attack, Following the book advice, the combat would have just been boring.

Instead, I depleted my Fear reserves. I’m happy because the players get a challenging fight. The players are happy, because my ability to wreck them is reduced in future scenes.

 

[overgeeked]

I mean, this is clearly better advice than suggesting that you limit the Fear within the scene.

Recently, I ran a fight where the players were rolling on fire. 0 Fear generation and I had to use existing Fear to interrupt to attack, Following the book advice, the combat would have just been boring.

Instead, I depleted my Fear reserves. I’m happy because the players get a challenging fight. The players are happy, because my ability to wreck them is reduced in future scenes.

That’s where I am, too. If the fight’s not supposed to be challenging, or the scene is not important…skip it! If the scene or fight are worth having in the game at all, they’re worth being important.

Something like 1/4 of the referee advice is about keeping things moving and interesting. Make every roll important. Keep the story moving forward. Cut to the action. Work in moments and montages. Don’t let scenes drag. Etc.

Despite CR being famous for their slice-of-life play and filler shopping trip episodes, Daggerheart is an action-adventure game. Daggerheart is the Legends of Vox Machina cartoon RPG. Cut out the boring stuff and go!

 

[Seramus]

What I found, and the advice I gave to the GM who ran the campaign I played in with the beta rules, is that you can spend a basic amount of Fear in a scene (and the guildelines in there aren't terrible) but then you can adjust it based on how the characters are doing in comparison to the weight you want to give to the scene. If the group is being wrecked by a minor opponent, go easy with the Fear. If the climax of the adventure is going too fast, spend more. Effectively, it gives you mechanics that you'd have to fudge to get in other circumstances.

I think this is better advice than what is given in the book.

Like, I realize they wanted to give people a rule of thumb, and a certain subset of people want actual hard numbers of average amounts of fear that might be used in a scene, but my personal experience is just... the number is wildly random and dependant on what I want out of the scene, and how the dice are treating the players. It's so random and dependant on how the scene is going that there might as well not have been any mention of a guideline at all because it would actively hold me back if I followed it.

I don't hold it against the book. It's the smallest speedbump in a book with lots of stellar ideas.

 

[overgeeked]

I don't hold it against the book. It's the smallest speedbump in a book with lots of stellar ideas.

Exactly. In a book filled with spectacular advice and great design it's one of maybe four hiccups.

 

[aramis erak]

I am positive DH combat is more dynamic than 5E.
I am positive it is not faster.

It's faster for me than D&D 5.
Multiple factors:

1. no book lookups for powers - the full text is indeed on the card. And in the back of the book.
2. Simpler powers in general
3. no "it's your turn" lag; whomever is ready goes.
4. fewer turns overall for a given fight.

I'll note that, in part, this is because of reduced analysis paralysis in my players.

 

[Seramus]

I have noticed an issue with swapping Domain cards during level up. The wording on Pg 111 says "Additionally, you can also choose to trade out one domain card you already have for a different domain card of an equal level or lower."

That means anytime a player voluntarily chooses a lower level card, they are locked into that lower level. It's probably not a huge deal since I imagine most players will only "lock" themselves into one or two such lower level choices (the hypothetical extreme where a player locks themselves into 4+ lower level cards is very unlikely).

It's more relevant an issue for the level up option, "Choose an additional domain card of your level or lower from a domain you have access to (up to level 4)." Where choosing it at level 2 locks you into a 2nd Level Domain Card, while waiting until Level 3 or Level 4 gives you a higher level card.

Personally, I have no problem letting a player that chooses the level up option upgrade to a higher level card (up to 4/7/10), since they could have simply chosen to wait before taking the option. But it's interesting that such a "lock" can happen.

 

[Vael]

I would "lock" the bonus domain cards to when the player chose that level up option, but ...

Let's say a player grabbed a third level 1 domain card when they leveled up to 2. If they later wanted to swap a level 1 to a level 2 card, I'd allow that.

So iow, ignoring bonus domain cards, a PC should be able to have 2 first level domain cards and 1 of each other level, up to their current level.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Yes. If you follow the terrible advice on fear spending limits you will be fear capped most of the game. And that’s why the fear spend by scene limit is terrible advice. Don’t do that. Spend fear freely.

You’re misreading the table as a hard rule when it’s clearly a guideline. The book even says so in bold, on p. 155:

Here is a rough guide of how much Fear you might want to spend in a given scene depending on its role in the story:

More importantly, you’re also missing the broader context of the whole chapter. The GMing section is intentionally conversational and not a rigid ruleset. Right from the introduction to the chapter (p. 141):

Parts of this chapter are much more conversational than the rest of this book. The previous chapters were primarily focused on delivering the mechanics of the game; while we're going to cover mechanics in this chapter as well, we're also going to talk about topics that lend themselves much better to a conversation than hard-and-fast rules: aspects of gameplay like story structure, improv, and world-building. Because, at the end of the day, the "big secret" about GMing is that you aren't bound by a rigid ruleset like the players--you get to make it all up. Whether you made it up the week before, the day before, or in the moment at the table, you're always crafting an experience for your players through the decisions you make.

It also encourages you to spend Fear when you have the opportunity (p. 147):

Because you gain Fear any time a PC rolls with Fear, as well as during downtime, you'll often have a stockpile of Fear to draw on when you need it. Do your best to spend that Fear when you have the opportunity. Spending more Fear at the start of a combat or during a big moment can generate a lot of tension and set the stakes. This helps give shape to the scene, where the PCs are on the ropes, being reactive more than proactive as they fight to get their footing. Then, as they get their equilibrium, they become proactive, directly pursuing their objectives. Once they've made some strides toward those objectives, they may roll with Fear. This creates an opening for you to make another Fear move to complicate the scene.

And it flatly states that you can make a GM move whenever you want (p. 149):

Knowing when to make moves (and what kind of moves to make) is a significant part of learning to GM Daggerheart. The frequency and severity of these moves depends on the type of story you're telling, the actions the players take, and the tone of the session you're running, but the general rule of thumb is this: you can make a GM move whenever you want. That's right! You're the GM--your job is not to crush the PCs or always act adversarially; it's to help tell a story. You should be making moves whenever you see an opportunity to do so.

Finally, on p. 152, it reminds you that your style is your own:

The way you make moves truly defines your story and style. Everyone who plays this game will interact with GM moves differently, so you should never feel like you have to use them the same way anyone else does! As long as you and your table are having fun, you're staying true to the story, and you're acting as a fan of your players, that's what matters.

The “per scene” table isn’t a restriction—it’s a pacing tool. The real advice is: spend Fear in a way that serves the scene and the story.

Final thought: When read in full, the GM section — and really the entire Core Rulebook — builds its guidance in a deliberate, connected way. Early chapters set clear expectations that the GM’s role is flexible, interpretive, and story-first, and later advice (including the Fear spend table) is given in that same spirit. If you lift one piece of that guidance out of its context, or treat a pacing tool as a fixed rule, you’re no longer engaging with the system as it’s presented. Daggerheart isn’t meant to be run piecemeal; it’s designed so that the principles laid out at the start carry through to every part of the game. Ignore those foundations, and of course the advice will feel mismatched — but that’s a result of losing the context, not of the advice itself.