NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rainbow Scissors" data-source="post: 9697063" data-attributes="member: 7052820">My group has had a little more experience with Daggerheart.There are some good things about the system: character creation is easy; production values of the books are very good; there are innovative ideas. However, one gripe that my group has is that there are a lot of extra steps involved in combat that often end up not actually doing much of anything. I believe there are a lot of good ideas contained within the game, but I am currently not sure that they are implemented in a wholly satisfying way.For example, the idea of the wound points (or whatever they are called... I forget) and armor reducing damage is something that makes sense. One of the group members has run FFG Age of Rebellion in the past. But I don't quite grasp why there are so many additional steps to accomplish what other games do with "Soak" or "armor as DR." Even when that means other games also have a lot of steps, the steps at least seem to be meaningful. Currently, I am not sure that I understand having so many extra steps in Daggerheart for those extra steps to usually not matter in a meaningful way.Similarly, sometimes combat feels a little bit like D&D 4th Edition, and I like that. At the same time, a lot of the extra paperwork involved in playing Daggerheart ends up being a bit hollow. Where D&D 4th Edition options mattered and produced results, it often feels that Daggerheart asks me to do a lot of extra work without giving me much payoff in the end. On the other end of the spectrum, Hope & Fear appear to be a simplified version of the narrative system that Age of Rebellion used. While the damage mechanics add too many steps, I think this is an area that has too few. At first, narrating the passing around of metacurrency was cool, but it became somewhat repetitive due to the lack of variety. Part of them is due to players getting burned out and not wanting to narrate as much, but I also think part of it is that there's not much variety with only 2 dice involved. It's too binary to keep things interesting over the entirety of a campaign. It's still a very cool idea; I'm just not sure that Daggerheart's implementation of it will hold my group's attention for a longer campaign. I enjoyed the experience, and I still think it could be a fine game to have on my shelf for shorter campaigns. There are a lot of Daggerheart ideas that are cool, and I did mostly enjoy the sessions of the game. It just feels a little off and made me wish that we were playing the games that inspired Daggerheart instead of playing Daggerheart. Overall: A lot of cool ideas but feels slightly off. Daggerheart has a lot of potential. If it has a second edition, that might be a better time to buy in. In the meantime, you probably still will have fun with the game. Just don't expect combat to be much faster than D&D 5E.</blockquote>

Verification