• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

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

How does the Hope/Fear mechanics plays out, exactly?

My biggest gripe with systems like Star Wars/Genesys is that advantages/setbacks happen too often, but in Daggerheart it seems it happens literally on every dice roll. This makes me wary, but reading through post there seems to be Hope/Fear pools, so I’m no longer sure how they’re being used.
You aren't required to come up with a story beat or anything on roll with hope or fear. If you roll with hope (the hope die is higher) you get a hope. If you roll with fear, the GM gets a fear and (during combat) can have an adversary take an action.

Otherwise, success with hope is Yes, and; success with fear is Yes, but...; failure with hope is No, but...; and failure with fear is No, and...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

How does the Hope/Fear mechanics plays out, exactly?

My biggest gripe with systems like Star Wars/Genesys is that advantages/setbacks happen too often, but in Daggerheart it seems it happens literally on every dice roll. This makes me wary, but reading through post there seems to be Hope/Fear pools, so I’m no longer sure how they’re being used.
It will vary by game group because some will make heavy use of it and others will use it as a token resource to be spent with little flair.

It is supposed to be a guide for how the GM 'roleplays' the results of actions.

You succeed with hope or with fear - in both cases you got a success. One comes with a sense of accomplishment and the other might be hard won, pyrrhic, or set the stage for a further challenge.

You're doing a lightsaber battle in a room with the glass window blown out leading into the open air. You kick your enemy out the window. You make the roll with fear - the enemy falls, but then manages to grab a pole sticking out one floor below and swing themselves through the glass of the floor beneath you. The chase is on - and they're coming for you.

If you won with hope, maybe they'd instead fall away, and at least for now you've gotten rid of them. The GM narrates them falling into the distance until the view of them is swallowed up by the lights of hover cars down below.


In any given situation - hope vs fear sets up the follow on in how the 'roleplay' of the outcome is then desribed.

They also hand out game mechanics values. The GM gets a point of fear for example.

So some groups will craft elaborate stories around this, and others will mark a notch on a resource meter.
 

Every check has one of four outcomes.
  • Success with Hope - Player gets a Hope Resource, succeeds check with a narrative bonus of some kind.
  • Success with Fear - GM gets a Fear Resource, succeeds check but with a narrative negative consequence of some kind.
  • Failure with Hope - Player gets a Hope Resource, but fails check. Failure comes with a narrative bonus of some kind.
  • Failure with Fear - GM gets a resource, player fails check and there's an additional negative consequence.
In combat, rolls with Hope and rolls with Fear largely determine who goes next in combat. Outside of combat, rolls with Fear can be determined by the GM or by the player. So, if a player has a roll with Fear, the GM can ask them to describe the narrative consequence of their check.
It's perhaps worth noting that the narrative aspects don't have to be huge, they might just be somewhat different spins on basically the same situation. The example of play shows this pretty well and the DM advice makes it clear you should never be giving out a negative consequence so bad that Success with Fear is basically not success or essentially worse than Failure with Hope or the like.
 

So some groups will craft elaborate stories around this, and others will mark a notch on a resource meter.
It's also worth noting that the game is essentially okay with this - there is no one "right way" to play it, and DMs having different styles and approaches is a good thing it supports.

That's how you know we're not in the 1990s anymore, when several games had one "right" way to play them and anything else was wrong! I will never forgive Vampire: The Masquerade Revised Edition for doing precisely that!

(Sadly many people online still seem to be trapped in this '90s mindset, and I've seen lot of people get mad about others playing PtbA, FitD, and even Shadowdark "wrong".)
 

One of the easiest options is to mark a stress on a fear and clear a stress on a hope. That's what I do when I don't have a clever idea for a plot twist.

I think that Daggerheart is trying to thread the needle between narrative style PbtA games and something more comfortable to fantasy 20 players by providing concrete options for its narrative resources. That's why the pools are there rather than the broad "something else happens" advice of pbtA. For example, the example bad guys and scenes in the book often have a thing you can spend Fear on, like a special attack or more zombies crawling out of the graveyard.
 
Last edited:

Every check has one of four outcomes.
  • Success with Hope - Player gets a Hope Resource, succeeds check with a narrative bonus of some kind.
  • Success with Fear - GM gets a Fear Resource, succeeds check but with a narrative negative consequence of some kind.
  • Failure with Hope - Player gets a Hope Resource, but fails check. Failure comes with a narrative bonus of some kind.
  • Failure with Fear - GM gets a resource, player fails check and there's an additional negative consequence.
In combat, rolls with Hope and rolls with Fear largely determine who goes next in combat. Outside of combat, rolls with Fear can be determined by the GM or by the player. So, if a player has a roll with Fear, the GM can ask them to describe the narrative consequence of their check.
Hum, not sure if this is for me then…
 

Hum, not sure if this is for me then…
Have you played any PtbA or FitD games? Like Apocalypse World, Dungeon World, Monsterhearts, Avatar Legends (the Avatar cartoon TTRPG), City of Mist, Ironsworn, Masks, Urban Shadows, Stonetop, Blades in the Dark, Scum and Villainy, and so on? It's basically similar to that, but actually a bit closer to trad games.
 

I think I'll stick with Shadowdark and OSE. Nothing about the system or the setting excites me enough to pick it up. If I have a chance to play it at a convention or something I'll give it a shot (I've been proven wrong before), but it's not ticking any boxes for me so far.
 

I think I'll stick with Shadowdark and OSE. Nothing about the system or the setting excites me enough to pick it up. If I have a chance to play it at a convention or something I'll give it a shot (I've been proven wrong before), but it's not ticking any boxes for me so far.
I'm going to Gencon this year, and I'll probably try it if there's time and an open slot, but it's not a priority. Shadowdark and OSE (from what I've read of the latter) are far more my speed.
 

I'm going to Gencon this year, and I'll probably try it if there's time and an open slot, but it's not a priority. Shadowdark and OSE (from what I've read of the latter) are far more my speed.
I sort of think of Daggerheart as the anti-Shadowdark -- and not in a bad way. I love both. Shadowdark is the best new game I have encountered in a long time. It is too early to say for DH because i have not been able to play as much as I would like, but I am hoping it is similarly awesome at the table.
 

Into the Woods

Related Articles

Remove ads

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top