Daggerheart Sold Out in Two Weeks, Has Three-Year Plan in Place

A recent interview with Business Insider revealed just how well Daggerheart did for Critical Role's Darrington Press when it first launched earlier this year. Ed Lopez, Critical Role's chief operating officer, revealed that Daggerheart sold out in two weeks. According to Lopez, Critical Role anticipated that their stock would last a year, but the game was forced to go into reprints in a hurry. "The amount of units that we ordered we thought was going to last us a year, and it lasted us literally two weeks," Lopez said. "It's a great problem, it's a Champagne problem, but it's now changing our view in terms of what this product can be."

Lopez also revealed that Darrington Press has a three-year plan in place for Daggerheart, which includes the already announced Hope & Fear expansion, which adds a new domain and several new classes and backgrounds to the game.

Lopez also spoke about the hires of Jeremy Crawford and Chris Perkins, stating that the two would be working on both Daggerheart and D&D material for Darrington Press. "We really want their creative juices brought to the world of 'Daggerheart.' That being said, we're also doing a bunch of 'D&D' stuff, and who better to bring in than the guys who used to do it?" Lopez said.

 

[Reynard]

I tend to think of Daggerheart as D&D 4e meets Apocalypse World meets a "greatest hits of narrative game design of the past 25 years" and Genesys is one of the systems they explicitly credited. Meanwhile I tend to think of Cosmere as D&D 5e meets Genesys meets a selection of games from the past 25 years including Apocalypse World (and there's a lot of 4e in 5e of course). So yes very much overlapping influences.

I'm not sure whether Cosmere started with the 3 action economy from PF2e or the 2 action economy from WFRP 2e and other places.

I'm honestly not sure where folks get the 4E connection. I know the designers even talk about it, but aside from cards, I don't see it.

 

[Parmandur]

I tend to think of Daggerheart as D&D 4e meets Apocalypse World meets a "greatest hits of narrative game design of the past 25 years" and Genesys is one of the systems they explicitly credited. Meanwhile I tend to think of Cosmere as D&D 5e meets Genesys meets a selection of games from the past 25 years including Apocalypse World (and there's a lot of 4e in 5e of course). So yes very much overlapping influences.

I'm not sure whether Cosmere started with the 3 action economy from PF2e or the 2 action economy from WFRP 2e and other places.

Pretty fair: for Cosmere, I would also throw 3E (three derived Saves, Skill Points instead of a unified Proficiency track) and d20 Modern (the base Careers being themed around the 6 ability scores, armor as damage resistence), even 4E (Encounter based design, Endeavors being Skill Challenges fully baked)

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm honestly not sure where folks get the 4E connection. I know the designers even talk about it, but aside from cards, I don't see it.

The first question is do you see the D&D connection? Because I can not think of one single thing that's D&Desque that's in Daggerheart but not 4e even if they use Advantage to 5e levels (although use a post 5e implementation). Meanwhile there are:

• Class symmetry (including martials being interesting)
• Powers being self contained and fitting on a card
• Character sheets having not just cards but being small and self contained so you never need to look anything up
• Just about everything about monsters except the social role (I know that they explicitly credit 13th Age - but there is nothing in 13A monsters that carries forward that didn't appear in 4e first)
• Meaningful and useful short rests
• Not having a healer doesn't overwhelm the game because the characters bring their own healing.

So basically you have class design, character sheet design, monster design, and monster encounter design all being grounded very heavily in 4e and entirely unlike any other edition of D&D - and in many cases not much like most of the other sources except the ones that are also 4e derived.

 

[Parmandur]

I'm honestly not sure where folks get the 4E connection. I know the designers even talk about it, but aside from cards, I don't see it.

I haven't heard much of the rules in play that sound very 4E, but there are certain flavor elements and vibes that give that feeling, like the way compound nouns are used gives that very Aughts taste. And the 4E DMing advise about Points of Light and Campaign design seems like they influenced the Campaign Frames approach.

 

[zakael19]

I'm honestly not sure where folks get the 4E connection. I know the designers even talk about it, but aside from cards, I don't see it.

From the book's Special Appreciations section:

"The design of Wizards of the Coast’s Dungeons & Dragons fourth edition and the monster design of Flee, Mortals! from MCDM Productions informed the enemy types and ways of managing minions."

Kinda hard to get much more explicit than that?

Edit: 13th age is credited as the root of the Experiences via the Backgrounds concept.

 

[Reynard]

From the book's Special Appreciations section:

"The design of Wizards of the Coast’s Dungeons & Dragons fourth edition and the monster design of Flee, Mortals! from MCDM Productions informed the enemy types and ways of managing minions."

Kinda hard to get much more explicit than that?

Edit: 13th age is credited as the root of the Experiences via the Backgrounds concept.

I'll buy interesting monster design as being rooted in 4E, although my guess is Flee Mortals actually had more real impact (as it was inspired by 4E too, but was built for 5E, which is the kind of game DH is going for).

It is kind of hard to see 4E otherwise, especially tactically, since 4E was SO grid oriented and DH is so loose, tactically.

 

[zakael19]

I'll buy interesting monster design as being rooted in 4E, although my guess is Flee Mortals actually had more real impact (as it was inspired by 4E too, but was built for 5E, which is the kind of game DH is going for).

It is kind of hard to see 4E otherwise, especially tactically, since 4E was SO grid oriented and DH is so loose, tactically.

FM! was kinda more boring 4e monsters mathed for 5e but did a bit of an update for Minions that DS! further extends. I think that DH's adversary design trends more towards the 4e side but manages minions and hordes in a way more similar to FM!

I think that @Neonchameleon has a point wrt player ability design and cards and such as well.

Interestingly, while they point out the 5e Adv/Disadv inspiration (which was in 4e first of course), the player side of that is really different (a totally different dice, the way it handles multiple sources via a "best of," etc) in execution.

 

[Teemu]

I think that the 4e connection is overblown. Yes, adversary roles and how there's a bit of synergy between them is reminiscent of 4e, but otherwise I don't feel that DH is particularly 4e inspired. The moment to moment gameplay feels different. Combat doesn't focus on positioning and movement and action economy usage. To me DH is more 5e inspired, if we have to draw comparisons to D&D.

With the domain abilities I see small similarities with 4e, yet at the same time DH is also more like 5e because it's less about 4e-style martial abilities and more akin to 5e battle master type abilities for warrior characters. DH spells are definitely more similar to 5e spells rather than 4e arcane/divine/primal powers (especially utility). There's also no true universal recharge cycle for the domain cards, unlike 4e short and long rests, which are very integral to the 4e experience.

 

[Parmandur]

Interestingly, while they point out the 5e Adv/Disadv inspiration (which was in 4e first of course), the player side of that is really different (a totally different dice, the way it handles multiple sources via a "best of," etc) in execution.

How does Daggerheart do adv/disadv?

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'll buy interesting monster design as being rooted in 4E, although my guess is Flee Mortals actually had more real impact (as it was inspired by 4E too, but was built for 5E, which is the kind of game DH is going for).

It is kind of hard to see 4E otherwise, especially tactically, since 4E was SO grid oriented and DH is so loose, tactically.

I found 4e to be more than the combat - and although Daggerheart has very different combat the out of combat experience is fairly close.

How does Daggerheart do adv/disadv?

For GMs as 5e. For PCs as Lancer (and I think SotDL); you roll a number of d6s with the normal roll equal to your level of Advantage (or disadvantage) and only add (or subtract) the result of the highest d6. Levels of Advantage and Disadvantage cancel where necessary.

So if you had three sources of Advantage and one of Disadvantage you'd add the higher of 2d6 to the roll.