Shadowheart...Daggerdark [+]

[zakael19]

Having Ancestries or not doesn't necessarily break the game. It's really more about the vibe you want out of your game. For me, removing ancestries is more about the expressed Sword & Sorcery vibe, which is mostly anthropocentric with a few exceptions (e.g., Elric and Corum), and I think that those non-human characters could just as easily be represented by Communities. Obviously if you want your S&S to be more D&D-esque (e.g., Primeval Thule), then you may want to add other ancestries. I believe that Kelsey Dionne has been on record as saying that she prefers mostly human-focused games since she likes the S&S genre.

Yeah, I'm a little less into early S&S and a little more into "classic dungeon crawling."

I think I like the split of "nature" vs "nurture" you get with ancestry/community (background). Some walk thoughts:

- Collapse communities down a bit, and provide d6 options of backgrounds on each echoing SD. Instead of an overarching ability, you can use your background to gain advantages / info on relevant stuff. I think the Communites could use a little refinement (it's not really what you're born into is it? Why is there an E there? they're kinda broad as written in a way that doesn't feel super fictionally appropriate sometimes) EG:

- Studied. You come from a background that involved dusty tomes, copying scrolls by dim candlelight, or the accumulation of specialized knowledge.

1.Cult Initiate. 2. Wizard's Apprentice. 3. Acolyte. 4. Minstrel. 5. Scholar. 6. Chirurgeon

 

[Aldarc]

Interesting. Are you thinking of generic Domain cards? Like there’s a “Dungeoneering” domain anybody can pick from? Or like at L2 a fighter can choose “Squire” or something

Possibly, but we're just brainstorming at this stage. You could even mostly get rid of domains or reduce the total number. You could just be an adventurer and you pick your loadout or abilities, which is essentially how Ironsworn handles it.

Yeah, I'm a little less into early S&S and a little more into "classic dungeon crawling."

I think I like the split of "nature" vs "nurture" you get with ancestry/community (background).

If you have a mostly anthropocentric S&S world, then obviously there is less need to have nature vs. nurture as you would just have nurture since a human nature would be baseline.

(it's not really what you're born into is it? Why is there an E there?

"Borne" has overlap with the word "born," as both are past tense forms of the verb "to bear," but there are are times when they are used differently. "Born" pertains to birth, beginning, or origin, whereas "borne" means "to carry" or "to endure."

However, an 'E' is used grammatically when born/borne is part of a compound adjective: e.g., airborne, seaborne, bloodborne, etc. Such is the case in Daggerheart's list of Communities. They are compound adjectives.

I assume that being "Seaborne," for example, is less about where you were "born" in the sense of birth; instead, it reflects your origin and beginning that was a notable part of your formative experience. It's more figurative.

Some walk thoughts:

- Collapse communities down a bit, and provide d6 options of backgrounds on each echoing SD. Instead of an overarching ability, you can use your background to gain advantages / info on relevant stuff.

they're kinda broad as written in a way that doesn't feel super fictionally appropriate sometimes) EG:

- Studied. You come from a background that involved dusty tomes, copying scrolls by dim candlelight, or the accumulation of specialized knowledge.

1.Cult Initiate. 2. Wizard's Apprentice. 3. Acolyte. 4. Minstrel. 5. Scholar. 6. Chirurgeon

I personally prefer Communities over Ancestries, especially since I find Ancestries are mostly cosmetic anyway, so this feels like two steps backwards for me. The fact that Ancestries have any mechanical heft at all in a more narrative game like Daggerheart feels almost like an out of place relic like other D&Disms in the game.

 

[zakael19]

I personally prefer Communities over Ancestries, especially since I find Ancestries are mostly cosmetic anyway, so this feels like two steps backwards for me. The fact that Ancestries have any mechanical heft at all in a more narrative game like Daggerheart feels almost like an out of place relic like other D&Disms in the game.

Well i loathe when you have a bunch of distinct species that are just masks over humanity. Core DH’s ancestries are really species and IMO could use some additional distinction. When I wrote my fantasy tropes campaign frame one thing I did was assert some additional differences about each ancestry that fit the world and then added a couple of “tell us something that sets them apart” questions.

 

[Aldarc]

Well i loathe when you have a bunch of distinct species that are just masks over humanity.

Let's maybe shelve that rabbit hole of a conversation for a different thread. This is a real "I understand where you are coming from and agree to an extent, but..." sort of situation.

I will say, however, that due to my experiences with games like Dungeon World, Fate, or Fabula Ultima, which have a more narrative approach to this issue, I probably would have handled "ancestry" or "species" differently for a game like Daggerheart than the way that it did.

 

[zakael19]

I will say, however, that due to my experiences with games like Dungeon World, Fate, or Fabula Ultima, which have a more narrative approach to this issue, I probably would have handled "ancestry" or "species" differently for a game like Daggerheart than the way that it did.

Sure, ok.

Lets take a step back and look at the core DH character assumptions then and what we might want to change:

• Class / subclass. "Role-based archetypes" that also gate your abilities.
• Heritage. Ancestry + community (or nature/nurture). Per the Homebrew kit, when they were thinking about Ancestries they were looking at a combination of "What the ancestry is" which results in a biological characteristic, and "what the ancestry does" which represents how they approach the world in a different way. For Communities, it's looking at a place / physical feature that would shape a resident culture, or ideals/circumstances for same. The Naming convention is intended to be evocative of how the culture is represented.
• Languages are left to "we all speak common."
• Background questions tied to class. Meant to give you some initial prompts for understanding who your character is.
• Experiences (many examples are similar to the Backgrounds that Shadowdark uses), which should reflect some degree of what your character has gone through in their life so far.
• PC Connections / Bonds.

 

[Scribe]

Sure, ok.

Lets take a step back and look at the core DH character assumptions then and what we might want to change:

• Class / subclass. "Role-based archetypes" that also gate your abilities.
• Heritage. Ancestry + community (or nature/nurture). Per the Homebrew kit, when they were thinking about Ancestries they were looking at a combination of "What the ancestry is" which results in a biological characteristic, and "what the ancestry does" which represents how they approach the world in a different way. For Communities, it's looking at a place / physical feature that would shape a resident culture, or ideals/circumstances for same. The Naming convention is intended to be evocative of how the culture is represented.
• Languages are left to "we all speak common."
• Background questions tied to class. Meant to give you some initial prompts for understanding who your character is.
• Experiences (many examples are similar to the Backgrounds that Shadowdark uses), which should reflect some degree of what your character has gone through in their life so far.
• Connections.

Of those, I am looking at.

Class/Subclass, keep.
Ancestry, keep, DH style with mixing.
Communities, keep.
Adding in SD Languages
Background (SD) replaces Experiences. I don't know why but I was having a hard time wrapping my mind around Experiences.
Connections, dropped.

 

[zakael19]

Oh, you can't drop Connections or Bonds. Integrating a short "how do you all know each other already" with some fun evocative questions is a delightful part of group formation. It's a Must for me in any game these days (I'd be tempted to steal some of His Majesty the Worm's Bonds tbh).

I guess the other question is one that HMTW and SD and some other NSR games tackle up front as well: why are these adventurers ... adventuring? For the former, you've failed at everything else you did - delving into Dungeons is your last chance to make anything of yourself.

 

[Scribe]

why are these adventurers ... adventuring?

The core conceit of Shadowdark.

 

[zakael19]

The core conceit of Shadowdark.

"Yet you only want one thing: to see your players triumph.

So you craft malevolent villains worth defeating. You sculpt marvelous treasures worth stealing. You fill the world with rot, darkness, and death so it can be driven back by sword, spell, and flame.

Through this, you offer an invitation. You propose it loudly with roaring dragons, humbly with helpless villagers, secretly with hidden treasure maps.

You call the players to adventure.

And they answer."

Idk! Thinking about what the unique GM and Player principles here would be, right? I'm not sure "Pursue Wealth at all Costs" is there.

 

[Aldarc]

Sure, ok.

Lets take a step back and look at the core DH character assumptions then and what we might want to change:

• Class / subclass. "Role-based archetypes" that also gate your abilities.
• Heritage. Ancestry + community (or nature/nurture). Per the Homebrew kit, when they were thinking about Ancestries they were looking at a combination of "What the ancestry is" which results in a biological characteristic, and "what the ancestry does" which represents how they approach the world in a different way. For Communities, it's looking at a place / physical feature that would shape a resident culture, or ideals/circumstances for same. The Naming convention is intended to be evocative of how the culture is represented.
• Languages are left to "we all speak common."
• Background questions tied to class. Meant to give you some initial prompts for understanding who your character is.
• Experiences (many examples are similar to the Backgrounds that Shadowdark uses), which should reflect some degree of what your character has gone through in their life so far.
• PC Connections / Bonds.

Don't worry about it, zakael. We aren't required to have the same vision for what our dungeon crawl Daggerheart game would look like in this thread. It's okay to have different ideas for this. I gave some insight into what I would do and why.

I don't know why but I was having a hard time wrapping my mind around Experiences.

Have you asked about them in the Daggerheart+ thread? I would be glad to provide my own perspective on them there or to answer your questions.