Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 9749885" data-attributes="member: 86653">The more I think about it the more I get lost in the weeds. Here's a pass of what I'm thinking now.I'd start from a Shadowdark base and mostly add things from Daggerheart. Getting all the easy stuff out of the way: add environments, countdowns/clocks, downtime, ancestry format, mixed-ancestry rules, mixed results with rolls, fiction first, and all the advice about reskinning and accessibility.Cards/Text. The "PC rules bits" in Shadowdark are small enough that putting them on cards or keeping them as text is a wash. It's more about presentation than any change.Stats/Scores. I prefer the bonus only approach, so ability scores are out.Armor. I prefer armor as damage reduction, but I'm not really a fan of how Daggerheart handles it.Rolling. I am kinda tired of 1d20 and 2d12 still seems awkward. So maybe something like 2d10. Crits on doubles. Total equal to or greater than the TN and it's a crit success; total under the TN and it's a crit fail. I really do like the mix of results from Daggerheart, but I think Fear makes things a bit awkward.Hope/Fear. This I'm torn on. I love the fiction-forward, mixed results, etc stuff from Daggerheart, and that's the first thing that comes to mind when mixing-and-matching these systems. But I fall more on the side of simplicity and fewer or no metacurrencies.Lethality. This should be an optional switch between baseline Shadowdark and baseline Daggerheart, which come down to death moves, really. I can see arguments in either direction. But I do think it should be a table decision, not a referee or individual player decision. If the table wants lethal play but one player does not, either that player accepts lethal play or finds a new table. Reason being this is a big genre switch. Four characters in the lethal Shadowdark mode and one immortal Daggerheart character would not be a great gaming experience.Advancement. If I'm being honest, I'd use neither advancement setup. I'd port in carousing from Pirate Borg. Make your advancements between sessions and the PCs wake up after the party with a situation in their laps.Spellcasting. As much as I love roll-to-cast, I do love mana points and similar systems. This is one bit I think I'd go with why not both. Make some casters work like Daggerheart and others like Shadowdark.Initiative. I'm ambivalent. Either works. Depends on the table, really.Collaborative Worldbuilding. I think the setting is the referee's. Period. If the referee wants to invite the players to contribute things like NPCs, town names, clues, items, etc that the referee can accept or decline, that's great. I'm all for that. But the bits where the players can just dictate the world to the referee go too far.</blockquote>

Verification