What do YOU plan on doing with Daggerheart?

[Kichwas]

I’d go with something like Procyn. Close enough to the real word to be useful, and also only two syllables.

Mapache
- That's their Spanish name.
Mapachtli
- That's their Aztec name.

I'd go with "Mapachtli" as it's one of the original names of the creatures.

All I had to do was look on Wikipedia to find that. Which also considers "trash panda" to be a side-door synonym (trash panda redirects to racoon).

By Mapachtli just sounds cool.
- I also just like the idea of using a word from a 'language of origin' to where an animal comes from for it's "fantasy name".

Ps: The reason why the shortened version of the English word became a racial slur is fascinating - US political parties adopt a mascot and the Whigs used the Racoon. Opponents of the Whigs accused them of not being racist enough, and started using the shortened word to call out how Whigs were too friendly to Black folk...
- So in a way it was what we'd consider a compliment in these times. But it stuck as a pejorative and I'd not try to be the lone person standing against the English language in trying to pretend otherwise now.

 

[Faolyn]

Mapache
- That's their Spanish name.
Mapachtli
- That's their Aztec name.

I'd go with "Mapachtli" as it's one of the original names of the creatures.

That explains why the Humblewood setting calls their rac-folk Mapache! I always meant to look it up and never got around to it.

Some of the original Powhatan names for them were transcribed as aroughcun or arathkon. I could see either of those being used as well.

Also, very interesting about the slur original!

 

[aramis erak]

Note that if the GM has fear from any source they can do an “intrusion” style activation to step in with an adversary spotlight. Yes, it’s technically possible to get to a combat encounter with 0 fear stacked and never roll a failure (failures alsohand over the spotlight) or with fear, but seems deeply unlikely - given that resting gives fear to the GM.

It's still a restricted GM style. And that's very non-Trad. It's probably the biggest step away from D&D, and the one that is most likely to both be a stumbling block and to be house ruled away.
One of my groups is likely to take full advantage, and generate mayhem. The other? Not so much.

 

[zakael19]

It's still a restricted GM style. And that's very non-Trad. It's probably the biggest step away from D&D, and the one that is most likely to both be a stumbling block and to be house ruled away.
One of my groups is likely to take full advantage, and generate mayhem. The other? Not so much.

Yeah, sure, it’s pretty explicit about this up front. It’s got an Agenda and Principles the GM is asked to consider themselves bound by, directly centers player protagonism & how they respond to things vs monster/NPC/GM actions as much as possible (see: GMs being encouraged to prompt for player Reaction rolls for most fictional actions which basically rolls around to Defy Danger).

The weirdest thing to me is that they go through all this, and don’t have any recommendations on how to leave XP/leveling in the player’s hands. That’s the most conventional bit here, relying on opaque “GM narrative OK” to get a level up.

 

[aramis erak]

Yeah, sure, it’s pretty explicit about this up front. It’s got an Agenda and Principles the GM is asked to consider themselves bound by, directly centers player protagonism & how they respond to things vs monster/NPC/GM actions as much as possible (see: GMs being encouraged to prompt for player Reaction rolls for most fictional actions which basically rolls around to Defy Danger).

The weirdest thing to me is that they go through all this, and don’t have any recommendations on how to leave XP/leveling in the player’s hands. That’s the most conventional bit here, relying on opaque “GM narrative OK” to get a level up.

GM Fiat leveling is a thing in D&D 5, and in Pugmire (a 5e derivative), the Renegade Studios' Essence 20 games (TF, MLP, GIJ), Final Fantasy ⅩⅣ TT. And a few other level-based games. Not that it's really anything new - there were people using fiat leveling in the 70's; it's just been in the 2010's onward that it's become part of rules-as-published.
I'm not surprised at all its in DH. Is it my preferred method? No. Doable? Yeah.

I am a bit annoyed at the vagueness of the advice.
the guidance is from 2 sessions to "one arc"... (p. 183).

One arc is defined on page 189 as "Arcs are typically between three to five sessions in length, though they can be longer depending on how large of a campaign you’re running."
Note the one-arc definition is blurred by the page 191 table... where Yaro's Return arc is only 6 sessions... but spans 9 sessions. And others on it run up to 7 sessions.

It may be neuro-diversity brain, but that kind of vagueness in a major experiential element is probably the most annoying bit I've found. (The rest so far are needless jargon differences.)

 

[zakael19]

GM Fiat leveling is a thing in D&D 5, and in Pugmire (a 5e derivative), the Renegade Studios' Essence 20 games (TF, MLP, GIJ), Final Fantasy ⅩⅣ TT. And a few other level-based games. Not that it's really anything new - there were people using fiat leveling in the 70's; it's just been in the 2010's onward that it's become part of rules-as-published.
I'm not surprised at all its in DH. Is it my preferred method? No. Doable? Yeah.

I am a bit annoyed at the vagueness of the advice.
the guidance is from 2 sessions to "one arc"... (p. 183).

One arc is defined on page 189 as "Arcs are typically between three to five sessions in length, though they can be longer depending on how large of a campaign you’re running."
Note the one-arc definition is blurred by the page 191 table... where Yaro's Return arc is only 6 sessions... but spans 9 sessions. And others on it run up to 7 sessions.

It may be neuro-diversity brain, but that kind of vagueness in a major experiential element is probably the most annoying bit I've found. (The rest so far are needless jargon differences.)

Yeah, I’m aware that the preponderance of 5e leveling has switched to GM fiat / milestone. Been there, done that. I’m just saying that compared to all the other frameworks of narrativist play here this is the most GM authority bit. I can see why you can’t do individual leveling like in a PBTA due to combat balance being a thing here, but I’m contemplating either Quest / encounter based XP like 4e used, or some sort of group iterative end of session track where each player’s answers to the personal questions give a chunk towards getting the group a level.

 

[Neonchameleon]

That's my concern as well. As mentioned at the tail end of Christian's Daggerheart review he mentions the split between the crunchy combat and almost freeform narrative elements. To get the most out of a game like this you need to find players who like both. That's going to be a huge ask. In my experience it's very much an either-or situation. Either a player likes the crunchy rules or they like super-lightweight freeform play. Finding a group of people who like both when that Venn diagram is effectively two separate circles is going to be hard.

Having been through the rulebook myself I think the split isn't too different from 5e's pretty freeform non-combat and relatively crunchy combat (at least compared to that skill system). The Daggerheart combat will certainly be faster than 5e's and is easier to track.

The target audience are people who want "Like D&D 5e but supports more narrative play" which ... is pretty close to the Critical Role audience. This one (unlike the Blades of the Dark lite Candela Obscura) might have serious weight.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Daggerheart has nowhere near the crunch of D&D though. It's classes have, what, 4 abilities?

A few more than that. You're looking at level 1 and have missed the domain abilities. My "character crunch" estimate is about equal to a 5e Monk from levels 1-3 with a bit steeper curve after that.

But you have more variety and options thanks to the core mechanics including choices on rest and at 0hp.

 

[Reynard]

A few more than that. You're looking at level 1 and have missed the domain abilities. My "character crunch" estimate is about equal to a 5e Monk from levels 1-3 with a bit steeper curve after that.

But you have more variety and options thanks to the core mechanics including choices on rest and at 0hp.

I was using hyprbole for effect.

But my point stands: DH characters are simpler and have fewer moving parts than the majority of 5E characters (some of the simpler subclasses are probably equivalent).

 

[Doctor Futurity]

I'm learning the system now and my plan is to run it instead of 5.5E which I am thoroughly burned out on. So far I am liking what Dagggerheart has to offer, and am keen to give it a spin. I'll be devising my own setting for use with it, though.