Daggerheart - First Impressions and Hands On Review! | Podcast | Episode 6
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 07. 2024
- This episode sees Matt and Steve talk about the new beta playtest for the eagerly awaited game from Critical Role's Darrington Press imprint, Daggerheart.
Errant Adventures: www.errantadventurespod.com/
Come join my Patreon: patreon.com/thebadspotcast
Errant Adventures on Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/errantadventures
Come find me on Twitter: @thebadspotcast - Hry
I was concerned about the gm fatigue caused by constantly coming up with complications and mitigating factors for mixed success/failure, but then I saw that fear can be banked for use when narratively appropriate, or spent immediately to cause stress, and hope can be explained as simply "that didn't work, but it'll probably be fine. Your next try will be better". And they can spend that hope to boost the next roll in one way or another, fulfilling the positive feeling.
I think this makes it feel even more arbitrary, which is my other fear about it.
I felt fatigued from saving it up as well, as though I was doing something wrong or not utilizing a resource rather than trusting my natural storytelling insticts.
@@thebadspotI just watched your conversation about what you learned from playing starforged and you said you love to “bank consequences” which is exactly what dagger heart has introduced as an “option”.
That is true, but I bank consequences maybe a handful of times over my 60 episodes, Daggerheart generates these resources every single roll. There’s no bank big enough!
It is funny how this video came out and the next day CR announces v1.3 and Daggerheart hype starts anew.
We are always right there with our fingers in the pulse!
Here's the thing about Fear being a bankable token:
It's clearly intended to be a pacing mechanism. Just as Hope is intended to be a pacing mechanism for the players to keep them from using their cool abilities all the time, Fear is supposed to be a pacing mechanism for the GM to keep them from using GM power all the time. It's supposed to space it out, make it flow, and give the players something that they can physically see on the table to represent looming tension. When the GM sits on a pile of Fear, the players are supposed to know that big nasty stuff is about to come down the pipe so they should be ready. An ominous smile is optional.
In practice, the problem is there really aren't enough things that the GM can burn Fear on as a matter of course. I think more of the GM Moves should be tied to burning Fear to evoke them, effectively giving the players a bit of control about when they get smacked around a little bit by letting them choose when to engage with things aggressively rather than waiting and feeding the GM more power.
The real problem is that the mechanism just doesn't work. There isn't enough hook for the players to be able to control the flow of Fear to the GM other than deciding to either take a roll and have a 50% chance of giving Fear to the GM or not taking a roll and trying to engage with something not mechanically.
The pacing mechanism just doesn't work.
One bit that would help would be taking out the Action Counters and simply letting the GM burn Fear to take an action. Specific numbers might have to be juggled around but that would reduce one token economy which would help.
Ultimately, though, I don't have high hopes for Daggerheart. It's neither too hot nor too cold and being lukewarm it's going to be spit out.
By the way, if you are still interested in fantasy PbtA but recognize that Dungeon World is definitely not cutting-edge RPG technology anymore, take a look at Fantasy World (unplayablegamesrpg.itch.io/fantasy-world), which is basically what happens when someone decides the PbtA architecture in general has gotten to philosophical and needs to be re-grounded dialectically and make use of all of the new tools in that design space. It's pretty fantastic if you want to explore effectively low magic fantasy with a heavy emphasis on drama. Far better than Dungeon World.
Check it out if you have time in your busy RPG schedules.
That’s a great point about hope & fear, and a great summation of Daggerheart as a whole: a cool idea that doesn’t quite work. I’ll check out Fantasy World!
@@thebadspot I'm looking forward to see what Tomkin does with the moon dice in Sundered Isles, which is effectively leveraging the same source idea but not using it to generate a token resource but instead just flavor the outcomes. I think that, combined with "in control"/"in a bad spot" is probably more than enough to provide solid guidance to whoever is envisioning outcomes to go a long way.
I think you'll like Fantasy World; it really is the best statement of PbtA principles and mechanics that I have seen yet.
I’m so glad you did this review. I feel like daggerheart relates more to ironsworn than it does dnd so it’s good to hear your perspective
It was fun to talk about!
Got so excited when I heard about the Experiences, and so bummed to hear that it’s not the way that dice are *always* rolled. It’s such a great way to keep the narrative and characterization front of mind, and City of Mist does it so well. (And the way you build your character by answering questions about their experiences, that’s so much more interesting to me than assigning numbers.). Looking forward to Legend in the Mist quite a lot as well.
I don't have any expedience with City of Mist, but I am excited for Legend in the Mist based mostly on Matt's pitching it to me.
Yeah it seems like a bummer to not be able to use them as much as you’d like.
Ever rolled a rhombic dodecahedron D12? Fantastic shape. And they're space-filling.
Great feeling.
Excellent discussion! If a player rolls really high, but with Fear, I would make a very soft move. Perhaps just a narrative shift, a feeling, or a premonition of something that may or may not come to pass.
Thanks for watching! I think that experienced GMs who have a lot of PBTA under their belts will be able to make hard and soft moves in the way they always do, but it may well throw new people. I'm excited to see how this shakes out.
I played it over 2 sessions. I enjoyed it. You definitely have to be aware of the players at your table during combat. It has it good points. I don't believe it is a DnD killer. No game will be. The only that will kill DnD is DnD.
Great show tonight. I love these monthly chats about different games. Keep up the excellent work.
Thanks so much!
I can agree that the only thing that's a danger to D&D is D&D, but a boy can hope.
I'd play DH over DnD (which is always hard pass for me if someone offers) as a vanilla or intro/beginner system.
The beta got a lot of hate from people who haven't actually played it, read out of context taken stuff or from people who have a bone to pick with Crit Role. There are some valid questions and criticisms (how do you handle friendly NPC activation in combat, should there be GM fear limit due to bad rolls accumulation etc.). I am kind of meh when it comes to races, you have standard fantasy ones plus anthropomorphic animals and a veggie but I don't find them particularly standing out over what we have seen so far. For classes I believe that even though names are standard they offer enough choices and builds with card system.
Lastly, I think the review would have been better if Matt played the game too, there was a lot of guesswork from him how things would function based on mechanics he knows from other system, but nothing to confirm how these different bits and pieces actually function within Daggerheart system.
That’s fair, although I think we’re clear that my thoughts are based on reading the doc rather than Steve’s which are based on playing the QuickStart. It was fun to talk about!
I'm curious after seeing a couple of actual play playtests to see Darrington handle friendly npcs in combat, and pvp actions. I know some tables outright prohibit pvp, but I can't see that happening at a CR table.
I do feel like the ancestries and their implementation do fit the Critical Role vibe, so it makes a certain amount of sense. One of my players played the frog man pre-gen and had a lot of fun with it.
Honestly I grew rather annoyed at the conversation surrounding Daggerheart particularly the "turn-less" play structure as the conversation either ended up being "well your just an awful GM that can't manage your table" or "your playing with dick players and you shouldn't". I suspect that if this is meant as an "introductory" system, having a few guidelines (such as turn-like gameplay) there even as optional rules might help bridge the gap because it's all well and good for Critical Role to claim this as their rule set, but it's to be published and to be sold so it should work for everyone else too.
I guess the reason it comes up is that you CAN use initiative or round table if you want it’s just the GM/world aren’t included in that order. Basically just like ironsworn co-op . There is no initiative and the GM “moves” are just mixed success and missing
@@SkittleBombswhat I want to see though is that confirmation of the idea that a "turn order" can be used, in writing, in the play test document/ruleset. Sounds pedantic but it is the difference between a GM using popcorn initiative in a d&d 5e game as a house rule and to suggest doing so is an official mode of play (as written in the games' ruleset). yeah GMs are free to run their game however they want, but rules are an expression of the intended experience. to loop back to my main point, by putting the "turn order" rules in the literal rules it could help bridge that gap between those that are new to narrative play and etiquette and those that don't need the safety rails.
For the record, Pathfinder 2e, is D&D done right. PF2e literally fixes everything that has ever bugged a DM about 5e, so shifting over to PF2e is not without reason.
Thanks for watching!
Answering the question "Who is Daggerheart for?" I think primarily its for Critical Role and I mean specifically for their AP games. We know they couldn't continue to use D&D, so I think made a "fantasy heartbreaker" which had mechanical elements to enable narrative opportunities. Fans of Critical Role will inevitably play it off the back of their AP.
Beyond that, there will always be people who are curious, especially amongst people who want crunch but more narrative control, but I do think that this is a much smaller demographic. The people truly interested in a narrative heavy fantasy game will just play Blades in the Darkness or the like.
I think that’s pretty spot on. It’ll be interesting to see if it catches on once the CR gang bang out a couple of seasons of it and don’t notice much of a change to their audience.
I think this is pretty much where I settled. This is primarily for CR to let them continue doing their thing playing a game that will hopefully suit their play style and interests. And I can't really begrudge them that.
I think they just need to introduce more trad gaming “rules” and say basic rules and how to play more rules light when your table advances in skill as “optional” rules
That’s an interesting idea!
I have mixed feelings on Daggerheart. I'm really keen on at least 90% of the character creation stuff. I love that it's more narrative-focused (the experiences mechanic and the rest mechanic being highlights). The hope/fear die is an interesting idea and I want to love it, but I feel like there's room to make it "feel" better (and I'm too tired to articulate my thoughts on that - but the examples mentioned about rolling no/very few hope during an entire session or succeeding just about as well as you possibly can and still handing over GM-gets-to-be-a-meanie currency takes the sugar off of it, and seems somehow discordant with the overall feel of the game, or at least the way *I* see the game).
I think the most mixed feeling I have about it is because of the shrug I'd have to do if someone asked me if I'd play it. Of course I would if someone else was GMing it. But I'd never want to myself (combat seems like too much of a PITA for me to GM, even though it seems fine on the player end), and my group is on an indefinite hiatus anyway. That would leave soloing it and in its current form, RAW, it's too crunchy for me to bother. I'd probably just steal my favorite bits and bolt them on to a less taxing system. And that's not really the game's fault that I cbf to play it RAW when it's not designed for solo in the first place. Which IS a shame, honestly. I've been loving the recent trend of games having a solo mode and I can't imagine Darrington Press going in that direction anytime soon since they're basically promoting these big-cast games.
In any case, I definitely want it to do well and I'm hoping that some of my gripes get workshopped into something better for me... and if not for *me* then that it has enough mainstream appeal that it makes enough of a ripple effect in the community and rocks the boat a little. (I'm mixing metaphors at this point, so time to sleep.)
tldr - Enjoyed the episode! Thanks gents!
I'm with you on the hope/fear die, and I wonder if they just got rid of the fear and made it entirely player focused it would feel more enjoyable. I'm not sure what the solution is, but definitely interested to see what comes next.
Have you ever seen Swords Without Master? I can't help but look at the hope/fear dice and think of the glum/jovial dice from SwoM. Totally different idea really. In SwoM, everything the GM or players do is a 2D6 roll, and the dice are handed around so everyone is helping keep track of who hasn't talked recently. Rolling the dice isn't mainly about success vs failure -- the main thing is which color rolled high, and the GM and players share a responsibility to "hit the tone" that rolled high. The jovial tone is hit via bright, fast, loud, violent, happy, or excited narration, and glum is hit via quiet, dark, small, etc. etc.
Just describing it makes me want to play it again. Great system.
I have never heard of that and it sounds super weird and cool. I’m into it.
@@dranorter I'm pretty sure I have Swords without Master somewhere on a hard drive. Always wanted to play but never have.
@@errantadventurespod SwoM was actually the first thing I ever GM'd. It's great for one-shots that really let the characters shine. I've done a longer campaign but it gets pretty zany (maybe unless everyone is on the same page about tone... it feels a lot like a GMless system even though it's not).
The Rogue's Phase is probably my favorite part, I love the back and forth of challenges. I haven't used the advanced rules a whole lot but I do like the "We do this, and we do it together..." ritual where the dice get split up.
Nothing else is like Swords. It has its flaws (the Discovery phase never feels smooth for us) but it's just so full of good ideas. I'd love a peek at an alternate world where Swordslike games took off instead of PbtA.
A year or so back, Epidiah said he'd finally been talked into doing a fancy edition of the game. It's existed just as the magazine version for so long.
Matt, it’s pronounced beta not beta 😊
I thought it was beta? Man do I feel silly?
I wondered why he said beta not beta.
My thoughts listening to this in the car: “what the fuck is a beater version of a game”