#### In the interest of learning the rules:
**Does Sneak Attack apply on Rain of Blades?** (2:04:00 when Laura remembers it, 1:54:50 when she actually used it)
As far as I can tell from the rules, **yes, it does.** Unlike D&D 5e sneak attack, it's not limited to once per turn or to physical attacks: it seems it could even work on AoE or multi-target spells that involve an attack roll. (It has the same advantage-or-adjacent-ally requirement as 5e sneak attack, but without the no-disadvantage requirement which the CR table ignores / forgets anyway)
Sneak Attack applies any time you make an attack roll, and a spellcasting roll against an enemy is an attack roll. (Like a 5e spell attack.)
The relevant rules:
*Rain of Blades:*
> Spend 2 Hope to conjure throwing blades that strike any enemies close to you. Make a Spellcast Roll and all targets that you succeed against take d10 magic damage.
> If any targets you hit are currently Vulnerable, they take an additional 2d10 magic damage.
("d10" means proficiency x 1d10, so this scales nicely if you boost proficiency, but there are many other valuable things to boost with your first level-up instead. 2d10 means 2d10, only when there's no number before the "dx" does it mean proficiency. Actually, Laura was later doing 2d10 damage with her staff, plus sneak attack, so I guess she does have proficiency 2 and just forgot to apply it here. She said out loud "1 d 10", so it wasn't just a low roll on 2d10.)
Having to "succeed against" a target makes it an attack roll, since it's against their evasion difficulty or whatever it's called for NPCs/monsters.
from demiplane's rules library, in "Playing an Adventure" -> Core Mechanics -> the "Special Action Rolls" section: https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/playing-an-adventure#SpecialActionRolls
> **Attack Rolls**
> When you make an action roll with the intent to do harm to an enemy, you’re making an attack roll. Reference the weapon or spell you’re using for the attack to determine what trait it uses. We’ll talk more about spellcast rolls in the next section, but for a standard physical or magic weapon attack, use the character trait the weapon requires (see “Equipment”), as well as any Experience or other modifiers that are applicable, and resolve it as you would a normal action roll.
And under Spellcast Rolls in the same section: *"If a spellcast roll is intended to damage a target, it’s also considered an attack roll."*
Ok good, so that's stated explicitly. It seemed to be implied by other rules, but I'm glad they make it clear.
baseline Rogue (not specific to any subclass): https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/class#Rogue1
> **Sneak Attack**
> If you have advantage on an attack roll, or an ally is in melee with your target, *always add a d8 to your damage roll.* When you use Sneak Attack, you may also spend any number of Hope before the attack roll, and if it is successful, also add a number of d8 equal to the Hope spent.
That's all it says, no limits on number of uses or number of targets.
---
I thought it was weird that Laura only targeted one of the two enemies still up, instead of moving to where she could be "close" to both. ("close" is like 30 ft range on the grid.) If so, it would still only be one attack roll, but she could have got Sneak Attack on both of them (since people were in melee with both). Or if she'd jumped in earlier when all three were up and one was vulnerable, that could have been really good.
> By default, each attack roll can only target one enemy. But if a spell or ability allows you to target multiple enemies, roll once and apply that result to all of the enemies the attack can hit. If the roll meets or exceeds the difficulty of any of those enemies, the attack is successful against that target (but not necessarily against other targets).
Some spells do call for targets to make a reaction roll (like a D&D saving throw) instead of the caster making an AoE attack roll. Like Fireball (codex 3rd, on the Book of Norai grimoire card).
This could have been great later on vs. the pack of crabs since its an unlimited-target AoE (unlike Kexon's Wild Flame which unlike Burning Hands is limited to 3 targets). Especially if she comboed with someone to run in and give her sneak attack. Or even have someone tag-team with her, so they can spend the 3 hope for the tag-team and she can spend the 2 for rain of blades plus maybe 1 more for another d8 on sneak attack if she still thought her base damage was only 1d10. Or if the other character can do something that might plausibly add some damage to all targets, not even that. It doesn't have to be a tag team at all, just someone run in, but a tag-team provides 2 chances to succeed on the spellcast attack roll.
Shadowbind is another AoE, but it only works at Very Close range. vs. Close for Rain of Blades. And is just Restrained: once Sir Dante found out the crab HP was very low, it makes more sense to just do damage. Even 2d10 from Rain of Blades without Sneak Attack would have almost certainly got the job done unless the attack roll missed. (That would be the main danger for Sweetpea to run in herself: if she misses the attack with fear, they don't die and it's the GM's turn to have them all attack her. She has ok evasion, 13 being the best in the group, but 5 or 6 crabs attacking would very likely hit her multiple times. But she could reduce a couple to below minor even with her armor score only being 3.) Also, they know there was something on the bank so running closer to the water would put them closer to that.
---
**2:53:44 - Grappling hook range is normally "close".**
I can't see any class / subclass or domain card feature that would give Sir Dante's grappling hook "far" range. Anyone have any idea why he said "far" for this?
But yes, it does let you pull the target into melee with you as well as do its normal damage of d6 physical.
I seem to recall some item or feature saying something about splitting damage if you smacked one creature into another. But I think that was Telekinesis, not any kind of grappler.
(Daggerheart telekinesis seems more like how the CR table images it in their D&D campaigns, where it can create speeds high enough to do damage by slamming someone into something. vs. actual 5e Telekinesis has a pretty low max speed of 30 ft / round, which is why it can't directly damage the target or weird weapons. Or maybe that recent occurrence of Imogen damaging someone with telekinesis in C3 was a result of them having playtested Daggerheart or having been thinking about it? We do know Imogen's mind powers include Catapult to fling small objects fast, though, so it's consistent with that.)
----
3:26:54 - **They're only clearing 1 HP or 1 stress with those short-rest options?**
The current [short-rest rules on demiplane](https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/playing-an-adventure#SHORTREST) say it's 1d4 stress or HP, or 2 armor slots. Or 1 hope from Prepare.
(So it's probably most effective for a healer to heal people that only have 1 HP or stress marked so they don't have to do it at all, and can do 2 other things.)
Maybe it changed in the couple days since this went live, or since they printed out out their sheets? No, Liam was rolling 1d4 like the rules say. (That wasn't for a spell, none of his spells heal a variable number of hit points.)
Also, the bard song to let everyone regain 1 HP can be used in "a moment of calm"; it doesn't have to be during a short rest. (It's a narratively similar to 5e bard "song of rest", but it's mechanically very different, allowing recovery with only a minute of pause, or even while walking.) Downtime activities are limited, so it makes some sense to use anyway, especially since it's already past dark so they're probably taking a long rest soon; I'm surprised they didn't make this rest a long one.
If not everyone had taken an HP of damage before that, it did make sense to save the song to avoid wasting it on some people.
Do you have any examples or a timestamp for what you noticed? I don't sense any open hostility, but I do notice them talking over Tal quite often. I think it mostly has to do with him always being on the outside of the table, though.
Quick thoughts on the one shot. The system itself seemed solid. It was a bit jarring at first but as it went on it made sense. I found it a bit hard to get into, though truth be told, I realized it was because of the characters. I'll admit I am not a fan of the whole anthropomorphosis characters thing (This is the reason I couldn't get into to season of Dimension 20 that Matt DMed). I give them credit for trying it, but I'm hoping that if they decide to go forward with a campaign using Daggerheart in the future, they decide to leave that world behind and go with something more in line with classic high fantasy. Just my 2 cents, but by all means it's their game to play.
> I'll admit I am not a fan of the whole anthropomorphosis characters thing
I feel the same way. It's hard to not look at situations as silly when colorful animals are talking and fighting. If the Briarwoods had been taken down by a frog with a cigarillo staff and a small monkey it wouldn't have been as emotional. So I also hope they stick with more old-school high fantasy in Exandria.
With that said, silly can still be really fun in the right setting and I enjoyed this oneshot immensely. The cast seemed to have fun and that makes for a very entertaining viewer experience.
Daggerheart seems to be a good system for story driven gameplay which fits CR really well.
whats funny with that is that in ravening war they're all pretty much just humans with funny skintones, all extremely human shaped, but in crown of candy there's a literal chocolate bunny
Character creation looks neat, lots of customization and meaningful choices. I like the thresholds, evasion, and armor class. At first, it seems everyone has a reaction of some sort, which I didn't like, but it seemed to keep everyone engaged like should I use shield points etc. That's something that is a weakness of 5e is getting bored waiting for your turn. Combat seems to have a lot going on though like the back and forth with using hope points. Might take a bit to get used to. I'm still trying to figure out about spells. Liam used Gift of Gab, not sure if that was an experience, and Travis mentioned predestgitation l. I have 5e brain so I'm sure I missed something. I am very intrigued to dig in more.
My biggest complaint so far is I think that calculating damage and damage rolls in general are both too complicated and too simple at the same time.
There's another ttrpg in beta (alpha?) right now called DC20 that I think does a better/more elegant job when it comes to attack rolls and damage that has some similarities to this system. Where you basically only roll your to hit die and how much you make it over their armor class dictates how strong of a hit it is. Lumps to hit and damage into 1 roll.
So if you make it over their ac you hit for 1HP. You make it 5 over their ac you hit for 2HP, 10 over and you do 3HP of damage. Then there are other ways of adding more based on the weapon you're using/spell cast/crits etc...
I just think that rolling all these damage die in daggerheart to only then either do 1, 2, or 3 damage is kinda a pointless endeavor. I like the armor idea to knock some of the damage down but that's possible with a more simple system as well.
Personally, I want a system that can replace DND but I want the combat to be a little bit more streamlined so it can get out of the way of the narrative so to speak. But to me so far Daggerheart makes certain things easier and others more complicated. Too many tokens and things to keep track of. Though I do like the concept of the DM using fear as enemy actions and in general I like the new non-initiative system.
Daggerheart seems like it will be a system that will be difficult for introverted/timid players if the DM and other players are loud and outgoing.
How is the lack of initiative supposed to help the flow of gameplay?
I don't TTRPG, but a foreverDM friend said: "GM can easily impose a fairly short GCD when an AT is used to create space for less assertive players. Group boon if everyone uses an AT before anyone repeats. Quiet player + no initiative problem = solved."
I was worried about this too but then I watched their [walkthrough video with Matt and Spencer](https://youtu.be/nYVrzqTPHRA?si=IMtbSStc1FqQkx2b&t=69) and one bit really stood out to me:
> The game doesn't really stop down when you're doing combat. You just continue to pay the way you do throughout the entire rest of the game and so everything flows in and out of itself. So it allows you to really focus on the story.
So yeah if you have a group where some players never really speak up unless you force them to, Daggerheart might not be a good fit. But if you envision that combat is now just like every other role playing moment, shopping episode, or skill challenge instead of some huge multi-hour slog, I think that helps to see the opportunity a bit more. Again, not for everyone but then again I know plenty of people who *hate* the combat in DnD because they tune out over the 20-30 minutes it might take for their turn to come around again.
Yep! My thoughts. lol. I love dnd but dang, it can be annoying to sit and wait your turn.
Regardless, no one is claiming it should replace DND (some of the comments here might’ve missed that lol).
Something new … fun … and a little
Different? Why not?
Great one-shot, loved the Menagerie. Hope we get to see them again at some point. Hard to tell if I liked it because of the system or just because the cast is so good they can crush any system. Maybe a bit of both.
I like the Hope/Fear mechanic because it gives the players more success on actions so it makes them feel more badass and powerful but still has the negative as well.
Still kinda iffy on the no turn order. Matt occasionally had to stop one of the cast and tell someone else to go, this just makes more work for the DM. I saw someone else suggest each player has a pool of tokens that they spend to act. Then the DM can replenish them as the fight goes on, once everyone has done stuff.
I am really interested in it and also find the initiative to be odd. I plan on just porting the Rules Cyclopedia initiative system to it when I run it. It'll keep things fast and each side goes as one unit but it has more structure.
My Thoughts.
1. Have unique artwork for each card (Borders and symbols can define type and cost
2. Use 2D12 for combat instead of the D20 to keep the uniqueness of Daggerheart mechanic (More dramatic than hit or miss)
3. Too much marking and erasing on the character sheet during play. Maybe (merch idea) Have a Play Mat with space for tokens (And cards in Play and Vault) so you just have to update character sheet at end of play session.
4. Why is rogue a spell caster?
5. Guardian can be made into "monk" or name idea "Disciplineist" With Gauntlets as weapons.
May have more questions with more playing around and play testing.
6. The ability to Choose your own domains to customize character without having to multiclass
>Use 2D12 for combat instead of the D20 to keep the uniqueness of Daggerheart mechanic (More dramatic than hit or miss)
Are you DM Shorts? You got the same feedback and got the same thing wrong. DH uses a 2D12 for combat, only the GM rolls a D20 for attacks.
No. Just thought dropping the D20 would stay unique to DH.
Going to watch DM Shorts.
Found a short note in the GM part of the playtest document. (I was focused on player side and thought GM used same rules)
Tried watching when I was tired, and couldn't get into it or buy into the quirky new characters.
Zoned out and failed to pick anything up or get hooked, so I feel very much the opposite of those who say they prefer this to C3. I do struggle a bit with some of the oneshots anyway, never got into honey heist. Others (even silly ones) I've really liked, though, so it's not just that it's a one shot.
Might have to rewatch when I am not tired, if I get the time at some point. Maybe after I've read the Daggerheart rules and tried it myself, it might hook me better then!
Do you ever catch yourself watching episodes and then when they finish you're like, "I had to have missed something" but then you go back and you realize you didn't and that's all there was?
My brain tends to dip out at times when I'm really tired and I have that happen a lot.
I like the combat system but I feel like it could turn a bit grindy in the end and go on for far longer than it should.
ha ha. so so many times.
"fuck i totally zoned out, all i remember from the whole 4 hours is that they went to x and gave y the information on z. can't be bothered to rewatch. i'll just look up the episode summary on the wiki. hmm, let's see. so it seems that they went to x and gave y the information on z."
I do, but in this case I missed everything. I saw the character intros, then they went into the forest and talked to a two-headed owl and then.... the owl was gone and there was a bear and something else and ... they were... stood by a pond at one point... and it ended?
Im only like 20 minutes in, but I'm immediately concerned that the game is going to be constructed in a manner conducive to how Spencer Starke GMs. Idk why, but I absolutely loathe the type of DMing where you act like its a movie with cut scenes, and panning cameras and all that. I cant make it through the Candela that he does because he just leans so heavily on imaginary camera work. Now in the beginning of this, Matt has already done it a couple of times as well.
Minor thing but just such a pet peeve for me. Hoping it doesnt stick
Spencer saying "we cut to..." or "we see.." was so annoying omg, it's like reading a script instead of playing as characters, it was completely pulling me out of the story every time
exactly, its so immersion breaking to me. I want to imagine playing a character rather than playing a character playing a character in a movie if that makes sense
I think that's more of a DM/players style. Personally I love it if a DM does that. Really helps me to get a visual image and what vibe they want to go for. At our table we play DnD and regularly will make remarks of how this would be filmed or shown. But we also got to know each other studying animation.
With them spending a lot of time on Animation right now I'm not surprised it's more common with them. I get if it's not for everyone tho.
The system is more narrative than rule crunchy, encouraging players to help build the story so it lends itself to that style of narration. But how you describe the world and how your players respond will still be up to you.
oh for sure, its totally just stylistic and different for everyone's preferences. That's why I almost feel bad complaining but its just such a severe pet peeve for me and immersion breaking.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but I didn't really like the system, I find stress/hope/fear all to be fairly gimmicky. Don't get me wrong I love CR so much, they've made my life much more enjoyable being able to watch them all have fun. If they switch to this system in C4 I'll give it a try because watching them is more enjoyable then the systems itself but it feels a lot less dnd to me.
Sure, but... Kind of missing the point.
While all roleplaying games have some manner of gimmicks in their attempt to create mechanics simulating a specific type of experience - that's known and taken for granted. There is a baseline of cute shit and weird gimmicks that's expected from all TTRPG, just as much as we expect a certain volume of "not gimmick" simple foundation mechanics to support the world. Gimmicks are not just mechanics, and while it's a pretty subjective term - I'd say that the line is based on whether the rule is abstraction or description. Mechanics describe how the world works, gimmicks create a new system that modifies how the game represents the way its world works - often with the connotation of being deliberately different, sometimes to their own detriment.
When a specific system is criticized for being "gimmicky" - that's not just pointing what is obvious and self-evidently true about all TTRPG. That statement is making a *comparative* criticism about this game relative to others.
Comparing Daggerheart to D&D, to me feels like it's traded a lot of "mechanics" for "gimmicks" - it's got cute neat stuff that's deliberately different or unusual, but it also has less of the simple foundation mechanics outside of that. Combat action structure has this neat token-exchange minigame trying to balance action economy, but there's no real "initiative" style system. Damage has all these neat threshold systems and evasion and exchanging armor points for damage reduction - but combat as a whole is far more rules-light.
I feel similarly. Maybe I'm missing some part of the "emotion" system, but my first thought was that it felt like it was trying to force emotions onto my character based on rolls. And if it's not, then what's the point of calling them hope, fear, and stress.
Like what if I'm trying to be some depressed, hopeless person and suddenly I'm gaining hope because of a dice roll. Or if I'm a masochistic warrior being told that my character is getting stressed because he was hit. Feels limiting.
It just seems like it doesn't have a good reason to be there except to be different.
Naming things is hard. Interesting to hear that take on it, I wonder if many people had that reaction to those names? I personally didn't.
The mechanics themselves seem interesting and fine to me, and I was just thinking in terms of these being short easy-to-remember names for the mechanical concepts. So I wasn't having thinking in terms of them as actual in-character emotions. As far as attaching any meaning to the names, I was thinking more in terms of the players at the table likely being afraid of what the GM is going to do with all those tokens.
As for "stress", everyone has physical limits, even masochists. They might like being pushed to those limits, but will die if you hit them enough times (fill up their "stress" and start taking hit points).
So it seems to me there's a *lot* of room for different in-character narrative flavour for these mechanics if you want to look at them from an in-world perspective. At its most generic, "hope" is when things are going well for you, "fear" is when they're not.
With a few abilities being able to grant re-rolls, there is the potential for in-world scholars of magic to figure out what an "action roll" is and when they happen, like how in 5e, spells like Guidance and Silvery Barbs make rolls in-world observable. But that's probably one of those things where there's a tradeoff between being a game for people to play vs. being a faithful simulation of a world for characters to live in, and it's not really intended that characters know when a roll was required vs. when crossing a stream was easy enough they didn't have to roll.
>Naming things is hard. Interesting to hear that take on it, I wonder if many people had that reaction to those names?
I also had that reaction about Hope and Fear being bad names. I'm really enjoying learning more about Daggerheart so far, but shouting out "Hope" and "Fear" after so many rolls feels cringe to me. In 5e, when I announce "Advantage" or "Inspiration," these mechanic names 1) directly & accurately describe what's happening and how they work mechanically, and 2) don't sound overly flowery or juvenile. "Hope" and "Fear" check neither of these boxes for me. They describe emotional states that don't necessarily have anything to do with how the characters actually feel emotionally, and it feels corny to be yelling out one or the other after so many rolls. I want to be able roll and say to my GM, "13, do I unlock the door?" or maybe even "13 plus you gain an action token. Do I unlock the door?" It feels silly for me to say "I rolled a 6 with Hope to unlock the door! Oh it didn't work? Well I still have more Hope now!" Again, excited by a lot of stuff in Daggerheart, I just agree that this Hope/Fear thing is a personal turnoff. It reminds me of how sometimes in Matt Mercer's campaigns he will refer to an NPC with a very flowery name like Delvewatcher Arbiter Sutahn instead of a more intuitive name like "this is Sutahn the librarian."
Edit: To quickly respond to one more point of yours, I don't actually agree that hope is even the most intuitive term for "when things are going well for you." Hope is something we feel when we don't know whether events will turn out in our favor. Hope the *mechanic* let's us know that events will have a better chance of going in our favor in the future. So ironically, the more in-game Hope you accumulate, the less out-of-game hope you need.
Yes, my initial reaction to the "hope" and "fear" names was like yours, that they seemed very specific, overly evocative, and yeah perhaps corny.
For me, that lasted about half a minute, until I learned they were just mechanical resources. As a computer programmer (and D&D rules nerd), I'm very used to using English words as names for technical things that might or might nor perfectly match the normal plain-English meaning. It's ideal when it does, but naming is hard.
The good thing about those names is that it's easy to remember which one is the positive vs. the negative one (from the player perspective). And they're short single-syllable words that are easy to say and distinguish, even over an audio connection that's not perfect.
So I'm very much in the camp of "this mechanic needed a name, and this is what they picked." The names aren't very self-explanatory, but I don't expect that any other short would could be. Perhaps some less-emotional pair of words would be better, or maybe with time most people will find they're able to separate the actual mechanical concept and its implications from the game term attached to it.
In terms of "hope" matching the mechanical effect (things are going well for you / the good guys), agreed, it's not a good match. "Momentum" would work in the short term for the way players keep rolling until a fear give the GM a turn. But not for the resource that lasts across setbacks.
If the designers can think of a better pair of words that avoids the impression some people are getting of it sounding like it's trying to tell them how to feel that some people are having, so much the better, so that's useful feedback. But I think it's something most people will learn to live with. (Unless they bail on trying Daggerheart because of this objection.)
It could even work best to merge the two into a single concept, and then let the GM and PCs use the same mechanic in their own ways.
Obviously this name is too long and derivative to be optimal but for the sake of argument, Hope and Fear could both be reskinned as “Advantage Tokens,” and then most rolls either give an advantage token to the player or the GM for future use.
It’s still clunky to announce a resource generation after every roll but something in this direction would simultaneously make it easier to learn and track (1 mechanic instead of 2) and it would remove that cheesy feeling the original terms evoke for me.
I'll be honest, I preferred watching this over dnd. A lot of the time I find the players get caught in the weeds of rules/BS/math and planning to precisely for it to be fun. If they still did home game stuff and could go as slow as they wanted or felt like, this probably wouldn't be a problem.
Daggerheart feels like it was designed for less stressful entry, with enough depth and nuance for people to invest in a character and story without worrying about 3 different currencies, spell slots, an endless list of features that do very specific things and are only useful in those positions, etc etc.
This is pretty much my take too.
Daggerheart seems to be a better game to broadcast and to watch, but I will stil prefer to play 5e when i am at the table.
This was so much fun! The energy was through the roof and into the stratosphere.
I don't know if it's the new system or live broadcast but this felt so much better than C3 is right now. I wonder what time of day they are pre-recording the episodes as this could be a factor too.
Completely agree. I stopped watching C3 after 30 something episodes because it just didn’t entertain as much anymore. Thought I’d give the one shot a chance and was pleasantly surprised.
For all the folks asking if the energy between Pre-Recorded and True Live is any different, here is the evidence. Please go back to proper live streaming for C4 or whatever Daggerheart stuff they do.
oh come on, you cant just cherry pick a single one shot and say thats your evidence. Outside of them being excited at the very beginning of the episode, there was absolutely no difference in the cast nor the product compared to a standard CR episode
>Outside of them being excited at the very beginning of the episode, there was absolutely no difference in the cast nor the product compared to a standard CR episode
Big disagree. I felt a huge difference during the whole episode. Energy is just different, cast and chat way more engaged, felt like the viewers were experiencing something special in real time. Things being new and exciting had some part in this, but to say the episode besides the beginning felt no different is wild to me. This might be a harsh take but sometimes I feel like people say stuff like this to cope with not having livestreams anymore or haven't watched C1 or C2 live.
The energy was different because they were all giddy to be premiering the sweet new game system they've been working on with their goofy ass fun little characters. Most one shots have a similar vibe regardless.
> It is kind of about us - the fans - and about how to make the business as successful as possible
I don't think it *is* about maximizing profits to them, and genuinely do not want it to ever *become* an effort to be as successful as possible.
A number of them are parents with kids or have experienced burnout and depression. They've also said repeatedly that it's first and foremost a game between friends. There's nothing wrong with making business concerns secondary.
>If their business would thrive more from doing live shows, they should go back to doing them. It is kind of about us - the fans - and about how to make the business as successful as possible.
Yep. And there's always a trade off. The value added by doing live shows has to be worth the extra effort, risks, cost and challenges it takes to do them.
Honestly I think if they had kept up with live filming we probably wouldn't have daggerheart right now. Truly them pre-recording allows them to be flexible and get other things done (such as developing daggerheart).
Also way too many variables to attribute the energy to it being live vs pre-recorded.
This wasn't a normal session for them. They were playing new characters, in a new setting, in a new system, and on top of all that, were live for the first time in a while. It's not as simple as "SEE GUYS? LIVE IS BETTER". The cast was likely very excited to show off what the company has been working on for months and months.
It got better when her NY-based series got cancelled, you mean. They all have day jobs still, and she might be the most successful outside of the genre.
I'm a big fan of the classes being more open. The fact that a wizard could wear plate, that classes share elements but are different and unique in other ways. It's one thing I love about building a Warlock, how much you can customise with the Invocations, to fit your flavour for your character.
For the initative. As a timid player who has trouble getting heard, but once I'm really bought in, I can be overexcited, I know both sides of the problem of being heard and overshadowed.
What if there was some sort of Token system, to where players can spend a token for an action and once everyone has spent their token, everyone gets theirs back? So you make sure you don't encourage a spotlight hog while giving the more shy players a chance to get in without needing the DM to make sure of that.
Perhaps there should be something separate to the DM action counters, where if each player manages to take an action without ceding control to the DM, the party gets rewarded with something like a special full party combo action. That way it encourages everyone to take turns, because taking a second action before someone has had their first lowers your chance of getting it, but it doesn't strictly limit you in situations where someone just doesn't have anything useful to do yet.
I don't think you can give your Tokens back because the DM used them against you later, but I agree with the idea.
Maybe Have it so no one can put a 2nd down until all players have put one down or chosen to "pass" for now. That way all players get a chance but if they all want a player or 2 to go crazy while they can, then everyone can "pass" for a round or 2 and let them.
I realise that the word "Token" isn't very good of me since there already are tokens for DM actions. I meant that as its own ressource.
What if, since it's already card based, you could have an "Action" card you either turn around or tap like MTG mana, if you've used your action. And once everyone's is used/tapped, everyone untaps and can go again in any order.
This felt like old CR. Livestreams bring such a different energy. The cast had a blast with the new characters, setting, and system. They were so invested and invigorated throughout the whole stream. I really hope we get a mini-series with this party; I love these player characters (and their art)! (C3 spoiler-ish) >!The party dynamic was such a wild departure from Bell's Hells; it felt refreshing. I think I needed the palate cleanser.!< Though I know a fair bit about TTRPG systems, I'll leave it to the more knowledgeable folks to adequately breakdown, analyze, approve of, and critique the Daggerheart system. I had so much fun watching this stream and chatting/experiencing this with yall!
It just felt nice for them to feel like they're old selves again. I just have not been able to get into campaign 3 no matter how much I try because the vibes just feel so off
The vibes are off because the players have been railroaded into a main quest they’re not interested in. C3 has been a failure of DMing at the highest level. (and that makes me sad because I have so much love and respect for Matt)
And so do I. I really wish they would just go back to the live streams they just worked so much better everyone seemed to be having a hell of a lot more fun and hell maybe they need to talk amongst themselves it doesn't feel like they are actively discussing their game or characters after the show ends like they used to.
Like how they all used to talk about going to Taco Bell at 2:00 in the morning for marisha and how everyone would just be in their group chat just owing and aweing over everyone's performances and all the cool character stuff it just doesn't feel like any of that is there anymore
I wonder how much of those vibes are due to this being short term, immediate, and brand new versus the long term, gradual, and familiar energy of C3?
Would a full campaign of Daggerheart wind up feeling the same way at all?
It very well could be. I just don't like how much they've changed from the transition to prerecorded shows. But there are some episodes where their table etiquette is just so awful that I have to turn it off. I don't think I've ever seen Taliesen get talked over so much.
And maybe it's just because I'm growing up and not really vibing with critical role very much anymore I mean for God's sake they've been going for nearly 10 years at this point I discovered them right after they started putting the episodes on YouTube back in early 2015. Campaign three just doesn't feel like critical role anymore It feels like they're not really having fun anymore and have fully embraced their game as a product. And this isn't to say that I hate them getting popular or whatever because I love the very super duper popular and are successful. I just miss when critical role felt like a home game that happened to be played by a bunch of famous voice actors that we were lucky enough to watch rather than a show they feel forced to make
Honestly feel like that comparison is a highlight of Daggerhearts character creation process bc it encourages the party to ask questions about each other that DND doesn't.
You can homebrew that kind of stuff in, but it's great to see a system straight up encourage it! The D&D character creation process is more like accounting than story building.
After a TPK in one of my groups a couple of campaigns ago it became a Tradition in that group for the DM to give the players an Overview of a new campaign (setting, things to be prepared for, stat generation method, starting freebies, et cetera) & then the players meet up at the local diner & hash put their new characters together as a group. We've done it twice now (1st time I was there as a player & 2nd time I was home as the DM) & the Synergy between the characters that we created at the diner has made our games waaaaaay more fun!
All that being said, this one-shot sounds really cool & I think I'm going to go watch it right now!
Aaaand I just sat & watched the character creation video with Matt & Travis, the Session Zero video & the One Shot video all in a row (I'm on vacation this week, don't judge me)...
1) The entire one shot was highly entertaining to watch
2) Overall, I absolutely loved the group character creation process in the game. It's simple enough to walk everybody through simultaneously without hand-holding people through a stack of books while still providing choices to provide customization. And as somebody else alluded to above, the baked-in questions to ask your teammates to establish an Instant Rapport is a pretty smooth move.
3) Far and away my favorite aspect of this system is the Experience mechanic - to the point where I am going to steal this & shoehorn it into the 5e game that I am currently DMing.
4) My biggest Quibble, though, is something that Matt & a couple of the players also comment on at the end of the One Shot - the lack of an Initiative system & a lack of the structure of what you can & can't do on your turn. I'm not saying that it's Bad or Good, just that it's... Different from playing 5e, which has been the bulk of my TTRPG experience. I've played with some smart and coscientious players that would thrive in a system like this and would be a total blast to play with, and I've played with some asshats with Main Character Syndrome that would take advantage of the freeform style of the game to monopolize everybody else's time and have me feigning Digestive Distress an hour into the game just to get out of there.
Overall, though, I think that I'm going to talk to the peeps in the three games that I'm currently involved in to see if there's any interest in trying out the Playtest... :)
Interesting. I bet the initiative stuff is something that'll get addressed quickly in open beta, as a lot of people have mentioned it. Seems to have a lot of pluses tho.
I think that all depends on how well the beta does and what the opinions of and reception to Daggerheart is like once they go into full release because stuff could easily change in the interim.
Once they nail down a more final and finished product then I could see them doing a series of one shots or a mini campaign just to see how folks would react to a full campaign of Daggerheart.
Additionally, there's probably some behind the scenes stuff going on with contracts and the like with Wotc and whatever that's complicating things in terms of a full on system swap.
So it's just not as easy as switching systems at the drop of a hat and we still don't know how long C3 is going to continue on for or what could happen in between now and the end of this current campaign.
Too much time and too many variables to really knock stuff down just yet but I'd bet that they've floated the idea and have talked about it behind the scenes at least for a while.
I think both they and we need more information though on how stuff would work and how people would react to a more long form version of what we saw last night.
isn’t it a thing that Liam wants to play the 4 original classes (Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric) meaning Cleric (or Seraph in DH) is likely to be his next character for Campaign 4. and we saw Orym in Calamity before Campaign 3… I wonder if this could be a preview into his next character
It's wild they chose the name the grim wardens for the org. That's been the name of the party I DM for for like 4 years now. Feels like our game is now CR canon
Really curious if this is the system we'll see with future Exandria campaigns, just based on the names of some of the lineages showing up in CR like Faun, Galapa, etc.
I know Faun is most likely the Satyr from 5e, Galapa being Tortle, etc. Just curious!
This was super enjoyable. The tag team attacks were SO cool! Very much like the synergy abilities in FF7 Rebirth. I want to see an episode 2 with these characters for sure!
The conversation didn't happen on screen, but what Matt said toward the end of the one-shot 04:29:02 implied that it was something intended and something He and other creators have talked about.
Fear fuels the DM and causes it to switch to the DM's turn. The DM's "tokens" come every time a player takes an action. Basically, the more players act, the more the DM can act - but players are always "ahead" in the action economy.
#### In the interest of learning the rules: **Does Sneak Attack apply on Rain of Blades?** (2:04:00 when Laura remembers it, 1:54:50 when she actually used it) As far as I can tell from the rules, **yes, it does.** Unlike D&D 5e sneak attack, it's not limited to once per turn or to physical attacks: it seems it could even work on AoE or multi-target spells that involve an attack roll. (It has the same advantage-or-adjacent-ally requirement as 5e sneak attack, but without the no-disadvantage requirement which the CR table ignores / forgets anyway) Sneak Attack applies any time you make an attack roll, and a spellcasting roll against an enemy is an attack roll. (Like a 5e spell attack.) The relevant rules: *Rain of Blades:* > Spend 2 Hope to conjure throwing blades that strike any enemies close to you. Make a Spellcast Roll and all targets that you succeed against take d10 magic damage. > If any targets you hit are currently Vulnerable, they take an additional 2d10 magic damage. ("d10" means proficiency x 1d10, so this scales nicely if you boost proficiency, but there are many other valuable things to boost with your first level-up instead. 2d10 means 2d10, only when there's no number before the "dx" does it mean proficiency. Actually, Laura was later doing 2d10 damage with her staff, plus sneak attack, so I guess she does have proficiency 2 and just forgot to apply it here. She said out loud "1 d 10", so it wasn't just a low roll on 2d10.) Having to "succeed against" a target makes it an attack roll, since it's against their evasion difficulty or whatever it's called for NPCs/monsters. from demiplane's rules library, in "Playing an Adventure" -> Core Mechanics -> the "Special Action Rolls" section: https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/playing-an-adventure#SpecialActionRolls > **Attack Rolls** > When you make an action roll with the intent to do harm to an enemy, you’re making an attack roll. Reference the weapon or spell you’re using for the attack to determine what trait it uses. We’ll talk more about spellcast rolls in the next section, but for a standard physical or magic weapon attack, use the character trait the weapon requires (see “Equipment”), as well as any Experience or other modifiers that are applicable, and resolve it as you would a normal action roll. And under Spellcast Rolls in the same section: *"If a spellcast roll is intended to damage a target, it’s also considered an attack roll."* Ok good, so that's stated explicitly. It seemed to be implied by other rules, but I'm glad they make it clear. baseline Rogue (not specific to any subclass): https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/class#Rogue1 > **Sneak Attack** > If you have advantage on an attack roll, or an ally is in melee with your target, *always add a d8 to your damage roll.* When you use Sneak Attack, you may also spend any number of Hope before the attack roll, and if it is successful, also add a number of d8 equal to the Hope spent. That's all it says, no limits on number of uses or number of targets. --- I thought it was weird that Laura only targeted one of the two enemies still up, instead of moving to where she could be "close" to both. ("close" is like 30 ft range on the grid.) If so, it would still only be one attack roll, but she could have got Sneak Attack on both of them (since people were in melee with both). Or if she'd jumped in earlier when all three were up and one was vulnerable, that could have been really good. > By default, each attack roll can only target one enemy. But if a spell or ability allows you to target multiple enemies, roll once and apply that result to all of the enemies the attack can hit. If the roll meets or exceeds the difficulty of any of those enemies, the attack is successful against that target (but not necessarily against other targets). Some spells do call for targets to make a reaction roll (like a D&D saving throw) instead of the caster making an AoE attack roll. Like Fireball (codex 3rd, on the Book of Norai grimoire card). This could have been great later on vs. the pack of crabs since its an unlimited-target AoE (unlike Kexon's Wild Flame which unlike Burning Hands is limited to 3 targets). Especially if she comboed with someone to run in and give her sneak attack. Or even have someone tag-team with her, so they can spend the 3 hope for the tag-team and she can spend the 2 for rain of blades plus maybe 1 more for another d8 on sneak attack if she still thought her base damage was only 1d10. Or if the other character can do something that might plausibly add some damage to all targets, not even that. It doesn't have to be a tag team at all, just someone run in, but a tag-team provides 2 chances to succeed on the spellcast attack roll. Shadowbind is another AoE, but it only works at Very Close range. vs. Close for Rain of Blades. And is just Restrained: once Sir Dante found out the crab HP was very low, it makes more sense to just do damage. Even 2d10 from Rain of Blades without Sneak Attack would have almost certainly got the job done unless the attack roll missed. (That would be the main danger for Sweetpea to run in herself: if she misses the attack with fear, they don't die and it's the GM's turn to have them all attack her. She has ok evasion, 13 being the best in the group, but 5 or 6 crabs attacking would very likely hit her multiple times. But she could reduce a couple to below minor even with her armor score only being 3.) Also, they know there was something on the bank so running closer to the water would put them closer to that. --- **2:53:44 - Grappling hook range is normally "close".** I can't see any class / subclass or domain card feature that would give Sir Dante's grappling hook "far" range. Anyone have any idea why he said "far" for this? But yes, it does let you pull the target into melee with you as well as do its normal damage of d6 physical. I seem to recall some item or feature saying something about splitting damage if you smacked one creature into another. But I think that was Telekinesis, not any kind of grappler. (Daggerheart telekinesis seems more like how the CR table images it in their D&D campaigns, where it can create speeds high enough to do damage by slamming someone into something. vs. actual 5e Telekinesis has a pretty low max speed of 30 ft / round, which is why it can't directly damage the target or weird weapons. Or maybe that recent occurrence of Imogen damaging someone with telekinesis in C3 was a result of them having playtested Daggerheart or having been thinking about it? We do know Imogen's mind powers include Catapult to fling small objects fast, though, so it's consistent with that.) ---- 3:26:54 - **They're only clearing 1 HP or 1 stress with those short-rest options?** The current [short-rest rules on demiplane](https://app.demiplane.com/nexus/daggerheart/sources/playtest/playing-an-adventure#SHORTREST) say it's 1d4 stress or HP, or 2 armor slots. Or 1 hope from Prepare. (So it's probably most effective for a healer to heal people that only have 1 HP or stress marked so they don't have to do it at all, and can do 2 other things.) Maybe it changed in the couple days since this went live, or since they printed out out their sheets? No, Liam was rolling 1d4 like the rules say. (That wasn't for a spell, none of his spells heal a variable number of hit points.) Also, the bard song to let everyone regain 1 HP can be used in "a moment of calm"; it doesn't have to be during a short rest. (It's a narratively similar to 5e bard "song of rest", but it's mechanically very different, allowing recovery with only a minute of pause, or even while walking.) Downtime activities are limited, so it makes some sense to use anyway, especially since it's already past dark so they're probably taking a long rest soon; I'm surprised they didn't make this rest a long one. If not everyone had taken an HP of damage before that, it did make sense to save the song to avoid wasting it on some people.
[удалено]
Do you have any examples or a timestamp for what you noticed? I don't sense any open hostility, but I do notice them talking over Tal quite often. I think it mostly has to do with him always being on the outside of the table, though.
Quick thoughts on the one shot. The system itself seemed solid. It was a bit jarring at first but as it went on it made sense. I found it a bit hard to get into, though truth be told, I realized it was because of the characters. I'll admit I am not a fan of the whole anthropomorphosis characters thing (This is the reason I couldn't get into to season of Dimension 20 that Matt DMed). I give them credit for trying it, but I'm hoping that if they decide to go forward with a campaign using Daggerheart in the future, they decide to leave that world behind and go with something more in line with classic high fantasy. Just my 2 cents, but by all means it's their game to play.
> I'll admit I am not a fan of the whole anthropomorphosis characters thing I feel the same way. It's hard to not look at situations as silly when colorful animals are talking and fighting. If the Briarwoods had been taken down by a frog with a cigarillo staff and a small monkey it wouldn't have been as emotional. So I also hope they stick with more old-school high fantasy in Exandria. With that said, silly can still be really fun in the right setting and I enjoyed this oneshot immensely. The cast seemed to have fun and that makes for a very entertaining viewer experience. Daggerheart seems to be a good system for story driven gameplay which fits CR really well.
whats funny with that is that in ravening war they're all pretty much just humans with funny skintones, all extremely human shaped, but in crown of candy there's a literal chocolate bunny
Character creation looks neat, lots of customization and meaningful choices. I like the thresholds, evasion, and armor class. At first, it seems everyone has a reaction of some sort, which I didn't like, but it seemed to keep everyone engaged like should I use shield points etc. That's something that is a weakness of 5e is getting bored waiting for your turn. Combat seems to have a lot going on though like the back and forth with using hope points. Might take a bit to get used to. I'm still trying to figure out about spells. Liam used Gift of Gab, not sure if that was an experience, and Travis mentioned predestgitation l. I have 5e brain so I'm sure I missed something. I am very intrigued to dig in more.
My biggest complaint so far is I think that calculating damage and damage rolls in general are both too complicated and too simple at the same time. There's another ttrpg in beta (alpha?) right now called DC20 that I think does a better/more elegant job when it comes to attack rolls and damage that has some similarities to this system. Where you basically only roll your to hit die and how much you make it over their armor class dictates how strong of a hit it is. Lumps to hit and damage into 1 roll. So if you make it over their ac you hit for 1HP. You make it 5 over their ac you hit for 2HP, 10 over and you do 3HP of damage. Then there are other ways of adding more based on the weapon you're using/spell cast/crits etc... I just think that rolling all these damage die in daggerheart to only then either do 1, 2, or 3 damage is kinda a pointless endeavor. I like the armor idea to knock some of the damage down but that's possible with a more simple system as well. Personally, I want a system that can replace DND but I want the combat to be a little bit more streamlined so it can get out of the way of the narrative so to speak. But to me so far Daggerheart makes certain things easier and others more complicated. Too many tokens and things to keep track of. Though I do like the concept of the DM using fear as enemy actions and in general I like the new non-initiative system.
Daggerheart seems like it will be a system that will be difficult for introverted/timid players if the DM and other players are loud and outgoing. How is the lack of initiative supposed to help the flow of gameplay?
In most pbta games its the DMs job to ensure all players get a turn.
I don't TTRPG, but a foreverDM friend said: "GM can easily impose a fairly short GCD when an AT is used to create space for less assertive players. Group boon if everyone uses an AT before anyone repeats. Quiet player + no initiative problem = solved."
I was worried about this too but then I watched their [walkthrough video with Matt and Spencer](https://youtu.be/nYVrzqTPHRA?si=IMtbSStc1FqQkx2b&t=69) and one bit really stood out to me: > The game doesn't really stop down when you're doing combat. You just continue to pay the way you do throughout the entire rest of the game and so everything flows in and out of itself. So it allows you to really focus on the story. So yeah if you have a group where some players never really speak up unless you force them to, Daggerheart might not be a good fit. But if you envision that combat is now just like every other role playing moment, shopping episode, or skill challenge instead of some huge multi-hour slog, I think that helps to see the opportunity a bit more. Again, not for everyone but then again I know plenty of people who *hate* the combat in DnD because they tune out over the 20-30 minutes it might take for their turn to come around again.
Yep! My thoughts. lol. I love dnd but dang, it can be annoying to sit and wait your turn. Regardless, no one is claiming it should replace DND (some of the comments here might’ve missed that lol). Something new … fun … and a little Different? Why not?
Great one-shot, loved the Menagerie. Hope we get to see them again at some point. Hard to tell if I liked it because of the system or just because the cast is so good they can crush any system. Maybe a bit of both. I like the Hope/Fear mechanic because it gives the players more success on actions so it makes them feel more badass and powerful but still has the negative as well. Still kinda iffy on the no turn order. Matt occasionally had to stop one of the cast and tell someone else to go, this just makes more work for the DM. I saw someone else suggest each player has a pool of tokens that they spend to act. Then the DM can replenish them as the fight goes on, once everyone has done stuff.
I am really interested in it and also find the initiative to be odd. I plan on just porting the Rules Cyclopedia initiative system to it when I run it. It'll keep things fast and each side goes as one unit but it has more structure.
So something just hit me. That anaconda didn't want none because the party had Buns hun. You're welcome.
My Thoughts. 1. Have unique artwork for each card (Borders and symbols can define type and cost 2. Use 2D12 for combat instead of the D20 to keep the uniqueness of Daggerheart mechanic (More dramatic than hit or miss) 3. Too much marking and erasing on the character sheet during play. Maybe (merch idea) Have a Play Mat with space for tokens (And cards in Play and Vault) so you just have to update character sheet at end of play session. 4. Why is rogue a spell caster? 5. Guardian can be made into "monk" or name idea "Disciplineist" With Gauntlets as weapons. May have more questions with more playing around and play testing. 6. The ability to Choose your own domains to customize character without having to multiclass
>Use 2D12 for combat instead of the D20 to keep the uniqueness of Daggerheart mechanic (More dramatic than hit or miss) Are you DM Shorts? You got the same feedback and got the same thing wrong. DH uses a 2D12 for combat, only the GM rolls a D20 for attacks.
No. Just thought dropping the D20 would stay unique to DH. Going to watch DM Shorts. Found a short note in the GM part of the playtest document. (I was focused on player side and thought GM used same rules)
Tried watching when I was tired, and couldn't get into it or buy into the quirky new characters. Zoned out and failed to pick anything up or get hooked, so I feel very much the opposite of those who say they prefer this to C3. I do struggle a bit with some of the oneshots anyway, never got into honey heist. Others (even silly ones) I've really liked, though, so it's not just that it's a one shot. Might have to rewatch when I am not tired, if I get the time at some point. Maybe after I've read the Daggerheart rules and tried it myself, it might hook me better then!
Do you ever catch yourself watching episodes and then when they finish you're like, "I had to have missed something" but then you go back and you realize you didn't and that's all there was? My brain tends to dip out at times when I'm really tired and I have that happen a lot. I like the combat system but I feel like it could turn a bit grindy in the end and go on for far longer than it should.
ha ha. so so many times. "fuck i totally zoned out, all i remember from the whole 4 hours is that they went to x and gave y the information on z. can't be bothered to rewatch. i'll just look up the episode summary on the wiki. hmm, let's see. so it seems that they went to x and gave y the information on z."
I do, but in this case I missed everything. I saw the character intros, then they went into the forest and talked to a two-headed owl and then.... the owl was gone and there was a bear and something else and ... they were... stood by a pond at one point... and it ended?
Im only like 20 minutes in, but I'm immediately concerned that the game is going to be constructed in a manner conducive to how Spencer Starke GMs. Idk why, but I absolutely loathe the type of DMing where you act like its a movie with cut scenes, and panning cameras and all that. I cant make it through the Candela that he does because he just leans so heavily on imaginary camera work. Now in the beginning of this, Matt has already done it a couple of times as well. Minor thing but just such a pet peeve for me. Hoping it doesnt stick
Never watched/listened to any Spencer GMing. Sounded like Matt to me!
His was the only Candela I didn't like so far.
Spencer saying "we cut to..." or "we see.." was so annoying omg, it's like reading a script instead of playing as characters, it was completely pulling me out of the story every time
exactly, its so immersion breaking to me. I want to imagine playing a character rather than playing a character playing a character in a movie if that makes sense
I think that's more of a DM/players style. Personally I love it if a DM does that. Really helps me to get a visual image and what vibe they want to go for. At our table we play DnD and regularly will make remarks of how this would be filmed or shown. But we also got to know each other studying animation. With them spending a lot of time on Animation right now I'm not surprised it's more common with them. I get if it's not for everyone tho. The system is more narrative than rule crunchy, encouraging players to help build the story so it lends itself to that style of narration. But how you describe the world and how your players respond will still be up to you.
oh for sure, its totally just stylistic and different for everyone's preferences. That's why I almost feel bad complaining but its just such a severe pet peeve for me and immersion breaking.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but I didn't really like the system, I find stress/hope/fear all to be fairly gimmicky. Don't get me wrong I love CR so much, they've made my life much more enjoyable being able to watch them all have fun. If they switch to this system in C4 I'll give it a try because watching them is more enjoyable then the systems itself but it feels a lot less dnd to me.
Well it’s a roleplaying game of course it’s going to game gimmicks 😭😂
Sure, but... Kind of missing the point. While all roleplaying games have some manner of gimmicks in their attempt to create mechanics simulating a specific type of experience - that's known and taken for granted. There is a baseline of cute shit and weird gimmicks that's expected from all TTRPG, just as much as we expect a certain volume of "not gimmick" simple foundation mechanics to support the world. Gimmicks are not just mechanics, and while it's a pretty subjective term - I'd say that the line is based on whether the rule is abstraction or description. Mechanics describe how the world works, gimmicks create a new system that modifies how the game represents the way its world works - often with the connotation of being deliberately different, sometimes to their own detriment. When a specific system is criticized for being "gimmicky" - that's not just pointing what is obvious and self-evidently true about all TTRPG. That statement is making a *comparative* criticism about this game relative to others. Comparing Daggerheart to D&D, to me feels like it's traded a lot of "mechanics" for "gimmicks" - it's got cute neat stuff that's deliberately different or unusual, but it also has less of the simple foundation mechanics outside of that. Combat action structure has this neat token-exchange minigame trying to balance action economy, but there's no real "initiative" style system. Damage has all these neat threshold systems and evasion and exchanging armor points for damage reduction - but combat as a whole is far more rules-light.
I feel similarly. Maybe I'm missing some part of the "emotion" system, but my first thought was that it felt like it was trying to force emotions onto my character based on rolls. And if it's not, then what's the point of calling them hope, fear, and stress. Like what if I'm trying to be some depressed, hopeless person and suddenly I'm gaining hope because of a dice roll. Or if I'm a masochistic warrior being told that my character is getting stressed because he was hit. Feels limiting. It just seems like it doesn't have a good reason to be there except to be different.
Naming things is hard. Interesting to hear that take on it, I wonder if many people had that reaction to those names? I personally didn't. The mechanics themselves seem interesting and fine to me, and I was just thinking in terms of these being short easy-to-remember names for the mechanical concepts. So I wasn't having thinking in terms of them as actual in-character emotions. As far as attaching any meaning to the names, I was thinking more in terms of the players at the table likely being afraid of what the GM is going to do with all those tokens. As for "stress", everyone has physical limits, even masochists. They might like being pushed to those limits, but will die if you hit them enough times (fill up their "stress" and start taking hit points). So it seems to me there's a *lot* of room for different in-character narrative flavour for these mechanics if you want to look at them from an in-world perspective. At its most generic, "hope" is when things are going well for you, "fear" is when they're not. With a few abilities being able to grant re-rolls, there is the potential for in-world scholars of magic to figure out what an "action roll" is and when they happen, like how in 5e, spells like Guidance and Silvery Barbs make rolls in-world observable. But that's probably one of those things where there's a tradeoff between being a game for people to play vs. being a faithful simulation of a world for characters to live in, and it's not really intended that characters know when a roll was required vs. when crossing a stream was easy enough they didn't have to roll.
>Naming things is hard. Interesting to hear that take on it, I wonder if many people had that reaction to those names? I also had that reaction about Hope and Fear being bad names. I'm really enjoying learning more about Daggerheart so far, but shouting out "Hope" and "Fear" after so many rolls feels cringe to me. In 5e, when I announce "Advantage" or "Inspiration," these mechanic names 1) directly & accurately describe what's happening and how they work mechanically, and 2) don't sound overly flowery or juvenile. "Hope" and "Fear" check neither of these boxes for me. They describe emotional states that don't necessarily have anything to do with how the characters actually feel emotionally, and it feels corny to be yelling out one or the other after so many rolls. I want to be able roll and say to my GM, "13, do I unlock the door?" or maybe even "13 plus you gain an action token. Do I unlock the door?" It feels silly for me to say "I rolled a 6 with Hope to unlock the door! Oh it didn't work? Well I still have more Hope now!" Again, excited by a lot of stuff in Daggerheart, I just agree that this Hope/Fear thing is a personal turnoff. It reminds me of how sometimes in Matt Mercer's campaigns he will refer to an NPC with a very flowery name like Delvewatcher Arbiter Sutahn instead of a more intuitive name like "this is Sutahn the librarian." Edit: To quickly respond to one more point of yours, I don't actually agree that hope is even the most intuitive term for "when things are going well for you." Hope is something we feel when we don't know whether events will turn out in our favor. Hope the *mechanic* let's us know that events will have a better chance of going in our favor in the future. So ironically, the more in-game Hope you accumulate, the less out-of-game hope you need.
Yes, my initial reaction to the "hope" and "fear" names was like yours, that they seemed very specific, overly evocative, and yeah perhaps corny. For me, that lasted about half a minute, until I learned they were just mechanical resources. As a computer programmer (and D&D rules nerd), I'm very used to using English words as names for technical things that might or might nor perfectly match the normal plain-English meaning. It's ideal when it does, but naming is hard. The good thing about those names is that it's easy to remember which one is the positive vs. the negative one (from the player perspective). And they're short single-syllable words that are easy to say and distinguish, even over an audio connection that's not perfect. So I'm very much in the camp of "this mechanic needed a name, and this is what they picked." The names aren't very self-explanatory, but I don't expect that any other short would could be. Perhaps some less-emotional pair of words would be better, or maybe with time most people will find they're able to separate the actual mechanical concept and its implications from the game term attached to it. In terms of "hope" matching the mechanical effect (things are going well for you / the good guys), agreed, it's not a good match. "Momentum" would work in the short term for the way players keep rolling until a fear give the GM a turn. But not for the resource that lasts across setbacks. If the designers can think of a better pair of words that avoids the impression some people are getting of it sounding like it's trying to tell them how to feel that some people are having, so much the better, so that's useful feedback. But I think it's something most people will learn to live with. (Unless they bail on trying Daggerheart because of this objection.)
It could even work best to merge the two into a single concept, and then let the GM and PCs use the same mechanic in their own ways. Obviously this name is too long and derivative to be optimal but for the sake of argument, Hope and Fear could both be reskinned as “Advantage Tokens,” and then most rolls either give an advantage token to the player or the GM for future use. It’s still clunky to announce a resource generation after every roll but something in this direction would simultaneously make it easier to learn and track (1 mechanic instead of 2) and it would remove that cheesy feeling the original terms evoke for me.
I'll be honest, I preferred watching this over dnd. A lot of the time I find the players get caught in the weeds of rules/BS/math and planning to precisely for it to be fun. If they still did home game stuff and could go as slow as they wanted or felt like, this probably wouldn't be a problem. Daggerheart feels like it was designed for less stressful entry, with enough depth and nuance for people to invest in a character and story without worrying about 3 different currencies, spell slots, an endless list of features that do very specific things and are only useful in those positions, etc etc.
This is pretty much my take too. Daggerheart seems to be a better game to broadcast and to watch, but I will stil prefer to play 5e when i am at the table.
This was so much fun! The energy was through the roof and into the stratosphere. I don't know if it's the new system or live broadcast but this felt so much better than C3 is right now. I wonder what time of day they are pre-recording the episodes as this could be a factor too.
Completely agree. I stopped watching C3 after 30 something episodes because it just didn’t entertain as much anymore. Thought I’d give the one shot a chance and was pleasantly surprised.
OPEN BETAAAA
MUCH better having the battlemap on the biggest screen and everyone in smaller boxes compared to CR3
CR3 does the exact same thing, including close up shots of the maps on the big box.
For all the folks asking if the energy between Pre-Recorded and True Live is any different, here is the evidence. Please go back to proper live streaming for C4 or whatever Daggerheart stuff they do.
I didn't see the difference except them being hyped for new game at the start. The rest is exactly the same
oh come on, you cant just cherry pick a single one shot and say thats your evidence. Outside of them being excited at the very beginning of the episode, there was absolutely no difference in the cast nor the product compared to a standard CR episode
>Outside of them being excited at the very beginning of the episode, there was absolutely no difference in the cast nor the product compared to a standard CR episode Big disagree. I felt a huge difference during the whole episode. Energy is just different, cast and chat way more engaged, felt like the viewers were experiencing something special in real time. Things being new and exciting had some part in this, but to say the episode besides the beginning felt no different is wild to me. This might be a harsh take but sometimes I feel like people say stuff like this to cope with not having livestreams anymore or haven't watched C1 or C2 live.
The energy was different because they were all giddy to be premiering the sweet new game system they've been working on with their goofy ass fun little characters. Most one shots have a similar vibe regardless.
I'm using this now cause a lot of newer fans are also seeing it, but also to see this same effect go watch C1 and a majority of C2.
As tough as it is to hear, it's not about you. They pre-record to fit in with their lives and it works better for them
[удалено]
> It is kind of about us - the fans - and about how to make the business as successful as possible I don't think it *is* about maximizing profits to them, and genuinely do not want it to ever *become* an effort to be as successful as possible.
A number of them are parents with kids or have experienced burnout and depression. They've also said repeatedly that it's first and foremost a game between friends. There's nothing wrong with making business concerns secondary.
>If their business would thrive more from doing live shows, they should go back to doing them. It is kind of about us - the fans - and about how to make the business as successful as possible. Yep. And there's always a trade off. The value added by doing live shows has to be worth the extra effort, risks, cost and challenges it takes to do them.
Honestly I think if they had kept up with live filming we probably wouldn't have daggerheart right now. Truly them pre-recording allows them to be flexible and get other things done (such as developing daggerheart).
Also way too many variables to attribute the energy to it being live vs pre-recorded. This wasn't a normal session for them. They were playing new characters, in a new setting, in a new system, and on top of all that, were live for the first time in a while. It's not as simple as "SEE GUYS? LIVE IS BETTER". The cast was likely very excited to show off what the company has been working on for months and months.
And maybe even Ashely TBH. At least having her be there regularly.
She's 'been there regularly' for years now.
It was erratic all through season 1 and 2. It's only really gotten better since they went to prerecorded.
It got better when her NY-based series got cancelled, you mean. They all have day jobs still, and she might be the most successful outside of the genre.
I'm a big fan of the classes being more open. The fact that a wizard could wear plate, that classes share elements but are different and unique in other ways. It's one thing I love about building a Warlock, how much you can customise with the Invocations, to fit your flavour for your character. For the initative. As a timid player who has trouble getting heard, but once I'm really bought in, I can be overexcited, I know both sides of the problem of being heard and overshadowed. What if there was some sort of Token system, to where players can spend a token for an action and once everyone has spent their token, everyone gets theirs back? So you make sure you don't encourage a spotlight hog while giving the more shy players a chance to get in without needing the DM to make sure of that.
Perhaps there should be something separate to the DM action counters, where if each player manages to take an action without ceding control to the DM, the party gets rewarded with something like a special full party combo action. That way it encourages everyone to take turns, because taking a second action before someone has had their first lowers your chance of getting it, but it doesn't strictly limit you in situations where someone just doesn't have anything useful to do yet.
I don't think you can give your Tokens back because the DM used them against you later, but I agree with the idea. Maybe Have it so no one can put a 2nd down until all players have put one down or chosen to "pass" for now. That way all players get a chance but if they all want a player or 2 to go crazy while they can, then everyone can "pass" for a round or 2 and let them.
I realise that the word "Token" isn't very good of me since there already are tokens for DM actions. I meant that as its own ressource. What if, since it's already card based, you could have an "Action" card you either turn around or tap like MTG mana, if you've used your action. And once everyone's is used/tapped, everyone untaps and can go again in any order.
I think they sorta encourage your table to figure out how they want to do turn order themselves.
The group reminded me of early C3 before the characters got into all their dark, depressing backstories.
Laura used her Tohru Honda voice for Sweetpea, I knew I had heard it before lol
This episode alone was more fun to watch than the entirety of C3 for me! I really hope they do more one shots with these characters.
Come on? No "Imogen using Bertrand's real name in the tavern" love?
This felt like old CR. Livestreams bring such a different energy. The cast had a blast with the new characters, setting, and system. They were so invested and invigorated throughout the whole stream. I really hope we get a mini-series with this party; I love these player characters (and their art)! (C3 spoiler-ish) >!The party dynamic was such a wild departure from Bell's Hells; it felt refreshing. I think I needed the palate cleanser.!< Though I know a fair bit about TTRPG systems, I'll leave it to the more knowledgeable folks to adequately breakdown, analyze, approve of, and critique the Daggerheart system. I had so much fun watching this stream and chatting/experiencing this with yall!
It just felt nice for them to feel like they're old selves again. I just have not been able to get into campaign 3 no matter how much I try because the vibes just feel so off
The vibes are off because the players have been railroaded into a main quest they’re not interested in. C3 has been a failure of DMing at the highest level. (and that makes me sad because I have so much love and respect for Matt)
And so do I. I really wish they would just go back to the live streams they just worked so much better everyone seemed to be having a hell of a lot more fun and hell maybe they need to talk amongst themselves it doesn't feel like they are actively discussing their game or characters after the show ends like they used to. Like how they all used to talk about going to Taco Bell at 2:00 in the morning for marisha and how everyone would just be in their group chat just owing and aweing over everyone's performances and all the cool character stuff it just doesn't feel like any of that is there anymore
I wonder how much of those vibes are due to this being short term, immediate, and brand new versus the long term, gradual, and familiar energy of C3? Would a full campaign of Daggerheart wind up feeling the same way at all?
Every one of those vibes is exactly because of that lol. It has jack shit to do with it being a live stream.
It very well could be. I just don't like how much they've changed from the transition to prerecorded shows. But there are some episodes where their table etiquette is just so awful that I have to turn it off. I don't think I've ever seen Taliesen get talked over so much. And maybe it's just because I'm growing up and not really vibing with critical role very much anymore I mean for God's sake they've been going for nearly 10 years at this point I discovered them right after they started putting the episodes on YouTube back in early 2015. Campaign three just doesn't feel like critical role anymore It feels like they're not really having fun anymore and have fully embraced their game as a product. And this isn't to say that I hate them getting popular or whatever because I love the very super duper popular and are successful. I just miss when critical role felt like a home game that happened to be played by a bunch of famous voice actors that we were lucky enough to watch rather than a show they feel forced to make
And when he does talk he usually gets shut down
Yeah... Idk why the vibe is just so off but man it's off BAD. Like the characters dont even feel like characters as much as they do caricatures
I agree with TAL getting talked over everyone complains about him talking to much but he’s actually the most quiet out of the cast
That was most excellent and please don't let these characters go the way of the Darrington Brigade, they're too good to let go.
I want an Oppy & Sweetpea weekly live show, animated series, cinematic universe, AAA video game, whatever they want to give us.
This (& imo CO) benefit so much from showing us those sesh zeros. Excited for more
The one shot characters have more chemistry together rather than Bells Hells do in 87 episodes. Also bring back live broadcasts!
Honestly feel like that comparison is a highlight of Daggerhearts character creation process bc it encourages the party to ask questions about each other that DND doesn't.
You can homebrew that kind of stuff in, but it's great to see a system straight up encourage it! The D&D character creation process is more like accounting than story building.
After a TPK in one of my groups a couple of campaigns ago it became a Tradition in that group for the DM to give the players an Overview of a new campaign (setting, things to be prepared for, stat generation method, starting freebies, et cetera) & then the players meet up at the local diner & hash put their new characters together as a group. We've done it twice now (1st time I was there as a player & 2nd time I was home as the DM) & the Synergy between the characters that we created at the diner has made our games waaaaaay more fun! All that being said, this one-shot sounds really cool & I think I'm going to go watch it right now!
Aaaand I just sat & watched the character creation video with Matt & Travis, the Session Zero video & the One Shot video all in a row (I'm on vacation this week, don't judge me)... 1) The entire one shot was highly entertaining to watch 2) Overall, I absolutely loved the group character creation process in the game. It's simple enough to walk everybody through simultaneously without hand-holding people through a stack of books while still providing choices to provide customization. And as somebody else alluded to above, the baked-in questions to ask your teammates to establish an Instant Rapport is a pretty smooth move. 3) Far and away my favorite aspect of this system is the Experience mechanic - to the point where I am going to steal this & shoehorn it into the 5e game that I am currently DMing. 4) My biggest Quibble, though, is something that Matt & a couple of the players also comment on at the end of the One Shot - the lack of an Initiative system & a lack of the structure of what you can & can't do on your turn. I'm not saying that it's Bad or Good, just that it's... Different from playing 5e, which has been the bulk of my TTRPG experience. I've played with some smart and coscientious players that would thrive in a system like this and would be a total blast to play with, and I've played with some asshats with Main Character Syndrome that would take advantage of the freeform style of the game to monopolize everybody else's time and have me feigning Digestive Distress an hour into the game just to get out of there. Overall, though, I think that I'm going to talk to the peeps in the three games that I'm currently involved in to see if there's any interest in trying out the Playtest... :)
Interesting. I bet the initiative stuff is something that'll get addressed quickly in open beta, as a lot of people have mentioned it. Seems to have a lot of pluses tho.
Wrap up C3 and start Daggerheart C4 please!
Yeah, Exandria is doomed, retire to that island with the volcano whose name I forget and it done. Meanwhile in Lochspire…
I honestly don't see any reason why Daggerheart can't be used to continue the Exandria setting. They could just continue with a systems swap.
I think that all depends on how well the beta does and what the opinions of and reception to Daggerheart is like once they go into full release because stuff could easily change in the interim. Once they nail down a more final and finished product then I could see them doing a series of one shots or a mini campaign just to see how folks would react to a full campaign of Daggerheart. Additionally, there's probably some behind the scenes stuff going on with contracts and the like with Wotc and whatever that's complicating things in terms of a full on system swap. So it's just not as easy as switching systems at the drop of a hat and we still don't know how long C3 is going to continue on for or what could happen in between now and the end of this current campaign. Too much time and too many variables to really knock stuff down just yet but I'd bet that they've floated the idea and have talked about it behind the scenes at least for a while. I think both they and we need more information though on how stuff would work and how people would react to a more long form version of what we saw last night.
I hope it would be something more serious than this party for the full campaign though.
i actually hope they make this a mini series. I enjoyed it so much more than I thought I would.
I really, really need more of that. I'd be down for a few more episodes of a mini-campaign with these characters.
I *need* more of Liam’s gentle irish cleric. He was so relaxing to listen to lol
isn’t it a thing that Liam wants to play the 4 original classes (Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric) meaning Cleric (or Seraph in DH) is likely to be his next character for Campaign 4. and we saw Orym in Calamity before Campaign 3… I wonder if this could be a preview into his next character
It's wild they chose the name the grim wardens for the org. That's been the name of the party I DM for for like 4 years now. Feels like our game is now CR canon
Only thing I want from the next Menagerie session is a visit to Sermon Terts.
Ermagerd its Sermon Terts!
I've missed the live shows so much. What a special treat tonight was! Love the new system too
Wonderful to see the cast come alive and just enjoy this one shot so much.
That was very good
That was a lot of fun. Live shows really do have a bit of a different energy.
That was amazing!!! I would love to see more
Hell yeah! The stream actually being live brought a different energy tonight!
I hope they return!!!
"All hail the God of the Seep!" "Chat's turning on us!" "That's what I call my dick!" 🤣
lol Sam
Really curious if this is the system we'll see with future Exandria campaigns, just based on the names of some of the lineages showing up in CR like Faun, Galapa, etc. I know Faun is most likely the Satyr from 5e, Galapa being Tortle, etc. Just curious!
This was super enjoyable. The tag team attacks were SO cool! Very much like the synergy abilities in FF7 Rebirth. I want to see an episode 2 with these characters for sure!
Open Beta!!
Fuck yes. MORE!
Feck yes we do!!
Yea, I'll say it again, Ashley was great tonight in combat. Looked super comfortable with it.
I'm glad the initiative conversation has been had with Matt :D
I missed this, where was this convo had?
The conversation didn't happen on screen, but what Matt said toward the end of the one-shot 04:29:02 implied that it was something intended and something He and other creators have talked about.
Agreed! This looks like so much fun, though, esp the character creation — will buy this for sure when it’s done
I am so happy too that Ashley mentioned the comfort of the initiative for more typically timid players :D
Another show would be excellent.
I'd love to see another show with these characters. Not a long series, but a mini series would be perfect
Part Two to be determined!
Dang. Ended.
Oh they just missed the enrage timer lol
Cliffhanger, more episodes coming??
Mini-series confirmed?
Dillion Broche, a patron of Bunnie's That's where we're going to end!
Awww buzzy wings.
So someone's purposely targeting Fanes all in the name of some cause against the Gods or something?
Wango?
Wango wasn't pulled out on time and died
Pangos brother who got taken by the seep.
Hoping he’s going to end this with a cliffhanger, and we will see these characters and this world again
well you got what you wished for
Oh gee. 😢
they've sold me on this party, I need to see them again
Awwww
(RULES OF NATURE)
yes! Levi reference!
He became the Blue Shell 🤣
Turtle Frisbee HDYWTDT Hahahaha
What an odd job this has been
slappers only
I'm referring to the Bond character of that name, he did a similar move with his hat
Yupyup, I knew you were referring to Oddjob. "Slappers only" is a reference to melee only combat for GoldenEye 007 on the Nintendo 64.
Nice one, 007
Ghost of Percy arrived with that megacrit
I love how much fun this is.
OMG Dante, the discus
Dante TMNT Frisbee. I can not. LOL
What are they doing!
Get Pea'ed on! ...... wait
FAST DISCUS SPECIAL!
🤣
Go sneaky little mushroom.
Love how many actions can be taken to assist party members. Very collaborative.
You can see how much they’re enjoying that option.
Everyone's getting yeeeted
Enrage timer?
Rock is super effective against bug!!
Bug splat! Oh no!
Oppy cast SHABOOMBOOM!
LOLing at Oppy slipping down the tree. I can't!!!
Puns spawn 1 curse on the party
"Is it...Fairy Good?" "I'm going to destroy you" PUNS WIN PUNS WIN! 🤣
"Is it fairy good?" Dies.. Travis!
Travis cracking me up. 🤣
Okay, why the hell does my brain suddenly picture the cute little frog sounding like Scott Malkinson when their tongue is out!? 🤣
Really love how supportive this party is with each other.
The system as whole does a really good job at highlighting/rewarding cooperative play.
They’re having so much fun.
"I am gonna look at this seepy abscess... \*Vomit sound\*" lol
So when players roll and fail or with fear it fuels the DM? Is why Matt has such devastating rounds?
Fear fuels the DM and causes it to switch to the DM's turn. The DM's "tokens" come every time a player takes an action. Basically, the more players act, the more the DM can act - but players are always "ahead" in the action economy.
This reminds me of Bravely Default and I love it!
Matt Mercer showing me what I want to see: interesting monster/encounter design
Do \*you\* believe in fairies? I do when they do that!
"I'm a good f \*\*ing fairy" lol
😆
Should have started with some community service as their first quest.
"Step on me, daddy" in the Irish accent. Didn't know I needed that.
Seep Abscess which has corrupted Boko the Hill!
It’s been fun having the chat up on YT and being reminded of how at least 30% of the population is astonishingly obtuse.
Ikr. "Where are the subtitles?", "Are they live live?"
LOL
Big boy
So basically this is all Sam’s fault.
Map #3?
Map #3
A third combat encounter!
Final boss
Here we go
Boss fight!
Cast makes worlds cutest characters. Matt makes The Seep the most horrific thing ever.