rpg

3992 readers

14 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

Do not distribute pirate content
Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
Do not advertise for livestreams
Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
No Zak S content.
Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Daggerheart: I expected another Dungeons and Dragons, but found something much, much better (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I run a table. One of the people at the table insisted that I checked out Daggerheart. So I did. And I was very pleasantly surprised.

Why? Well, I admit I had some prejudices against it. First, I sort of made up my mind when I saw the whole licensing issue, Daggerheart basically doing what Wizards of the Coast did with Dungeons and Dragons. But not only that, I also saw red flags in Daggerheart itself: minis.

I saw a video for Daggerheart where the thumbnail showed minis. I was out. I find minis so frustrating. They are in my list of things that I cannot care about. I care about dramatic stories, not combat simulation. I care about intrigue and character growth, not arithmetic. I saw that and assumed that Daggerheart was a combat simulator just like Dungeons and Dragons is. I didn't even pay attention.

But then my friend insisted that I read about Daggerheart. And so I did.

I was pleasantly surprised when I saw that minis are optional. Even more importantly, I was shocked to find a game that effectively is Powered by the Apocalypse. I was especially relieved to not find rules for movement that require trigonometry or strange approximations (unlike Dungeons and Dragons, where there are grids and numbers everywhere).

I found a game that prioritized drama. Yes, it still simulates combat, but it does so in such a simple way that makes me happy to run it.

I’m excited! This would be the first game that I ever play when the game is just released. This would be the first game in which I don't even have to pitch to the table; the table already wants to play it.

Of course, these are my first impressions. Maybe they'll change. For now, I'm happy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I think that the Critical Role crew has done their utmost to conflate DnD with improv stage performance and that Daggerheart looks like nothing more than a platform to continue their failing brand.

Idk, it might be fun — don't let my personal feelings about Critical Role cloud your judgement. I just have been very disappointed with Critical Role and have decided to vote with my wallet.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Huh. Thanks for sharing. I'm totally up for critically evaluating Critical Role and Daggerheart.

I do agree that Critical Role's play style was a bit like a square peg in a round hole. Other games could've been more appropriate for them. Arguably a more appropriate game for them is Daggerheart.

As to not letting your personal feelings about Critical Role cloud my judgement, thanks for caring about not biasing me. At the same time, I'm sure you have good reasons to be critical of Daggerheart. Understanding why we say what we say sounds like a good plan, and I'm curious to hear what you think:

What is it about Daggerheart that makes you think it's nothing more than a platform to continue their failing brand?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

thanks for caring about not biasing me

Games are games, I try not to yuck anyone's yum.

What is it about Daggerheart that makes you think it's nothing more than a platform to continue their failing brand?

I think that if you look at campaign 2 and 3 of Critical Role — there is a very clear decline in quality. This decline in quality has retroactively permeated things like Legend of Vox Machina (Pike, the cleric, suddenly deciding 'Gods r bad'. Very clearly mimicking the poor narrative decisions Matt has made.).

Now, I don't know if Daggerheart is bad — really it just sounds like it's a platform for improv performance, which I don't dislike! I also think you're right on the money about the square peg in the round hole. I think what I need to see from Daggerheart is that it's worth the amount of effort they put into it, considering how they've treated their DnD campaigns.

TL;DR — it's hard for me to separate the lack of quality in CR's recent campaigns from Daggerheart. I gave up on CR a long time ago, Daggerheart needs to prove itself to me, and can't be through CR.