Demiplane is made by the same people who originally built DnDbeyond, so makes sense that it would feel the same. Though DnDbeyond took a long time to get where it is now so would definitely expect bugs for a good while as they still build it up.
I'm still very curious about Daggerheart. The group I play with on a weekly basis tend to struggle the trudge of combat offered by 5e and PF2. So, by limiting options to five powers seems like a good way to get the 'wrong move heeby jeebies' out of the way before anyone crosses steal. I'll keep my eye on it and others.
Yeah, it might be for your table. If you get a chance you should run the quick start adventure with your group! Though I would maybe wait a few weeks to see if a new version releases based on feedback. Thanks for sharing though! You'll have to update me if you try it out any time soon
This was a really good review. Got a new sub. I liked the focus on gameplay over mechanics with enough rules included. Sounds like 1.4 included a similar initiative solution as you mentioned.
EDIT: this comment was made after reading other comments moreso than reacting to the video. This is probably because I'm an old, but I don't understand why DH is largely looked at from the lens of contrast to D&D. I mean, I get why people compare it. But it seems very Internet that people have a thing and then move on to something else as the new hotness. As an old gamer, to me it would be just another game on the shelf. I get that D&D might be a new gamer's first game experience, and someone new to gaming might be surprised to learn that there's more than just D&D. But the notion that discovering the fact makes you either choose it or move on to something else seems weird. It's like discovering Rush, and while still learning their catalog discovering prog as a genre. I don't think people say, either I keep listening to Rush or move onto something new, or wonder is this new band better than Rush. They just start listening to another band and don't stop listening to Rush....
I mean, I agree with this. I don't think I will stop playing D&D, I'll just continue playing different games. But because of the OGL thing early last year and subsequently other poor decisions on WOTC part, I think people are looking for other games to be "their main squeeze". I honestly think this is a phase. WOTC isn't what makes the game for me, it's the players. I will say though, people being upset about corporations has made my players more amenable to trying new systems though. Before they didn't want to "learn new rule systems" and now they're more open. But also it's easier to compare things to that we know and you're all on my channel because of D&D or PF so those are the ones I typically compare to. Just makes it easier tbh
@grr-OUCH Or, to that new person, D&D is Warrant and the listener just discovered prog rock with Rush, aka Savage Worlds, and Yes, aka Call of Cthulhu.
Something I am missing that I thought was the big issue. The idea, as I understood it, was to have a NARRATIVE-focused game. So is that IN THE RULES SYSTEM? So the personal development, super dramatic character moments are in the rules? Or are we leaning on the Game Masters for that background to foreground character work? Which is ok - but if so- then why create a whole new system?
Actually, it kinda IS in the rules. They have a lot of paragraphs in the rules throughout that recommend doing what feels right for the story and I vaguely remember the first intro section suggesting it as well. I think that's also why throughout their quickstart adventure they included questions the DM is supposed to ask the players about what is happening. (i specifically remember a question about the way the sablewood trees looked and was surprised that each table had a different response that changed the way the forest felt) And then the obvious reason they created a new system was because of the OGL debacle last year that spurred all these different groups making new systems. They also have the influence to do that and make a good amount on it. But this is all my understanding while playing the game and interpreting the situation
@CantripsMedia That was a very satisfying answer! OGL and Influence aside, IF they have a real "how‐to" for these major character moments, then I will buy/ read it just to integrate it into my current game.
Haha I'm glad you liked it. I mean they are still working on the game rules and I'll be honest I haven't kept up with the recent changes. So I can't say for certain that it'll be in the final product, but the general feel did have a lot guidelines. I would be interested to see how they integrate that in adventure modules myself. I saw some of it in the quickstart adventure, but I wonder what that would look like in a longer form campaign where things are way more likely to change and a GM would need to be flexible, you know? It's sort of hard to help guide a narrative like that. But yeah I think, depending on what it ends up being like, It could be interesting to take stuff from Daggerheart and put it into other types of games. Thanks for your comments!! 😊
It's true and I think you can figure out ways to make it work out to be faster but I think it takes effort. At least at all my tables it does, so could very well be a me problem hahahaha
Nah, D&D combat doesn't *need* to be slow, but it *is* finicky - especially with abundant options or newer players. There is a learning curve to it - just as there is with any game - but I think D&D is more vulnerable to analysis paralysis.
@@CantripsMedia collaborative storytelling with hard rules that represent reality. And yes those dice roles represent the hard rules of the universe. If those aren’t there, it’s all flimsy. That not what I started playing rpgs for.
@jessebourbeau1616 What, precisely, is realistic about advantage/disadvantage over the circumstantial bonus/penalty system? Or a linear resolution roll as opposed to a bell curve dynamic?
Honestly I'm not feeling DH as a good DnD alternative. Perhaps it's too early to judge but for now ttrpgs like Shadow of the Demon Lord or Shadowdark seem better.
Yeah who knows what the end result will be. And honestly I think it depends on your table for this one. If they aren't there for more roleplay action this one might not be a good fit
Thank you. Been saying this from candela. They're voice actors that prefer to act over game mechanics... There's nothing wrong with that, but don't expect game mechanics to be the focus or even very well designed when that's not their interest or strength...
I don't know that game mechanics aren't a focus for them, based on the fact that they have a board game creating company as well, plus they have enough money to hire people specifically for the game design portion. But they do focus on the narrative and this is definitely a game that focuses on narrative. Acting out the stories is their strong suit and why people enjoy the show for sure and you can tell they are channeling that strength into this creation
From what I know of it so far, Daggerheart is kinda "D&D: The Show: The Game". For those who missed that trend of media, it was when a property was adapted to a different media and then back. Not entirely unlike translating a phrase through different languages in Google translate. It gets a bit wonky. It's also trying to be both the crunchy, quasi-simulationist style game with a lot of focus on combat abilities _and_ a narrative focused game that would like to focus on character and story. And I don't think that'll appeal to most people, because they'll want something that sticks closer to one or the other. At least, I didn't think the narrative-focus stuff was all that good for encouraging and supporting gameplay focus on story/character. But the D&D-ish part of the game is quite prevalent and I think a 5E player _could_ transition over with almost no friction -- save for their probable phobia of learning a new system even if it's 99% the same as 5E. But I also think most 5E players will be unhappy that it makes _some_ changes to what are 5E fundamentals.
Honestly, after playing it, it doesn't feel crunchy/simulation like to me. It feels more.. cinematic? The narrative focus shines through even the battle portions. I don't know that it's that similar to D&D really other than a fantasy setting and some class names. But I do think it's pretty easy for a 5e player to pick up and could also see some disliking how far it steps away from some basic d&d mechanics (lol you can read such response in other comments on this video). Thanks for sharing! It was an interesting take
I hoped they would consciously lean away from 5e similarities, like MCDM is doing. But I felt a lot of unnecessary similitudes, like the weapon chart. It's a narrative focused game, why not give me the tools to create and imagine my weapon instead of picking from a list
I really like your videos. I don't care much for daggerheart. But I like your voice. And your attitude. The way you talk. I'm not very good on explaining myself in English 😅. I love your giggles
A combat system meant to put the PCs in actual danger of dying that ONLY WORKS if the players agree to play sub-optimally (by not having the best fighter take all of the actions) is simply a BAD SYSTEM. It's a mistake. I love the Critical Role folks. This is objectively bad system mechanics design.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, so if you could explain this more to me that would be helpful. :D Other versions of D&D and even 5e can put PCs in danger of dying, that's why I'm a bit confused about this perspective
Aw wait. I started thinking about this more and I maybe understand now haha (sorry been a long day). Daggerheart DOES have a rule built in (though it's optional) to have players not able to take a turn until everyone else does. I think this is all just their way of allowing the narrative to drive combat as well, so that if it makes more sense in the narrative they would be able to take their turn again (in a similar way as if you had everyone hold their actions in 5e so that someone else could take a turn but with less repercussions). But I don't typically have a table full of min-maxers, so they wouldn't want to cheese the game in such a way anyways. This wouldn't be a perfect fit for every table though
Daggerheart exists as long as Critical Role does. It stands almost entirely on their popularity and not on its merits. It is not better in any one direction than others already on the market, and is certainly not better across the board.
I mean you can make the same argument on MCDM's RPG. I honestly feel that it's impossible for any one game to be better than all the others out there as there are so many systems and games as well as so many different types of GMs and players. Many people are looking for the "one game" that's "better than D&D" but that's like looking for a unicorn in the vastness of space. Sure it might exist, but you'll be passing up all these other cool alien creatures to find it. I don't think it's possible to be "better across the board", only that a game system can be better for me and my players. And hopefully this review gives people a chance to figure out if Daggerheart is right for them or not. I'm okay with being the guinea pig if it means I get to try all these different systems
@@CantripsMedia Agreed! I have no interest in anything I heard about MCDM's rpg either. WIth the OGl debacle and PR nightmare since, EVERYONE's trying to capitalize to make a TTRPG, and most of them aren't good and a *lot* have been "rules light" without understanding game mechanics or design. There's simply less chance (die rolls) and more "narrative focus", which is basically play acting.... Which I like. I'm definitely more of the "theater kid" than the "war gamer" when it comes to the D&D player base divide, but rules exist for a reason, and failure is sometimes better for story, and the rolls for success or fail are what makes games fun and exhilarating.
@@CantripsMedia By being objective. 5e is objectively better than the other systems. Do I prefer others? Sure, but they all have their downsides. 5e has the smallest set of downsides as compared to their appeal and most of why people hate it is because of those in charge. That highlights how good the base system is. Better across the board is a universal statement encompassing all factors and measuring them working as a unit. 5e holds that title. Feel how you want about things, but they have the field.
@CantripsMedia DnD 5E is the best TTRPG across the board. It's so good that everyone is trying to clone it and make money. Yet, it's still by far the most popular TTRP.
From my perspective, I don't think we can be objective about games, since they are a form of entertainment and what people find entertaining is a subjective thing. D&D certainly is the best game for some people and certainly it's the most popular but that comes with being as old as it is and from being able to release 5 editions of rules where they have innovated and changed many things. I also think saying it's best across the board because everyone is trying to copy it is not exactly accurate. Most of the major new systems have been looking at D&D and trying to make it better in the ways that they feel need improved. But only those people would fully be able to explain their desires to make a game system. This is just how I interpret how things are going. It's always interesting to read other people's take on things though. Thank you for sharing!! 😊
I am worried about Daggerheart because the idea of moving past DND is foolish IMHO. It is the only TTRPG that has momentum, real momentum. So to abandon for a few rule changes seems foolish. I want TTRPGs to grow and I think support DND lets that happen. Abandoning it for games that have produced close to nothing seems incredibly unwise for the TTRPG Community. Thank you very much for your video.
I see what you're saying. I myself think that if they can become something good, which they have the audience to do, then they could introduce competition to the scene which might force D&D to be better. While they don't have a monopoly exactly, aside from Pathfinder, not a lot of game systems out there can light a candle to their audience. And Pathfinder 2e is still heavily based in D&D and is geared to a certain group of people, I feel. I think Daggerheart and MCDM might be able to push D&D or at least WOTC into actually trying to win us over again and that might be good. But honestly I don't know what will happen. I don't care what we play as long as we have dice hahaha Thank you for your comment!!
@@CantripsMedia Thank you for the response! The recent Lego DND crossover made me VERY happy with WOTC and I see huge opportunity for DND in the future. I hope people realize that DND really is doing things that other TTRPGs are not (or simply can't). I really think we are not even close to what DND can accomplish so I am very nervous to spilt the audience to smaller games that will not accomplish much for the TTRPG Community. I really dug your coverage of Daggerheart. It is a key competitor, despite my concerns. Looking forward to your next video.
Awe so glad you like it!! I agree there are lots of little games popping up and that's too many to change things. I think in like a year or two it'll stabilize and there will be 3-4 game systems actively vying for the same audience and that to me is the sweet spot. I think of it like Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo and PC gaming. All the same audience and most people dip their toes into a few of and each one offers different pros and cons. But obviously only time will tell!
@JScottGaribay I assure you, when any particular group is playing its own favored system, it doesn’t do so to spite or give any thought of the “good of the almighty community”, and that definitely includes groups who stick with old school D&D and OSRs. #no1way2play
Daggerheart seems like someone wanted to make pbta game, but make it mainstream and filling off serial numbers. Shame on them for it really. Also, they are trying to reinvent a tested engine.
Actually, I think that's what they did with Candela Obscura. I haven't played Blades in the Dark, but was told it was very similar. But regardless I think some of their team helped make Blades in the Dark
Oh, is that what happened at your table? At both of mine the combat actually felt very minimal. There was way less to worry about than 5e or PF2e and the focus of the rest of the game fell heavily into roleplay. But it could have been my two tables 🤷♀️
Watching people play it makes it seem to be a very gimmicky game. To be fair, all games have a gimmick to try to make them stand out, but this one is pretty much ONLY gimmick.
What I mean is mostly game mechanic, but sometimes the way information is presented. They are things that get you to give the game a try, but after a while of playing they lose their charm and can kill the game. An example of presentation is like when a game uses symbols to mean things. That is much more common in war games than roleplaying games, but I have seen it sometimes like on special dice. The special dice themselves would also be a gimmick that is interesting but annoys me (I hate having to look things up). The Rolemaster game only really had its critical hit tables going for it, the rest of the system was just too complex to play more than a few attempts. The d20 being the only die used in a game, such as Mutants and Masterminds is a gimmick. In practice, it flops hard if you play more than a few sessions. Some people groups have made house rules to try to make it more playable, but you should not have to do that.Some games, such as the Storyteller system and Shadowrun, use dice pools. To me these are gimmicks because they end up with very strange probability curves. It woks okay early game but once your skills go higher it breaks and you are more likely to fail with a die result. The character sheets in Dagger Heart are cool, but I can see it becoming less cool as more books come out, if people want to make their own stuff, etc. It makes you dependent on only using their official stuff. You can shrug and make your own character sheets so it is not so bad. At first the two d12 seem pretty cool and a novel idea, but I can see it ruining games. The math is broken. Some people groups have made house rules to try to make it more playable, but you should not have to do that. Some games require special cards. Not all gimmicks are a bad thing. Savage Worlds uses a deck of cards for initiative, this is a gimmick as most people are used to roll for initiative, but in play it works very well. The games that do not have initiative, or have the players pick their order, can be fun but it can also be the source of frustration. At least if someone rolled it, or drew it, everyone can be on the same page. Some games let you swap your initiative with another player, too. I rambled on, but I did try to give some sort of idea what I mean. I have bought and player a LOT of different systems since the early 80s. Most games have some really cool features. They can all be fun, but for me the question is for how long? In the mid 90s, I found myself going back to D&D. I liked Vampire the Masquerade, but not its system. Shadowrun was fun but hard to play. I played GURPS with a group for ten years, but there are some major frustrations with the system. The dice, which were meant to be an interesting alternative to a d20, just did not really cut it. The game by MCDM makes me think of Diablo Tabletop Edition, so that is a no for me. I like the video game, but I would not want to play it on the table. I like some of the ideas in Daggerheart, but I am concerned that their appeal is short lived.
I see! Thank you for elaborating! Always interested in hearing different perspectives on things. I can see where you are coming from now. Makes sense to me. The only thing that I think makes DH a little different than other systems you mentioned is their audience size. Arguably their audience is what brought people to D&D and I could see it bringing people to their own tabletop game if done correctly. But that's all just speculation at this point and only time will truly tell
@grr-OUCH These examples read like specious reasons to justify your solitary experience wrongly applied to a collective basis. You found other systems inferior and that’s your understanding, but it never means it applies to everyone who’s ever played in the hobby as a whole. I find D&D lacking and prefer other systems by far, some of which you have mentioned, but I don’t pretend to think that should include you to conclude my reasoning. #no1way2play
For some reason fans wanted this game to be a dagger in D&D's heart. This hurt their game also there will not be that much 3rd party support no matter how much fans ask. This will aslo hurt the game. It will be a one and done unfortunately.
Oh I see. I think that's underestimating their audience reach, since I foresee them playing Daggerheart instead of D&D for their main campaigns. But only time will truly tell
CR has a cabal of fan illustrators, animators, and fictioners (sometimes shippers), and you actually believe no one will step up using ORC or DH’s OGL?
I think they go hand in hand. Certainly you can have one without the other, larping and battlefield reenactment for example could be seen as a more roleplay focused. But someone who larps or reenacts does typically try to get into character with a good backstory or knowledge of lore/history. They are two sides of the same coin to me
@CantripsMedia Thanks for answering! I think the reason why I and, probably, the OP are asking these questions is because "x game encourages narrative/RP" has been such a thorny topic for those who spend much more time engaging with roleplaying games online than actually playing them. Myself included and yourself probably excluded, judging by the fact that you actually playtested a game. Carry on doing what you're doing and ignore the old codgers like me who spent their youth following GNS debates on late 90s internet forums.
Haha I won't ignore you because even if we're coming from different angles, I want to know that perspective. It not only helps me to better understand the landscape but also helps me provide better content so that more people can glean something from my videos. I like when people push for me to explain myself a bit because it forces me to think. I AM the type of person though who tries not to judge a book by its cover so to speak, hence why I wanted to actually playtest the game before sharing my thoughts. But that doesn't mean I'm always very clear at explaining my thoughts in videos lmao
This game sounds absolutely dreadful. It’s not a role-playing game anymore, it sounds like one of those cooperative Raven loft board games lol. I’m one of the weird people, if you want to write a good story or have a great narrative as a game master of some sort, ride book, if you want to be an arbitrator of rules that allows you to tell a story with these rules running game.
Sure thing, though you'll have to be more specific about the perspective you're talking about, since I mention quite a few different points and perspectives in this video.
My homegroup recently switched from 5E to daggerheat and so far I am really loving it
That's great! I think it could really work for some groups for sure. I am hoping to try a mini campaign in it myself
Have you tried Worlds without Number by Sine Nomine?
Oh yes, defo check out DC20! It's still in it's alpha stages, but there's already so much to love!
On the list for sure!! Thanks for sharing 😊
Demiplane is made by the same people who originally built DnDbeyond, so makes sense that it would feel the same. Though DnDbeyond took a long time to get where it is now so would definitely expect bugs for a good while as they still build it up.
Oh interesting and good to know
Whatever happened to Astral?
Did you mean DC20 at the end there? Combat is pretty fun in that system.
Yes! That's the one! I was blanking on the name hahaha thank you!!
For Warlock Id suggest trying Sorcerer as with the midnight domain it has more of a Warlock feel to me
I'm surprised no one has noticed the similarity with 4th edition, limited numbers of powers, from a limited selection.
I’ve heard around that Colville love 4E. It makes sense for this to be his own application of it.
You should try DC20! It’s fantastic so far and the Kickstarter starts soon!
I'm still very curious about Daggerheart. The group I play with on a weekly basis tend to struggle the trudge of combat offered by 5e and PF2. So, by limiting options to five powers seems like a good way to get the 'wrong move heeby jeebies' out of the way before anyone crosses steal.
I'll keep my eye on it and others.
Yeah, it might be for your table. If you get a chance you should run the quick start adventure with your group! Though I would maybe wait a few weeks to see if a new version releases based on feedback.
Thanks for sharing though! You'll have to update me if you try it out any time soon
This was a really good review. Got a new sub. I liked the focus on gameplay over mechanics with enough rules included. Sounds like 1.4 included a similar initiative solution as you mentioned.
Glad you enjoyed! Thanks for the comment!
I like role playing through the game play and I can tell it is not for me just by looking at the rules.
Well I hope the video was helpful in deciding that!
Amazing and in depth review, thanks!
Glad you liked it!
EDIT: this comment was made after reading other comments moreso than reacting to the video.
This is probably because I'm an old, but I don't understand why DH is largely looked at from the lens of contrast to D&D. I mean, I get why people compare it. But it seems very Internet that people have a thing and then move on to something else as the new hotness. As an old gamer, to me it would be just another game on the shelf.
I get that D&D might be a new gamer's first game experience, and someone new to gaming might be surprised to learn that there's more than just D&D. But the notion that discovering the fact makes you either choose it or move on to something else seems weird. It's like discovering Rush, and while still learning their catalog discovering prog as a genre. I don't think people say, either I keep listening to Rush or move onto something new, or wonder is this new band better than Rush. They just start listening to another band and don't stop listening to Rush....
I mean, I agree with this. I don't think I will stop playing D&D, I'll just continue playing different games. But because of the OGL thing early last year and subsequently other poor decisions on WOTC part, I think people are looking for other games to be "their main squeeze". I honestly think this is a phase. WOTC isn't what makes the game for me, it's the players.
I will say though, people being upset about corporations has made my players more amenable to trying new systems though. Before they didn't want to "learn new rule systems" and now they're more open.
But also it's easier to compare things to that we know and you're all on my channel because of D&D or PF so those are the ones I typically compare to. Just makes it easier tbh
@grr-OUCH Or, to that new person, D&D is Warrant and the listener just discovered prog rock with Rush, aka Savage Worlds, and Yes, aka Call of Cthulhu.
hi you just came up on my recommendations so hope you get more views!!!!!
Awe thanks! Comments def help the algorithm! So thank you for taking the time!!
You should try Sword World 2.5 o:!!
Something I am missing that I thought was the big issue. The idea, as I understood it, was to have a NARRATIVE-focused game. So is that IN THE RULES SYSTEM? So the personal development, super dramatic character moments are in the rules? Or are we leaning on the Game Masters for that background to foreground character work? Which is ok - but if so- then why create a whole new system?
Actually, it kinda IS in the rules. They have a lot of paragraphs in the rules throughout that recommend doing what feels right for the story and I vaguely remember the first intro section suggesting it as well. I think that's also why throughout their quickstart adventure they included questions the DM is supposed to ask the players about what is happening. (i specifically remember a question about the way the sablewood trees looked and was surprised that each table had a different response that changed the way the forest felt)
And then the obvious reason they created a new system was because of the OGL debacle last year that spurred all these different groups making new systems. They also have the influence to do that and make a good amount on it.
But this is all my understanding while playing the game and interpreting the situation
@CantripsMedia That was a very satisfying answer!
OGL and Influence aside, IF they have a real "how‐to" for these major character moments, then I will buy/ read it just to integrate it into my current game.
Haha I'm glad you liked it. I mean they are still working on the game rules and I'll be honest I haven't kept up with the recent changes. So I can't say for certain that it'll be in the final product, but the general feel did have a lot guidelines.
I would be interested to see how they integrate that in adventure modules myself. I saw some of it in the quickstart adventure, but I wonder what that would look like in a longer form campaign where things are way more likely to change and a GM would need to be flexible, you know? It's sort of hard to help guide a narrative like that.
But yeah I think, depending on what it ends up being like, It could be interesting to take stuff from Daggerheart and put it into other types of games.
Thanks for your comments!! 😊
DnD combat does not have to be slow. This is largely on the players (and how the group wants to play, I suppose)
It's true and I think you can figure out ways to make it work out to be faster but I think it takes effort. At least at all my tables it does, so could very well be a me problem hahahaha
Nah, D&D combat doesn't *need* to be slow, but it *is* finicky - especially with abundant options or newer players. There is a learning curve to it - just as there is with any game - but I think D&D is more vulnerable to analysis paralysis.
It sounds like a story game and not a roleplaying game. Not interested.
Arguably most ttrpgs are a collaborative storytelling game, but this one is a little more focused on narrative than dice rolls
@@CantripsMedia collaborative storytelling with hard rules that represent reality. And yes those dice roles represent the hard rules of the universe. If those aren’t there, it’s all flimsy. That not what I started playing rpgs for.
@jessebourbeau1616 What, precisely, is realistic about advantage/disadvantage over the circumstantial bonus/penalty system? Or a linear resolution roll as opposed to a bell curve dynamic?
Honestly I'm not feeling DH as a good DnD alternative. Perhaps it's too early to judge but for now ttrpgs like Shadow of the Demon Lord or Shadowdark seem better.
Yeah who knows what the end result will be. And honestly I think it depends on your table for this one. If they aren't there for more roleplay action this one might not be a good fit
Check out DC20
On the list!!
Thank you. Been saying this from candela. They're voice actors that prefer to act over game mechanics...
There's nothing wrong with that, but don't expect game mechanics to be the focus or even very well designed when that's not their interest or strength...
I don't know that game mechanics aren't a focus for them, based on the fact that they have a board game creating company as well, plus they have enough money to hire people specifically for the game design portion. But they do focus on the narrative and this is definitely a game that focuses on narrative. Acting out the stories is their strong suit and why people enjoy the show for sure and you can tell they are channeling that strength into this creation
From what I know of it so far, Daggerheart is kinda "D&D: The Show: The Game". For those who missed that trend of media, it was when a property was adapted to a different media and then back. Not entirely unlike translating a phrase through different languages in Google translate. It gets a bit wonky.
It's also trying to be both the crunchy, quasi-simulationist style game with a lot of focus on combat abilities _and_ a narrative focused game that would like to focus on character and story. And I don't think that'll appeal to most people, because they'll want something that sticks closer to one or the other. At least, I didn't think the narrative-focus stuff was all that good for encouraging and supporting gameplay focus on story/character. But the D&D-ish part of the game is quite prevalent and I think a 5E player _could_ transition over with almost no friction -- save for their probable phobia of learning a new system even if it's 99% the same as 5E. But I also think most 5E players will be unhappy that it makes _some_ changes to what are 5E fundamentals.
Honestly, after playing it, it doesn't feel crunchy/simulation like to me. It feels more.. cinematic? The narrative focus shines through even the battle portions.
I don't know that it's that similar to D&D really other than a fantasy setting and some class names. But I do think it's pretty easy for a 5e player to pick up and could also see some disliking how far it steps away from some basic d&d mechanics (lol you can read such response in other comments on this video).
Thanks for sharing! It was an interesting take
I hoped they would consciously lean away from 5e similarities, like MCDM is doing. But I felt a lot of unnecessary similitudes, like the weapon chart.
It's a narrative focused game, why not give me the tools to create and imagine my weapon instead of picking from a list
@gabriel1rodrigues2 That… is a very good point. Even Fate manages to do exactly that.
I really like your videos. I don't care much for daggerheart. But I like your voice. And your attitude. The way you talk. I'm not very good on explaining myself in English 😅. I love your giggles
Awe thank you! That made me smile 😊
A combat system meant to put the PCs in actual danger of dying that ONLY WORKS if the players agree to play sub-optimally (by not having the best fighter take all of the actions) is simply a BAD SYSTEM. It's a mistake. I love the Critical Role folks. This is objectively bad system mechanics design.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, so if you could explain this more to me that would be helpful. :D Other versions of D&D and even 5e can put PCs in danger of dying, that's why I'm a bit confused about this perspective
Aw wait. I started thinking about this more and I maybe understand now haha (sorry been a long day). Daggerheart DOES have a rule built in (though it's optional) to have players not able to take a turn until everyone else does. I think this is all just their way of allowing the narrative to drive combat as well, so that if it makes more sense in the narrative they would be able to take their turn again (in a similar way as if you had everyone hold their actions in 5e so that someone else could take a turn but with less repercussions). But I don't typically have a table full of min-maxers, so they wouldn't want to cheese the game in such a way anyways. This wouldn't be a perfect fit for every table though
Daggerheart exists as long as Critical Role does. It stands almost entirely on their popularity and not on its merits. It is not better in any one direction than others already on the market, and is certainly not better across the board.
I mean you can make the same argument on MCDM's RPG. I honestly feel that it's impossible for any one game to be better than all the others out there as there are so many systems and games as well as so many different types of GMs and players. Many people are looking for the "one game" that's "better than D&D" but that's like looking for a unicorn in the vastness of space. Sure it might exist, but you'll be passing up all these other cool alien creatures to find it.
I don't think it's possible to be "better across the board", only that a game system can be better for me and my players. And hopefully this review gives people a chance to figure out if Daggerheart is right for them or not. I'm okay with being the guinea pig if it means I get to try all these different systems
@@CantripsMedia Agreed!
I have no interest in anything I heard about MCDM's rpg either.
WIth the OGl debacle and PR nightmare since, EVERYONE's trying to capitalize to make a TTRPG, and most of them aren't good and a *lot* have been "rules light" without understanding game mechanics or design.
There's simply less chance (die rolls) and more "narrative focus", which is basically play acting.... Which I like. I'm definitely more of the "theater kid" than the "war gamer" when it comes to the D&D player base divide, but rules exist for a reason, and failure is sometimes better for story, and the rolls for success or fail are what makes games fun and exhilarating.
@@CantripsMedia By being objective. 5e is objectively better than the other systems. Do I prefer others? Sure, but they all have their downsides. 5e has the smallest set of downsides as compared to their appeal and most of why people hate it is because of those in charge. That highlights how good the base system is.
Better across the board is a universal statement encompassing all factors and measuring them working as a unit. 5e holds that title. Feel how you want about things, but they have the field.
@CantripsMedia DnD 5E is the best TTRPG across the board. It's so good that everyone is trying to clone it and make money. Yet, it's still by far the most popular TTRP.
From my perspective, I don't think we can be objective about games, since they are a form of entertainment and what people find entertaining is a subjective thing.
D&D certainly is the best game for some people and certainly it's the most popular but that comes with being as old as it is and from being able to release 5 editions of rules where they have innovated and changed many things.
I also think saying it's best across the board because everyone is trying to copy it is not exactly accurate. Most of the major new systems have been looking at D&D and trying to make it better in the ways that they feel need improved.
But only those people would fully be able to explain their desires to make a game system. This is just how I interpret how things are going. It's always interesting to read other people's take on things though. Thank you for sharing!! 😊
I am worried about Daggerheart because the idea of moving past DND is foolish IMHO. It is the only TTRPG that has momentum, real momentum. So to abandon for a few rule changes seems foolish. I want TTRPGs to grow and I think support DND lets that happen. Abandoning it for games that have produced close to nothing seems incredibly unwise for the TTRPG Community. Thank you very much for your video.
I see what you're saying. I myself think that if they can become something good, which they have the audience to do, then they could introduce competition to the scene which might force D&D to be better. While they don't have a monopoly exactly, aside from Pathfinder, not a lot of game systems out there can light a candle to their audience. And Pathfinder 2e is still heavily based in D&D and is geared to a certain group of people, I feel. I think Daggerheart and MCDM might be able to push D&D or at least WOTC into actually trying to win us over again and that might be good.
But honestly I don't know what will happen. I don't care what we play as long as we have dice hahaha
Thank you for your comment!!
@@CantripsMedia Thank you for the response! The recent Lego DND crossover made me VERY happy with WOTC and I see huge opportunity for DND in the future. I hope people realize that DND really is doing things that other TTRPGs are not (or simply can't). I really think we are not even close to what DND can accomplish so I am very nervous to spilt the audience to smaller games that will not accomplish much for the TTRPG Community. I really dug your coverage of Daggerheart. It is a key competitor, despite my concerns. Looking forward to your next video.
Awe so glad you like it!!
I agree there are lots of little games popping up and that's too many to change things. I think in like a year or two it'll stabilize and there will be 3-4 game systems actively vying for the same audience and that to me is the sweet spot. I think of it like Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo and PC gaming. All the same audience and most people dip their toes into a few of and each one offers different pros and cons.
But obviously only time will tell!
@JScottGaribay I assure you, when any particular group is playing its own favored system, it doesn’t do so to spite or give any thought of the “good of the almighty community”, and that definitely includes groups who stick with old school D&D and OSRs.
#no1way2play
Daggerheart seems like someone wanted to make pbta game, but make it mainstream and filling off serial numbers.
Shame on them for it really. Also, they are trying to reinvent a tested engine.
Actually, I think that's what they did with Candela Obscura. I haven't played Blades in the Dark, but was told it was very similar. But regardless I think some of their team helped make Blades in the Dark
It’s not narrative focused … that’s the problem … it wants to be … but it just isn’t it … you see that in the complexity of the combat mechanics.
Oh, is that what happened at your table? At both of mine the combat actually felt very minimal. There was way less to worry about than 5e or PF2e and the focus of the rest of the game fell heavily into roleplay. But it could have been my two tables 🤷♀️
Watching people play it makes it seem to be a very gimmicky game. To be fair, all games have a gimmick to try to make them stand out, but this one is pretty much ONLY gimmick.
Elaborate a bit for me, what do you consider the gimmick?
(just curious)
What I mean is mostly game mechanic, but sometimes the way information is presented. They are things that get you to give the game a try, but after a while of playing they lose their charm and can kill the game. An example of presentation is like when a game uses symbols to mean things. That is much more common in war games than roleplaying games, but I have seen it sometimes like on special dice. The special dice themselves would also be a gimmick that is interesting but annoys me (I hate having to look things up). The Rolemaster game only really had its critical hit tables going for it, the rest of the system was just too complex to play more than a few attempts. The d20 being the only die used in a game, such as Mutants and Masterminds is a gimmick. In practice, it flops hard if you play more than a few sessions. Some people groups have made house rules to try to make it more playable, but you should not have to do that.Some games, such as the Storyteller system and Shadowrun, use dice pools. To me these are gimmicks because they end up with very strange probability curves. It woks okay early game but once your skills go higher it breaks and you are more likely to fail with a die result. The character sheets in Dagger Heart are cool, but I can see it becoming less cool as more books come out, if people want to make their own stuff, etc. It makes you dependent on only using their official stuff. You can shrug and make your own character sheets so it is not so bad. At first the two d12 seem pretty cool and a novel idea, but I can see it ruining games. The math is broken. Some people groups have made house rules to try to make it more playable, but you should not have to do that. Some games require special cards. Not all gimmicks are a bad thing. Savage Worlds uses a deck of cards for initiative, this is a gimmick as most people are used to roll for initiative, but in play it works very well. The games that do not have initiative, or have the players pick their order, can be fun but it can also be the source of frustration. At least if someone rolled it, or drew it, everyone can be on the same page. Some games let you swap your initiative with another player, too. I rambled on, but I did try to give some sort of idea what I mean. I have bought and player a LOT of different systems since the early 80s. Most games have some really cool features. They can all be fun, but for me the question is for how long? In the mid 90s, I found myself going back to D&D. I liked Vampire the Masquerade, but not its system. Shadowrun was fun but hard to play. I played GURPS with a group for ten years, but there are some major frustrations with the system. The dice, which were meant to be an interesting alternative to a d20, just did not really cut it. The game by MCDM makes me think of Diablo Tabletop Edition, so that is a no for me. I like the video game, but I would not want to play it on the table. I like some of the ideas in Daggerheart, but I am concerned that their appeal is short lived.
I see! Thank you for elaborating! Always interested in hearing different perspectives on things. I can see where you are coming from now. Makes sense to me.
The only thing that I think makes DH a little different than other systems you mentioned is their audience size. Arguably their audience is what brought people to D&D and I could see it bringing people to their own tabletop game if done correctly. But that's all just speculation at this point and only time will truly tell
@grr-OUCH These examples read like specious reasons to justify your solitary experience wrongly applied to a collective basis. You found other systems inferior and that’s your understanding, but it never means it applies to everyone who’s ever played in the hobby as a whole. I find D&D lacking and prefer other systems by far, some of which you have mentioned, but I don’t pretend to think that should include you to conclude my reasoning.
#no1way2play
For some reason fans wanted this game to be a dagger in D&D's heart. This hurt their game also there will not be that much 3rd party support no matter how much fans ask. This will aslo hurt the game. It will be a one and done unfortunately.
I'm not sure why you think there's not going to be 3rd party support? Can you share why you think that? Just curious 😁
@@CantripsMedia I don't think enough people will be playing it.
Oh I see. I think that's underestimating their audience reach, since I foresee them playing Daggerheart instead of D&D for their main campaigns. But only time will truly tell
CR has a cabal of fan illustrators, animators, and fictioners (sometimes shippers), and you actually believe no one will step up using ORC or DH’s OGL?
I am curious about what do you personally mean by a narrative focused game?
I mean, it's focused on making a good story, not combat. The focus is roleplay, which isn't a bad thing but isn't something for every table
So are roleplay and narrative synonyms for you? Or is one a necessary or sufficient condition for the other?
I think they go hand in hand. Certainly you can have one without the other, larping and battlefield reenactment for example could be seen as a more roleplay focused. But someone who larps or reenacts does typically try to get into character with a good backstory or knowledge of lore/history.
They are two sides of the same coin to me
@CantripsMedia Thanks for answering! I think the reason why I and, probably, the OP are asking these questions is because "x game encourages narrative/RP" has been such a thorny topic for those who spend much more time engaging with roleplaying games online than actually playing them. Myself included and yourself probably excluded, judging by the fact that you actually playtested a game. Carry on doing what you're doing and ignore the old codgers like me who spent their youth following GNS debates on late 90s internet forums.
Haha I won't ignore you because even if we're coming from different angles, I want to know that perspective. It not only helps me to better understand the landscape but also helps me provide better content so that more people can glean something from my videos.
I like when people push for me to explain myself a bit because it forces me to think.
I AM the type of person though who tries not to judge a book by its cover so to speak, hence why I wanted to actually playtest the game before sharing my thoughts. But that doesn't mean I'm always very clear at explaining my thoughts in videos lmao
This game sounds absolutely dreadful. It’s not a role-playing game anymore, it sounds like one of those cooperative Raven loft board games lol. I’m one of the weird people, if you want to write a good story or have a great narrative as a game master of some sort, ride book, if you want to be an arbitrator of rules that allows you to tell a story with these rules running game.
If this is your take away from it, you've kind of misunderstood. It is nothing like the board games you are referencing.
Most can't ride a book. They would need a ghost rider.
That means they probably do even less well as a dungeon master then LMAO.
@@brucehutchinson7139 🤣
Ok - so now review 5E from the same perspective. You'll throw $150 worth of books in the trash.
Sure thing, though you'll have to be more specific about the perspective you're talking about, since I mention quite a few different points and perspectives in this video.
And 6E is supposed to be more expensive, so it’s more like $210 trashed 😁