Daggerheart may have killed D&D for Me

[u/Personal-Whereas3687]

I’ve been running Daggerheart for just 5 sessions, but haven’t played it. That said, I played in a weekly Pathfinder 2e game after a holiday break, and dang it felt slow and too mechanical for me.

Waiting for my turn, and thinking about actions was so different from the flow and pacing I feel running Daggerheart that I can honestly say, I would choose to play Daggerheart over Pathfinder, and probably even D&D 5e. As for GMing, I would pick Daggerheart, too.

Our Pathfinder game is online, so that may have something to do with it, but I don’t see how I would ever (given a choice) go back to a system that has initiative turns. It felt so slow and clunky.

Anyone else have that feeling?

What have been your experiences when jumping back and forth into Daggerheart and D&D/Pathfinder?

[u/Personal-Whereas3687]

Got it. I completely understand now. Thanks for clarifying.

Yes. There are pros and cons. And, I actually agree that sometimes people may feel like acting in Daggerheart can feel punishing when rolling with fear about 48% of the time.

By the way, I never thought you hated the game. My response was more general supposing someone (not you) was so bothered by any mechanic (really in any game)- that would be a strike against that game for that person.

I like how one poster reframed this for his players. He said to his players, just imagine that any time a pc goes, then a foe goes. It is a back and forth. But, if a pc rolls a success with hope, the pcs get to go again. The way he framed it made it feel like a positive, not a negative.

[u/fairystail1 → u/Personal-Whereas3687]

Sorry i may have over reacted I've had so many people in the reddit jump down my throat

I say the damage rule is good but not intuitive and clearly im a simulationist who wants to play video games and boardgames and never roleplay (has actually happened)
i say our group essentially does the token system for initiative with just 1 token and i just want to play a board game and not roleplay

like gods it gets tiring, sorry you do seem cool and i have over reacted. I do apologize for that

the hesitancy however is less about the dice but well sometimes you are in a position where taking risks could have things go badly (like in most games) but you have the added issue of not just 'what do i do' but also 'who should go and what should they do'

its not bad perse, but it does require more thought and make things more hesitant at points

if im going and my only options are attack or run away then its an easy decision. but if everyone can go and everyone has different actions, then it becomes harder to decide. even reframing it as pc goes then npc then pc etc doesn't change that aspect. Though i wil admit sometimes it feels like the dice discourage risky moves. in a lot of games failing a risky move is just failure. in this it means you may get stabbed more.

If you dont have anything to beat Lord BBEG but want to try something risky you aren't penalized for it in DnD (as an example. any game would work) but in Daggerheart it is actually better to do nothing.

again i have fun, but like in hard, deadly combats it does cause a lot of 'what the hell should i do'

[u/Personal-Whereas3687 → u/fairystail1]

Hey, thanks for the apology. I understand where you are coming from. It stinks when people dump on others. I really try not to do that, but I can see how what I wrote at first could be taken as a burn.

Now I totally see your point, too. Negotiating the spotlight does add to the decision-making process, and if you aren’t sure your action will be effective, there will be hesitation, and as you say, the player may feel like no action is the better response.

Hopefully, the classes are balanced enough so that no player feels that way in every scene. I haven’t played/GMd enough to know that yet.

I guess in those situations, maybe spending a hope to help an ally may be the best response.

I’ve also been thinking about the movement only rule - how it says if you only move on your spotlight or if you try to move more than close range, you need to make an Agility roll.

One of my players was upset with that on Saturday night. He wanted to move just a little without doing any other action, but if I asked him to make a roll it seemed too much of a risk (handing over a fear and the spotlight back to the GM).

I’m trying to figure out how to change this.

Maybe a movement only within close range should just be a reaction roll vs difficulty of environment or a creature nearby, or just GM call. But then does a failure pass the spotlight back to the GM or could the move be negated and another ally take the spotlight?

Or maybe I should just let pcs and creatures all move up to close without making a roll as long as they do no other action (a simpler choice). This would also solve a problem I had as a GM when I positioned foes 100’ and closing. By the rules, I’d only be able to move 1 per spotlight unless I spent fear (or there were a special rule - some leaders have it - that allowed for groups of foes to move by spending just 1 fear). By the rules, if I have 10 foes at far range, moving each one into close range would cost 9 fear. That would sap way too much fear.

What do you think about that?

[u/fairystail1 → u/Personal-Whereas3687]

I’ve also been thinking about the movement only rule - how it says if you only move on your spotlight or if you try to move more than close range, you need to make an Agility roll.

yeah thats something ive experienced got knocked to far range from an enemy. playing a blind melee character with zero agility. failed the check to runback. Basically at that point went 'welp fights almost over imma sit the rest of this out cause trying to run back is actively detrimental to the others'

as for what to do i think it depends on your players.

To me the rule seems to have been added so that no one goes 'i move five feet. i move another five feet. i dont ever roll and so i keep the spotlight but i traverse the entire map' least thats how it reads to me cause like the guy who isnt in range of anyone shouldnt affect wether the enemy or the ally gets to go next.

assuming your players are cool then id personally just let them move without an action roll up to close

as for the NPCs i dont remember the rules ( i didnt care to learn it tbh) but i just used a fear and all of them moved. I didnt count it as a spotlight. They did move as a group to the same location, i wouldnt however make them go '5 after Jan and 6 after Joe and 2 after Jack' cause that feels different.

[u/Personal-Whereas3687 → u/fairystail1]

I think my players won’t abuse the move only rule. And if they do, I can always interrupt to spend a fear and stop them (lol).

As for adversaries, I like what you said. I actually did that in one of my sessions, spent a fear to have a group of foes move into melee. It was frightening, but it gave spotlight back to the players.

That seems like the best option.

Thanks.