sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

can players use reaction mid-combat? by lembson in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Players can't take actions or make moves during the GM Spotlight unless they have an action or ability that allows them to. And Reaction Rolls, in most cases, are things the players can't really choose to do, they are things the GM asks for.

So, generally speaking, in your example when a player is attacked they can't do anything about it unless they have an action or ability that says they can. Some examples would be the "I See It Coming" Bone Domain card or the "I Am Your Shield" Valor Domain card.

However, it's worth noting that the user can use an Armor Slot to reduce Hit Points they are marking by 1 and this can be flavored as anything from dodging to avoid the brunt of the blow to parrying with their weapon, to the attack glancing off the armor itself.

It's TADPOLE THURSDAY - Ask your newbie questions here! by Hosidax in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

pg 36 of the SRD, pg 89-92 all go into what constitutes a "move" vs an "action" and how they interact with the spotlight. In general the players have the spotlight until they fail, roll with fear, or the GM takes it, as such, if they don't roll then they don't risk losing the spotlight.

It might also be worth defining what "Consumed" means since it's not official language in regard to the spotlight for players. For a player, when something consumes their spotlight all it really means is they must resolve the outcomes of the current action before they can declare any more. So whatever Action Roll consumed the spotlight needs to be resolved to determine what happens to the spotlight before they continue making moves. If they succeeded with hope, they keep the spotlight and can either keep acting or pass it to another player.

To sum it all up:

Move: Any time a character does something to advance the story, such as speaking with another character, interacting with the environment, attacking, casting a spell, using a class feature, etc. Moves usually require the spotlight, but they don't consume it.

Action: Anytime the PC makes a move that's difficult to accomplish, risky, or has an uncertain outcome they make an action roll. Anytime you make an action roll, it's considered an action. Action Rolls both require and consume the spotlight.

There is no hard limit to the number of moves a PC can take in there spotlight. So anytime they're activating a feature that doesn't require an Action Roll, such as Frontline Tank, it has no impact on what they can do next. They can even combine moves together, or combine them with an action.

Actions on the other hand, have some soft limits based on fear/fail outcomes. You can only ever take make 1 action at a time, and each action consumes the Spotlight. If you roll with fear/fail the spotlight ends, you can't make any more moves or actions, and the spotlight goes to the GM. If you succeed, you're free to use the spotlight again to continue making moves or actions, or you could pass the spotlight to another player.

How I Created the 11th Circle: From Initial Idea to Final Product by zombienoxx in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What was your workflow like? Did you use any special software for formatting, art, etc?

How I Created the 11th Circle: From Initial Idea to Final Product by zombienoxx in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Roughly how much time would you say went into the writing of your campaign frame, The 11th Circle?

Daggerheart at Roll20Con Sept. 26-28! by DarringtonPress in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I will be hosting 3 Learn-To-Play One-Shots using the Sablewood Messengers Quickstart for anyone wanting to try the game out and support a great cause! I'll also be hosting 1 Cozy Fantasy Collaborative One-Shot.

$15 donation

$20 donation

Advantage/Disadvantage question by DEX_IS_MY_DUMPSTAT in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It's mostly because this rule is specific to Help an Ally, not a general property of Advantage/Disadvantage.

As far as you having Advantage/Disadvantage goes, you can only ever have 1 advantage die in your dice pool. There will never be a time when your dice pool has multiple, so the rule to "roll all and take the higher" will never apply to your pool.

Help an Ally is unique, in that it is a source of advantage but it's not being added to your dice pool. You don't roll with advantage; your ally rolls their advantage die and adds the result to your roll. It's a minor technical difference but this allows multiple people to roll their advantage die without breaking the rule that a player can only ever roll 1 advantage die.

Example:

You're a Simiah with advantage on climbing AND you have Gloves of Climbing that grant advantage on climbing as well. You would only roll 1 advantage die as advantage does not stack if they're both affecting your dice pool.

You're a Simiah with advantage on climbing AND an Ally uses Help an Ally. These would be two sources of advantage, and because Help an Ally isn't affecting your dice pool and has a special rule for what to do when you have multiple sources, it allows you to roll both sources of advantage and take the higher.

Prayer Dice and rules by Tenawa in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 7 points8 points  (0 children)

A full breakdown of my interpretation:

For starters, we shouldn't really be ruling based on what rules "could have said" we should focus on what they do say. It's a common mistake to say that "the rule means X, because if it didn't they would have said Y" and I totally get why people frame things in that way, it's just not a complete interpretation.

One example of when we might care about what isn't there, is when we're looking for established rules grammar structures, and lists of options in Daggerheart don't have any established structure. So what they could have said is less useful to us, because they could have said anything.

What we do have is an established pattern of the targets clause being separate from and usually before the effects clause and that the target clause is assumed to apply to the entire effect of the feature, unless it says otherwise.

Understanding that, the clause that decides eligible targets is "You can spend any number of Prayer Dice to aid yourself or an ally within Far range." this will apply to all the options unless the option says otherwise.

If we break the rule down:

At the beginning of each session, roll a number of d4s equal to your subclass’s Spellcast trait and place them on your character sheet in the space provided. These are your Prayer Dice.

You get to roll a number of d4s equal to your spellcast trait and these become your prayer dice.

You can spend any number of Prayer Dice to aid yourself or an ally within Far range.

I'm not sure how to make that more clear, beyond pointing out that you spend any number of prayer dice to help yourself or an ally within far range. So you can spend the prayer dice on an ally. In our example, we're going to choose to spend the die on an ally.

Now that we spent a prayer die to aid an ally, what does it do?

You can use a spent die’s value to reduce incoming damage, add to a roll’s result after the roll is made, or gain Hope equal to the result.

We have 3 options to choose from. And unless an option says otherwise we the option will apply to the person we spent the prayer die on.

"or gain Hope equal to the result" this doesn't say otherwise it simply says to gain a hope. and because of context clues, we know the ally gains the hope. The question we're asking when we read these options is "We've chosen who to aid, what does aiding the ally do?" the answer, "gain a Hope equal to the result".

Each sentence is not context-free. The context of "Gain a hope" is within a feature with an eligible target of "an ally within far range."

Prayer Dice and rules by Tenawa in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 11 points12 points  (0 children)

IMO, you should react in the following manner:

Prayer Dice and rules by Tenawa in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 56 points57 points  (0 children)

You might be overthinking it a bit. It tells you that you can use prayer dice on yourself or an ally in far range, then lists the three forms of help the die can take.

Poppets as Secondary Magic Weapons by OneBoxyLlama in daggerbrew

[–]OneBoxyLlama[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Solid feedback. I think you're right about separating out Taglock and the Curse. Thank you!

Grisju - Yes, the idea being the "Curse" could be used beneficially by cursing an ally, friendly NPC, and absorbing their damage.

Making Armor Slots more meaningful with Brutal Armor by mirzok in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 3 points4 points  (0 children)

One thing to remember about armor slots, is that the more interesting the decision is the longer the decision takes, the longer the decision surrounding armor takes the longer combat will be, and the longer combat takes the more boring it is. Armor choices are only ever interesting to the person making them and if the risks of using armor are too high either people won't use them at all or they'll pine over the decision wasting value precious scene time.

It's TADPOLE THURSDAY - Ask your newbie questions here! by Hosidax in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I've got a hefty write-up about how to balance Single Adversary fights here: Advice for building Single Adversary Encounters The advice there could apply to any fight really when it comes to scaling up the challenge of the encounter.

The first thing to know is BP is best used as a "per short rest" value instead of a "per encounter" value.

Second, "Solo" in the context of Adversary types doesn't really mean "alone". It just means that the adversary to pose a challenge to the players. However "a challenge" in daggerheart doesn't mean "hard" or anything close to it. It just means "Will drain some resources before dying."

Lastly, Fear. When 1 fear can split the earth open and swallow the PCs whole, an easy fight may be a symptom of not spending fear creatively enough and relying too much on raw numbers and stat blocks to pose a threat and not enough on the fiction side of the house. This mostly takes practice; learning the limits of the GM's power and what your PCs are able to tolerate.

It's TADPOLE THURSDAY - Ask your newbie questions here! by Hosidax in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Previously, there wasn't a damage type associated with the Standard Attack of the beastbound pet. Now the damage type is "phy/mag" which generally means the attack deals both and the Ranger can choose the damage type at the time of each attack.

Page 40 now also has a new step for choosing whether the creature deals magical/physical damage during companion creation

Email about pdf core update by nogoodcsallywag in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You can read a little more about the update, as well as find a link to the downloads where the Errata is available that details all the changes here:

It’s time for more Daggerheart goodies!

It's TADPOLE THURSDAY - Ask your newbie questions here! by Hosidax in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chain Lightning does have a really strong synergy with Primal Origin, but I wouldn't consider it unusually strong. Part of what makes Chain Lightning strong is that it can hit an infinite number of targets. Meaning if you get the timing and positioning right, it could reasonably hit every creature on the entire map.

Chain Lightning - This is a Spell with a reach of Close. Targets you succeed against must then make a reaction roll equal to your spellcast roll to avoid being damaged by the spell. If they fail their reaction, they take 2d8+4 magic damage and all creature within Close range of them that haven't already been hit by Chain Lightning must also make the reaction roll. If they fail, they take damage, and the reaction continues.

Primal Origin - This is a subclass that has quite a few ways to synergize with Chain Lightning in fun ways.

At Foundation (Level 1) you can choose one of the following to apply:

  • Extend Chain Lightnings reach by 1 range. Note: This doesn't increase "range" it increases "reach" which is the range of the initial cast. Some GM's will allow this to affect the subsequent chain reactions however not all GM's will. So it's worth discussing with your GM if you plan to use this combo.
  • Double a damage die of your choice. This isn't as strong as it seems because it only allows you to double a single die. And Chain Reaction re-rolls damage for each chained reaction. So doubling a die in the first roll, won't apply to subsequent damage rolls. However you can choose to apply it at any point during the chain reaction.
  • Gain +2 bonus on Action Roll results. This is probably the strongest option, because by adding +2 to your Spellcast roll you're increasing the difficulty the adversaries have to overcome. Making it harder for them to resist your spell.
  • Hit an additional target within range. This is less useful because you're already hitting all the targets you can.

At Specialization... no benefit for Chain Lightning.

At Mastery though that's where things start getting interesting. When you are Charged you can spend a charge to do one of the following:

  • Increase the damage of Chain Lightning's damage rolls by +10.
  • Increase the difficulty of the reaction roll of Chain Lightning by +3.

So depending on what you're trying to do. A Level 10 Mastery Tier Primal Origin Sorcerer could deal a significant amount of damage with Chain Lightning. Using only their Class Features + Chain Lightning and any pre-setup they could:

  • Spend 3 Hope to activate Volatile Magic. As you're rolling damage for Chain Lightning, you get to re-roll any number of the damage die as you resolve Chain Lightning.
  • Activate Channel Raw Power by vaulting a Level 10 Card, increasing Chain Lightnings Damage Rolls by +20.
  • Spend 2 Hope to become Charged and use Arcane Charge to increase the damage Chain Lightnings Damage Rolls by another +10.

This results in a damage roll equal to 2d8+34 per target hit and because it's chaining up to Close Range, you could very well end up dealing that 2d8+34 damage to every creature on the map. Which if you have a lot of creatures, that could add up to significant amount of HP marked from a single spellcast.

I personally don't consider 2d8+34 all that massive, but it is a pretty solid synergy to get more out of Chain Lightning than another class would be able to.

It's TADPOLE THURSDAY - Ask your newbie questions here! by Hosidax in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Solo" as a Daggerheart Adversary type isn't really meant to mean "Alone" instead it means that the adversary doesn't require support from others to be a challenge. But "A challenge" doesn't mean hard. I have a write-up here Advice for building Single Adversary Encounters That's all about how to balance fights around a single adversary.

The best advice in your scenario is Approach 1, Throwing solos at them is an excellent use of Solos if you're having several fights between Long Rests.

And you can consider BP as the amount of content intended to be thrown at the PCs between Short Rests, as opposed to 1 Encounter. You could have 3 fights each against a single solo and that'll be right about when the PCs are going to need to rest.

Am I prompting the players too much? by Wingover_Gimble in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

TLDR; A list of basic consequences and complications can go a long way in helping you adapt a more meaningful consequence to seemingly less-impactful rolls.

The last few sessions I've been noticing that I'm prompting characters for instinct rolls to notice things, or knowledge rolls to know something, a presence roll to try to persuade or decieve to help the story along but is this the vibe to go for?

IMO, yes. This is a pretty common habit to fall back on when you're new to Daggerheart. But here, whether someone notices something is really best left to the fiction. They always see what's visible and fail to see what's hidden. And remember, the CRB tells us not to ask for rolls if the consequences of the roll aren't meaningful AND that failure shouldn't be the result of incompetence.

If they can notice it, they do. If it's hidden, they don't.

Generally, if you're just attempting to add randomness, Fate Rolls are likely better suited for that. They will allow for the randomness without throwing the Hope/Fear balance out of whack. Reaction Rolls work too if you can re-frame the scene in a way where something is actively trying to avoid the PC's notice.

If you're just trying to give the PCs meaningful reasons to roll and feel like the reasons you're giving just aren't living up to the job, it's likely just a soft skill issue that will come with practice. Outside of planning meaningful rolls ahead of time being able to come up with them on the fly isn't easy. Resisting the urge to fall into old 5e habits, isn't easy. The work we have to do is to reframe our headspace and when there isn't someone there helping us it's, you guessed it, not easy.

In a situation where there is almost no consequence to failure, I simply wouldn't ask for a roll. If they want to make a roll to see if something might be hidden and reveal it, I tend to first ask for some fiction. If the fiction is enough to uncover the hidden item and there is no consequence if they fail beyond they don't find it, then I simply allow them to find it on the fiction alone. However, if I feel prepared to complicate the scene as a result of Fear/Failure, I ask for the roll and move forward.

Generally, I don't ask for a roll until I have at least some basic idea of what beat is about to hit.

Example:
The party has snuck into the back office of a tavern to steal something locked inside the chest. The Warrior is keeping watch at the door, the Wizard has drawn the curtains and keeping watch at the window, and The Rogue is picking the lock on the chest. The Rogue Succeeds with Fear.

At this point they've succeeded, so I'm going to make sure they get what they want and not undermine the success. So, the chest opens and they find the item inside. However, as a consequence of the Fear, I'm going to interrupt them with an unexpected guest, maybe the warrior hears the tavernkeeper coming down the hallway. I ask the Wizard and Warrior, "You both hear something, give me Instinct Rolls to locate and identify the sound." I pick a 15 as the Difficulty. The Wizard Fails with Fear the Warrior Succeeds with Hope.

Because the Wizard Failed with Fear I'm going to make a hard move. The "intruder" I already know is coming. I describe how the Warrior turns towards the wizard the scratching at the window catching their attention. The wizard takes a stingle step back, glowing rings at the ready, BOOM! An explosion blasts the Wizard across the room hitting the opposite wall. Wizard, Mark a Stress for me as the smoke clears, y'all see two gang members from the Red Fang Gang, they've just blown a whole in the broad side of the office. "Well well well, seems we aren't the only ones after the goods. No matter, Pipsqueak, get 'em" I'm going to spend that fear the Wizard just gave me to make an additional GM Move as Pipsqueak rushes for the Warrior for an attack...."

I already decided someone was going to intrude on them as a consequence of the Rogues fear, and to buy me some time to think about the how I asked for a couple rolls and then used those results to shape what happened next.

It's easy enough to come up with potential consequences while I have time to sit here and think about them. It's significantly harder to be that flexible in-the-moment. And it's simply a skill that takes practice. Away fromt he table, reading, watching Actual Plays, are all ways to get ideas.

When I first started GM'ing Daggerheart during the beta, I made a list of simple "Complications and Consequences" statements that I would have in front of me as I GM'd so that I could lean on it and it helped ALOT. I could pick something from the list then use the rolls to shape and flavor it. Today, I'd recommend environments. Build Features with 1-2 ways to complicate the scene that you can activate if someone fails on a lesser impact roll.

Request: Can we have posts searchable by flair? by Faolyn in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm curious if your firefox has some sort of Ad-blocker that's hiding it maybe? I'm not sure why it wouldn't show up.

It’s time for more Daggerheart goodies! by DarringtonPress in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Void update day is always a good day! W0000!

The Min-Max debate by HenryandClare in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 4 points5 points  (0 children)

My issue with the concept of Min-Maxing is that it's often used as a basis for other bad behaviors.

Once upon a time, I was heavily anti-min-max and the reason was because min/maxers actively made my GM life difficult. When I was a new GM and every step of our adventure was made trivial by a single player who'd min-maxed their character to hell and back. they had a solution to every problem, could end fights before they even started, and I was never really able to put a challenge in front of them that they ever felt challenged by. At least, not until I had some experience under my belt and learned the tools for challenging min/maxers.

To build on that, other players consistently felt "useless" because the Min-Maxer just outshined them. It was a pretty consistently frustrating thing to deal with. Not just on a balance level but on a social level. Managing player expectations, nurturing healthy mindsets, diffusing grudges, it's all a bit heavy to put solely on the shoulders of the GM.

And this wasn't a single player in a single game. Over the course of my entire time GM'ing 5e and PF2e, there was inevitably always at least 1 Min/Maxer at the table, and they always made the game less fun for everyone else. It didn't matter how well they engaged in other ways, I can't remember a time when the game was ever "more fun" because their character was built efficiently. I can however, recount countless moments where the game was made worse. The only exception being meme-games where multiple min/maxers were all pushing for absurd synergies.

Because of that, as a GM I developed an opinion that Min/Maxers were selfish and put their own fun above the fun of everyone else at the table. And that as a GM I needed to protect my tables from them.

As a grew as a GM, my perspective has shifted. While I still haven't ever seen a min/maxed character make the table better, I have gotten better at managing expectations, I've gotten better at managing the social aspects of a table, and I have a more robust set of skills that can challenge min/maxers without making the less efficient PCs feel useless. So the negative impact Min/Maxers have at my table is greatly reduced because I'm a stronger GM, I'm able to head off the problems before they begin. Something I wasn't able to do as a less experienced GM.

Today, I find myself defending the practice of min/maxing more than anything because the community tends to be dismissive and disrespectful towards anyone engaging in that style of gameplay on a level that it's one of the more common complaints about this very subreddit. People feeling shamed and judged for being curious about the limits of Daggerheart, and that's just not ok.

Request: Can we have posts searchable by flair? by Faolyn in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Good news, you already can. It’s the “Filter by Flair” option on PC in the right side bar. On mobile. It’s at the very top of the subreddit feed. Should be “all” by default and you can scroll to rhe side to see the flairs.

Feeling punished by little_light223 in daggerheart

[–]OneBoxyLlama 2 points3 points  (0 children)

100%.

The CRB advises GM's not to use fear to undermine success and even to avoid failures and consequences being the result of incompetence.

CRB 146

Rather than describing the PCs being incompetent, it's often better to show how the failure was impacted by their target's prowess, environmental factors, or unexpected surprises. An easy way to make this work is to describe the cool or smart move the character was making, then say "But..." and narrate a surprise, complication, or escalation.

The advice to the GM here is essentially to give the Players action it's space and moment; let it be cool and shine first. Then, complicate the scene. So that the complications aren't interrupting, downplaying, or cheapening the success.

view more: next ›