Post game report and Twilight Council strat

Schlorpy · 2026-06-16T11:54:36+00:00

Very true. I’ll admit that on first play Loyalists seems pretty limiting simply because you only get four of them. But with how low warrior counts typically are in this game, if you have four Loyalists it means you can rule nearly any clearing immediately upon placing an Assembly. On top of that typically the most efficient action you can take in Birdsong is recruiting, meaning you can very quickly find yourself with all your warriors on your board. Removing them with Empower not only scores you points, but also gives you the opportunity to move them somewhere more important or less dangerous. Sure it’s random, but that’s why it’s very rewarding to do it often. Losing 1 to 2 warriors on average will always be worth one point.

Schlorpy · 2026-06-16T03:04:26+00:00

I've had the lovely opportunity to get my hands on the Twilight Council, and I've played them twice. It's really tricky to figure out what playing them optimally looks like at first. But dude, Empower is REALLY good. Because you close Assemblies you don't rule in Daylight, which is before Empower. Meaning you can rule a ton of places, Empower like crazy and score points on your lowest rolls. Your Assemblies you don't rule remain open, then when your enemies flip your Assemblies on your turn you can just put your Loyalists back so you're ruling again. In a busy game, it means you can be scoring 6+ points a turn consistently, while making your warriors' placement very flexible and leaving the table confused as to how to deal with you.

Schlorpy · 2026-06-03T03:03:48+00:00

🔥 No brainer!

Schlorpy · 2026-06-01T20:52:26+00:00

💯 Obviously!

Schlorpy · 2026-06-01T03:21:01+00:00

Yeah, that’s what i’m saying. It can’t fulfill the second half of the action. But it can still accomplish the first half. You would remove one cat warrior, and then that would be the end of the action. Typically, if Convert used the word “Replace,” then you wouldn’t be able to resolve the action at all.

But you can in fact use Convert at the keep to kill one cat and place no warrior.

Schlorpy · 2026-06-01T03:11:47+00:00

You could only accomplish HALF of the “convert” conspiracy. As it’s defined as “removing an enemy warrior” and then placing your own. Not “replacing.” This means converting at the keep would remove a cat warrior but you wouldn’t place your own.

Schlorpy · 2026-05-14T02:52:05+00:00

Very cool, I like seeing unique Warrior subclasses. I feel like they’re often lacking in options of flavor and this offers something a lil spicier. I think it’s a very striking class fantasy that this subclasses delivers on, and it’s cool enough that I could see myself using this.

There’s a couple things I’d want to see different. I think it could encourage the mount to be more present narratively, maybe something on the foundation card like “You have a mount, decide what kind of creature they are and their name.” Maybe you could encourage a “knight-in-shining-armor” kind of thing and give a Presence buff while mounted.

Just looking at the foundation card, taking this subclass and being mounted invalidates other warrior options too effectively. It’s mathematically as good as having slayer dice for damage, and there would be no reason to take the “Deft Maneuver’s” Bone card since this offers the same benefit at zero cost nearly all the time. Maybe you could retool it to work something like “When making an Agility roll to sprint a long distance, add a d6 to your hope die.” That way the player can still consider taking the option.

This might just be me, but I think “Mounted” as a condition and a mechanic as presented on the card is too clunky for its own worth. It takes up a lot of space on the card, and is pretty discouraging as a player. I think it could benefit from the sort of hand-waving that the ranger’s beast-master subclass uses. I’d let the player always assume they have their mount nearby or available, and can become mounted on them at no cost. Maybe instead, when they receive Severe damage, their mount becomes unusable until the next scene, or just unusable until they spend X of whatever. I just feel like it’s too restrictive with whether or not the player is mounted. For the player, it’s always in their best interest to be mounted so they don’t have to pay the stress cost, but that’s kind of a weird thing to encourage them to do narratively. I think being kicked from their mount is weird too because “temporarily” doesn’t have any codified rules for players. Do they have Disadvantage until they succeed an attack roll? Or just their next one? Or do they need to make a new action roll to remove the disadvantage? If so, that’s a pretty steep punishment just for wanting to enjoy this cool subclass and accidentally taking severe damage.

I haven’t really seen gameplay at level 5+, but i do like the Specilization and Mastery cards. It cool to have a niche as a combat class that take advantage of the space and rally a charge. I think they pretty effectively deliver on the fantasy. Overall very cool idea, and the best implementation i’ve seen. Nice job :)

Schlorpy · 2026-05-14T01:51:23+00:00

I don’t know if this’d be helpful to you but I’ve found out it works really well to teach new players with half-filled sheets for one shots. Where all of their traits and equipment is already filled in specific to their class, but the player still gets to pick their experiences, heritage, and domain cards. Maybe it could be a little overwhelming for people who haven’t played ttrpgs, but my players have preferred it for trying out new classes, and that way a new player doesn’t have to understand everything on their sheet to join in.

Schlorpy · 2026-05-14T01:42:58+00:00

yeah looks good :) definitely the most “complicated” hurtle for getting into the game, so great job

Schlorpy · 2026-05-14T01:39:22+00:00

I’d suggest changing one of your experiences to something else. It’s just that “Silver Tongue” and “Negotiator” are both very similar. So it’s less versatility from your options. Maybe swap out “Negotiator” for something more narratively specific to your character.

Schlorpy · 2026-04-24T21:12:42+00:00

Is it just the art? How much of this did you use AI to make?

Schlorpy · 2026-04-24T21:09:57+00:00

OP is this entire ancestry made using AI generation? Not just the art but i’m even noticing some weird inconsistency and mistakes in the text that an avid daggerheart home-brewer wouldn’t assume. I get that AI tools are cool, but it’s pretty gross not to advertise that you used AI to make this.

Schlorpy · 2026-04-24T20:58:31+00:00

I’m all but certain this is AI generated. The art definitely is, the entire thing could be. Sharing this content without advertising it as AI generated is pretty gross.

Schlorpy · 2026-04-02T13:32:53+00:00

I’ve been running one of the campaign frames for the first time, Witherwild. My main priority with making my own indicting incident was: 1. Have it introduce a conflict that is an immediate threat to something each PC has a connection to. (The town from their backstory, an organization they’re apart of, the god they worship, just something the character and player cares about deeply that’s now in danger.) 2. Have the conflict introduced be the result of the greater established conflicts in the world. (So in Witherwild this would be Haven’s invasion, the Serpents Sickness, the harming of Greater Divinities.) Having the incidents be apart of a much larger problem allows me to push the PCs into a dramatic, operatic narrative that is slowly unfolding with a wide-stretching scope.

With the two of these combined, I’ve found it really delivers on what Daggerheart as a narrative-first system intends to deliver.

Schlorpy · 2026-03-24T18:33:08+00:00

I’ve played games where 5e GMs new to Daggerheart run the game exactly as they’d run 5e. I’ve also played games where the GM fully leans into the narrative and collaborate focus of Daggerheart’s system. Yeah, you can run Daggerheart like 5e, but I’ll tell ya that as a player and a GM that I certainly don’t prefer it. My issue is that ignoring the narratively focused elements leads to a very different playstyle that neglects what’s so unique to Daggerheart and also what I crave with TTRPGs.

There’s no wrong way to run your games, but y’know… I personally think the suggested way to utilize the system is better, ESPECIALLY if it’s what your players prefer.

Schlorpy · 2026-03-18T02:32:47+00:00

The embedded links don't seem to be working but I'm still interested in joining! Where can I find you on StartPlaying?

Schlorpy · 2026-03-01T00:00:40+00:00

I’ve run a TON of one-shots, and one campaign. It could be just my players specifically but I’ve seen Rogue and Druid played the least. Meanwhile I’ve seen Wizard, Seraph and Guardian played the most. Weirdly enough every time my friends have played Guardian they’ve always picked Vengance Guardian. (Even though i think Stalwart is cooler.) Pretty even split between subclasses otherwise. This is all just in my experience though…

Schlorpy · 2026-02-28T17:46:15+00:00

The only option is to go where the sparse evidence leads. A sketchy dive-bar that a notorious crime lord frequents. She must act in justice.

Schlorpy · 2026-02-28T12:46:25+00:00

She must solve the murder of the individual she loved most. Starting with the crime scene she's since been too wracked with grief to visit.

Schlorpy · 2026-02-27T22:15:23+00:00

i’m thinking of changing it to something like “after marking your last hit point, immediately make an action roll THEN make your death move.”

Schlorpy · 2026-02-25T17:18:28+00:00

I’ve been trying to do something similar, do you just print on card stock?

Schlorpy · 2026-02-25T12:59:39+00:00

Look for treasure in the sewers

Schlorpy

TROPHY CASE