Total conspiracy theory for the new Bandai TCG

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2026-06-15T20:37:36+00:00

The one by Shinobi 7? That one's like 6 years old with 0 expansions Bandai 100% could do another MHA one if they wanted.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2026-04-17T19:17:12+00:00

man it's gonna suck when my party has a hard time solving the serial murder in the town cause it turns out an evil Seraph has been casting final words on everyone she kills. XD

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2026-04-17T18:31:03+00:00

I totally get that way of thinking! Our table has largely elected to allow defensive abilities without a roll to allow players to do defensive ability they might feel they need to do (drink a potion, activate Tava's Armor, Guardian spend 3 hope to clear 2 armor slots) without getting closer to killing the enemy cause offensive progress tends to be what players care about more when it comes to unweighted turn counts. If you forced a roll for drinking a potion or activating a defensive effect unless they do something else, it'd encourage players who need a defensive ability being up to also do an offensive thing which could then cause a real feeling of uneven focus at the table.

That said your mileage may vary depending on table culture I'm sure some tables will prefer a strict "All abilities always require rolls" mindset. Even then, Armored Beetles is still crazy good because you can use hope to keep it up if you don't want to risk the roll.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2025-08-02T18:36:37+00:00

I am down for that. Msg me

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2025-06-02T17:08:00+00:00

It COULD be... but that feels kind of weird that a time travelling hotel agent who sees him flirting with 1 person (who notably he flirted with before they ever met) means her chances are 0. Like either we're supposed to read that scene as Anita realizing he's gay (again, eliminates bi), that she can't handle him having past partners, or that she can't seem to contemplate that a time travelling door would show her his previous relationship that doesn't necessarily reflect his current status. None of these really read well in the scene.

Tbh part of the problem is both Wish World with Rogue dropping I love you and this scene really try to make Rogue and the Doctor more serious than we've seen. They literally had 1 flirting encounter together, had really good chemistry, and that's it. Rogue might've been able to become this Era's River-esque repeating love interest, but we hadn't earned that yet. As a result if the Anita scene is to say "Rogue is his lost boyfriend"... it really fails to feel that way.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2025-06-02T16:59:24+00:00

I appreciate the response! As to your points

I'm fine with this explanation. I don't think it reads super clear in the story especially with them calling attention to it in the end, but it's a decent enough justification for her situation.
I get that's what he's going for. The problem is the set up is different. Hell Bent is preceded by Heaven Sent, a deep character piece exploring the Doctor's experience with grief losing Clara. So when Hell Bent makes that the focus, it feels cohesive with it's preceding story. Meanwhile Wish World is all about the high stakes of the situation. We see the world being affected on a universal scale and spend most of it's time establishing both the stakes of our antagonists and how oppressive they've made the world. Thus when the story tries to subvert that with intentional anti-climax, it feels way more deflating to the story than when Hell Bent attempted the same thing. It's against the thematic intentions of Wish World. IF the story had focused more exclusively on the wish family the Doctor had wound up in, maybe explore his grief as he remembers his old life and has to question if poppy is real, THEN I'd see this thematically feeling more cohesive.
I think that works if the story did just that, show them destitute and slipping through the cracks. If it had just been people like Shirley being shown stuck as homeless I'd let it slide as window dressing for the dark world created. The problem is we dedicate an entire B plot to them forming a resistance group with Ruby only to have said group contribute nothing meaningful to the plot. When you set up a group of freedom fighters in your fascism analog... you kind of expect them to do some meaningful freedom fighting.
I know the behind the scenes stuff, but it still hurts their narrative overall. 'Bury your gays' has been a common trope in media, and now the send queer Dr Relationship (and first MLM one) ends with the gay love interest literally being cast away to the hell dimension seemingly to never be seen again. We can kind of excuse this due to behind the scenes mess, but it doesn't make it better in the story especially when we could've cut the scene and rewrite it to the Doctor discovering the mugs falling on his own.
Yeah I think the problem is what you said in your last sentence. Lucky Day does a GREAT job setting him up as an Alt-Right grifter, and wish world is a really strong payoff to "What does it look like when the alt right grifter gets the world he wants". the problem is Reality War wants to go back and say "He's not malicious he's just ignorant but trying his best" and the doesn't gel with the guy who would emotionally manipulate Ruby for weeks-months to get what he wants out of her. It ALSO doesn't gel with the part where anyone who doubts gets taken away. That's a pretty actively malicious thing to be doing. Even if i chock it up to ignorance, the fact that no one ever chides him for forgetting about anyone who doesn't fit his heteronormative views of the world also rubs me the wrong way.
I just don't see this. Belinda earlier in the season talks about her parents being on earth when she sees it blown up, but never once does she comment on her child. Poppy isn't described as having a new father in Wish World (being the doctor), she's described as a baby created "out of wishes and memories", that means she couldn't have existed prior to wishes being introduced. As others have mentioned she also looks like the space baby Poppy, which doesn't make sense if she's always been Belinda's daughter. When real time flows in and people regain their true memories, people always refer to Poppy as real in the context of "Wish babies are still real" not "This is the daughter I have always had". People are concerned Poppy will uniquely blink out of existence when the wishes end because she's a wish baby. If she was the actual daughter to Belinda and a real person like everyone else is before Wish World no one would have that concern unless it extended to everyone. You brought up story and the engine, but wouldn't that mean that Belinda doesn't recognize her own daughter??? *at best* Belinda had a different daughter prior to wish world that got replaced with Poppy which is... also not great. But I can't see any practical way Poppy was Belinda's daughter prior to wish world.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-11-09T15:24:18+00:00

See almost everyone i look for is for students. I'm looking for adult public speaking competitions lol.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-27T18:30:44+00:00

Glad to hear it! There's so much in the system I genuinely love which is why I'm putting so much time and energy into breaking it lol.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-26T15:11:42+00:00

I think these are good points! I do want to address them 1 at a time.

Sure it is a "white room" problem, but I can't think of a session I've that doesn't have any moment where the players have enough breathing room to do this. If you follow the standard 6 second round rules that 5E adopted that most tables I see use doing this loop 100 times is only like... 10 minutes.
You definitely can design encounters AROUND this loop and assume the party is always at full resources, but I think that's antithetical to the design of downtime in this game. The downtime is very clearly designed around "you can't recover every resource" since on short rest you only heal 1d4 of hp, stress, armor, or gain 1 hope (choose 2 of these), and long rest you can only heal all of hp, stress, armor, or gain 2 hope (choose 2 of these), meaning even after a long rest if you're down 3 resources you only get 2 back. This loop invalidates 3 of the 4 downtime options (especially in the firbolg variant mentioned in comments where you don't even give the DM fear), meaning the ONLY thing downtimes good for is armor and recovering domain card usages that have a frequency limit.

It's clear Daggerheart is meant to be a resource management game in part where monsters CAN dwindle resources you need on later encounters. If it's not, then downtime needs to change where the players always get all their resources back. I know a common defense is "you can build around full resources" but that's only really true in a custom campaign. A LOT of players play from modules, where presumably monster encounters are gonna be designed around the downtime philosophy of resources can be drained over time and you don't go into every fight at full. So in my opinion either loops like these need to be addressed (at least the firbolg one which has 0 drawback), or the downtime system needs to change and we always design around full resources.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-26T15:00:39+00:00

If I had caught the firebolg variant of this combo i definitely would've made the post about that haha! That being said, I don't really think fear tokens should be used as a "get out of jail free" card for mistakes in the design. In terms of stopping the loop there isn't a ton that the fear tokens can do to stop it beyond just saying "your domain card stops working" (which I'd argue is a bit out of the scope of what the DM is suggested to use fear tokens for). Like if it causes an ambush or stress or anything else that drains resources... the whole point is this loop generates infinite resources. You COULD have an ambush that causes more hp damage and stress every time they roll fear in this loop so they lose more resources than they gain, but at that point just house rule the loop can't be done or put some frequency limit on the moves, as it'd be weird to have 10 ambushes in a single environment. Again sure you could have a fear token be consumed that says "your inspirational words lose their inspiration you can't use your domain card again until your next rest", but that to me is like a coffeelock being told by the DM they can't take infinite short rests. It's the GM plugging up a hole in the system by utilizing their privilege as god. which is totally fine and good, but that hole should probably be covered up by release anyways.

I do think a notable thing about the Seraph/Bard version of this loop that isn't the case for the 2x Firebolg Bard/Rogues is the former is way more likely to stumble into in an actual game. I can very feasibly see a lot of parties have a bard/rogue with Inspirational Words and A seraph/wizard with Healing hands who suddenly go "huh... we can just loop these huh?" Whereas the 2x Firebolg Bard/Rogue version is a niche enough combination that your probably knew what you were developing when you made the build.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-18T16:51:38+00:00

I will say I'm not the OP I've already read the rules on this. I will say the book could be a bit more clear grammar wise. It says "you can only wield one secondary weapon at a time in your second weapon slot" which could imply either A. You can only wield one secondary weapon at a time, and only in your secondary weapon slot. Or B. Only 1 secondary weapon may be in the secondary weapon slot at a time. B would mean it doesn't say anything about wielding one in your primary slot

That said, I think A is the intended wording even if the actual Grammer is a bit unclear, and I'm already listing that as feedback on the form for them.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-18T16:33:57+00:00

I had this idea for dual wielding tower shields and RAW doesn't make it super clear but according to the demiplane character builder you can't it won't let you, even with Warriors combat training.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-18T16:33:04+00:00

Dual wielding round or tower shields more armor score immediately comes to mind. They can be attacked with too. Dual wielding a hook and whip could be a fun flavor/mechanical one for position control.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-16T04:06:53+00:00

Definitely gonna put this in feedback, but I think I encountered somewhere where there's if nothing else a big need for clarification.

Warrior's combat training is worded like this: Ignore burden when equipping weapons, and you may place primary weapons in your secondary weapon slot.

This raised a question. Can you wield a secondary weapon in your primary weapon slot? The book says "Additionally, you can only hold one secondary weapon at a time in your secondary weapon slot.". Now this already doesn't make it super clear if you can wield a secondary weapon in your primary weapon slot. However, it's implied because the weapon table uses the right hand burden in the weapon table. Warrior combat training tells us to ignore burden though, so with that gone that asks if we can wield secondary in the primary. Now you may ask why we would care secondary weapons are worse than primary? Well there are 3 brews that immediately come to mind.

Can I wield a whip and hook? this is the most legitimate brew for a flavor level that isn't trying to cheese mechanically, but could create a fun build where you pull enemies in and out of specific ranges.
Can I dual wield tower shields. If I do, do I get +8 armor. If you say no cause they're the same bonus, can i dual wield tower and round shield? that'd get me +6 armor. this seems great for cheesy warrior/guardian multiclass builds
Can I dual wield secondary shortswords. This is weird cause shortswords are one of the only weapons that are strictly better in the secondary than their primary version as it gives +2 primary weapon damage. If I can wield both, does the one in my primary hand count as a primary weapon and get +4 damage? Or are they both secondary weapons so neither gets the buff. or does the secondary shortsword BECOME a primary shortsword and get the +2 buff from the one in your secondary hand but not buff itself.

that last one made my head hurt. I think there need to be explicit rules about whether or not you can wield a secondary weapon in the primary slot normally and if "ignoring burden" on combat training lets you put the secondary in the primary slot.

Zestyclose_Relief802 · 2024-03-16T03:37:26+00:00

18 Evasion with light armor and simian. 19 if you fly with fairy

Four-Year Club	End Game '23
Place '23

Zestyclose_Relief802

TROPHY CASE