D&D General Critical Role Ending

[doctorbadwolf]

Do you find that this tone encourages people to engage with you?

Incredulity is oftentimes warranted.

 

[pemerton]

I think streamed games should be run first for the players. The audience is along for the ride, but the game should not be run for them.

But isn't the whole point of Critical Role to muster an audience so as to generate revenue for the creators/performers?

It's a type of theatre, as I understand it.

 

[Parmandur]

But isn't the whole point of Critical Role to muster an audience so as to generate revenue for the creators/performers?

It's a type of theatre, as I understand it.

No, the point is primarily for the main group of friends to hang out. They are grateful that turns out to be something they can monetize, but the main goal is to hang out and play their game with friends.

 

[pemerton]

In my experience, games with narrative rules make it harder to engage in that sort of improvisational storytelling simply because there are rules to consider. In D&D the players and the DM are free to do whatever suits their table in regards to such things because there is no metacurrency to count or rules restrictions to avoid.

Apocalypse World has no metacurrency. Nor does it have any "rules restrictions" that I'm aware of.

Wuthering Heights has no metacurrency. Nor any "rules restrictions" that I'm aware of.

D&D has bucketloads of rules. In all versions it has the metacurrency of hit points. In its 5e version it has the metacurrency of inspiration, and individual players have to keep track of metacurrency like spells slots, actions surges, ki points, manoeuvre dice, etc.

For the above reasons I find your assertion hard to interpret.

If you mean that D&D players ignore the rules from time-to-time I'm sure that's probably true. But I'm not sure why you couldn't just ignore the rules in other RPGs if you wanted to.

 

[Manbearcat]

What impediments does D&D have to improvisational play? I've never noticed any in 35 years.

As to narrative rules getting in the way: nothing brings a narrative to a screeching halt quite like Aspects. I love Fate but it is a very difficult game to teach. And I think PbtA "GM moves" are the opposite of improvisational tools.

Could be an interesting GMing/system conversation to be had here!

Curious what you mean by the bolded bit. GM moves in PBtA are a means to (a) structure play broadly within the marriage of the action resolution framework + the GMs responsibilities in conflict framing within the game's theme/premise and (b) structure a GM's cognitive workload specifically. In light of that (their place within the structure/formulation of play), I'm interested in what you mean by them being the opposite of improvisational tools. I'm curious what you feel make for improvisational tools.

Do you (i) have a pithy play excerpt from a PBtA game you GMed that you could relay (showing how you felt they were the opposite of improvisational tools) and a (ii) pithy play excerpt from an alternative system that you GMed that shows functional improvisational tools? That would be really helpful to understand what you mean.

 

[jgsugden]

They literally forced him to help them make it right or they’d turn him over to his government or mere out justice themselves, and then never let him forget his sins every subsequent time they spent time with him. What show did you watch?

To a lot of people, myself included, the decision of the Mighty Nein not to capture and turn in Essek was immoral, illegal and irresponsible. Veth nearly lost her husband because of the trickery - and easily could have seen her child killed. Yasha has every reason to hate mind games. Beau has every reason to hate people that abuse power. Caduceus is generally a moral person, although noncommittal. Jester, Fjord and Caleb are all well in character, however, to put a friendship above the impacts to so many people.

Had I been the DM, I would have been expecting that discussion to go very differently - and it seems like Matt did too.

 

[Maxperson]

To a lot of people, myself included, the decision of the Mighty Nein not to capture and turn in Essek was immoral, illegal and irresponsible. Veth nearly lost her husband because of the trickery - and easily could have seen her child killed. Yasha has every reason to hate mind games. Beau has every reason to hate people that abuse power. Caduceus is generally a moral person, although noncommittal. Jester, Fjord and Caleb are all well in character, however, to put a friendship above the impacts to so many people.

Had I been the DM, I would have been expecting that discussion to go very differently - and it seems like Matt did too.

Sound like great roleplay to me. Realistic personalities are not one way all of the time. People that are generally moral and would normally turn in such a person can and often are conflicted when it's one of their close friends. Often they don't do the moral thing out of friendship. Beliefs often get set aside. It doesn't sound like anyone did anything wrong and it could have gone either way, but turned out in Essek's favor this go around.

Edit: Corrected a typo

 

[pemerton]

What impediments does D&D have to improvisational play?

The action economy. The hit point and damage rules. The rules for magic-use, based around spell slots and class abilities. The rules for recovery via rest periods.

Maybe some others too, but those were the ones I thought of in the time it took me to type them up.

EDIT: I also noticed these posts upthread which identify more impediments (though I'm not saying that was what these posters were themselves doing):

I think the acid test for anyone who says they've run high level D&D is to ask them how many times they resorted to "[spell name] doesn't work here." The most common spells probably being Teleport, Detect Thoughts or Scrying. Even CR had to resort to "teleportation doesn't work here" in the final arc so that the PC's would actually experience the cool setting rather than teleporting to the objective.

More than anything else, the problem with high levels is the number of spells that might as well read "Remove Challenge" in their description.

She’s noted that numbers and math are not her thing, and I think that is exacerbated by having to do it on camera. I also think she’s one who has the more vivid imagination of the scene so the hard bump back to mechanics might be especially disruptive to her train of thought.

 

[MarkB]

But isn't the whole point of Critical Role to muster an audience so as to generate revenue for the creators/performers?

It's a type of theatre, as I understand it.

That's always the way I've viewed it. This form of entertainment is essentially group-based improvisational storytelling with an RPG ruleset used as an organising structure. And this one is performed by people who are really good at getting fully invested in their characters.

 

[Manbearcat]

That's always the way I've viewed it. This form of entertainment is essentially group-based improvisational storytelling with an RPG ruleset used as an organising structure. And this one is performed by people who are really good at getting fully invested in their characters.

I would say that 5e's contribution to Critical Role is well south of structure but north of veneer. I can't think of a word in the english language that fits that bill...perhaps "performative sheathing" (as in you frame a roof with trusses and hangers and then sheath it with OSB/plywood before you roof it)?