D&D General Critical Role: Overrated, Underrated, or Goldilocks?

[jgsugden]

also... the CR cast even say they are performing on the show. They didn't have so elaborate backstories and deep personal relations before the show. Saying they are performing is not saying they are fake, or not being honest in their portrayal of the characters or the game....

They had their backstories from the beginning. Look at the comic books that chronicle their Vox Machina origins. The early story was built out of their backstories.

This is how Matt operates now, and historically. It is how a good number of DMs operate. You get back story, Then you weave it into your stories as you go forward. This allows you to tell a long story that unfolds over several chapters. The backstory of each character folds into those early stories.

 

[Umbran]

But I would ask this. Even if the Mercer effect is a real thing, and hundreds of thousands of CR followers are going to home games and having a terrible time and making DMs wish Mercer had never been born, do you think they would have even tried the game if not for CR in the first place?

Why does what I think of that matter in this discussion?

I mean, it looks like a lead in to dismissal - If I accept that Mercer and CR are responsible for a lot of people trying the game, then the natural follow on would be that positive aspect outweighs any negative impacts, so we can ignore the negative.

If that's your intent, I don't buy into it, I'm afraid. I think that if CR's work has led to good things, it helps if we consider how to make it even more good, by helping to mitigate negative aspects.

 

[BRayne]

They had their backstories from the beginning. Look at the comic books that chronicle their Vox Machina origins. The early story was built out of their backstories.

This is how Matt operates now, and historically. It is how a good number of DMs operate. You get back story, Then you weave it into your stories as you go forward. This allows you to tell a long story that unfolds over several chapters. The backstory of each character folds into those early stories.

They have said that starting the show did encourage them to develop the characters substantially more. But the question would be how much of that was the presence of cameras and how much of that was going from playing an 8-10 hour game every couple of months to a 4 hour one weekly. With the fact that they had been developing their characters and backstories over the course of the entire time they were playing at home, they went from pretty barebones characters day one to fairly established backstories by the time the stream started, I'm inclined to think that playing more often, more consistently, and in shorter sessions had a larger effect there than the cameras themselves did.

 

[Deset Gled]

I would love it if people stopped calling behavior/opinions they dont agree with gatekeeping.

How is it used incorrectly here? Snarf has already said they "don't take kindly" when people make judging comments but don't read the OP. And I agree with them on this point. I voted "yes" in this poll. The net effect is that if you want to participate in the conversation (especially early on), you're expected to perform a task (lots of reading) before doing so. Isn't that the basic definition of gatekeeping? How is this different from telling someone that can't comment on a book trilogy before reading the last book, except the book is a 2000 word, 4x 8.5x11" page manifesto?

Alternatively, if you don't like the word "gatekeeping" here, what word should I use instead? This is a case where I would value advice over snide comments.

 

[OB1]

Why does what I think of that matter in this discussion?

I mean, it looks like a lead in to dismissal - If I accept that Mercer and CR are responsible for a lot of people trying the game, then the natural follow on would be that positive aspect outweighs any negative impacts, so we can ignore the negative.

If that's your intent, I don't buy into it, I'm afraid. I think that if CR's work has led to good things, it helps if we consider how to make it even more good, by helping to mitigate negative aspects.

I was arguing not to throw the baby out with the bath water, but agree that consideration of how to make it even more good is a good thing. In a weird way, we saw the Mercer effect with Aabria's run on EXU, where a portion of the fandom saw someone DMing in a different style from Mercer and went toxic with it. Toxic fandom (which I think is one of the root causes of the Mercer effect) is IMHO, a critical issue to work on, I'm just not sure that the blame or the fix is in the hands of content creators.

 

[Oofta]

On a more serious note, this is exactly why I think adult films are a better analogue than professional sports. Pro sports are the same activity as amateur sports, done at a higher level, which is not the relationship streaming games have to home games - what would a “higher level” even mean in the context of playing D&D? The very idea smacks of elitism. On the other hand, adult film actors engage in the same activity that partners do at home, but they do it to entertain an audience, rather than only themselves and each other (though I imagine at least some, especially the good ones, do also enjoy themselves while doing so.) That is precisely the relationship streamed games have to home games.

Critical Role started out as a home game that they played simply for their own personal enjoyment. Porn is not about the personal enjoyment of the actors.

 

[Oofta]

I think public performances are subject to reasonable criticism. Not insults, but criticism. I don't understand why some fans can't bear to see the show criticized at all. By and large I'm a huge fan of the show. There are also some things that drive me nuts about it. I don't see that as a problem.

Because some people equate CR to porn? Then call it "semantics"? I mean, having real relations with someone is fundamentally different from doing it solely to get paid.

Saying that CR is like porn is saying that they are acting like they enjoy playing D&D. All the jokes, the laughs, the comradery is "acting". I see no reason to believe they are not just extremely talented people who enjoy playing and happen to stream their show.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How is it used incorrectly here? Snarf has already said they "don't take kindly" when people make judging comments but don't read the OP. And I agree with them on this point. I voted "yes" in this poll. The net effect is that if you want to participate in the conversation (especially early on), you're expected to perform a task (lots of reading) before doing so. Isn't that the basic definition of gatekeeping? How is this different from telling someone that can't comment on a book trilogy before reading the last book, except the book is a 2000 word, 4x 8.5x11" page manifesto?

Alternatively, if you don't like the word "gatekeeping" here, what word should I use instead? This is a case where I would value advice over snide comments.

I suppose I'm asking for of a spectrum here, whereas gatekeeping as a buzzword has a very negative connotation attached to it. There's nothing with having an opinion about something and wanting to Express it regardless of your knowledge or investment, but those things do make a big difference in how your opinion can be weighed and responded to by others. As soon as you call that "gatekeeping" the conversation becomes about that person being a jerk.

 

[Retreater]

Saying that CR is like porn is saying that they are acting like they enjoy playing D&D. All the jokes, the laughs, the comradery is "acting". I see no reason to believe they are not just extremely talented people who enjoy playing and happen to stream their show.

When you're a paid performer, that's exactly what you do. Even if you sometimes love your job, it's still a job.
How many times have I had to pretend to be happy onstage while I was in physical pain?
Anyone who gets paid to play D&D has made it a job, and is (at least at times) faking it.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

My feeling is that there's a lot to learn from CR, because they do play to their audience, every table has an audience, the other players, and that shared sense of trying to keep things fun for the other people around you is actually a really valuable thing. They play into each other and when they're mutual professionalism means that they're always picking up what the others are putting them down, it's professional but it isn't fake, or inappropriate to bring to the table. They play the way they do because they're as entertained by each other as we are by them, that's the secret sauce of Critical Role's magic (along with Mercer being an excellent DM, and great production values, including things like character voices and such) and its something not a lot of other streaming shows seem to have, honestly DCA got the closest.