Critical Role Reveals Soldiers' Table and Motivations

The first of Critical Role's three tables has officially been revealed. Near the end of last night's episode, the Soldiers were revealed as Kattigan Vale (Robbie Daymond), Teor Pridesire (Travis Willingham), Thimble (Laura Bailey), Tyranny (Whitney Moore), and Wicander Halovar (Sam Riegel). The group's initial objective will be to track down the smuggler Casimir Gavendale, who betrayed a conspiracy to rescue condemned rogue Thjazi Fang and then left the city in pursuit of Teor's brother Cyd Pridesire.

Casimir's Crow Keepers (a thieves guild) had attacked Thimble immediately prior to the campaign, leading to her not delivering a glyph that would have transported him to safety. Meanwhile, Kattigan and Teor are old associates of Casimir, as they had all served in a mercenary group that rebelled several years prior to the start of the series. Tyranny and Wicander are joining the party as Casimir had dealings with Wicander's family House Halovar, and Wicander is seeking to rectify the wrongs of his family. Tyranny is seemingly loyal to Wicander, having made a pact with him to enter the Material Plane.

Two more tables will be revealed in Critical Role, presumably by the end of the next episode. One group, the Schemers, will likely look to take on the Sundered Houses and their growing influence on Dol Majkar, while the Seekers will likely be tasked with protecting Occtis Tachonis (Alex Ward) from his family and also exploring the state of the afterlife in the aftermath of the gods' death.

 

[nyvinter]

"You've expressed that you want to be in these groups, find ways during the last two overture sessions to group together." It doesn't have to be any more complex than that.

Looking at them, I do not believe for a second that they "knew" how or what was coming.

 

[Matchstick]

Exactly. The world is treated as a real place, not a power fantasy theme park for the PCs. The NPCs act like real people, they don’t fawn over the PCs. This is one thing that’s making me more interested in this campaign, not less.

Same. Matt has always given the players WAY too much wiggle room with stuff like that. I'm a huge fan of Campaign 1 for example, but I always skip the negotiations with a certain white dragon because the players (Tal and Marisha mostly) take such incredible advantage of Matt's unwillingness to make them face consequences. I'm far more interested in a campaign with actual logical consequences, even if it means taking Matt out of the GM chair. We'll see if those consequences are incoming; I'm skeptical.

 

[Retros_x]

I have 1 complaint- did it feel pre planned?

I have the feeling these 4 overture episodes are like a narrative session zero for the viewers and the players did know from the start what their teams and goals will be starting from episode 5. At least thats my guess, they know they somehow should end up there and thus can do actions in this direction.

 

[OB1]

Re Primus and Murray, that’s exactly the kind of high level play that I love watching. Should almost come with a “professional players, don’t attempt at home” warning.

Marisha and BLeeM are highly skilled, empathetic, storytellers. I have no doubt that Marisha understood she was playing with fire, and was poking to see just how far she could push. Had she gone to far and got Murray killed, there would have been no hard feelings.

And the Scheemers plot really needs those kind of stakes and risk taking from the PCs to make it interesting. Passive play would make that concept incredibly boring. In fact, the schemers may turn out to be the deadliest of the three groups.

 

[Chaltab]

It depends on what you mean by 'gotten Murray killed'. We're still talking about a game with rules here and just having a character die by DM fiat because they back-talked an NPC is not something I would be okay with. I doubt that's what Brennan meant. Honestly I half expected the response to be "I'll kill you where you stand." to be "You can certainly try."

Granted, I don't have Beacon and haven't watched the after show so maybe that is what he meant.

 

[nyvinter]

It wouldn't be death by DM fiat as such if the CR 15 NPC* attacked the level 3 pc. But it would probably have been 100% certain.

*) My guess. Brennan was explicit that NPCs are going to be at the CR that makes sense to the world and not adjusting for players. Primus is the head of a Sundered House, he's got to be high.

 

[TiQuinn]

It wouldn't be death by DM fiat as such if the CR 15 NPC* attacked the level 3 pc. But it would probably have been 100% certain.

*) My guess. Brennan was explicit that NPCs are going to be at the CR that makes sense to the world and not adjusting for players. Primus is the head of a Sundered House, he's got to be high.

Again, it’s always the DM‘s choice if a NPC is going to use their spells to kill or subdue or humiliate or any other kind of action that they want to take against the PC

 

[OB1]

Again, it’s always the DM‘s choice if a NPC is going to use their spells to kill or subdue or humiliate or any other kind of action that they want to take against the PC

And it's the players choice to not listen to explicit warnings from the DM that their course of action could lead to severe consequences.

For my personal DM style, had I been running that situation and Marisha had pushed again after the explicit warning, I would have broken from the scene and said something to the effect of "Just to be clear, an NPC that is far above your power level and who your character knows to be one to make good on his threats will attack you and there is a very high chance that it will not be possible to survive the encounter should it go that way. Is the intent for your character that they continue to ignore the warning signs and as a player that you are good with your character experiencing the consequences of their choice?" Just to make sure that the player had properly read my intent as a DM. Communication errors can and do happen between DM and Players.

However, my take on the players and DM of CR is that they don't need that explicit warning. They are all skilled enough players, know each other and have enough empathy that the above was all implied in the moment. In other words

'Professional Role Players. Do not attempt at home.'

 

[overgeeked]

I get the feeling that some people will always complain if PCs have to face the logical consequences of their actions. There’s no point arguing about it endlessly. For some the point of RPGs is to have a power fantasy in a consequence-free space. After watching the scene 4-5 times now, it’s crystal clear Murray was repeatedly warned to not press the big red button but chose to anyway.

 

[Chaltab]

I get the feeling that some people will always complain if PCs have to face the logical consequences of their actions. There’s no point arguing about it endlessly. For some the point of RPGs is to have a power fantasy in a consequence-free space. After watching the scene 4-5 times now, it’s crystal clear Murray was repeatedly warned to not press the big red button but chose to anyway.

Kiind of feel like that's a strawman. Attacking a level 15 wizard is one thing, but he came in and insulted her, so she shot back. The point is the level of escalation from verbal banter to threats of violence felt a bit forced.