Critical Role Critical Role Campaign 3 Discussion (SPOILERS)

[DarkCrisis]

Need to make the EXU characters feel more welcome and have them roll Saving Throws for everything

 

[Hexmage-EN]

Count me in as another that didn't care for Exandria Unlimited. Did not care for Aabria's DMing style at all compared to Matt's. I've heard she's been better in other things, though, so maybe part of the problem was how radically different she was from Matt.

However, I am kind of excited about Fearne being in Campaign 3. She's already been established to have pissed-off the ruler of the Seelie Fey in the Exandria setting's version of the Feywild: Lady Elmenore the Unforgiving, High Warqueen of the Burning Vale. I'm hoping we get more info about Matt's take on the Feywild thanks to her presence.

Plus I enjoyed that pretty much the first thing she did was steal someone's holy symbol for no reason.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Count me in as another that didn't care for Exandria Unlimited. Did not care for Aabria's DMing style at all compared to Matt's. I've heard she's been better in other things, though, so maybe part of the problem was how radically different she was from Matt.

However, I am kind of excited about Fearne being in Campaign 3. She's already been established to have pissed-off the ruler of the Seelie Fey in the Exandria setting's version of the Feywild: Lady Elmenore the Unforgiving, High Warqueen of the Burning Vale. I'm hoping we get more info about Matt's take on the Feywild thanks to her presence.

Plus I enjoyed that pretty much the first thing she did was steal someone's holy symbol for no reason.

I thought her story telling etc was fine, my biggest issue was she used a Saving Throw for everything. Did she even know the characters had skills?

Im half convinced shes a big AD&D fan and was just trying to usr the old "roll under your stat" method of "skills".

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Kinda tough crowd here!

I liked Exandria Unlimited quite a bit and I was happy to see characters from there to return. Now this starting episode was certainly a bit slow, and we really didn't get to know the new characters yes, so it is hard to say how they will be. Though I suspect that I will really like Laudna.

Now one thing I'm a bit leery about is Fresh Cut Grass. I usually really like Sam's characters, but this seems a bit much. But that just might be because I find constant increase of high-tech elements in Exandria bit jarring. But Sam is a great player, and is master at combining humour with depth, so I'm sure I'll get over it.

 

[Charlaquin]

1. The constant unprompted asking for checks (which is itself annoying and not necessary) but then having the checks not even matter (It seems she reacted and dictated the exact same thing whether a 5 was rolled or a 20 was rolled);

This one bothered me a lot too. I see it often with new DMs, who think “an action was declared, therefore I must call for a check” without thinking through whether or not the action would have a cost or a consequence for failure. So when the check is failed, they hem and haw for a bit and then say something like, “well, eventually you [get the result of success], but [some insignificant drawback; often taking a long time and/or looking foolish in the process].”

 

[DarkCrisis]

This one bothered me a lot too. I see it often with new DMs, who think “an action was declared, therefore I must call for a check” without thinking through whether or not the action would have a cost or a consequence for failure. So when the check is failed, they hem and haw for a bit and then say something like, “well, eventually you [get the result of success], but [some insignificant drawback; often taking a long time and/or looking foolish in the process].”

ive noticed that a lot of new games have “succeed at a cost” instead of failure. Keeps the game moving and adds spice and uncertainty. Like the new Avatar the Last Airbender has such a system

 

[Mort]

ive noticed that a lot of new games have “succeed at a cost” instead of failure. Keeps the game moving and adds spice and uncertainty. Like the new Avatar the Last Airbender has such a system

It's presented in the 5e DMG as an optional rule.

 

[Mort]

This one bothered me a lot too. I see it often with new DMs, who think “an action was declared, therefore I must call for a check” without thinking through whether or not the action would have a cost or a consequence for failure. So when the check is failed, they hem and haw for a bit and then say something like, “well, eventually you [get the result of success], but [some insignificant drawback; often taking a long time and/or looking foolish in the process].”

Yeah, it was bad. There was one case, She asks for a history check. The player rolls a 0 (bad modifier) and she responds with something like "well, you really need this information..." and proceeds to give a full exposition. Then DON'T ASK FOR A CHECK.

 

[Charlaquin]

ive noticed that a lot of new games have “succeed at a cost” instead of failure. Keeps the game moving and adds spice and uncertainty. Like the new Avatar the Last Airbender has such a system

Success at a cost is great, but the cost has to be meaningful. Taking a long time when there’s no source of time pressure or looking foolish are not meaningful costs.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It seems that a lot of people pay way more attention to how things are mechanically handled in CR than me. Or I mean I do notice these things, but I don't really care. That's not what I'm watching the show for. Yeah, Aabria handled certain things mechanically in manner I wouldn't have, but so does Matt occasionally. But games of both have great atmosphere, engaging and well portrayed NPCs and players obviously are invested and having fun so it's all works for me.