Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9777922" data-attributes="member: 6779196">That’s the thing though, Critical Role is entertainment media. The players are part of the cast, the audience is passive. The choice of how to start may arguably not have been ideal for a home game, but it was IMO a very good choice for an actual play. I mean, it’s clear that the players are all much more familiar with the setting and lore than we are already. These aren’t choices being made about how to get the players invested, they’re about how to get the audience invested.Most definitely! And, again, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with not caring for this approach.I mean, I disagree. In RPG adventures, you get the players invested in the world by getting them invested in the NPCs in it. But, it is certainly the case that the approach the Critical Role cast seems to be taking is getting the audience invested in the campaign by getting them invested in the PCs. If what you like about Critical Role is being a fly on the wall for a “real” game of D&D, I can see this being a move away from what you’re in it for. Though, I would argue the show hasn’t really been that since Campaign 1. The longer the show has gone on, the more they’ve moved away from that candid camera type approach and towards creating a more polished viewer experience. And if you primarily watch Critical Role for the characters and stories, like it’s a fantasy fiction audio play podcast that happens to be heavily improvised, then this is probably the best execution of that we’ve seen from Critical Role.</blockquote>

Verification