Critical Role to Use D&D 2024 Rules For Campaign Four, Expands to Three Tables and Thirteen Players

Critical Role will continue to use Dungeons & Dragons as the play system for its upcoming campaign, with the cast expanding to three distinct tables consisting of a total of 13 players. Today, Critical Role announced new details about its new campaign, which is set to air on October 4th. The new campaign will feature the full founding cast members as players, alongside several new players. In total, the cast includes Laura Bailey, Luis Carazo, Robbie Daymond, Aabria Iyengar, Taliesin Jaffe, Ashley Johnson, Matthew Mercer, Whitney Moore, Liam O’Brien, Marisha Ray, Sam Riegel, Alexander Ward, and Travis Willingham, with the previously announced Brennan Lee Mulligan serving as GM.

The campaign itself will be run as a "West Marches" style of campaign, with three separate groups of players exploring the world. The groups are divided into gameplay styles, with a combat-focused Soldiers group, a lore/exploration-focused Seekers group, and a intrigue-focused Schemers group. All three groups will explore the world of Araman, created by Mulligan for the campaign.

Perhaps most importantly, Critical Role will not be switching to Daggerheart for the fourth campaign. Instead, they'll be opting for the new 2024 ruleset of Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition. Daggerheart will be represented at Critical Role via the Age of Umbra and "other" Actual Play series, as well as partnerships with other Actual Play troupes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And that’s fine. I’m not saying it isn’t different, and new players can certainly feel the difference in my experience. But I played 8 games at GenCon all using 2024, many of them with players that said they haven’t tried the new update yet, and all of them basically came away saying “so it’s just 5e?”

Outside of a few things like Weapon Mastery, most casual fans would probably not be able to tell the difference between 2014 and 2024 by just glancing at a premade character sheet.

I'm sure that's true. However, I'm not a casual player, and frankly have a hard time thinking like one.

 

[kermit4karate]

Are you suggesting that D&D would continue to grow at its current rate without any new products or marketing? I think that's a bonkers suggestion.

Who said it has to continue growing at its current rate? 1%/year of 10 million is still 100,000 new players/year.

Even if it's just baaaaarely growing, it'll continue to outpace everything else.

I realize that that annoys a great many people here, but it is what it is. D&D is a cultural phenom that still controls massive global mindshare in the TTRPG world.

 

[Umbran]

Big businesses may also have a lot of bureaucratic/managerial structures that makes catering to smaller, niche or fringe markets or other specialty or experimental projects too expensive to pursue for acceptable return whereas smaller businesses with less overhead have opportunities to excel.

Yep. Fiduciary duty to shareholders can actually force larger companies away from serving smaller markets.

 

[kermit4karate]

And that’s fine. I’m not saying it isn’t different, and new players can certainly feel the difference in my experience. But I played 8 games at GenCon all using 2024, many of them with players that said they haven’t tried the new update yet, and all of them basically came away saying “so it’s just 5e?”

Outside of a few things like Weapon Mastery, most casual fans would probably not be able to tell the difference between 2014 and 2024 by just glancing at a premade character sheet.

That's also been my experience. I'd even go further to say that most casual D&D observers, meaning people who've played at least one version or other over the past 40 years, see 2024 and think, "So, it's basically the same?"

And that's even taking into account THAC0. As soon as they see STR, INT, DEX, CON, WIS, CHA, AC, HP, etc., they immediately think 2024 is the same game. Because really, it mostly is the same game.

 

[Parmandur]

That's also been my experience. I'd even go further to say that most casual D&D observers, meaning people who've played at least one version or other over the past 40 years, see 2024 and think, "So, it's basically the same?"

And that's even taking into account THAC0. As soon as they see STR, INT, DEX, CON, WIS, CHA, AC, HP, etc., they immediately think 2024 is the same game. Because really, it mostly is the same game.

Hell, I've struggled trying to explain to the people I play with how 4E was different than 5E...and they've played both, too!

 

[kermit4karate]

Hell, I've struggled trying to explain to the people I play with how 4E was different than 5E...and they've played both, too!

Agreed, me too. But then I ask myself, "What's the point here??" If my players are/were familiar with 2E, for instance, when I was running 4E games, I basically neutered it to make it more like 2E because what do I care as long as my players are having a good time?

By the time 4E came around, I'd already dropped THAC0, stole the unified XP for level advancement, stole unlimited cantrips for spellcasters who got them, a few other things. I don't care which edition comes out with which specific rules and never have. I treat them all as different ingredients to prepare whatever kind of dish the guest wants. But that's just how I do it.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think if you tell the small business owner who will lose their home if their business tanks that they can take bigger risks because they have "less riding on it", they would be justified in laughing at that suggestion.

I expect that, more often, you have it backwards backwards. Large businesses, with huge reserves and large current profits can afford to rest on their laurels. Meanwhile, small businesses sometimes find themselves in the position where taking a big risk is their only option.

Well, yes, that is accurate. I was using the terms “afford” and “risk” in the euphemistic way they are often used in the business world, not this more grounded and honest way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yep. Fiduciary duty to shareholders can actually force larger companies away from serving smaller markets.

Which is why I strongly dislike publicly-held companies.

 

[mamba]

What's the actual name of the WWN podcast? I'd love to check it out but I'm having a hard time looking it up.

 

[Umbran]

Are you suggesting that D&D would continue to grow at its current rate without any new products or marketing? I think that's a bonkers suggestion.

It isn't bonkers to think that it would carry on for a while, at least. I don't expect it is a runaway train, but it has some momentum.

Plus, it is a hypothetical, as we know that WotC is doing new products.