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.

 

[Aldarc]

Some people really can’t accept the simple fact that there are folks out there who just actually enjoy playing DND.

I don't necessarily think that these are mutually exclusive ideas. Critical Role can enjoy playing D&D while also being a business that takes financial gain into consideration when making decisions about their business.

 

[Valetudo]

I think they are still using .24 dnd because they still have a deal with wotc and this new campaign will be a third party series on dnd beyond. They have kinda hinted on Aramon being created by Crawford and Perkins and they need to advertise the campaign world before they release it.

 

[TwoSix]

I also think that DP also initially rubbed some fans the wrong way when they didn't cite their sources when it came to their game: i.e., Blades in the Dark. It's obviously not required. D&D doesn't do it. But it's increasingly becoming seen as common courtesy to mention the other games that influenced your game, especially when it's a pretty clear influence. DP added those citations in later, but it was still a sore point for some.

In their defense, they were extremely overt in calling out their game influences in Daggerheart. Lesson learned and all that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

They have kinda hinted on Aramon being created by Crawford and Perkins and they need to advertise the campaign world before they release it.

I wonder if it's the same setting as the one they're working on for DH, if that's the case, or if this is the other project that Perkins alluded to?

My guess is it is the same one - maybe they'll release a dual-stat book for DH and D&D 2024 eventually? That's got some real potential I think because as much as people can gasp and collapse on the fainting couch about them using 2024 for this campaign, if they started releasing material for it that was dual-statted, that could help out DH honestly.

 

[kermit4karate]

In their defense, they were extremely overt in calling out their game influences in Daggerheart. Lesson learned and all that.

I don't go in for angry mobs. I don't think anyone has any responsibility to call out any influences they have at all beyond what's defensible through the courts as far as copyright infringement. If an allegation of infringement is made as far as someone alleging that someone has stolen an idea for something, that determination is for the actual courts to decide, not a court of public opinion, i.e. armchair attorneys.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It has, but I really think we need more time before we see what kind of staying power Daggerheart will end up with.

I mean, that's a bit of truism, isn't it?

Like, if you looked at 5E in 2014/2015 you might reasonably have said "Eh it'll probably do okay but it's not going to grow D&D, just please some old fans", based on sales and impact, but the combination of accessibility, broad appeal and massive non-WotC-related cultural factors (very much including CR!) in the next few years (and then pandemic on top!) boosted it into the absolute stratosphere.

(Intentionally avoiding examples of the other direction to avoid starting something lol)

I don't think anyone has any responsibility to call out any influences they have at all beyond what's defensible through the courts as far as copyright infringement.

I mean, there's "legal responsibility" and then there's "doing what's right" and then there's "doing what's smart", three separate things, and calling out your influences tends to fall into the latter two categories.

I cannot think of a single TTRPG that I thought less of because it called out its influences. Can you? Some might have the odd risible one in there (usually a movie or book that's a bit silly, or an RPG that it's hard to see how it relates, but in among a lot of cool stuff), but overall, "influences"-type stuff tends to make people like a game a lot more than otherwise. It tends to give them a connection to it and a perspective on it.

If I was writing an RPG, I absolutely would make sure I had a decent-sized influences section!

Plus I have thought less of RPGs for seeming to be heavily influenced by X or Y but making absolutely no reference to that fact. Not in some exciting "torches and pitchforks" way, but in a "really we're not going to talk about this elephant that has me squeezed up against the wall? Okay guess..." way.

 

[AlViking]

I don't necessarily think that these are mutually exclusive ideas. Critical Role can enjoy playing D&D while also being a business that takes financial gain into consideration when making decisions about their business.

They've been pretty open that they're sponsored in the past and by whom. I would assume most of their money nowadays comes from ads based on number of views. Of course none of us have insider information, I just don't buy the whole "The only reason they're using D&D is because of payments from WOTC" line. By having to appear only for 1/3 of the sessions, the players are freed up to do other things if they want, like do streams for DH. I also don't see a good reason for them to go all in on DH at this point, there's no telling whether or not the game will have legs.

 

[kermit4karate]

I cannot think of a single TTRPG that I thought less of because it called out its influences. Can you? Some might have the odd risible one in there (usually a movie or book that's a bit silly, or an RPG that it's hard to see how it relates, but in among a lot of cool stuff), but overall, "influences"-type stuff tends to make people like a game a lot more than otherwise. It tends to give them a connection to it and a perspective on it.

Because you cannot satisfy everyone, and it's futile and unwise to even attempt to. Even if one were to preemptively credit 10 different influences, it wouldn't stop another 10 or 200 people from later claiming some were overlooked, and the acknowledgment of influence could weaken future legal proceedings that were to arise.

And what often leads to charges of infringement in mass-market goods? Money, as in when something becomes wildly successful.

Acknowledgment sections are best kept vague and inspirational, like "I would like to thank Gary Gygax for inspiring my lifelong love of gaming," stuff like that. No specific claims, though, unless you want to pay someone down the road for admitting to steal their idea when your pockets are deeper.

All of that said, anyone publishing anything should take all reasonable precautions to ensure that they aren't infringing on any valid copyrights. Beyond actual valid copyright, though, doesn't matter. Defend what's yours, and don't knowingly infringe on a copyright held by anyone else.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't go in for angry mobs. I don't think anyone has any responsibility to call out any influences they have at all beyond what's defensible through the courts as far as copyright infringement. If an allegation of infringement is made as far as someone alleging that someone has stolen an idea for something, that determination is for the actual courts to decide, not a court of public opinion, i.e. armchair attorneys.

It's not about copyright infringement or theft. It's generally just seen as good form in the indie scene to platform your fellow creators who influenced your work through theirs. It's a way of cross-promoting and building good relations in our tiny hobby.

It's also IME useful because it's like reading the footnotes (or endnotes if they are evil-aligned) and works cited in a book. You often get a good idea of where they author/scholar is coming from by glancing through these bits.

They've been pretty open that they're sponsored in the past and by whom. I would assume most of their money nowadays comes from ads based on number of views. Of course none of us have insider information, I just don't buy the whole "The only reason they're using D&D is because of payments from WOTC" line. By having to appear only for 1/3 of the sessions, the players are freed up to do other things if they want, like do streams for DH. I also don't see a good reason for them to go all in on DH at this point, there's no telling whether or not the game will have legs.

Only reason? No. But it certainly may have factored into their decision.

 

[Parmandur]

I wonder if it's the same setting as the one they're working on for DH, if that's the case, or if this is the other project that Perkins alluded to?

My guess is it is the same one - maybe they'll release a dual-stat book for DH and D&D 2024 eventually? That's got some real potential I think because as much as people can gasp and collapse on the fainting couch about them using 2024 for this campaign, if they started releasing material for it that was dual-statted, that could help out DH honestly.

I would be shocked if they didn't. And honestly, it seems easy enought? Granted, I haven't done a deep dive on Daggerheart, but from what I have seen it isn't exactly rocket surgery to dual stat a few things.

The fluffuer part of a Campaign Setting would be super easy, too: the Campaign Frames can work as prep for D&D, and a little more old school detail wouldn't exactly hurt a Daggerheart prep.