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.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I challenge anyone to look at the 2024 MM compared to the ToV or A5E ones and make the case that the 2024 monsters are better designed.

I will say, having played and run monsters from all three of those books now for a while, that I really like the D&D 2024 monsters. First, there are simply more of them in a single book which works well for me at the table. Second, the stat blocks are all on a single page which is something both TOV and A5e don't manage to do in their books. Third, most of the stat blocks work well enough that there isn't a huge difference for me between the three. Sometimes I like a monster better in TOV than I do in 2024 but most of the time they're close enough. Fourth, D&D 2024 monsters hit good and hard -- definitely threatening for their challenge level. I've been running D&D 2024 monsters against tier 3 (soon tier 4) characters and have no problem keeping the challenge up. I love A5e design but they're just a bit too low in damage output for me.

There's lots of stuff to love about both TOV and A5e books. I love them and use them. But I think D&D 2024's MM holds up just fine and is better in some ways from the other two.

 

[kermit4karate]

D&D Sponsorship apparently pays them millions for the exposure. No amount of mathing on the DH side is going to overcome that number.

I don't know this for sure -- not sure anyone here does -- but we do know some things.

Like, we know that WotC is backed by millions of $$$.

We know that D&D is a much more popular game than DH.

We know that many of the CR members work professionally as entertainers. Making a living from it is clearly important to at least some of them.

Makes sense to assume that a great deal of money changed hands, and it's safe to assume where most of it is coming from.

Nothing wrong with that at all if it's even true. That's the thing, right? People have every right to want to make money from their profession.

 

[chuckdee]

I don't know this for sure -- not sure anyone here does -- but we do know some things.

Like, we know that WotC is backed by millions of $$$.

We know that D&D is a much more popular than DH.

We know that many of rhe CR members work professionally as entertainers. Making a living from it is clearly important to at least some of them.

Makes sense to assume that a great deal of money changed hands, and it's safe to assume where most of it is coming from.

There was a video in the Daggerheart+ thread that broke down the financials, from known sources.

 

[Reynard]

I will say, having played and run monsters from all three of those books now for a while, that I really like the D&D 2024 monsters. First, there are simply more of them in a single book which works well for me at the table. Second, the stat blocks are all on a single page which is something both TOV and A5e don't manage to do in their books. Third, most of the stat blocks work well enough that there isn't a huge difference for me between the three. Sometimes I like a monster better in TOV than I do in 2024 but most of the time they're close enough. Fourth, D&D 2024 monsters hit good and hard -- definitely threatening for their challenge level. I've been running D&D 2024 monsters against tier 3 (soon tier 4) characters and have no problem keeping the challenge up. I love A5e design but they're just a bit too low in damage output for me.

There's lots of stuff to love about both TOV and A5e books. I love them and use them. But I think D&D 2024's MM holds up just fine and is better in some ways from the other two.

I run my 2024 game on Fantasy Grounds, and I have access to both the ToV and A5E MMs there too. When I am setting things up (either as prep or on the fly) I compare all of the version of the same monster(s) I want to use and I almost never pick the 2024 version. Mostly they are boring. I understand that the 2024 PCs are more robust than their 2014 counterparts so I adjust total encounter math to compensate.

 

[Imaro]

I don't know this for sure -- not sure anyone here does -- but we do know some things.

Like, we know that WotC is backed by millions of $$$.

We know that D&D is a much more popular game than DH.

We know that many of rhe CR members work professionally as entertainers. Making a living from it is clearly important to at least some of them.

Makes sense to assume that a great deal of money changed hands, and it's safe to assume where most of it is coming from.

Nothing wrong woth that at all if it's even true. That's the thing, right? People have every right to want to make money from their profession.

Well another possibility is revenue that is indirectly tied to WotC... if you're producing a D&D product (whether youre WotC or not)...are you going to want to pay to advertise on a non D&D show? At the very least you wont be willing to pay a premium rate since it isnt necessarily your audience... and im sorry but no one outside DP is producing DH anything at a level worthy of paying for CR advertising

 

[SlyFlourish]

I run my 2024 game on Fantasy Grounds, and I have access to both the ToV and A5E MMs there too. When I am setting things up (either as prep or on the fly) I compare all of the version of the same monster(s) I want to use and I almost never pick the 2024 version. Mostly they are boring. I understand that the 2024 PCs are more robust than their 2014 counterparts so I adjust total encounter math to compensate.

I love boring monsters.

More specifically, I don't need a lot of mechanics -- I focus on making monsters interesting in the fiction of the game. Numenera and Cypher really rammed this into me. The idea that you could have a "level 7 monster" and that was all the stat line you needed.

 

[Chaltab]

I love boring monsters.

More specifically, I don't need a lot of mechanics -- I focus on making monsters interesting in the fiction of the game. Numenera and Cypher really rammed this into me. The idea that you could have a "level 7 monster" and that was all the stat line you needed.

...But how would that even work?

Level alone tells you next to nothing.

 

[chuckdee]

Well another possibility is revenue that is indirectly tied to WotC... if you're producing a D&D product (whether youre WotC or not)...are you going to want to pay to advertise on a non D&D show? At the very least you wont be willing to pay a premium rate since it isnt necessarily your audience... and im sorry but no one outside DP is producing DH anything at a level worthy of paying for CR advertising

This is the post:

Post in thread 'Daggerheart General Thread [+]'

Yesterday at 6:29 PM

This can't be ignored:

• Theory of Games

It's a click-baity title, but the content is really good and it comes down to the financial benefits.

 

[AlViking]

D&D Sponsorship apparently pays them millions for the exposure. No amount of mathing on the DH side is going to overcome that number.

You know they pay them millions base on what, exactly? Because while I can't find any current information, this link they didn't spend anywhere near that for there entire advertising budget. On the other hand, getting any factual information on this topic is a crapshoot.

 

[chuckdee]

You know they pay them millions base on what, exactly? Because while I can't find any current information, this link they didn't spend anywhere near that for there entire advertising budget. On the other hand, getting any factual information on this topic is a crapshoot.

See above your post...