True, though I expect you'll find there's some aspects that are, while not ubiquitous, are very common. There are styles that exist through large swaths of the gaming community that most of us an recognize.
Well, of course. For example, most of us use dice rather than dice apps. People tend to play barbarians as melee builds. However, for the topics discussed here, I do not find there to be meaningful play styles that are consistent over a majority of the games unless you speak very vaguely. DMs run very different games.
The argument arises because media consumption sets expectations. And if you have your expectations set by behavior that actually has different goals than the folks at your table, that's a recipe for confusion and disappointment.
If your recipe doesn't turn out, ask if you followed the entire recipe. Critical Role sets expectations for new players - which DMs need to address for these new players to let them know how they run games - and the players need to advise the DM as to what they're seeking in a game as well. Then you figure out hw to make everyone happy (which may mean fnding different tables).
Appeal to authority? As if we don't have scores of people around who have similar levels of exposure.
And yet, my experience is my experience and relevant. We spend a lot of time out there citing experience and authority in the professional world for a reason: Experience matters. That is why I mentioned my experience. Obviously.
And... if those scores were mostly convention and one-shot play, that experience doesn't necessarily translate to long-term campaign play, much like many of the patterns useful in short-story writing must be left behind when you write a novel.
I've played a lot of games with a lot of DMs in a lot of scenarios. I've had 6 different DMs with which I've played at least 2 year long campaigns. I've DMed for 7 campaigns that have run at least 2 years. I've had at least 20 more 'adventure long' events (running an entire module or more worth of material) with a variety of DMs. And I've had an insane amount of one to three shots with a wide varety of folks - both as player and DM.
And based upon that experience, I am pretty comfortable saying you can get a feel for a DMs style within a few minutes of play and that there are not surprising changes to their styles between their short and long adventure methods. They do not have time for everything during a short session that they might do in a campaign, but those that enjoy the 'long game' elements like a 2 hour in game shopping trip often make it clear just how much they're rushing things they usually like to take slow.
And, you know what? Mercer's table would likely be improved by taking hints from other GMs, too. Everyone has room for improvement. I suspect, if you ask him, Mercer would say his table owes a great deal of its character to the other GMs that Mercer himself played under.
No need to suspect - he talks about learning a lot from other DMs all the time. I think when we are open minded we can find something useful whenever we listen to others. Sometimes it is learning about things to avoid. Other times - things to steal. Other times things to drop from our games because they may not work as well as we think they do.
Everyone has room for improvement. And nobody's game is beyond criticism. The Critical Role table is *very* public, and so it will attract more criticism.
Right. However, I don't get the arguments that people are making that it is the 'wrong' way to play or that 'no game is like theirs'. There are games that have a lot of similarities - and a lot of games that are very different in very different ways. D&D is a wide spectrum.
