Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Harzel" data-source="post: 7426807" data-attributes="member: 6857506">That has not been my experience.&nbsp; I have watched CR regularly for quite a while, and to the best of my knowledge it has not made me more insecure about my DM-ing.&nbsp; Matt Mercer is very good at somethings, competent at most, and has a few weaknesses - some of which he works at improving, and others of which he doesn't seem to care about (or are just low priority for him).&nbsp; In a few spots, I think I am better than he is; other places I try to learn from him.&nbsp;Yes, it would not be a good idea to treat it as a D&amp;D ideal that must be matched (or even necessarily emulated).&nbsp; If you pay attention, though, you will notice that the cast do not style themselves as great D&amp;D players - they're very explicit about the notion that they are doing what is fun for them.It doesn't have to be either/or.All solid advice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Harzel, post: 7426807, member: 6857506"] That has not been my experience. I have watched CR regularly for quite a while, and to the best of my knowledge it has not made me more insecure about my DM-ing. Matt Mercer is very good at somethings, competent at most, and has a few weaknesses - some of which he works at improving, and others of which he doesn't seem to care about (or are just low priority for him). In a few spots, I think I am better than he is; other places I try to learn from him. Yes, it would not be a good idea to treat it as a D&D ideal that must be matched (or even necessarily emulated). If you pay attention, though, you will notice that the cast do not style themselves as great D&D players - they're very explicit about the notion that they are doing what is fun for them. It doesn't have to be either/or. All solid advice. [/QUOTE]

Verification