Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8387637" data-attributes="member: 7023840">No, you don't! And that's fine. Because it doesn't have to be negative; no one is saying that entertaining people is bad.Instead, it's similar to Mitchell &amp; Webb's Kitchen Nightmares:[SPOILER=NSFW Language][MEDIA=youtube]i1NfWIaYed8[/MEDIA][/SPOILER]In effect, you're right. It's just a normal home game.A normal home game where:A. The players are paid to play.B. The players are all talented voice actors.C. The DM's career is based off of the game.D. The DM is a talented voice actor.E. Effectively infinite resources (in time and money) to prep for games- including making lore and props as needed.Yes, it is &quot;D&amp;D.&quot; But thinking it is the same as your home game is a category error; it just isn't. That's not a bad thing, at all! People can watch (for example) Gordon Ramsay cook and be inspired to cook more food. People can watch the Bucks win the NBA championship and want to shoot some hoops at the Y. But there is a difference.What is odd (IMO) is the number of people who reflexively assume that those who correctly note that this game is different than most D&amp;D games are somehow besmirching the reputation of Critical Role as opposed to acknowledging the obvious- that viewing this as typical D&amp;D (as opposed to performance, or entertainment D&amp;D) tends to cause quite a few issues. The reason it's weird is because it would be like someone saying, &quot;How dare you note that this Disney Marvel movie is different than what I am doing in my local community theater? How dare you, sir???&quot; No one was insulting Disney for having higher production values than you local community theater- far from it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8387637, member: 7023840"] No, you don't! And that's fine. Because it doesn't have to be negative; no one is saying that entertaining people is bad. Instead, it's similar to Mitchell & Webb's Kitchen Nightmares: [SPOILER=NSFW Language] [MEDIA=youtube]i1NfWIaYed8[/MEDIA] [/SPOILER] In effect, you're right. It's just a normal home game. A normal home game where: A. The players are paid to play. B. The players are all talented voice actors. C. The DM's career is based off of the game. D. The DM is a talented voice actor. E. Effectively infinite resources (in time and money) to prep for games- including making lore and props as needed. Yes, it is "D&D." But thinking it is the same as your home game is a category error; it just isn't. That's not a bad thing, at all! People can watch (for example) Gordon Ramsay cook and be inspired to cook more food. People can watch the Bucks win the NBA championship and want to shoot some hoops at the Y. But there is a difference. What is odd (IMO) is the number of people who reflexively assume that those who correctly note that this game is different than most D&D games are somehow besmirching the reputation of Critical Role as opposed to acknowledging the obvious- that viewing this as typical D&D (as opposed to performance, or entertainment D&D) tends to cause quite a few issues. The reason it's weird is because it would be like someone saying, "How dare you note that this Disney Marvel movie is different than what I am doing in my local community theater? How dare you, sir???" No one was insulting Disney for having higher production values than you local community theater- far from it. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification