Critical Role Is Critical Role Scripted

[Stalker0]

When it comes to a produced show, the players are going to weigh these choices differently. Their primary goal isn't to win the game. It's to make compelling content. They're going to look at these options, and while option one might be the more rational choice.. If they think option two will lead to better content, and better moments they'll go that way.

They talked about this in Game Knights. They intentionally powered down their decks. They recognized that some of the most powerful cards that consistently help win the game, also lead to consistently predictable play patterns. So while these cards may further the game plan of winning.. They don't make for as interesting content, and making interesting content is more important than winning.

Yeah I haven't watched much CR, but I had always assumed the characters and DM would make decisions that drove interesting scenarios rather than the "correct" decision that was more boring.

I never figured they would script entire episodes, but I did wonder about specific scenes, or perhaps edit key die rolls. If this was the saving throw that would lead to a TPK....would they roll the die multiple times and take the value they wanted for the episode kind of thing.

 

[Oofta]

Yeah I haven't watched much CR, but I had always assumed the characters and DM would make decisions that drove interesting scenarios rather than the "correct" decision that was more boring.

I have players make "interesting" decisions all the time.

I never figured they would script entire episodes, but I did wonder about specific scenes, or perhaps edit key die rolls. If this was the saving throw that would lead to a TPK....would they roll the die multiple times and take the value they wanted for the episode kind of thing.

No, they don't reroll. The dice fall where the dice fall even if that means killing off a PC.

The closest I remember them coming was something along the lines of Matt allowing Sam to roll a counterspell against disintegrate that would have turned Liam's PC to dust. He allowed it because Sam had previously polymorphed into a beholder and then returned to his normal form after failing a concentration check.

It was one of those judgement calls by the DM that prevented a really tough encounter from being a TPK because a player forgot an ability. Not saying I would have made exactly the same call, but I've done things fairly similar once in a rare blue moon.

 

[Meech17]

I've had plenty of players do what makes sense for their PCs or what will be fun instead of making the optimal choice. I do it myself sometimes. You may not play with people that choose option 2, I do. All the time.

I guess I should have qualified my statement.

Naturally not all home games strictly, and rigidly play by the optimal choices. I'm personally a big proponent of "Doing it for the bit" or eagerly biting at hooks, and going for drama over optimization.. I haven't always been that way, and I do remember a time where the "game" came first, story be damned.

I never figured they would script entire episodes, but I did wonder about specific scenes, or perhaps edit key die rolls. If this was the saving throw that would lead to a TPK....would they roll the die multiple times and take the value they wanted for the episode kind of thing.

I have to admit, I've never watched a whole episode of CR, but isn't it all live-streamed? I doubt there much in the way of editing for those kind of moments.

 

[Seramus]

I've had plenty of players do what makes sense for their PCs or what will be fun instead of making the optimal choice. I do it myself sometimes. You may not play with people that choose option 2, I do. All the time.

Agreed. Even when I'm a player, I tend to choose Option 2 a fair bit because I assume winning is the default state. You're going to win most fights, defeat most villains, overcome most challenges. Yes, you sometimes lose or run into a major complication, but at any given table you're probably winning most of the time. So I lean towards the option that is more interesting or entertaining (provided it is not disruptive to the table), so that the experience is more memorable once we have reached the goal.

And on a personal level, the complications that arise from HOW you won are a lot more interesting to me than the act of winning itself. And even when things do go catastrophically wrong, that's just more plot.

 

[Oofta]

I guess I should have qualified my statement.

Naturally not all home games strictly, and rigidly play by the optimal choices. I'm personally a big proponent of "Doing it for the bit" or eagerly biting at hooks, and going for drama over optimization.. I haven't always been that way, and I do remember a time where the "game" came first, story be damned.

I think there's a whole lot of variety in the way people play. Some are more into roleplaying than others, some are strictly "do what's optimal no matter what".

BTW the "you" was supposed to be a generic you, not a personal you.

I have to admit, I've never watched a whole episode of CR, but isn't it all live-streamed? I doubt there much in the way of editing for those kind of moments.

It's not edited, but when you have hundreds of hours of streaming certain specific moments can seem to be too perfect to be spontaneous.

I assume they could discuss some character direction ahead of time in that the players do discuss things offline with other players. But to me, that's just part of the game for a lot of people. It's not "In this session we're going to say X" it's more "It would be fun if our PCs became romantically involved, is that okay with you?"

 

[Staffan]

Bingo. And we know this just by reading the pages and pages and pages of threads here with people sending inordinate amounts of time worrying about stuff like "game balance" and "challenge ratings". All this talk about the mechanics-- making sure all the combats have all numbers within certain parameters to give every character and every archetype an equal chance of making sure they all contribute equally to every fight, with exactly the specific chances of survival or death for every character against every monster as calculated by the DM that they want to give their players so that they are "challenged".

In fairness to us, I think online discussions by their nature skew somewhat toward the mechanical rather than theatrical. It's easy to talk about things that can be measured in numbers and use that as a basis for discussion. You can argue that the -5/+10 part of Sharpshooter is generally less effective than +2 Dex would be, and then someone else can argue that that comparison doesn't cover all the cases where the Sharpshooter has some extra help that mitigate or eliminate the penalty, and then you can go back and forth over that. Pages of fruitful discourse, to paraphrase sir Humphrey. But the theatrics part is harder to discuss, because it's a subjective experience that's hard to put into words.

 

[Staffan]

I have to admit, I've never watched a whole episode of CR, but isn't it all live-streamed? I doubt there much in the way of editing for those kind of moments.

It's been a while since I watched, but my understanding is that it's pre-recorded these days, but that's mostly to accommodate various schedules (so when Laura gets another award, she can actually be at the award show and appreciate that without having to rush to get to the game). If there's any editing going on, I would suppose it would be things in the realm of practicality, not the game itself. Think bio breaks, not plot fumbles.

 

[Mistwell]

I've known, on a casual acquaintance basis, one of the players in CR for about 30 years or more. I will never understand the accusation that they're "just actors" or the game is somehow "not real." The person I know has played D&D all those years, well before there was such a thing as CR, and is a true blue nerd. He was playing D&D before he was professionally acting, and he went into acting because of things like "acting" at Ren Faire and Rocky Horror Picture Show.

And he's told me it's truly not scripted. And knowing him, I absolutely believe him.

 

[Mistwell]

all of the plot points are planned out beforehand (generally always true in any DnD game with a remotely prepared DM) and that all the players are aware of the upcoming plot points so that they can "improvise" cool reactions to what the DM throws at them

This is not accurate. Players are not made aware of upcoming plot points.

 

[borringman]

I suppose I'm weird and dumb but the vibe I got from what little I've watched of CR is that I can't possibly imagine what they'd script.

Probably the weirdest thing to me is, despite being VAs by trade, they're typical gamers almost to a fault. I kind of expected VAs to have more professionalism and flair for the dramatic, but from what I've seen, it's so authentic that it's almost painful to watch. The PCs are your bog standard "Cantina Effect" D&D pick-and-mix. Like any other DM, most of the time Mercer alternates between waiting patiently as the players get their snarky jokes out of their systems, and doing his darndest to hold everything together. I've jumped around trying to find the "scripted" parts people talk about, but my biggest takeaway was Mercer is a remarkably patient DM. I dunno, I didn't watch much (TBH I didn't see the point) and my perspective could be off, having gamed with thespians in the past.

If it's scripted, they're very meticulously performing very typical D&D sessions. Which. . . what would be the point?