Critical Role PSA: You are not Matt Mercer

[pickin_grinnin]

I manage expectations before I let someone join the campaign, and again during an all-group Session Zero. I specifically address this issue. That has always worked well for me.

 

[Fauchard1520]

I manage expectations before I let someone join the campaign, and again during an all-group Session Zero. I specifically address this issue. That has always worked well for me.

You specifically address the Matt Mercer thing? Why is that? Have you had it come up before?

 

[jgsugden]

Dear Mr. Mercer:

If you do, in fact, see this thread, I would like to assure you that you are, in fact, Matt Mercer.

To everyone else:

You are, in fact, not Matt Mercer. The title is correct.

If you need to check, you can find a mirror in the bathroom.

On a more serious note (although, seriously, Matt - if you read this, you are Matt Mercer), I hate that people use the names of people as labels for problems. It is a horrible practice. Calling this a Critical Role concern is a bit better, but even better would be just saying we're not voice actors as the label and referencing Critical and Matt Mercer in your discussion as an example. Saying there is a problem and then using a person's name for the label of the problem... it is just unpleasant. So, please, do not Fauchard1520 anyone else by using their name as a label.

 

[prabe]

You specifically address the Matt Mercer thing? Why is that? Have you had it come up before?

I'd imagine a slightly more broad message along the lines of "this is not a livecast game, and I am not an actor, so you shouldn't expect my DMing to look like that of an actor DMing a livecast game." Now that I think of it, I might put a message along those lines into the part of my welcome packet where I introduce myself to the players.

 

[prabe]

On a more serious note (although, seriously, Matt - if you read this, you are Matt Mercer), I hate that people use the names of people as labels for problems. It is a horrible practice. Calling this a Critical Role concern is a bit better, but even better would be just saying we're not voice actors as the label and referencing Critical and Matt Mercer in your discussion as an example. Saying there is a problem and then using a person's name for the label of the problem... it is just unpleasant. So, please, do not Fauchard1520 anyone else by using their name as a label.

To be fair, I haven't seen a lot of "Matt Mercer is a/the problem." I have seen some of "Someone trying to DM like Matt Mercer, who can't DM like Matt Mercer, can be/is/ a/the problem." In principle everyone who GMs would pick a system and a style that plays to their strengths, but in practice that doesn't always happen--not everyone has or knows enough systems to pick the right one, not everyone sees or imagines more than one style.

That said, I agree that Matt Mercer A) is Matt Mercer and B) is not himself a problem (let alone the problem).

 

[Jester David]

Thinking on this more, I’m not even sure Matt Mercer is still Matt Mercer.

The Matt Mercer of early 2016 would be in forking awe of the Matt Mercer of 2020, who now has four years of weekly Dungeon Mastering; sponsors throwing terrain at him; the budget of a hit show to use on minis, terrain, and maps; and the free time of being a paid DM to spend preparing for the game.

And Matt Mercer is still nothing without the cast, who are trained actors and know they’re planning a show for entertainment.

So we have characters with secrets and slow character arcs planned to unfold over years. Fjord who is using a fake accent for a year of play and Knott the Brave who wasn’t what they said. There’s foreshadowing to both of their reveals and twists in the first dozen episodes but no payoff until six months to a year in.
Players willing to take notes and remember NPCs and take the plot hooks. And pay forking attention and not spend half the session playing Candy Crush.

 

[Retreater]

I'm good with my style and enjoy my game more than I would a Critical Role game. I hope all the DMs out there realize that there is no pinnacle of DM achievement besides the goals you set for yourself.

 

[Oofta]

Thinking on this more, I’m not even sure Matt Mercer is still Matt Mercer.

The Matt Mercer of early 2016 would be in forking awe of the Matt Mercer of 2020, who now has four years of weekly Dungeon Mastering; sponsors throwing terrain at him; the budget of a hit show to use on minis, terrain, and maps; and the free time of being a paid DM to spend preparing for the game.

And Matt Mercer is still nothing without the cast, who are trained actors and know they’re planning a show for entertainment.

So we have characters with secrets and slow character arcs planned to unfold over years. Fjord who is using a fake accent for a year of play and Knott the Brave who wasn’t what they said. There’s foreshadowing to both of their reveals and twists in the first dozen episodes but no payoff until six months to a year in.
Players willing to take notes and remember NPCs and take the plot hooks. And pay forking attention and not spend half the session playing Candy Crush.

I've done very slow moving campaigns, similar in aspect to CR. They can be fun, but they are different. It also requires the right group and enough time as DM to figure out proper repercussions and background.

To me, that's more of a difference in many campaigns than the ability to do voice acting. Well, that and the desire of everyone at the table to really get into their characters which IMHO requires no acting skills whatsoever.

But these are artsy-fartsy folks* who assume other personalities for a living. Kind of makes sense that they care more about in-depth character development than getting that next shiny ability they gain the next level.

*Which is not an insult or put down in any way.

 

[jgsugden]

I'm good with my style and enjoy my game more than I would a Critical Role game. I hope all the DMs out there realize that there is no pinnacle of DM achievement besides the goals you set for yourself.

If we are, in fact, all knowing creatures that is true. However, experimenting with things that we have not experienced can open our eyes to possibilities that we had not considered when we set our goals.

Green Eggs and Ham.

At best estimate, I've played with over 200 DMs. I've watched thousands. I have stolen things from most of them, whether it was an administrative technique to run games more smoothly, an acting technique that conveyed something to the table really well, an idea for a new spell, a new monster build, or a physical prop (ok, I didn't steal the prop - but I did go out and buy my own). However, Matt Mercer is one of the 5 DMs I have heard run games the most - and I have stolen more things from him than from any other DM despite having come across his games nearly 40 years after I started to play and establish my methods. He is excellent at:

1.) Handling players that do not know the rules without making them feel bad.
2.) Using silence and pacing to create a more dramatic presentation.
3.) Misleads.
4.) Building upon what players try to do rather than negating it.
5.) World building (he started with one town and slowly built his entire campaign world from it in an organic way).
6.) Evolving the complexity of his campaign as the players explore it.
7.) Writing the characters into the story rather than letting the characters explore his story.

In short, while he uses his acting skills very well, he is also excellent at the project management skills that make an exceptional DM.

Even if you do not want to play a style of game that mimics Critical Role, you can learn a heck of a lot from listening to him DM. I really wish that they'd add a show to Critical Role that talks about some of his techniques and then shows clips of those techniques in practice.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Even if you do not want to play a style of game that mimics Critical Role, you can learn a heck of a lot from listening to him DM. I really wish that they'd add a show to Critical Role that talks about some of his techniques and then shows clips of those techniques in practice.

I would like that too, although I understand why they might not.

a magician never reveals their secrets after all.

 

[S'mon]

If we are, in fact, all knowing creatures that is true. However, experimenting with things that we have not experienced can open our eyes to possibilities that we had not considered when we set our goals.

Green Eggs and Ham.

At best estimate, I've played with over 200 DMs. I've watched thousands. I have stolen things from most of them, whether it was an administrative technique to run games more smoothly, an acting technique that conveyed something to the table really well, an idea for a new spell, a new monster build, or a physical prop (ok, I didn't steal the prop - but I did go out and buy my own). However, Matt Mercer is one of the 5 DMs I have heard run games the most - and I have stolen more things from him than from any other DM despite having come across his games nearly 40 years after I started to play and establish my methods. He is excellent at:

1.) Handling players that do not know the rules without making them feel bad.
2.) Using silence and pacing to create a more dramatic presentation.
3.) Misleads.
4.) Building upon what players try to do rather than negating it.
5.) World building (he started with one town and slowly built his entire campaign world from it in an organic way).
6.) Evolving the complexity of his campaign as the players explore it.
7.) Writing the characters into the story rather than letting the characters explore his story.

In short, while he uses his acting skills very well, he is also excellent at the project management skills that make an exceptional DM.

Even if you do not want to play a style of game that mimics Critical Role, you can learn a heck of a lot from listening to him DM. I really wish that they'd add a show to Critical Role that talks about some of his techniques and then shows clips of those techniques in practice.

I haven't watched the show much, but I did notice that Mercer is pretty well the only 'Internet GM' other than Matt Colville who gives consistently good GMing advice.

 

[Charlaquin]

I haven't watched the show much, but I did notice that Mercer is pretty well the only 'Internet GM' other than Matt Colville who gives consistently good GMing advice.

That’s funny, I don’t find either of their GMing advice consistently good (though they both do give advice that is occasionally good). On the other hand, I’ve read advice from a number of other DMs whose advice I would describe as consistently good. The Angry GM, The Alexandrian, our own @iserith ...

 

[Oofta]

A lot of people seem to focus on the voice acting, mannerisms sound effects and so on that's part and parcel of CR.

All of that is great. But it's not the only reason for it's appeal. The other part is the engagement, the world building and depth. It's a great example of one style of play. Is that style going to fit everyone? Of course not.

The other thing that it shows is good give-and-take, people that simply enjoy playing the game together as a group. The players obviously aren't min/maxing grognards, the fact that they don't always know the rules is kind of a plus. It shows that you don't have to have system mastery in order to have fun playing the game.

 

[Charlaquin]

A lot of people seem to focus on the voice acting, mannerisms sound effects and so on that's part and parcel of CR.

All of that is great. But it's not the only reason for it's appeal. The other part is the engagement, the world building and depth. It's a great example of one style of play. Is that style going to fit everyone? Of course not.

The other thing that it shows is good give-and-take, people that simply enjoy playing the game together as a group. The players obviously aren't min/maxing grognards, the fact that they don't always know the rules is kind of a plus. It shows that you don't have to have system mastery in order to have fun playing the game.

I think the aspect of CR that most distorts players’ expectations is actually not Matt so much as the players. They are basically always in-character apart from the occasional small digression, and they regularly interact with each other in character, sometimes at great length. I suppose Matt’s quirky NPCs contribute to this as well. Basically, Critical Role has a whole lot of talking in character, which is part of what I am getting at when I point out that as a performance it has different demands than a private game does. I don’t doubt that they genuinely enjoy all the in-character banter, but it’s also something that makes for a better show but might end up detracting from a non-publicized game.

Not to say that my players don’t interact in character, with each other or with NPCs. But that interaction is a huge focus of Critical Role, and arguably one of its primary points of appeal. Whereas, in my experience that’s not a focus of most games I’ve run or played in.

 

[S'mon]

That’s funny, I don’t find either of their GMing advice consistently good (though they both do give advice that is occasionally good). On the other hand, I’ve read advice from a number of other DMs whose advice I would describe as consistently good. The Angry GM, The Alexandrian, our own @iserith ...

Oh, I guess I meant Youtube GMs. I value The Alexandrian a lot, I find Angry GM pretty terrible, I have no opinion on iserith.

 

[Oofta]

I think the aspect of CR that most distorts players’ expectations is actually not Matt so much as the players. They are basically always in-character apart from the occasional small digression, and they regularly interact with each other in character, sometimes at great length. I suppose Matt’s quirky NPCs contribute to this as well. Basically, Critical Role has a whole lot of talking in character, which is part of what I am getting at when I point out that as a performance it has different demands than a private game does. I don’t doubt that they genuinely enjoy all the in-character banter, but it’s also something that makes for a better show but might end up detracting from a non-publicized game.

Not to say that my players don’t interact in character, with each other or with NPCs. But that interaction is a huge focus of Critical Role, and arguably one of its primary points of appeal. Whereas, in my experience that’s not a focus of most games I’ve run or played in.

I've had games where we had nearly as much inter-PC interaction as I've seen in the game. I basically asked everyone to stay in character while at the table. It depends on the group, what they enjoy, expectations and game.

So I disagree that it's public vs private, it's play style and preference.

 

[Charlaquin]

Oh, I guess I meant Youtube GMs. I value The Alexandrian a lot, I find Angry GM pretty terrible, I have no opinion on iserith.

Yeah, if you limit it to YouTube DMs, I’d say Matt Colville is the best I’ve seen. Mercer’s advice from what I’ve seen isn’t bad, it just isn’t particularly actionable. Lots of generic platitudes, not so much useful advice. Though I suppose that is better than most other well-known YouTube DMs, who in my experience all occasionally give straight-up bad advice. The Angry GM is a pretty abrasive dude and I disagree with him politically, but his advice is consistently excellent.

 

[Charlaquin]

I've had games where we had nearly as much inter-PC interaction as I've seen in the game. I basically asked everyone to stay in character while at the table. It depends on the group, what they enjoy, expectations and game.

So I disagree that it's public vs private, it's play style and preference.

It’s definitely a play style preference, but that amount of character dialogue is good for a show. For a game it might or might not be a good thing depending on what you like, though I generally think the amount that goes on in CR can set an expectation that most games that aren’t also shows won’t live up to.

 

[Fenris-77]

The Angry GM is a pretty abrasive dude and I disagree with him politically, but his advice is consistently excellent.

This might as well be the pitch on the front page of his blog. I agree on all counts.

 

[robus]

I've had games where we had nearly as much inter-PC interaction as I've seen in the game. I basically asked everyone to stay in character while at the table. It depends on the group, what they enjoy, expectations and game.

Whilst I’m not super concerned about being in character I would like it if my players expressed interest in the other characters. Next campaign I’m going to try and foster that. Up till now I’ve been learning the ropes.