SableWyvern
Cruel Despot
I expect a new player joining my group will learn how my group functions, not expect us to change to emulate some pre-conceived idea about how gaming works, that was acquired watching actual plays.Okay.
Do you think most players would view it that way? That if you were introducing this style to someone new, they would view it that way?
Imagine someone whose only exposure to D&D is seeing Honor Among Thieves and good episodes of an actual-play podcast (doesn't have to be Critical Role but that's the most likely one), so they're excited to play the "real thing". Would you expect them to take that attitude?
Because that--to me--is the crux here. Something SEVERAL people have used as a criticism of "narrative" games, both in this thread and elsewhere, is that they depend on the group already being highly aligned in terms of both what they want out of the experience, and what things they're expected to accept without comment. But now, with this argument, that seems to be no different for the "traditional GM" approach. That also requires the players to be highly aligned with what they want out of the experience, and even more about what things they're expected to accept without comment.
If you're relying on pre-existing understanding, if that's supposed to be something that generally applies--which the people who have upvoted you seem to be saying--then doesn't that rather weaken several of the arguments already made?
I have recently added a new player to the group, whose pre-existing understanding did, indeed, come from whatever they've seen online and two or three 5e D&D one-offs, and we've had no issues arriving at aligned expectations, even though my games are nothing like what he's seen online, aren't using D&D and, initially, was actually a supers game.
It's not that hard.