D&D 5E What is up with the popularity of watching other D&D groups play the game?

[iserith]

I tried to watch Critical Role but after an hour the PCs were still sitting around getting drunk in a pub. I really didn't get it - I would have had the pub burn down 45 minutes earlier just to get the game moving.

Same. As well, a D&D game that spends most of its session time on actual adventuring doesn't need to lack for social interaction either. It's just the social interaction happens in the context of Getting Stuff Done. My regular johns are constantly having their characters interact with each other and the NPCs/monsters while they explore and fight, playing to their traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws, and developing their characters. We don't need to sit around in a tavern or shop for an hour to do this.

 

[Don Durito]

That's the thing though, as far as they're concerned something is happening. I can understand wanting action all the time but sometimes spending that time in the tavern is what the players actually want to do, in that instance they're having fun. Why take that away from them just to push them into action, they'll get there eventually, just let them have this moment in the tavern.

Of for god's sake. I've answered this same question twice now.

Honesetly, I think the way you're trying to frame this is silly and loaded.

 

[Maxperson]

Of for god's sake. I've answered this same question twice now.

Honesetly, I think the way you're trying to frame this is silly and loaded.

It isn't silly or loaded. It's just a different playstyle. You need action to happen and don't have fun watching others roleplay. That's okay. Find players who enjoy what you do and it's all good. He doesn't need action to happen and does have fun watching the players roleplay. That's okay, too. He can find players that enjoy what he does and it's all good.

 

[billd91]

It isn't silly or loaded. It's just a different playstyle. You need action to happen and don't have fun watching others roleplay. That's okay. Find players who enjoy what you do and it's all good. He doesn't need action to happen and does have fun watching the players roleplay. That's okay, too. He can find players that enjoy what he does and it's all good.

Yeah, the problem arises when you mix groups with such different styles - I know that if I was really into the RP going on at the tavern, I'd be pretty pissed off if someone disrupted it because they were feeling impatient and wanted to get to the action.

 

[cbwjm]

Of for god's sake. I've answered this same question twice now.

Honesetly, I think the way you're trying to frame this is silly and loaded.

Sorry man, I wasn't trying to load the question as a gotcha or anything, thought we were just having a conversation. You didn't need to respond, you can always ignore me and keep scrolling. I just think our style of DMing is different and I was trying to understand why.

For me, if my players want to spend an entire session in a tavern or shopping in town, then I let them. I don't believe that action needs to be in every hour of every session, I just want my players to have fun. Sometimes that means constant action, sometimes that means they don't even need to look at their character sheets.

 

[Don Durito]

Sorry man, I wasn't trying to load the question as a gotcha or anything, thought we were just having a conversation. You didn't need to respond, you can always ignore me and keep scrolling. I just think our style of DMing is different and I was trying to understand why.

For me, if my players want to spend an entire session in a tavern or shopping in town, then I let them. I don't believe that action needs to be in every hour of every session, I just want my players to have fun. Sometimes that means constant action, sometimes that means they don't even need to look at their character sheets.

It always bemuses me that people think they can make inferences about gm style from throwaway forum posts.

 

[Ogre Mage]

Somewhat off topic, but the popularity of livestream D&D shows reminds me of the rise of reality TV shows in the 1990s and early 2000s (I am showing my age here). The Real World on MTV, a show about seven strangers living together in a loft in NYC was the first one I remember. It debuted in 1992 when I was still in high school. Survivor in 2000 was the show which really broke reality TV to the masses. From there the genre spiraled out of control and I began to hate reality TV shows.

I think my skepticism about livestream D&D is at least partially rooted in my hate of reality TV. Maybe the Gen X in me is just too cynical to buy into what I see on screen. That said, I have watched some livestreams and even enjoyed them in small doses. The livestreams have brought a new generation to the hobby of D&D that we all love, giving it a big shot in the arm. They have also helped dispel some of the negative stereotypes around D&D -- there has not been a recurrence of the "satanic panic" which we suffered through in the 1990s. The visibility of women and nonwhite players in the livestreams has helped make D&D more inclusive.

 

[Knight_Marshal]

Its better than most of the crap they put on TV.

 

[Knight_Marshal]

duplicate

 

[Leatherhead]

HarmonQuest is perhaps the easiest to watch (if you are into the humor of Dan Harmon) because it is heavily edited, with animations, and the live action bits are shot before an audience to begin with.

Anyway, this thread reminds me of my stance on watching American Football: The most interesting part of the game (for me) happens to be the one part they absolutely cannot broadcast (for obvious reasons), the sidelines with the coaches discussing plays. As such, watching Football on the T.V. is really boring for me because all that planning time becomes pure downtime, and there simply isn't enough play time to make up for it.