Critical Role Why Critical Role is so successful...

[billd91]

Given that fan outrage drove Matt Mercer to issue a public apology when a PC perma-died, I suspect the chance of bad things happening is lower than it used to be.

That’s not really an apology about the PC dying, though. It’s more of an “I’m sorry you feel this way” kind of apology. There is no implication that it can’t happen again.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think the point that they're actors would be stronger if it were some kind of scripted show or something edited, like Harmonquest. Sure, they're aware of the cameras and are ready to play a character but there really isn't anything conceptually or technically exceptional that they're doing that wouldn't translate to a home game.

I disagree strongly that the CR cast isn’t technically exceptional at portraying their characters. Whether it’s scripted or not, the cast is much better at convincingly portraying complex or intense emotions than the average untrained person. Acting is the art of expressing genuine reactions to artificial scenarios, and that is a far more difficult art to master than it may seem to an outside observer, but the cast of CR does it quite proficiently.

Yes, not every player in every game is interested in having a backstory or having a campaign that revolves around the characters' motives but there isn't an existential difference between an actor playing DnD for character development average Joe playing DnD for character development.

I’m not sure what you mean by “an existential difference,” but the difference between a (good) actor playing D&D for character development and average Joe playing D&D for character development is a high-level understanding of narrative structure and character arcs and a trained talent for convincingly portraying the character’s mental and emotional state.

 

[Seramus]

I think this is part of the point. That they don't min/max or know all the crannies and try to use every rule to their advantage. The extra 5% doesn't seem to matter.

I think there's a difference between using every rule to their advantage, and just remembering the basic abilities of their class. Everyone forgets things now and then, but the CR players are really really bad about it.

 

[NaturalZero]

I disagree strongly that the CR cast isn’t technically exceptional at portraying their characters. Whether it’s scripted or not, the cast is much better at convincingly portraying complex or intense emotions than the average untrained person. Acting is the art of expressing genuine reactions to artificial scenarios, and that is a far more difficult art to master than it may seem to an outside observer, but the cast of CR does it quite proficiently.

I wasn't referencing their ability to portray their characters exceptionally. Conceptually, the idea that players come up with backgrounds and play at a table where both the DM and other players are invested in those backgrounds is not a special exception that only exists on a streaming show. From a technical standpoint, there is no special app, or minis, or terrain, or table that makes the CR game an exception that exists outside of what another table can do. Being on camera doesn't change the technical make-up of physically running the game.

I’m not sure what you mean by “an existential difference,” but the difference between a (good) actor playing D&D for character development and average Joe playing D&D for character development is a high-level understanding of narrative structure and character arcs and a trained talent for convincingly portraying the character’s mental and emotional state.

There isn't a hard, black and white distinction between what a voice actor trying to invest in character interaction can do vs. some other guy who is invested in character development. I was replying to the implication that the actors at the were table were cherry picked for the show like the Monkeys.

You can't come to the conclusion that no one in your pick-up game of basketball will slam dunk because you believe the pros who slam dunk are fundamentally different from regular human beings. Actors are trained at inhabiting and developing characters but some people are acting like no one in a street game of DnD has a chance at slam dunking because the CR are meaningfully different from "regular" people.

Umbran is certainly correct that we need understand that CR is a show and that people are performing. The show is an extension of their home game, but they've said that the nature of the characterizations has certainly come to the fore as the game transitioned to streaming. That said, many of the discussions seem to veer into a strange place where some folks simply dismiss any valuable table concepts from CR because "it's just a show" or "but they're actors" as if there is something fundamentally different happening that can't apply to a home game.

 

[MarkB]

I think there's a difference between using every rule to their advantage, and just remembering the basic abilities of their class. Everyone forgets things now and then, but the CR players are really really bad about it.

They're about average compared to most tables I've seen.

 

[NaturalZero]

They're about average compared to most tables I've seen.

I'm getting to the end of campaign 1 and the players still haven't figured out how holding an action works. Including the time before they started streaming, that's probably 120 sessions of 5e where every week Matt has to explain to Liam how readying an action works like it's a new concept.

 

[Charlaquin]

I wasn't referencing their ability to portray their characters exceptionally. Conceptually, the idea that players come up with backgrounds and play at a table where both the DM and other players are invested in those backgrounds is not a special exception that only exists on a streaming show. From a technical standpoint, there is no special app, or minis, or terrain, or table that makes the CR game an exception that exists outside of what another table can do. Being on camera doesn't change the technical make-up of physically running the game.

Ahh, ok, I see what you mean now.

There isn't a hard, black and white distinction between what a voice actor trying to invest in character interaction can do vs. some other guy who is invested in character development. I was replying to the implication that the actors at the were table were cherry picked for the show like the Monkeys.

You can't come to the conclusion that no one in your pick-up game of basketball will slam dunk because you believe the pros who slam dunk are fundamentally different from regular human beings. Actors are trained at inhabiting and developing characters but some people are acting like no one in a street game of DnD has a chance at slam dunking because the CR are meaningfully different from "regular" people.

Yeah, I got you now. It came across less like you were saying “you don’t have to be a professional basket ball player to be able to slam dunk” and more like “professionals aren’t that special, anyone can slam dunk.” My mistake, carry on,

Umbran is certainly correct that we need understand that CR is a show and that people are performing. The show is an extension of their home game, but they've said that the nature of the characterizations has certainly come to the fore as the game transitioned to streaming. That said, many of the discussions seem to veer into a strange place where some folks simply dismiss any valuable table concepts from CR because "it's just a show" or "but they're actors" as if there is something fundamentally different happening that can't apply to a home game.

Agreed. It’s important to recognize both that Critical Role, as a show, naturally has different concerns than a private game would, but that doesn’t mean nothing in there games is applicable to home games, or that nothing of value can be learned from watching them play.

 

[NaturalZero]

Agreed. It’s important to recognize both that Critical Role, as a show, naturally has different concerns than a private game would, but that doesn’t mean nothing in there games is applicable to home games, or that nothing of value can be learned from watching them play.

I think it's also important that everyone realize that the ability to play a character as a great actor and the table-intention of investing in character development/plot are 2 different concepts. Most players certainly won't be great actors with great voice acting but the assumption that we're all coming to the table with the interest of promoting character-driven plots is certainly something any table anywhere can seek emulate, if that's the kind of game they want to play.

For me, the thing I'd wish to emulate from CR is not the accents or the acting but the eagerness to explore character backgrounds as a fundamental foundation of the plot. Most games I've played in usually revolve around the DM's plot concept with little nods to characters' backstories, at best. I'd like to run in and play in games where everyone gets a serious story arc that connects with other threads.

 

[Seramus]

I'm getting to the end of campaign 1 and the players still haven't figured out how holding an action works. Including the time before they started streaming, that's probably 120 sessions of 5e where every week Matt has to explain to Liam how readying an action works like it's a new concept.

Liam gets much better in C2. He even comments that the internet teasing him, and his time as a DM, pushed him to learn the rules. Marisha also does better with a more straight forward class. Curiously, Sam gets worse. He has a really good grasp of Scanlan's abilities, but struggles with Notts.

They're about average compared to most tables I've seen.

I honestly think it's disrespectful for a player to fumble the rules that much. I totally understand being new to the game, and that everyone forgets now and then, but if you haven't figured out the basics of your class by month 6 then you're making the entire table wait on you while you flounder.

 

[BRayne]

I would note that they played Pathfinder pre-stream (sans the initial Birthday one-shot which was 4e) and also it seems to me like Sam knows what his class/race allows but often purposefully avoids certain things, he notably has said the Halfling luck "seems dumb" on a few occasions