At first I thought Critical Role was the best thing since I became aware of the possibility of streaming/podcasting RPG sessions. I tried filming a session of mine with a VHS-camera in the late eighties, but the technology available to a teenager back then just couldn't cut it.
My brother gave me the tip to watch it and I enjoyed it a lot; I even told him "that DM is one of the best I've seen" but the main thing was that it was the first video or audio documentation of a D&D campaign I had seen that wasn't a disaster to watch, and/or cringe inducing in extremis. (Granted -- I am very sensitive to that sort of thing) That's how I felt about it at least.
I did skip a lot through parts I found boring but overall I was impressed. I still am. Then certain phenomena began to arise (bwa-ha) even here in far remote Sweden. People started dropping references to critical role on Swedish RPG pages, and the stream started attracting people to D&D who had never played before. These players (and other fans of this show too) seem to think that D&D is somehow synonymous with Critical Role. They refer to events that have happened during Critical Role streams, during my D&D sessions and at first I thought it was just a little bit quaint, but then it started to distract me. Sort of like how I get a little derailed by un-funny references to Monty Python and other things that are/were associated with 'nerd' culture. It will be interesting to see what effects this will have in the real long run, on the D&D hobby as a whole.
I feel that these fan players are sometimes meta-meta-playing (this is a new thing now) by trying to reenact characters and events from Critical Role during the sessions of other DM:s. The reference dropping is also a part of this I think. Also -- I've told players that watching Critical Role is a good way of learning how to play. I still think so, but Critical Role has gone from being just a stream of a home game to a show. The last few episodes I've seen don't have the feel of an authentic D&D campaign as much as the first campaign called 'Vox Machina'.
I still think that Mathew Mercer is a very good DM, but it would be grossly unfair to the many fantastic DMs I've played with to say, that he is the best DM in the world. He is a highly talented and experienced voice actor (something I envy) and it would be hard to top him at playing monsters and NPCs, but each successful DM has a unique style that makes them special. Trying to emulate him or any other 'celebrity' DM would be doing one's campaign a disservice I believe. But perhaps that would be difficult for new players now that they can easily compare their DMs to a host of others. BTW I believe successful DMs to be people who deliver a fun game and have a sh*tload of fun themselves. The way to achieve this I think is to find a style of your own, perhaps with the aid of inspiration from others, but not by imitating them.
Also: Mathew Mercer is not perfect. He makes lots of mistakes, some of which would be hard to spot for people who aren't experienced DMs. The most annoying to me is the fudging which is too transparent at times. I even implemented a strict no-fudging policy in my campaign because of it and so far, its going great! (Or did I...?)
Also: the thing that makes Critical Role entertaining to me is mainly the players, who are sometimes very good at making me laugh. I especially enjoy the guy who played Grog in the first campaign, and the women are very funny too many times. I think the tiefling and the monk are the best, most amusing characters so far in the new campaign.
As a DM who recently started watching CR it was clear to me that the game wasn't great content because Matt is a great DM (which he is, he's very skilled and practiced, and makes amazing NPCs!) -- it's because of the players. It's about how invested they are in what happens, and how they unquestionably are in the game. When something amazing happens, they're excited, they cheer. When something horrible happens, they panic. They engage their character with each other, and the DM. They care about the game just as much as Matt does, and that's what makes it so magical to watch.
I think more players need to realize that the more you play the more fun you can have... And unfortunately I feel like a lot of people who watch CR think that it's the DM making all of the fun happen in that game, altering the expectations of how much work the players in Matt's game are putting in. Their show is a true collaborative effort.
Even the most popular of things can’t be perfect for everybody. You know what they say, you can’t please all the people all the time. With that being said, maybe Critical Role just isn’t up your alley. I’m not saying that there’s no way you liked or didn’t like it, because your opinion is your own, but everybody likes things differently.
Mainly I think this because you say you skipped around due to boredom. For many others, myself included, the stream is fantastic. Sure, they make mistakes, but as Matt Mercer himself had said; nobody’s perfect, and mistakes are bound to happen in a game like this. The best thing to do is to just fix it when you can, and roll with it when you can’t.
I’m defending CR, but I’m not saying it’s the best thing ever. Sure, all of the players are very good at what they do, which is entertain. They used to just entertain each other, now they entertain us as well. But they aren’t the best; I have gripes with each of them. I’ll just as often take inspiration for how *not* to do something as I will for how to do it. But, it seems like a lot of your complaints are stemming from the “hipster” mindset - that is to say, when something is relatively unknown that a person enjoys, they tend to like it less once it becomes well known. Now I don’t know you and I am very likely incorrect with that, but that’s the feeling I got from reading your post.
I’m actually very excited about how popular CR is making DnD; in my eyes, the more the merrier! And people could have a much worse jumping point than CR. If they want to play a gnome bard because they were inspired by Scanlan, then good for them! I don’t see it as any different than a kid wanting to grow up to be a firefighter after they see how cool a firefighter can be in real life. Where we take inspiration doesn’t matter, so long as we bring that inspiration to the table.
(I also love Monty Python and am shocked that someone can possibly find it *un*funny)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
People have a tendency to go all in on something. Personally I really like Critical Role, and as a new player (who started before he found critical role) it's helped me learn the rules. It's not perfect, but then again what is?
It's something I'd watch if I had time, but I don't. The little bit I've seen is impressive. But I've heard of this phenomenon of newcomers thinking CR is THE way to play D&D. I guess like anything, they'll discover different as they go on.
I’m defending CR, but I’m not saying it’s the best thing ever. Sure, all of the players are very good at what they do, which is entertain. They used to just entertain each other, now they entertain us as well. But they aren’t the best; I have gripes with each of them. I’ll just as often take inspiration for how *not* to do something as I will for how to do it. But, it seems like a lot of your complaints are stemming from the “hipster” mindset - that is to say, when something is relatively unknown that a person enjoys, they tend to like it less once it becomes well known. Now I don’t know you and I am very likely incorrect with that, but that’s the feeling I got from reading your post.
(I also love Monty Python and am shocked that someone can possibly find it *un*funny)
I hope you won't be offended that I removed some of the OP...
I don't know how you would define a hipster, but this is an example of what I would call hipster mindset:
Is born in 1994
Gets into Nirvana in 2012
Stops being into Nirvana in 2016 when random people who aren't into them begin wearing Nirvana t-shirts for fashion
I would also like to add that this person sort of missed the revolution in the first place, which is one crucial aspect of hipsterdom. At least where I'm from, but anyway...
I didn't even start watching critical role until the second season had started, and I've been playing D&D since about 1986-87. D&D has never been cool or hip, and it will never really be cool or hip; at least not to people who sort of self-identify as meatheads or sexy girly-girls or whatever you call that type of people in the US (or wherever you're from). However, as I got older I began to realize that there really aren't any cool or hip people. Its all just posturing and facades on all 'sides' (that being a natural part of being human). Neither are there any cool or hip things, or nerdy things either for that matter. There's just what you like or don't like when it comes to popular culture, and that is why I skip through parts of critical role.
I don't mind Monty Python but I do mind second-hand jokes being regurgitated for the twentieth time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
At first I thought Critical Role was the best thing since I became aware of the possibility of streaming/podcasting RPG sessions. I tried filming a session of mine with a VHS-camera in the late eighties, but the technology available to a teenager back then just couldn't cut it.
My brother gave me the tip to watch it and I enjoyed it a lot; I even told him "that DM is one of the best I've seen" but the main thing was that it was the first video or audio documentation of a D&D campaign I had seen that wasn't a disaster to watch, and/or cringe inducing in extremis. (Granted -- I am very sensitive to that sort of thing) That's how I felt about it at least.
I did skip a lot through parts I found boring but overall I was impressed. I still am. Then certain phenomena began to arise (bwa-ha) even here in far remote Sweden. People started dropping references to critical role on Swedish RPG pages, and the stream started attracting people to D&D who had never played before. These players (and other fans of this show too) seem to think that D&D is somehow synonymous with Critical Role. They refer to events that have happened during Critical Role streams, during my D&D sessions and at first I thought it was just a little bit quaint, but then it started to distract me. Sort of like how I get a little derailed by un-funny references to Monty Python and other things that are/were associated with 'nerd' culture. It will be interesting to see what effects this will have in the real long run, on the D&D hobby as a whole.
I feel that these fan players are sometimes meta-meta-playing (this is a new thing now) by trying to reenact characters and events from Critical Role during the sessions of other DM:s. The reference dropping is also a part of this I think. Also -- I've told players that watching Critical Role is a good way of learning how to play. I still think so, but Critical Role has gone from being just a stream of a home game to a show. The last few episodes I've seen don't have the feel of an authentic D&D campaign as much as the first campaign called 'Vox Machina'.
I still think that Mathew Mercer is a very good DM, but it would be grossly unfair to the many fantastic DMs I've played with to say, that he is the best DM in the world. He is a highly talented and experienced voice actor (something I envy) and it would be hard to top him at playing monsters and NPCs, but each successful DM has a unique style that makes them special. Trying to emulate him or any other 'celebrity' DM would be doing one's campaign a disservice I believe. But perhaps that would be difficult for new players now that they can easily compare their DMs to a host of others. BTW I believe successful DMs to be people who deliver a fun game and have a sh*tload of fun themselves. The way to achieve this I think is to find a style of your own, perhaps with the aid of inspiration from others, but not by imitating them.
Also: Mathew Mercer is not perfect. He makes lots of mistakes, some of which would be hard to spot for people who aren't experienced DMs. The most annoying to me is the fudging which is too transparent at times. I even implemented a strict no-fudging policy in my campaign because of it and so far, its going great! (Or did I...?)
Also: the thing that makes Critical Role entertaining to me is mainly the players, who are sometimes very good at making me laugh. I especially enjoy the guy who played Grog in the first campaign, and the women are very funny too many times. I think the tiefling and the monk are the best, most amusing characters so far in the new campaign.
As a DM who recently started watching CR it was clear to me that the game wasn't great content because Matt is a great DM (which he is, he's very skilled and practiced, and makes amazing NPCs!) -- it's because of the players. It's about how invested they are in what happens, and how they unquestionably are in the game. When something amazing happens, they're excited, they cheer. When something horrible happens, they panic. They engage their character with each other, and the DM. They care about the game just as much as Matt does, and that's what makes it so magical to watch.
I think more players need to realize that the more you play the more fun you can have... And unfortunately I feel like a lot of people who watch CR think that it's the DM making all of the fun happen in that game, altering the expectations of how much work the players in Matt's game are putting in. Their show is a true collaborative effort.
Even the most popular of things can’t be perfect for everybody. You know what they say, you can’t please all the people all the time. With that being said, maybe Critical Role just isn’t up your alley. I’m not saying that there’s no way you liked or didn’t like it, because your opinion is your own, but everybody likes things differently.
Mainly I think this because you say you skipped around due to boredom. For many others, myself included, the stream is fantastic. Sure, they make mistakes, but as Matt Mercer himself had said; nobody’s perfect, and mistakes are bound to happen in a game like this. The best thing to do is to just fix it when you can, and roll with it when you can’t.
I’m defending CR, but I’m not saying it’s the best thing ever. Sure, all of the players are very good at what they do, which is entertain. They used to just entertain each other, now they entertain us as well. But they aren’t the best; I have gripes with each of them. I’ll just as often take inspiration for how *not* to do something as I will for how to do it. But, it seems like a lot of your complaints are stemming from the “hipster” mindset - that is to say, when something is relatively unknown that a person enjoys, they tend to like it less once it becomes well known. Now I don’t know you and I am very likely incorrect with that, but that’s the feeling I got from reading your post.
I’m actually very excited about how popular CR is making DnD; in my eyes, the more the merrier! And people could have a much worse jumping point than CR. If they want to play a gnome bard because they were inspired by Scanlan, then good for them! I don’t see it as any different than a kid wanting to grow up to be a firefighter after they see how cool a firefighter can be in real life. Where we take inspiration doesn’t matter, so long as we bring that inspiration to the table.
(I also love Monty Python and am shocked that someone can possibly find it *un*funny)
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
People have a tendency to go all in on something. Personally I really like Critical Role, and as a new player (who started before he found critical role) it's helped me learn the rules. It's not perfect, but then again what is?
It's something I'd watch if I had time, but I don't. The little bit I've seen is impressive. But I've heard of this phenomenon of newcomers thinking CR is THE way to play D&D. I guess like anything, they'll discover different as they go on.
I hope you won't be offended that I removed some of the OP...
I don't know how you would define a hipster, but this is an example of what I would call hipster mindset:
I would also like to add that this person sort of missed the revolution in the first place, which is one crucial aspect of hipsterdom. At least where I'm from, but anyway...
I didn't even start watching critical role until the second season had started, and I've been playing D&D since about 1986-87. D&D has never been cool or hip, and it will never really be cool or hip; at least not to people who sort of self-identify as meatheads or sexy girly-girls or whatever you call that type of people in the US (or wherever you're from). However, as I got older I began to realize that there really aren't any cool or hip people. Its all just posturing and facades on all 'sides' (that being a natural part of being human). Neither are there any cool or hip things, or nerdy things either for that matter. There's just what you like or don't like when it comes to popular culture, and that is why I skip through parts of critical role.
I don't mind Monty Python but I do mind second-hand jokes being regurgitated for the twentieth time.