Critical Role affects would-be normal #DnD newbs in the same way that porn can affect virgin's perceptions of what normal sex is like. And it has much the same effects in terms of potential dysfunction when trying the real thing.

[video=youtube_share;XW0AT3TVe3I]https://youtu.be/XW0AT3TVe3I[/youtube]


NOTE: just feel like I have to add a reminder here, it's against RPGsite rules to post any porn here.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1070655Critical Role affects would-be normal #DnD newbs in the same way that porn can affect virgin's perceptions of what normal sex is like. And it has much the same effects in terms of potential dysfunction when trying the real thing.

[video=youtube_share;XW0AT3TVe3I]https://youtu.be/XW0AT3TVe3I[/youtube]


NOTE: just feel like I have to add a reminder here, it's against RPGsite rules to post any porn here.

I haven't seen the whole video yet  (only had time to check out the beginning this morning, so my reaction may not account for later points you make). But the gist of the argument is one that makes more sense to me than the previous video on the subject. I do think that podcasts, and especially one like Critical Role, at the very least, are showing you an idealized game under the best of possible conditions (and that they are not as likely to crop up naturally in play). But my feeling on that is, it isn't the fault of Mercer or of this format that people build unrealistic expectations off  of something that is aiming to be entertaining and not waste peoples' time. Just like I wouldn't blame a video game or action movie for kids doing something crazy. I do think there is value in pointing out the difference between critical role and a typical session. But I also think it is a play style issue. CR to me seems to be more in the style of campaign where drama and story arcs are significant parts of the campaign. That style of play isn't one that gets a lot of traction here, it isn't one I myself particularly like that much, but you've seen people for ages now play this way (and it is very common in the mainstream of the hobby I think). Their show just seems like a really heightened version of that, with some heavy role-play thrown in (some of what they do also reminds me of players who get really, really, into their character). That they are professional actors is also significant. I'm never going to sound like Matt Mercer, I have a pretty dry delivery unless I've built up some steam over the session, and I imagine many GMs are similar. But there are more animated GMs with real acting chops out there.

My own experience of the Mercer effect has been pretty mild. I mentioned this in the other thread. Mostly it is the same sign I encounter when I meet someone who comes from a different style playgroup (they just come in with different expectations and I have to explain to them, there are lots of ways to approach the game, this is the way I am comfortable running a game, and I'll try to do it in a way that appeals to their sensibilities if I can, etc) .With the Mercer stuff, I just see this as an opportunity more than anything. It is bringing tons of people into the hobby. Some of them may be developing unrealistic expectations, or they may not realize that Mercer is presenting just one style of play and that there are a lot of other ways to approach a campaign (my sense is this is what Mercer was trying to convey with his post on the topic). This presents a chance to explain to people why we play the way we do, what we think the strengths of our approach are (i.e. we play to the strengths of the medium, we don't fight against it to get more desirable outcomes, etc).

Quote from: RPGPundit;1070655Critical Role affects would-be normal #DnD newbs in the same way that porn can affect virgin's perceptions of what normal sex is like. And it has much the same effects in terms of potential dysfunction when trying the real thing.

[video=youtube_share;XW0AT3TVe3I]https://youtu.be/XW0AT3TVe3I[/youtube]


NOTE: just feel like I have to add a reminder here, it's against RPGsite rules to post any porn here.

I haven't seen the whole video yet  (only had time to check out the beginning this morning, so my reaction may not account for later points you make). But the gist of the argument is one that makes more sense to me than the previous video on the subject. I do think that podcasts, and especially one like Critical Role, at the very least, are showing you an idealized game under the best of possible conditions (and that they are not as likely to crop up naturally in play). But my feeling on that is, it isn't the fault of Mercer or of this format that people build unrealistic expectations off  of something that is aiming to be entertaining and not waste peoples' time. Just like I wouldn't blame a video game or action movie for kids doing something crazy. I do think there is value in pointing out the difference between critical role and a typical session. But I also think it is a play style issue. CR to me seems to be more in the style of campaign where drama and story arcs are significant parts of the campaign. That style of play isn't one that gets a lot of traction here, it isn't one I myself particularly like that much, but you've seen people for ages now play this way (and it is very common in the mainstream of the hobby I think). Their show just seems like a really heightened version of that, with some heavy role-play thrown in (some of what they do also reminds me of players who get really, really, into their character). That they are professional actors is also significant. I'm never going to sound like Matt Mercer, I have a pretty dry delivery unless I've built up some steam over the session, and I imagine many GMs are similar. But there are more animated GMs with real acting chops out there.

My own experience of the Mercer effect has been pretty mild. I mentioned this in the other thread. Mostly it is the same sign I encounter when I meet someone who comes from a different style playgroup (they just come in with different expectations and I have to explain to them, there are lots of ways to approach the game, this is the way I am comfortable running a game, and I'll try to do it in a way that appeals to their sensibilities if I can, etc) .With the Mercer stuff, I just see this as an opportunity more than anything. It is bringing tons of people into the hobby. Some of them may be developing unrealistic expectations, or they may not realize that Mercer is presenting just one style of play and that there are a lot of other ways to approach a campaign (my sense is this is what Mercer was trying to convey with his post on the topic). This presents a chance to explain to people why we play the way we do, what we think the strengths of our approach are (i.e. we play to the strengths of the medium, we don't fight against it to get more desirable outcomes, etc).

... :confused: (What's happened to my TheRPGsite? Hold me, I'm scared!)

Quote from: Opaopajr;1070674... :confused: (What's happened to my TheRPGsite? Hold me, I'm scared!)

Shhh, there there, it's OK, it was just a bad dream. An overblown argument about 3d6 in order will crop up soon and make it all alright.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1070655Critical Role affects would-be normal #DnD newbs in the same way that porn can affect virgin's perceptions of what normal sex is like. And it has much the same effects in terms of potential dysfunction when trying the real thing.

What? Is it that good?

A better comparison would be playing football with friends in the backyard VS the NFL.

I've never seen Critical Role and watched like 5 minutes of it the other day.
Just two points from only 5 minutes of it:
1) We never allowed players to roll their own perception.
2) I'd boot the chick who says 'fuck', 'fucking', 'fucker' every two seconds.

If CR is porn, nobody would ever have sex.

I think the analogy is pretty spot on. And I think Brendan is rigut that this style of play is very popular, especially with the younger than 30 set.

I think we have a lot more drama geeks playing D&D these days than nerds that are good at math.

I spent more time laughing at the outfits these guys were wearing at chapter two.  No seriously go look at the thumbnails.  One guy was dress up as if he was a little school boy from the 1950's.

As for the show itself.  Twenty minutes in and already want to fucking leave.  The pretentious makes for so much cringe that I had to leave like a vampire escaping sunlight.

Haven't ever watched critical role, never saw any reason to. However, running a plot-focused RPG campaign CAN be done but it's one of the most difficult and exhausting (for the GM) kind of campaigns to DM and there's a high likelihood of things either meandering off course and getting goofy, ending up with passive players used to being lead around by the nose or ending feeling like a really slow CRPG with really bad graphics.

It can done if the GM is very skilled and really stays on top of things and stays one step ahead of the PCs and threads the needle by keeping the PCs on track without railroading them. But at the end of the day it's just easier and a lot more fun to just stop giving a shit, sit back, relax and let the players take the wheel and get themselves into trouble. In retrospect trying to run a game in the vein of Critical Role ruined RPG gaming for me as a teen in the 90's since I couldn't herd PC cats well enough to make it work. Enjoy GMing so much more now when I can just let the PC cats loose in the woods and not have to worry about trying to push them through my crappy unpublished fantasy novel.

I swear the next time a nerd-orbiting soi disant "TOTAL GEEK, GUYS!" who pings me on FB and asks if I've watched/am watching/have seen the latest "episode" of Critical Role I'm gonna scream.

Quote from: rawma;1070677Shhh, there there, it's OK, it was just a bad dream. An overblown argument about 3d6 in order will crop up soon and make it all alright.

:confused:
/relaxes
... it was the way God intended us to have chargen. It kept the cosmos demographics of paladins & rangers in check.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1070671I haven't seen the whole video yet  (only had time to check out the beginning this morning, so my reaction may not account for later points you make). But the gist of the argument is one that makes more sense to me than the previous video on the subject. I do think that podcasts, and especially one like Critical Role, at the very least, are showing you an idealized game under the best of possible conditions (and that they are not as likely to crop up naturally in play).

Well, that's not quite right, though. Porn, for example, doesn't show you an 'idealized sex under the best of all possible conditions'. Instead, it shows you an ACT, meant to titillate the viewer, with inherently fake scenarios and sexual activity that actually would not be ideal in real life.  Some of the positions in porn are shot just for the sake of the camera angle, or to focus on specific body parts, or just to prove that actual intercourse is going on; and those positions in real life would be uncomfortable and not the most pleasurable to do.

Critical Role is the same vis a vis a real RPG session.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1070721As for the show itself.  Twenty minutes in and already want to fucking leave.  The pretentious makes for so much cringe that I had to leave like a vampire escaping sunlight.

I know exactly what you mean. The research for these videos has been excruciating.