Critical role is really stupid. It has been given more credence to natural 20 fetishization than anything else...

critical role is really stupid. It has been given more credence to natural 20 fetishization than anything else. The players treat the game like it's Cards Against Fucking Humanity and act like that's the best way to run a system. People drool over Matt Mercer's DMing style but honestly anyone who is decently well-read can pull off those descriptions. I know I certainly do on a weekly basis, as does one of my GM friends. Yeah, 90% of people are shit at GMing, but that doesn't mean this dumb-ass is a gifted savant. His gunslinger homebrew is atrocious, leaving aside the fact that guns do not belong in D&D end of story, it is just terrible mechanics-wise. This show is basically the roosterteeth "listen to grown men chuckling autistically into 5000 dollar microphones with a bunch of retards shouting over each other as the hysterical assperger laughter reaches its crescendo" experience. Why the fuck would you want to watch these people play their shitty boring campaign when you could go out and do it yourself? Is it the tits on the girls? None of them are very hot and honestly they are all terrible actresses, every time I hear their voices I want to kill myself. I cannot even describe how much I hate this shit. Here's the thing: I've seen a few comedy shows of people playing D&D. It was hilarious. Critical Role is just fucking stupid, partly because they are trying to actually play and they make a huge deal out of their stupid fucking campaign. But, the problem with these comedy shows was that people started expecting that out of their normal games. They expected RPGs to be funny. Not just naturally humorous, they want to rape the campaign for any potential it has. And these chucklefucks have read a load of "D&D stories" on imgur and reddit so they think that's how it is. So we have these fuckers derailing our campaigns every time we let a new person in. Now, this can't entirely be blamed on Critical Role, but it sure did its part to exacerbate the problem.

Nice blog post.

Oh we're having this thread again let's see

>Travis is the best player there and it sucks that he can't do much because he plays off on Grog's intelligence
>Sam is pretty good in comparison to everyone else but as his new character shows he doesn't have that much range
>Taelisin is pretty good but god he's fucking edgey
>Liam speaking of edgey, cussing doesn't make you deep
>Ashley is pure and Pike is like able because Ashley is just playing herself
>Laura is cute but her character is serious cunt
>Marisha is worst player/girl
>Orion was worst player
>combat is boring and Mercer doesn't do anything unique with his monsters
>death means nothing in this game
>plot is predictable

>opens Veeky Forums
>searches the catalogue for his favourite gens
>sees a thread that isn't a gen
>stares at it for 5 minutes trying to find a funny and original was to totally own OP.
>hahaha got it
>nice blog post
>pictures the OP huffing and puffing in anger
>hahahhaha I bet he is so mad
>laugh so hard I get an asthma attack
>thats enough posting on Veeky Forums for today

I will agree with you on some points, mainly the whole nat 20 meme now flying around.

>leaving aside the fact that guns do not belong in D&D end of story

Is your personal opinion, especially since they have a table with guns and even laser guns in the DMG.

can someone do a TLDR? I can't be bothered to read if OP can't be bothered to format his posts.


You want an epic comeback, OP? Make a post deserving of one. This is amateur hour.

OP is mad nobody wants to play in his campaign despite the fact that he's "Totally as good as Matt Mercer, guys!"

Sad strange little man, you have my pity.

He's upset that Critical Role
>Perpetuate the nat 20 meme
>People really like Mercer's DMing style, going so far as to say he is just as good
>Hates the gunslinger class
>Mostly because he believes guns have no place in D&D
>Mad that newer people aren't into gritty campaigns

I'll admit has some points but it's lost amongst autistic screeching.

that’s for different settings
classic dnd ranges from high fantasy to historical fantasy in a medieval to tudor era.
adding a gunslinger subclass and then making it a fighter for extra bullshit is straight up retarded. not to mention how the fuck do you find materials to make replaceable parts for a gun? how do you create replaceable parts as an adventurer? as an adventurer to create the first gun or to be able to create your own gun you would need to be a wood worker, a smith a alchemist and a tinker.
I have no idea what matt thinks tinkering is. does he think that the first guns were made from cogs?

but thats wrong.
you done your best though. pretty hard to make an assumption on someone based off a 300 word post that they copy pasted.

What's the nat 20 meme?

>not to mention how the fuck do you find materials to make replaceable parts for a gun?

You make them out of the same stuff as originally used?

>how do you create replaceable parts as an adventurer?

Well he has a workshop, logic would dictate he made atleast a batch of replacements for the smaller parts and carries them with him.

>I have no idea what matt thinks tinkering is. does he think that the first guns were made from cogs?

It's a catch all instead of autisticly breaking every single step down.

The other main part you might have missed is how Percy made a deal with a demon to figure out what all he needed. Also it's true that it's not for every setting but that doesn't mean the whole statement of not belonging in D&D at all is true.

The first person who recommends those faggot McElroy brothers and thei faggot cum-gargling voices is going to have their fucking dog poisoned by me tonight.

The belief that if you roll a nat 20 you succeed, even if it was completely impossible for you to do so in the first place.

Probably something to do with the misconception that Nat 20s are not only "auto successes" for skill checks, but that it allows the player to do incredibly ridiculous shit ("I roll Nat 20 on Swim so I dive UP the waterfall! LOL!") so you can talk to all your Starbucks friends about the totally EPIK things you did in your last D&D session.

In response to the whole Gunslinger thing, keep in mind that this character's concept is that he made a literal deal with a demon to get the knowledge for his guns, and that even then the guns should misfire or explode on a 1/9 chance, it's just that DnD rules make it less likely to occur.

Also, the character was a tinkerer scientist guy in his background, as he expected to be a kid who would make a name for himself with his inventions while his older siblings would run his hometown. It's only after his family got murdered that he had to use his inventions for revenge.

>I roll to seduce the dragon who has done nothing but killed my kind
>Nat 20
>you fuck the shit out of the dragon xD

>I roll Nat 20 on Swim so I dive UP the waterfall!
That may be the kind of thing that spawned the meme, because that sounds good enough.

Can I just point out, this is retarded

Mercer says frequently that a nat 20 won't let you succeed the impossible and always asks for appropriate modifier on 20s

So... in the interest of making this thread better, Complete Degenerate here to answer all your questions about Fetlife and various Dating Sites.

For those of you who think this can't improve the thread, consider the fact that it's a Ragepost on Critical Role. There's not much lower we can go, but I'll be damned if I'm not going to try.

easy use magic, sigh Really I dislike guns myself as everyone go range and STR becomes a dump stat foe everyone. BUT then unless you going for a polearm build STR is already a Dump stat for every class in 5th ed

It is and I fully agree, but that doesn't stop fucktards from watching the show and thinking that's how it works.

I miss having quest threads on this board.

>that’s for different settings
And what setting is the game in that guns shouldn't be there?
More than half of the classic D&D settings have gunpowder and rudimentary guns, including all of the most well known ones save Ravenloft and Dark Sun.

Then they play the game, if they were interested at all, and see that it's not.

˛But that's just 1 in 20 chance.
I'd understand miracles happening with a 1 in 8000 roll.
ETA on board gaming becoming as cancerous and trash like vidya?

In most settings I'm aware of, ships have harpoons and cannons, so it's not too far out of the realm of possibility that some wacko is experimenting with a handheld version of a ship's cannon.

Hell, Forgotten Realms in 5th edition has an island of magical gnomes who BAMFed away to somewhere else during all of 4th edition, Spellplague stuff, and came back and started buying up as much black powder as they could, for "reasons."

How common are girls with decent figures?
I like tits and ass in abundance, and I hate how it took years for a decent figure on a woman to come back into vogue.

Is this pasta fresh?

Forgotten Realms have long had gunpowder, since 2e iirc, it's monopolized by a single nation, however.

I think his point was that if the "main" setting for D&D has gunpowder, then it's fine for them to exist, so long as the DM makes the logical step of having gunpowder and guns hard to get/make.

guns came way after gunpowder. cannons were common in 1500's guns were common in 1600's that 100 years difference.

not to mention that the first guns were uncontrolable and were only good in formation and not in duels.

do you think people dueled with rapier and buclker for fun?
do you think people walked ten paces and fired because they wanted to kill each other? or because they wanted to prove they were manly while realistically gaving a good chance of surviving.

>guns came way after gunpowder. cannons were common in 1500's guns were common in 1600's that 100 years difference.
>using real life precedents for setting concerns
user, stop, seriously.
If you want to go that route, I'll use the fact that plate armor as presented in D&D existed right alongside functional handheld firearms.


Hell, the term bulletproof literally comes from testing the quality of plate armor by shooting bullets at it.

Since when does the setting needs to have a nation utilizing gunpowder?

The player can easily make its own gunpowder. Or would this be considered metagaming? What if he rolls a knowledge check? Would that still be metagaming?

Go ahead, I will wait. The hardest part would be to find sulfur but beyond that, making gunpowder is easy, even a child can do it.

Not if the DM believes that's the way it works as well

I get that and once in a blue moon, depending on the circumstances, it might work with a nat 20. The problem is people are starting to believe it should always happen on a nat 20.

Then the GM hasn't read the book, now have they?

I just don't really get the appeal of watching people play D&D.

>a pc can skirt the decades it took to refine the formular that literally killed so many, the Chinese, who invesnted gunpowder, has a national warning that trying to make it would likely kill you
>the pc can skirt the further centuries it took to refine firearms to something functionally usable in combat
Yea, no, user.

>despite gunpowder not being invented yet you take a history roll.
>you invent a m15 assualt rifle. you do 2d12 damage
>what do you think of that dragon rider, you have some competition.

reminds me of the american tall tale where the guy swims through the rain.

meant to reply to

user, if you're going to talk shit, saying something can't happen in D&D because it's anachronistic is absolutely the worst way to go.

If Nat20 you probably can craft the gunpowder.

>They're doing fun wrong

Yes, if you ignore the rules about crafting (you generally need to be epic level to craft an unknown item, and the process does take years by RAW), ignore the rules for rolls, and basically handwave away all of the things that make such a thing unlikely.
At that point, why bother rolling if you are just going to give it to them?
No, I'm saying not to use real world precedents where they pointedly don't have a place.
If you want to argue anachronicities, you have already fucked up.

I've watched other role-playing shows, but I never even attempted to watch Critical Role, or anything else on Geek and Sundry, for that matter. I don't know what it is, but the people on that site always gave me the wrong impression. Almost like they're a bunch overstated millennials with no real personality outside of their Internet personas.

HA! He is a bitch, isnt he.

>Almost like they're a bunch overstated millennials with no real personality outside of their Internet personas.
I'm pretty sure that's literally what Geek and Sundry is.

calm down, you're not the intended audience. this stuff is for normies who fucking love science and BBT

You're acting like it is outside the realm of possibility for people to not actually read the rules. Fuck the screenshots from Reddit prove this is an entirely plausible scenario, even if I wish it wasn't.

What do you mean by internet personas? All of them are professional videogame voice actors

>videogame voice actor
Imagine being so much of a failure you can't become a real actor, a stage actor, a radio caster, and instead you're a bideo gaem voice "actor"
Bonus points if you belong to the crime syndicate aka VA guild

>The belief that if you roll a nat 20 you succeed, even if it was completely impossible for you to do so in the first place.
This has only ever applied on attack rolls, and nat1 being auto fail has only ever applied on attack rolls.

>Lore for Percy is he made a deal with a demon
>Demon showed him how to make a gun
>Took years to do

What's the problem here? Other than Talisen is crawling in my skin incarnate.

The problem is Veeky Forums will always find any bullshit excuse they can to discredit and insult Critical Role.

Let's go at this from a scientific/logic standpoint.

Let's assume that a generic fantasy world's tech level is at/around mid to late renaissance. So we have ships that can sail across the open ocean, the beginnings of understanding science/chemistry, and the beginnings of understanding physics. This knowledge would be reserved mostly for the middle class and above, being that they can afford to learn how to read, write, arithmetic, etc.

But magic still exists, and has for hundreds/thousands of years, and we see magic break the above laws of nature, science, physics, etc., because of the 'nature' of magic. It makes sense that more people would focus on magic, as many wound find it "easier" and "stronger" than the laws of nature.

Yet others feel that nature is tangible, predictable, and easier to control, hence the continued growth of science and experimentation.

To me, I wouldn't call it (knowledge of gunpowder) metagaming because of the steps outlined above; some people want the 'power' of magic, others want 'control' over nature. And while the actual, real world physics of renaissance levels of technology trying to craft a safe ratio of components for gunpowder is doable, it requires a TON of experimentation and potential loss of life over years of study and theory. I would have it be a pretty high knowledge check to know what the components are, and if you wanted to make gunpowder then I would require training in chemist's tools and 'tinkerer' stuff so you can make it and not blow yourself up in the process.

As for making a gun, that would require knowledge of intricate, precise metal crafting, a blacksmith's tools, and lots of time and money to experiment and craft.

Which, if you follow the backstory of the Gunslinger in Critical Role, is what he did; he studied hard and figured out gunpowder. It was only after his deal with a demon that he got the knowledge for making guns.

How is it not acting?

You cannot actually believe you will get an argument out of that post.

Some of the cast do have stage experience. Sam's done theater before, and most of them were in theater productions while in high school or college. Travis has had roles before on some TV shows (usually as a background character). Ashley's the "biggest" star of them all, being that she is an important character in a prime time network TV show airing right now in the US.

Is shitty acting still acting?

I had never even heard of this guy nor knew that people were live streaming/recording their games till I saw this post, but the autism flooding in from all sides is entertaining. Who knew that people live streaming theirs games could produce the tism it I'm seeing now.

Yes, it's just shit. You said so yourself.

Wtf I hate op now

Their community has a pretty vocal fanbase, for good or ill. The main thing is that they showed up at a pretty lucky time in streaming. 5th edition had just come out, the players and DM had already played these characters in a home game for a couple years in Pathfinder, and their excited talks about the home game when they were at work caught the attention of Felicia Day, back when she was still setting up the Geek and Sundry channel.

She invited them to set up the show, and Matt took it as an opportunity to switch them over to 5th edition to help the publicity for it, as they were able to do giveaways of the books for the first dozen episodes or show to lure watchers in. There were some growing pains from the switch in rules, but the community latched onto the characters. It also exposed a lot of the members of the community to tabletop games as a whole; they'd heard about D&D before, but never actually saw a game. Now, they could see how people play it, and got excited by the notion that they could have games like this.

You'd be hard pressed to find a professional VA that didn't have stage or radio experience.

They're out there, but they're pretty damn rare. Can't expect people to know that though, given that Voice Acting is not-entirely-unjustifiably treated as a fucking meme in the US.

The whole field could be handled a lot better than it is here.

But if it was impossible to succeed on the highest possible roll why would the player be rolling in the first place?

Shitty casting and direction sure isn't.

As is the sperg-ass process of not allowing your VAs to record at the same time and play off of eachother

Because most players, in my experience, throw a fit if you tell them "no you can't because x."

It's easier to to let them roll than listen to them piss and moan about being railroaded even if they are the ones who caused the whole impossible situation in the first place.

no one's even mentioned them.

also try RPGentleman. Because i want to see how you react, not because they're good

Why would gunpowder explode without the use of fire? Don't you just have to take some ingredients, put them together, and then grind them together?

How would gunpowder explode?

Wow I didn't know my post was good enough to be pasta-worthy. Thanks OP, I'm flattered.

>"Totally as good as Matt Mercer, guys!"

If someone was as good at DMing as Matt Mercer, I would never want to play in that person's campaign. Mercer is a fucking awful DM. Anyone who thinks he is good, I fucking pity.

>how would chemicals prone to strong reactions to heat and pressure explode

Are you saying if you grind too hard it might generate enough energy for the whole powder to blow up? That's crazy. Gunpowder would then be, pretty fucking dangerous.

Go ahead, make a post like OP's one about how he isn't a good DM. We will wait. It has to be as long as OP's post, and with the same structure he used.

Because the player doesn't know how difficult something is until they do it, sometimes?
Example: trying to lift a bowling ball but not realizing it's actually an inert neutron star.

First get better players
Second, if you let them roll and they get a twenty, their gonna react the exact same way except they'll have some kind of point

>Get better players
>Implying I haven't tried

In my area it's not the greatest and never really cared much for online. It's weird but they seem to take it better when I point out their roll and skill check wasn't high enough even with a nat 20.

Imagine being such a failure you're salty on a Tanzanian Batik forum

>Are you saying if you grind too hard it might generate enough energy for the whole powder to blow up? That's crazy. Gunpowder would then be, pretty fucking dangerous.

I don't know user I think a good DM is a DM who can accommodate for their players and Mercer does that well, he establishes a good setting that gets his players hooked and challenges that they enjoy.

No one is perfect though. He is not much of a rules lawyer so he makes mistakes on that end and balance could be easily destroyed if his players did stuff that they could be doing with the items at their disposal (Percy: Violent Shots, Cabal's Ruin criticals, Vax: Taking advantage of the ready action,ect.) but his players are there mainly for the RP so they don't care so much about that aspect of the game they just want to have fun which Mercer provides them.

First off: Paragraphs are your friend. They help pace your information and organize your flow of ideas. Keep in mind that a paragraph ideally should be a single topic supported by details. This means that not only should you divide what you say into paragraphs, you should also divide what is being said by paragraph.

In addition, paragraphs reduce fatigue in your reader. When you don't divide your text into paragraphs, all the words start to blend together. Lines start to resemble each other and the reader easily loses their place. By making sure you write paragraphs, you ensure that more readers will be able to comprehend your ideas and complaints.

When you write a big old block of text you not only show a lack of respect to your reader, but hinder your ability to best express yourself. You can do so much more.

Yes, that happens with gunpowder. There's a reason it's shipped as hazmat.

Funny as hell, that's the most terrifying thing i could think of.

Fuck off nolan north

>Gunpowder would then be, pretty fucking dangerous.
No shit man. Guess how the Boston Marathon bombers got their explosive material? They literally bought a shit ton of fireworks, took all the powder out of them, and out them in pressure cookers with nails and shit.

He's not. His descriptions are passable at best, facilitating the characters' goals to some degree is a basic GMing skill, if dependent on personal style. At best, he has a nice voice. THat's really it.

You and me both pal.

Grog, Scanlan, and Pike make it worth it

>playing games is serious business

>meme characters are good
>actual logical characters are bad

I understand that this guy Mercer was lucky in his timing, what I'm surprised by is that there is a market for watching streams of tt games.

Streaming is getting way more popular, tabletop games are getting way more popular, Let's Plays have already ballooned in popularity. Seems pretty easy to me.

>every time I hear their voices I want to kill myself.

I agree with a number of your points, and you even left out how awful their combat is, but given your massive rant about stuff people enjoy and how it's ruining your hobby you should probably strap on some headphones, listen to some critical role and swandive off a building.

>Taking a game this seriously.
As if your "creative" characters are any more valid. It's a game bro.


How successful is fetlife for actual people? And are they all nasty as hell?

I honestly can't imagine it being a super high quality of user.