Hi there! You mentioned in an earlier post (paraphrasing) that you noticed that the original cast have trouble trusting DM signals because of C3. Do you think now that the first Soldiers' arc is drawing to a close, that Travis, Sam and Laura have started to trust the signals again? I feel like they made some bold choices in the latest episode, but it might also be too early to tell. Would love to hear your thoughts about it.
It's going to be an ongoing process. Shit was bad for several years and so recovering from that is going to take a long time, and also, while the deterioration of various D&D signalling conventions in C3 is a contributing factor, I think some of this is also that Brennan is a relatively new DM to most of the cast with the exception of Aabria (in that he's DM-ed for them a few times and someone they are friends with and trust, but like, Matt DM-ed for the founding cast for over ten years), and that at least when it comes to combat, even if Brennan is extremely clear, some trepidation is expected because the world is not level-scaled. It's hard to tell right now however because it's not an issue of making bold choices in combat, really. I know I used combat as an example because the Otohan fight was so bad, but really, what that fight did was say "If you do an out of combat action that seems really clearly signaled (rescuing Treshi) this might be met with a violent fight that kills half the party" and also "you might get killed because someone else did or did not do something that was wildly unclear to everyone at the table." Combat is kind of a safe space in D&D, for the most part, in that it's much more bound by actual rules rather than convention.
What I'm watching for - and I think for a number of reasons the other tables will not be quite as susceptible (Seekers because Ashley was the only player in C3; Schemers because I think Luis's experience will be a stabilizing presence and Taliesin, Liam, and Marisha all have more D&D experience and specifically more DM-ing experience than Sam, Travis, and Laura) - is out of combat situation where the group is unable to make a decision for something that seems pretty clear cut from my outside obviously subjective but also, experienced in D&D and specifically D&D convention, perspective.
To just walk though my thought process: The tell wasn't a bold move. It was when the party assumed they couldn't trust Morgaine, who to me had a flashing sign over her head, basically, saying "THIS IS AN ALLY UNLESS YOU TRY TO KILL HER OR SOMETHING," and assumed she was going to poison them even after she outright was like "I am going to help hide your presence from the folks upstairs," and also the party seemed to think that even the slightest wrong move would result in Cyd's permanent death. And then I realized that this had happened the entire time: basically everywhere they went, people behaved if not kindly, at least like...reasonably and in a way that made sense based on who they were (ie, the fairies who knew of the Creed were less impressed by Wick but Tholomoine would do anything for him; Ulbid liked the party when he realized some were soldiers; Tasker liked Kattigan and Thimble but Hawthorn was upset with them) and which provided the party with accurate information along their way and the party kept being like "what if everyone is lying and out to get us". That's what tipped me off. It's not bold combat moves; it's strategic decisions that get fucked up by bad signaling.















