#critical discourse

[tdsn-feed]

[princeofassassins]

I have to readjust to this site, I left for 4 years, came back at the tail end of a campaign which has a ton of different viewpoints, saw an interesting one and, tagged someone I have followed for a while (and think is a really good creator, who makes great meta) who has a differing viewpoint re: the gods and said "hey do you think this could work?" (genuinely and not as a gotcha) and its was unfortunately viewed as snitch tagging to create drama or discourse and you're blocked immediately.

Gotta remember this place isnt twitter where people will see tags and usually ignore you if they dont want to engage with the prompt, or otherwise. Also I didnt get "No ask box = do not tag me" as a concept

To the person involved sorry for bothering you with that, what seemed like a generic "what do you think" came across as bait and switchy or some kind of trap, and I did not intend it as such. I dont interact much with the CR community on here, at least compared to what I did in C2 but as a former meta writer on here I wasnt trying to ruin your experience on this site. I wont make this mistake again.

[the-dragon-archivist]

Okay I'm not current on CR at ALL (every time I have enough time try and catch-up I'll get through an a handful of episodes and then be inundated with time consuming tasks and have to set it down again, but one day I will catch up) but I'm hearing about some ™️Discourse happening so I'm just gonna say something, but I don't even know if it's at all relevant. (I think it might actually be anti-thetical to whatever is currently happening but I'm having thoughts) I guess let me know if I'm making a fool of myself due to lack of context, this is maybe more about CR in general though so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

When in real play, TTRPGs aren't always going to flow smoothly or have characters make the smartest choices or even the choices that make sense for them as characters. It's just a fact of how weird the play space that role-playing games exist in can get, especially when it's done in formats geared towards an audience. Sometimes a player will just be in a weird place and it will blend into a session, or time between sessions might get stretched and suddenly you feel very differently about certain in games decisions. If you care a lot about making a perfect story that can be sold as a streamlined story, then it would be an issue, but if your just playing for fun then it doesn't really matter.

I feel like this is exacerbated by the fact that CR in my mind has always tried to be a game/player first situation over being a story/viewer first situation. What I mean by that is, in the game itself they don't always try and force a streamlined well thought-through story, though they definitely do try to make it more polished and well written. It's one of the things I always liked about CR, that the funky amorphous feeling of the role-playing heads pace is way more tangible in the campaign. Characters sometimes make wildly out-of-character decisions, or stories take weirdly convulated and unnecessary turns. It makes it feel more wobbly and imperfect and I love it dearly, as that just happens sometimes in role-playing, Shit gets weird when you let your friends into your brain.

That being said, when you're viewing it as a weekly show, that aspect can be so VERY frustrating because we're used to getting streamlined thought-out storylines from media. It can totally be enough to stop people from watching CR altogether if it bothers them enough. It's almost certainly the reason why people prefer other TTRPG shows like D20 or TAZ (refering entirely to the mini-seasons as ive never made it all the way through the big seasons of TAZ, so major grain of salt on this one), but it's also what makes CR feel different. D20 and TAZ and most other live play shows are usually short-form stories which allows/forces them to cut through the role-player brain fog and just focus on telling good stories.

Obviously CR does sometimes let the fact that the audience is watching 👀 affect their in game moments, and that's okay... because their role-playing, and role-playing is inherently imperfect. CR is more likely to experiences both ends of this dichotomy (being widely unstreamlined/convulated and being very streamlined/railroaded) because they are longer form and trying to capture that role-playing headspace, but they are ALSO a company who has based their careers around those organic (and imperfect) stories they tell, and how they are recieved by fans.

At the end of the day, I guess what I'm saying is, if you want CR but as a perfectly streamlined and well told story, but also maintaining some well-placed and intentional wobbliness, then the live campaign just isn't what you're looking for. Honestly in my mind that's what you'll get from the adaptations of the campaigns (Tlovm, TM9 show when it comes out, the comics, the books etc.) so I bet people who don't like the wonkiness of the campaign love those right!...right?

Obvs I'm not saying you can't be upset with whatever decision the Hells made (or didn't make) that has people fighting, but I also think that this decision they made being wrong, imperfect, or unsatisfying from a story perspective is just what can happen in TTRPGs. Capturing that is, to me, what CR is all about, and what endeared me to it so much before other liveplays. It captures the unique thing that happens during roleplay that is specifically experienced by the roleplayer and not the audience. Which can obvs be a little unsatisfying for the audience member sometimes if we're wanting it to feel like a show and not an experience.

[writing-for-life]

“Some of what I see […] is even pre-operational thinking. It’s I can only see it from my point of view.” (add by me: pre-operational = under 7).

“I avoided the topic entirely because I knew the drill: If you don’t agree with me, you’re wrong. If you offend me, you’re canceled.”

“Levine says that what alarms her about the rigid, concrete take on right or wrong she sees in my generation is that without the “capacity to hear opposing points of view, you don’t develop empathy.”

“We’re in desperate need of humans who can grapple openly with ideas, and disagree, as reasonable people will, without villainizing each other.”

“I see teenagers unintentionally becoming more unforgiving and judgmental rather than open-minded and compassionate.”

This article has been written by a high school senior, btw.

Listen up. The closing of the teenage mind is almost complete

Just when my friends and I should be exploring many perspectives and figuring out where we stand, we're self-censoring and following familia

[eggwhiteswithspinach]

Since the 20th-century inception of the one-drop rule, widespread critical discourse on the validity of the concept has followed. Some critics argue the importance for mixed-race children to identify themselves by all racial classifications involved, rather than choosing a dominant one. Some assert that Black being a dominant gene, is justifiable as grounds for primary race classification over other racial identities involved. While some simply contend the possibility to identify as both mixed-race and Black.

Willi Quinn

[topazsink]

Jeezum Pete all the debate over character alignments and stuff after last week’s episode 😅

Y’all thought Vox Machina was evil after how they killed Ripley y’all gotta chill tf out.

I know this fandom loves ANGST and debating characters but it always feels like people just wait for a character they don’t like to have a bad day and then try to conflate that into “SEE THEY’RE A BAD PERSON.”

(Either that, or they want to use it so the other person in the ship they like will try and bring them back from the dark side lol)

Idk I’m just tired of the constant “omg they’ve GONE TOO FAR.” You guys didn’t even think Essek went too far in STARTING A WAR but this episode is where ya drawn the line?

The fandom always hates when the characters are complex and try to boil it down to something too simple, if that makes sense.

[topazsink]

Alright, OBVIOUSLY I get the real world context of what’s going on in the game. Forcing religion is bad. Obviously.

But it feels like this, along with every single person in this game, except Orym and Ashton and Bor’Dor, being like “pft what have the gods ever done for me” is starting to get frustrating. Not to mention the gods suddenly being more “do this thing for me NOW.”

Isn’t the goal to SAVE the gods? Like the Wildmother that saved Fjord? Or everyone’s bae the Everlight? I’m not saying everyone in the game has to be pro-god, but there should be, I dunno, motivation to reach the goal? Instead of continuing the idea of “mehhhhhh fuck em.”

[dope-daggerx3]

I have absolutely no problem with people finding flaws and having criticisms regarding CR, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

However, shitting on the DM and saying that the way that he plays/creates the story is bad because you don't agree with it, is not alright. Saying that the way they are playing is not how "D&D works" bcuz that's not the way you would do it, is not alright. Presuming to know anything about the way the PCs/cast members feel or how they should feel about the way their campaign is going, is not alright.

Once again, we should all get this tattooed somewhere on our bodies so we don't have to keep going through this: It's their game. They are playing for themselves, not you. If you don't like the choices Matt makes with his world, or one of the cast members makes with their characters, nobody cares.

Complain if you want to, but you're just making people in the fandom not like you.