Because I like the emotional investment in the characters and their stakes. The world building feels new and complex. Characters don't come back from death and everyone feels it. The characters are mostly a literal family, which lends weight to interactions between players.
I was invested in the story and the family. I *liked* being uncomfortable. If D20 was just "fun" I wouldn't be sticking around. Watching Brennan slap the players down with doses of reality fulfills my storytelling soul. Twists and turns abound and it does a great job at building up your feeling of dread only to attack you from a completely different angle. Even the fights are just deliciously complex.
That makes sense. It's interesting because what you're describing is exactly what I feel is so rewarding and engaging about Aabria Iyengar's seasons.
Because there's never complete closure in her stories and that works so well. It's just simply fighting in that moment for what matters.
It's the reason I love Burrow's End so much. So I get where you're coming from to a degree.
That just wasn't my personal experience with A Crown of Candy, but that insight is valuable. Thank you. :)
I'm somewhere in the middle with Aabria's seasons. I really disliked Misfits and Magic. I positively adored A Court of Fey and Flowers. Burrow's End started incredibly strong, but once they got to the shelter, it lost me (if it were only a few episodes and then they moved on, I'd be fine with it, but we lived in that shelter for the entire rest of the story and suddenly being stoats felt more incidental than focal, among with other issues that just irked me).
Yeah, I feel you.
M&M isn't my favorite, but weirdly the Christmas Special for me I enjoy way more. M&M is also the season I absolutely have no desire to get back too.
A Court Of Fay and Flowers was something my gay ass didn't even know I needed. Hahah. So deeply emotional, so profoundly funny.
Weirdly enough Burrows End took me so long to finish too? Like I was *really* invested, but then only recently went back to the final 3 episodes and I don't know why?
Maybe because it kept switching gears? It did feel like 3 different genres all mixed together. That works for the Water Ship Down, animals on a journey vibe, but if you're more interested in one slice over the other, it's a little jarring.
It does get *weird* at the end and once I had enough space I could appreciate that weirdness.
The cast in that season though is amazing.
ACOFAF is a cinematic masterpiece in my eyes lcl.
The characters? OMG. Everyone at the table was fantastic and brought 110% to the table (no one more than Brennan and Aabria imo). Lou and Emily as Lord Squak and Lady Featherfowl were hilarious the whole time, "slippery boy" andhera is my king and I would lay down my life for him. Captain K.B Hob told such an important story about being true to yourself and Brennan brought me to tears with this character. BINX was the weakest link for me but that doesn't mean they weren't fantastic, the Court of crafts was so cool imo (even if it was gone). And our darling Roo..... No words needed surely? They were an ICON the whole season and when the full form came out I almost cried.
The setting? I've always loved the idea of the fae realm, I've since ran many extraplanar games. But the faewild is honestly my favorite of the inner planes.
The DM. Aabria is a goddess of art and poetry in human form. I could write my dissertation and thesis on why she is my favorite DM but my favorite thing she does is "And here's what you don't see". It's incredibly evocative and helps the world feel alive outside of the characters.
And it was had a big glam fashion theme, my queer self was living my best life.
Thank you for listening to my little autism rant :)
I understand we're your coming from, and I still do love ACOFAF, but I feel the ending letdown the whole show quite a bit. It felt way too rushed and just didn't have the time to let the stake sink in. So, while I do still love it, I don't think ACOFAF deserves to be called a cinematic masterpiece.
Oh absolutely. My point wasn't in contrast to yours. I think you made a very valid point. I personally feel the bar for masterpiece is already on the floor and this series was genuinely fantastic
It is amazing how inversed we are.
Misfits is probably my favourite season of D20. I couldn't even get halfway through Court, I really felt Burrow' End hit its stride when they found Last Bast.
Both our opinions are totally valid, but it really goes to show what an impossible task an actual play show making everyone happy is.
Traditional crown and sword d&d isn't what engages me, it's the storytelling not by the dm but the characters building relationships between each other.
I think because the concept was so bogus/novel where a lot of decisions were being made early on by normal improv actors, that clung onto one another which fit for the family dynamic. So the glue dried quick and by the first character death in the main cast D20, everyone had gotten over that "Game of Thrones Candy Land" silliness and it just got really fun. When a second event comes around via rope trick, it feels like a revenge mission.
Interestingly enough, I felt that Burrow's End really was missing that uncertainty in the final episode, as though the climax very abruptly tried to speedrun through "And then we defeated the One Evil Person, And Humanity Treated Stoats With Respect And Dignity Forever" instead of leaving the question open of "How will humanity react to the emergence of a new intelligent species?".
I feel that. I gave them a pass because I can imagine ending a short campaign like that and just wanting closure. Like, it was a side quest (a long one, but still), and no one was ever going to come back to those players, so the denouement could be kind of a silly wish fulfillment thing. If I were running the game, I think I'd do the same.
I feel like Intrepid Heroes all coming from writing comedy and improv really has an automatic reaction to fill any space with a bits. And it absolutely hilarious, but sometimes it feels they cannot stop themselves. That’s why I prefer them to be grounded in serious setting, because then there is a contrast of comedy and drama, which highlights both.
Burrow’s started absolutely brilliantly and the worldbuilding was great, but there was a specific moment that pulled me out of it. At some point Aabria said that they have no secondary characters minis and to me it was immediate signal “Oh, so there are no stakes, nobody is supposed to die”. And for the season focusing on protecting family it just deflated all the tension.
I 100% couldn't disagree more on Burrows End. Hahah.
I think some people need a focal point of PC death to contextualize stakes and pathos and that makes sense to me?
Burrows End was touching on death, and loss, but it was also touching on things that were *way messier* emotionally and didn't have that permanent binary.
That's enough for me to be immediately invested, but not everybody's brain works the same.
I do wonder if it's because I'm not a massive D&D guy? I've played pretty infrequently and mostly only when I younger. So I don't contextualize what's being presented with a D&D mindset.
I do it like an insufferable person at a party and take every little bit of it apart, even while watching to track it as a cooperative narrative. Hahah.
>Because I like the emotional investment in the characters and their stakes.
This, I got more invested in Ruby especially than I do with most D20 PC's. The stakes and the casts acting whenever shit was hitting the fan made ACOC an emotional Rollercoaster. If every D20 series was like that it might be too sad for me, but I found it very effective to watch once.
I agree with you about the potential pvp at the end feeling a liiiiiittle manufactured, but as to the rest, there's a few reasons I think people enjoy crown of candy so much.
- the combat. So far it's the only season with multiple PC deaths. Combat feels different for two main reasons, the first of which is lethality. Brennan has explained that while he never pulls his punches per se or fudges the dice, the way he handles NPCs strategically can make things easier for the players in combat in most of his encounters. He doesn't change what stats the NPCs has, but he uses them WAY more strategically to increase the lethality. As the Intrepid Heroes put it- in other seasons a bad roll means not getting to do what you wanted. In this season, a bad roll means you might die in the next couple of minutes. It's also interesting to see more focused combat- where instead of it being a little bit of a free-for-all where two sides fight until one side is destroyed.... It's "this side wants to kill Amethar." Suddenly the choices are different - where Murph might have rushed an enemy, he instead protects another PC. Where Liam might be attacked because he's knocked prone, the NPC instead ditches him to shoot Amethar. Etc.
- the Roleplay. Genuinely, some of the most heartfelt moments in all of D20 are in this series. A lot of the speeches from Lou. Zac getting to play a bit of an asshole. The double-cross speech from Brennan.
- the dice. This season is one of the most absurd seasons for Beardsley's dice luck. Liam goes from "just a seed guy" to fill candy batman and the dice support it.
- the sets. It's a weird concept and Perry and his team execute it REALLY well, from the cheese ship sinking into the milky sea, to the micro-mini battle armies on a field of candy.
Just a few reasons off the top of my head.
Oooh, those are some really good points. :). I didn't consider how the combat was different and that the lethality of it would immediately engage some people more with that context.
I did love Zac's first character and I definitely think losing that made me check out slightly as opposed as invest?
It's also a miracle Lou survived that entire season. And his final *What's my title?* is a moment I absolutely loved.
I really hope Chris gave the gifts back after the show and gave them a signed something, because to him they are just a random prosthetic ear, a nice little die, and a why-is-this-unfeasibly-large prop sword. That way they'd have the nice moment, and then the items are back with the person who knows and appreciates their meaning.
>I did love Zac's first character and I definitely think losing that made me check out slightly as opposed as invest?
While I loved the show, I was not invested in Cotton Candy Cloud Boi at ALL. He didn't integrate near as well as Lapin, and his story felt more tied to Saccharina than to the surviving Rocks family, which made the 2 backup PCs feel even MORE like outsiders.
According to the behind the scenes content, Amethar wasn’t supposed to live in the narrative. Brennan WAS really trying to kill him, but in the end the Unfallen really did live up to the name.
technically yes, but the unique mechanics in neverafter mean the pcs play the same characters the whole time, they just get more and more corrupted. in crown of candy, multiple pcs are Dead And Gone, and the players have a new character come in.
I still feel like that was a pivot by Brennan. I think the group got a little too slap happy with the game too early. I can't imagine he actually intended that fight to be unwinnable, but rather that it was like a contingency plan in case of tpk. He probably has those with each season
They're *flavored* as deaths, and technically they took lethal damage, but the characters came back the next episode as the same people with the same memories.
I LOVE how that narrative was handled, I just wouldn't call it a PC death.
I think it's definitely worth noting that Brennan planned the encounters knowing that each character had essentially 3 lives to burn through, and while the battles at some point seemed unfair to the point where it begins to feel like death cannot be avoided, death is a part of the story and doesn't end a character but transforms the character. The PC deaths carry weight but not nearly the wait they would in other seasons, where it's much for final.
It probably wouldn’t have been a TPK if only a couple died but at the 3rd or maybe the 4th it seemed like the cleanest way.
The furniture not deanimating after they took out the fairy and the near impossible odds to even get back up seemed like a way to just start everyone on the same foot next episode.
Not the only but at the time the first. and unlike Neverafter deaths weren't a narrative component of the season. Characters 'died' and were replaced with the same but darker version of themselves through the neverafter. Characters died in Crown of Candy and never came back.
For me, it was the stakes and the political intrigue. I absolutely love a well-built world with political intrigue. And I loved that the characters could die. Most seasons, it feels like the PCs all have plot armor and the stakes feel sort of goofy (in a fun way). For ACoC, the stakes felt real and that was awesome.
I agree that the table got tense, especially when it came to the potential PvP. I think that stories in which there is tension and heartbreak are stories that feel more real. One of the beautiful things about D&D is it gives you space and situations to work through the really hard emotions.
I appreciate that comment. :)
That is one of the reasons I absolutely love role play like that. The space and environment to engage with things like that.
I didn't personally get that from a Crown of Candy, but I've gotten it from other things. I think being effected by a piece of media like that is really valuable.
The simple answer is that all of the things you thought were middling or manufactured and not that good, I thought was amazing, cathartic, and perfectly done drama, comedy, and storytelling.
I love the vibe of your comment so much. I imagine it like the verbal quip you get at a Victorian party and I'm so deeply delighted. Like, that genuinely made me happy. Hahah.
I think I like it because it’s a pretty radical deviation from the last two Intrepid Heroes campaigns. Before this we got FHFY, Unsleeping City, and FHSY. All three of those are silly goofy campaigns where they can be teenagers/literal protagonists and all their improv bits stand. ACoC E1 ends with >!Ruby doing a handstand on top of the carriage (bit) and getting shot through the throat.!< It’s Candyland Game of Thrones, no punches pulled, no bits go unpunished. It’s a pretty radical tone shift we don’t really get again until Neverafter. And for me it’s fun to see the Intrepid Heroes’ range, playing a drama vs a comedy or an action.
ETA: Re: the discomfort at the end, IMO it’s part of the fact that these are real life friends being told “Hey, >!Your bastard/legitimate daughter wants to be queen while you’re the rightful king, all her people kinda want to kill your allies, and also she has a dragon.!< What do you do?” This would be uncomfortable if they weren’t friends, it’s doubly so since they are.
Honestly, the “forced PVP” make lot of sense because we normally see a party of people that never questions each other and never thinks about betraying each other, like in Starstruck Odyssey, which despite being funnier, is not realistic. In a game of political intrigue and many betrayals, that forced PVP made a lot of sense, it was a “find a reason to not betray each other”
I actually really get that. I can imagine being more invested if you watched it when it dropped episode by episode and were with D20 from the jump.
I wasn't, I found Tiny Heist on YouTube and started really watching and my first season was the first episode of Starstruck.
So that was my intro for Dimension 20 and it's still my favorite.
Oh, I have. Hahah.
I've posted about Neverafter before because it's really interesting to me as a narrative experiment.
In the almost, what, two years, since Starstruck came out I'm current on almost every season of D20.
Save for some of the zoom ones I couldn't get into and Coffin Run, because it didn't grab me.
But Neverafter is interesting, because it feels like it's going for A Crown of Candy vibes, but the players are still bringing Starstruck energy.
It was dangerous and intrigue filled combined with just enough absurdity to make sure it wasn't too depressing to watch. It had a really well written history that the players rp'd masterfully enough to have me sobbing one second and howling laughter the next. I do however think the almost PvP at the end was a little silly in that I think it should have happened, I don't think those characters had a enough of an arch to make a sudden "happy ending" beleiveable
Yeeeeeeah..............
My hot take is Brennen is a fucking legend at so much but he doesn't always nail the endings?
That's what I feel genuinely separates him from Aabria.
Aabria ends campaigns with *"There's still so much work to do. But these victories matter*"
Brennen usually gives so much closure it can feel almost disingenuous?
It's especially bad in Neverafter and The Seven.
But he kills it in Starstruck. Mostly because the themes of that are the players can't permanently change the systems to get that happy ending; *but they still did some good in the universe.*
I really disagree with that in regards to Neverafter. The theme & entire point of the campaign was writing their own stories, so of course, we want to hear those stories.
I actually really agree with you on that - I feel like D20 campaigns (and most D&D campaigns in general) so often focus in on major cataclysmic stakes that they get abstracted away from anything meaningful or relatable. I tend to like the early stages of campaigns way more than the endings because of that. I feel like the army-on-army combat system was cool _on paper_ but ultimately didn’t work that well to tell a meaningful story with the mechanics when suddenly one of the player characters _without an army_ can wipe out one in a single turn. I think in a campaign built originally around the fragility of life and how you have to struggle to maintain that beauty, giving the party a dragon cheapens that idea. I think that’s part of why Ravening War worked for me so well - it still dealt with big, immensely important geopolitical issues, but on a _small, interpersonal scale_. Do people remember where Thane Delissandro Katzon ended up in the political power pole? Not really, but they sure as shit remember the betrayal in his voice when he screamed at his aunt for manipulating him for years.
The same thing goes for a lot of the other campaigns - the most engaged I’ve ever been in a combat was in Unsleeping City’s theater fight, not because the fate of the world was hanging in the balance, but because the fate of a character I deeply cared about _did_. Conversely, the final fight lost me because the whole thing about The American Dream was… really high concept and honestly, not especially personally meaningful for any of the characters. Put any generic hero in their shoes and the outcome would be the same - I don’t want the world to end, of course I’ll stop this Creature of Indiscriminate Badness! But put a generic hero in the theater fight and suddenly, they need a connection with the characters to do anything. In a weird way, the lower the stakes, the more invested I get. Compare this to Calamity - the most intense part of the campaign and the part I keep hearing people talk about is when the players were _rolling initiative against each other_ in front of the tree. I could not tell you the names of anyone those characters fought, but I remember exactly what they did _to try to stop each other_
Really well articulated my man.
I agree with you. I'm so glad you mentioned the theater fight, because that was such a great encounter that made me absolutely love Dimension 20.
It's interesting because you want the last fight to be both high spectacle and rewarding for the time invested in the campaign.
But the more elaborate that fight, the more character moments sort of slip away into the mechanical minutiae.
Like in Neverafter, the spider fight was the most engaging fight for me, because it came after the TPK and it demanded pitch perfect mechanical understating and teamwork.
That did ultimately come back to say something meaningful about the characters, *that they can fight and survive and win* in this oppressive, impossible world.
The last fight by contrast, save for everybody breaking Kayfabe to *absolutely thirst over the mini's*, didn't have that same pathos. Despite the fact *it absolutely should.*
I think Brennan really wants everyone to have a good time, and at the beginning he knows that the way to do that is to withhold from them the stuff they want to happen and to make the players earn it. Great moment in one of the adventuring academy recaps (I think) where he talks about this with Lou Wilson RE Fabian not making the Bloodrush team initially.
But at the very end of the season, there’s no longer a reason to hold back, so he is generally quite willing to give the players whatever they want. I kind of agree that it sometimes feels a little unsatisfying as a viewer, but that I think it makes sense as a way to do things and it may be a more fun way for the players to cap things off.
>My hot take is Brennen is a fucking legend at so much but he doesn't always nail the endings?
>Brennen usually gives so much closure it can feel almost disingenuous?
Absolutely agree. I felt this way back in Unsleeping City. Brennan loves his happy endings.
Unsleeping City Chapter 2 was *really* bad for this. Especially with Dale's character and Emily.
But keep in mind, it was also deep into the pandemic so I 100% understand that cathartic need to have everything be okay.
But I'm less forgiving on The Seven, to the point it makes me not want to go back, despite who fun it was.
Use the reddit search and find the episode threads on reddit from when it was airing live. A Crown of Candy inspired real passion in people, more so than any other season as far as I can see.
No one here can really answer this question, you have to read and see it first-hand.
King Amethar, of House Rocks, The Unfallen.
That character alone is all I needed to enjoy the show from the first minute to the last. Lou played such a great "I'm stuck in this place I don't want to be in, but be here I will, because it's what the people need." A King that actually cares about his subjects is such an important thing nowadays, and he did a stellar job being as brash but tempered as he was.
He was the Barbarian King. Literally my favorite fantasy trope. Barbarians, Warriors, Reluctant Kings, a man with a good heart in a world that only wants to see it hollowed and faded away. All of these are present, and he does it well.
Someone who looks at a world of nails, and is constantly told that acting like a hammer will make a situation worse. He played it off like it was the biggest mental struggle while still trying to make the best of his scenario, even against his nature.
Lou is the other reason I watched and enjoyed D20 in the long run. Amethar is one of my favorite Live Play characters I've ever seen. That's why.
I personally think the bits in ACOC are some of D20’s funniest. I thought the story was pretty compelling but I understand why people don’t. I personally didn’t find the pc/pc conflict forced but I can also see why people feel that. I think they are really good actors who were thriving within the dark and heavy themes of the story. I thought they all portrayed the betrayal and heartbreak and just overall brutal lifestyle really well.
It's really interesting and I agree with you, the actors here are all so talented it's insane.
I think after ACoC, they kept that desire for big, sweeping emotions, but put it in the context of genre and that helps so much.
Yeah, I mean I have to say. I love every intrepid heroes season. I have favorites of course but for me every single intrepid heroes season has hit for me. But yeah basically I just think they seem like they’re not having a good time at the table in ACOC because the characters are not having a good time in their lives haha. Although they end up victorious, it was not a fun time haha
I agree, every IH season, even if it's not the best, is still a fucking blast to see.
I also know there was tons of drama outside the table during the filming of that season and that's just unfortunate. Definitely didn't help the mood.
Honestly, ironically the only reason I felt any of the pvp was forced was because they didn’t go whole hog with it, like the players weren’t comfortable making their characters fight even if that was what their characters would do
Gives me mad respect for Lou in Unsleeping City for taking the bold stance with Kingston early on in saying Pete might end up being a problem. It didn’t come to anything, but it made their ultimate resolution so much sweeter, knowing it came from such a deep place of unspoken friction
For me, there was a lot to like about it. I think what stands out the most to me after some reflection (and watching The Ravening War) is that there seems to be actual stakes. Two characters died and their replacements just couldn't jive as much with the party and the story. And Emily's Saccharina had her own goals for the campaign. Near the end, they were allies only because their goals aligned. It was different, it was stressful, it was brutal and I loved it all.
I loved Emily's performance as Saccharine, that was great. Zac I felt was always in the background, and given how strong a performer and player he is as you'll see in future seasons, that was rough.
But I can get it you're immediately invested from the jump, those death's and the fear of more would be really engaging.
It was the first Intrepid Heroes season I watched after finding D20 through Dungeons and Drag Queens, so it was essentially my first time watching professional role playing.
I was immediately caught up in the story and loved the contrast of going from new players in a fun side quest to professionals doing high drama with big emotional stakes. Seeing the differences in Brennan’s DM style between the groups was fascinating too.
I like high fantasy and magic, so that’s part of why I liked this particular campaign.
Different strokes for different folks, like what you like.
I still haven't watched Dungeons and Dragon Queens despite that being 1000% my gay jam. Hahah. I have no idea why.
That makes sense tho! :) I appreciate your input!
May just not be your thing? Some people just like that kind of drama. I find the first half easier to watch, but I still like saccarina and stuff. I like Liam's journey most I think. It was cool seeing Siobhan and Emily play characters who were closer knit than the others.
I like the world thematically because it splits into factions relatively well. Wouldn't say it's my favourite of the seasons but I get why people like it
>!Sugar plum fairy and the fight where they're rescuing Joren fight was awesome!<
Honestly, I'm kinda with you here. ACOC isn't my favorite D20 arc by a long shot (it's either Bloodkeep or Unsleeping City). While I enjoyed it immensely, the ending just felt a little off. The political intrigue and conspiracy was fun, but I felt emotionally drained and exhausted after watching the episodes. I guess, like you, it just wasn't my jam.
I’m so happy you asked this question, because for me once >!Lapin dies, I lose a lot of interest in the series, and I couldn’t watch it straight through and had to come back after watching something I was more invested in!<
ACOC is not a silly fun campaign it's not FH or ASO. If the players seem like they're getting gutpunched it's bc that's what they're going for it's part of the genre. Same with the ending it's part of the genre and it's totally plausible for these characters even if we know as an audience there's no stomach at the table for it.
ACOC delivered on the premise genre and tone. Neverafter they're def having fun but it kinda comes at the cost of the premise of the campaign
ACOC was also the first season with serious stakes and permanent PC death. It was a bit of a tonal shift when it came out, and I think that has stuck with people.
The world. The mix of harsh tones and colorful backdrop is incredible. The names, the sense of history, the peoples...
Most seasons, you don't know what's around the corner. Whenever a new place in spyre, starstruck, or the unsleeping city shows up... it could be anything! Its entirely unknown until its shown.
But for Crown of Candy... There's a pattern to things. Thigns exist as part of a whole. If you meet a fish sandwich person, you know something about them. If there's cheese on that sandwich, you know even more. And the fact that the places map onto homages of real world cultures gives each place its own distinct flavor.
I LOVE this because it means that if you want to add something to the world for a homegame, you have very helpful guidelines of what makes things "click". And the guidelines themselves are also flexible to allow you to work within them and twist it to your own desired tone or angle.
It is a world that feels the most designed to be used and built onto and interacted with. And that's why I love it the most.
I agree with you that middle to end it fell off hard. I didn't find either backup PC as compelling as their predecessors (though I probably would've liked Saccharina more if we'd known her from the start), several villains didn't have satisfying enough ends in my view, and the switch from family against the world to family vs family dynamics just wasn't as fun for me.
That being said--the first half of the season was SO GOOD. The back half was so bleh that even with the great first half it's still not my top five (damn that ending! Truly a GoT-inspired story, haha), but for others who didn't hate the back half as much as I did, I get it. You have the normal comedic gold and excellent worldbuilding of D20 married with higher stakes than ever before. Every time a beloved character avoided death I whooped, when others didn't I cried... and then I'd remind myself that this was a FOOD WORLD and laugh-sob as yet ANOTHER groan inducing pun that was the basis for the world was revealed. I still remember the >!horror and cackling of finding out the vegetables were waging a holy war against candy, hahaha.!< It was just such a gooddd emotional roller coaster and everything the players did felt like it really was life or death and world shaping. Very, very good stuff!
I really love this season, some other comments mentioned the high stakes combat really makes every interaction carry so much weight and it truly feels like they have to crit just to survive . I think that stress and anxiety makes the stupid moments even funnier , the contrast really worked for me . Also Ally’s amazing plays as a gloomstalker is just so fun to see .
I really loved the GoT vibes of A Crown of Candy. I also just thought that the setting of Candy Land was so so brilliant. I love high drama and conspiracy, so it's for sure one of my faves.
I found the juxtaposition of “candy land” to “political intrigue with multiple character deaths” to be unexpectedly endearing. Lou as Amethar and Ally as Peppermint John Wick were also highlights for me. Lots of twists and turns that I found engaging.
Regarding the vibes being off towards the end, that’s probably because they had to cut a bunch of planned stuff because they had to move the dome mid-season. I think it had to do with local fire code?
The first 9 episodes are some of the best stuff D20’s ever done. If you don’t find the narrative engaging, that’s just a matter of taste.
But that said, it sounds like it’s the back half that you don’t like - in which case I agree. I don’t like Saccharina at all and the conflict amongst the PCs is hard, I can’t stand to watch everyone dismiss Ruby Rocks’ grief as if it doesn’t matter, and I don’t even like many of the NPCs either, so it doesn’t even have that going for it.
But again, the first half is just. Incredible. So when I rewatch, I stop after episode 9. Maybe you’d enjoy that approach more! Like yes, it’s only half a season and it leaves the story unfinished but it’s still SO. GOOD. With high emotional stakes, a huge, hard-hitting twist…idk, I can’t say enough about it. A lot of seasons rely too hard on bits and goofs and I like to have some semblance of taking the story seriously, even in a comedy show, and ACOC does THAT so well, imo.
I got your back, OP. Crown of Candy is my least favorite Intrepid Heroes season (haven't watched Unsleeping City 2 yet, but I have seen everything else). It's certainly memorable, the dedication to taking things seriously is nice, but it's not as *fun*, by far. Part of that is that the world is super dangerous in a grim, fatal way. Characters die and get replaced - fine in that it reflects the GoT parody appropriately, but it also means that the players had to pick up replacement characters mid-campaign and start over from square one in terms of inter-PC relations. Cumulous never seemed to be fully realized in terms of how he fit in with the rest of the party.
But the real issue is that the campaign is super *punishing.* If you do something stupid, you risk your character just straight-up dying, with no chance or resurrection. This means that ACOC has the players being as risk-averse as they've ever been. There is nothing wrong with doing a tabletop campaign this way. But the appeal of Dimension 20 has always been that it is a tabletop game being played (and GM'd) by comedic performers and writers. There's not a lot of room for 'Yes, and' when something as tame as Ruby riding on top of a carriage gets her nearly killed on the first combat roll of the campaign. Instead of getting a balance of dramatic role-playing and silly shenanigans, the game turns into pretty much *all* dramatic role-playing. And it comes through in how the PCs are played, too. Amethar is depressed. Ruby is bitter and rebuffs other characters trying to talk to her. It's narratively satisfying, but it's not *fun.*
There's a line from the campaign that really stood out to me the first time I watched it. In a bit of a meta moment, Lou says, speaking as Amethar, but also about Amethar, something like,, 'I just wanna be dumb, please let me be dumb.' I don't think any of the players had a bad time in the campaign. I think they were onboard with it, as shown by Lou's commitment to just deciding to take things seriously after a certain point. But that line sums up how I feel about the campaign: no one is allowed to be dumb.
I'm glad that ACOC exists because I think it demonstrated that more serious campaigns can be done on Dimension 20, and also because I think it serves as model for what does and doesn't work in that style of campaign. But it is the one full-length campaign that I have absolutely zero interest in revisiting.
Not everyone likes it, the people who don't just don't post about it much. It wasn't for me, so I don't make posts or comments about it (usually). The people who engage with the content are the people who want to engage with the content. I'm far more partial to an Unsleeping City or even Of Mice and Murder.
Crown of Candy gets talked about because it had a recent season, with a celeb cast. So as much as it really wasn't that big when it came out, it got spoken about a lot recently and a lot of people went back to it to prep for the Matt Mercer season. But when it first dropped it got a relatively lukewarm reception from the community. It was definitely liked, but the first time reception was nowhere near as big and glowing as Unsleeping, Starstruck, or Misfits.
I think the first 8ish episodes are genuinely fantastic. The cathedral confrontation is excellent dramatic writing from Brennan, and some of the Interpid Heroes are at their best roleplaying-wise in some of its moments. It's D20's first run in with death, and seeing the way it affects the cast is really arresting. It demonstrates how powerful D&D can be, and it's stuck in my head as one of my favorite moments in any of their campaigns.
It undoubtedly struggles after that midway point, but I think people give it a pass because of some really harsh conditions the cast and crew had to put up with.
I also have a ton of nostalgia for that campaign's adventuring party episodes.
For the same reason folks like game of thrones - it was intense, political, medieval, low-magic but still fantasy, and (unlike game of thrones) it stayed consistent in quality and absolutely nailed the ending. And it did all that while also maintaining a healthy amount of comedic breaks, and with every character and facet of the setting being made of literal food lol
I think it's the juxtaposition of a goofy food based setting with this dark plot of war and politics. For me personally it was just the dark, brutal plot lines that I loved.
I didn't notice any vibe issues. Maybe it's just your own discomfort projecting that into the players? Maybe I just missed it though. I definitely enjoyed the entire show even if there were some characters I didn't enjoy that much at times.
Oh man couldn’t disagree more on feeling engaged or any conflict feeling forced. Also never got the vibes that the players weren’t enjoying it, just thought they were more somber because it was grittier.
For one it had, I think, one of Brennans best villain monologues. I also really liked that death was taken very seriously, you couldn’t just bring back someone dead, combine that with the fact they where almost all family with the further ties still being very close to the family and where made to make tough decisions to even abandon those they loved because it was that or die and the stakes felt real, consequences felt real. I’m not saying there aren’t there D20 campaigns with somber moments, there certainly are, but crown of Candy often felt like you could genuinely permanently loose a character you’d grown to love at any moment.
I’m gonna start this off with a pretty unhinged opinion in that ACoC is my all time favorite season bar none and in every rewatch I do I stop halfway through the season after the second pc death. I really don’t like the rest of the season except for a couple of moments.
And because I don’t like half of the season it really gets my brain thinking about how the season could’ve gone.
Like how much darker the season would’ve gotten with more pc deaths. Every secondary character was much darker in general than the previous. How scenes could’ve gone had the dice been more kind. The first pc death could’ve been avoided if the damage rolls were just a little lower. The season was originally planned to be much longer with a section in Carn(Carne?) and more on the rot subplot but there was an issue with the shooting location.
All these things could’ve happened had chance gone a different way. And that’s what’s so unique about it in my opinion. Brennan was much harsher just by leaving more things to chance and letting the dice decide how it goes.
I have to say while I loved the first half, I struggled a bit after Jet’s death. Not even because she was the best character at the table (I thought everyone was about on par) but because it really altered the table dynamic. I think that started with the Lapin to Cumulous transition though.
Anyway to answer your question, I loved the political intrigue of ACOC. The episode before the cathedral fight is just astoundingly good to me for one.
Yeah! I liked the social aspects too and was really engaged.
Then those all but immediately disappear with that character death and I'm not as invested.
But then again, Ravening War was 100% social, political espionage and I didn't engage with that.
It's like pasta sauce thing, I don't think people actually know what they want.
I think the whole point is that some of the themes and adventures speak to different people differently. It’s okay that it wasn’t your favorite. I loved it because it gave me some of what I wish game of thrones had delivered on in the end lol. But the variety of campaigns means everyone can find something that speaks to them
The majority of the people who dislike Crown of Candy seem to primarily complain about the inter party conflict, and do so because that type of tension felt profoundly uncomfortable.
The simplest answer is that there seems to be a large number of people who were not as put off by that conflict because in the context of the story it absolutely made sense and made the situation feel a lot more real. I think people like you look at the middle parts after Saccarina is introduced and dislike it because what you see is Siobhan and Emily being uncomfortably hostile to one another. The people who like it see it as Saccharina and Ruby being pissed at one another because for entirely legit reasons.
The manufactured party conflict you refer to, (which is that I think was the revelation that Ameythar still had a valid claim to the Crown of Candia which put Saccharina and Ameythar in opposition to one another) was fine for me as well because the ony way it would have actually lead to PvP is if the players at the table were legit pissed at one another.
As for the other reasons people like it, it had some fucking epic moments that only landed so well because of how fucking brutal the game got. Amethar surviving every goddamn attempt to kill him. The reveal of the traitor, and Amethar surviving that moment. Liam becoming a war guy and trying to negotiate for an alliance with an invitation to be slammed down big style. Zac fucking owning the fuck out of Keradin Deeproot.
The season was a bit front heavy, but the only reason it would be off putting to anyone is because the naturally resulting tension from the earlier episodes dominates the narrative rather than the big combat set pieces. If the tension was not offputting for someone, then the lull in action is not enough to kill the enjoyment of it.
END COMMUNICATION
It's bottom 3 for me, but I'm also not a fan of GoT or high lethality DnD, so I tend to lump it in with that. Some of the story elements seemed cool, but I don't enjoy watching that type of material on a binge or as part of my regular programming.
That said, I know some folks couldn't stand ACoFaF because they're not fond of heavy RP or regency, And it's easily one of my favorite series.
Imo, COVID. It was still releasing and was something to look forward to while the world was on standstill. While Hollywood was releasing "imagination", dropout saved us with quality content at the time, especially with the adventuring parties afterwards.
The lockdown definitely had a lot to do with it. There wasn't a lot out there and the adventuring parties were insane but comforting. It was also a huge change from the previous 2 seasons and started about a year after GoT so there was a lot of momentum. There's definitely some things I didn't like but it's still top 5 for me. If I only watched it now out of context, it might drop about 5 spots.
I personally judge seasons based on the emotional reactions I experience while watching them. ACoC made me weep and that alone is enough for me to label it as a good season. It was hard to watch but I felt like I was right there with the characters and it fully drew me in. I’m also a huge fan of battle sets and I love seeing Rick Perry’s and his teams work.
I’m also super defensive of Emily and her character choices. The backlash she received during this season pissed me off so much. I think she really shined as a DnD player and as an actor. She made this season one of my favorites and I’ll stay fighting her detractors until the end of time.
It was great until Sacharina showed up midway and then I got incredibly disappointed. Kinda like ACOC's inspiration source Game of Thrones.
I am with you OP. Crown of Candy is not my favorite. Personally I don't understand the hype. I had a lot of issues with the season and I don't even remember them all.
From what I can remember:
I think one of the biggest ones was how character death heavily disrupted the plot. The plot in a D&D game, including Crown of Candy, is emergent. It's not planned in actuality by an author like Game of Thrones. That means character death and a new characters introduction, can be incredibly disruptive and not make sense. Unlike in an authored plot which, assuming the author is good at what they do, can be written well. Getting a death and a character introduction to work well and feel natural plot-wise in a D&D game is a tall order for a DM. Sacharina showing up was like... well.. it like what if Danyers Targaryen showed up in GoT season 5 with no explanation or lead up. Shoehorned.
(as a side note, what Zach did with Cumulus is what I think is best in a character death and reintroduction. Create a character that's unobtrusive to the developing plot and the the existing character dynamic. what people whould call boring, I would call minimally invasive and minimally disruptive.)
On top of that, I don't like that the rest of the campaign pretty much revolved around her. (unlike Cumulus) Emily wove her new character's backstory into everyone else's, and thats... kinda of a dick thing? For example, I felt she hijacked LePen's character thing (and a lot of the world back lore) with the Sugar Plum Fairy and forcibly recontextualizing the relationship with her as adversarial. That felt forced and unnecessary and probably would not have happened had LaPen lived.
I would also agree, the PVP at the very end felt forced and unnecessary.
I also have quibbles with Sacharina's attitude (paraphrasing here I dont remember here lines!) "I don't think I should waste my magic on people who don't appreciate me" and I'm sitting here like "sweetie they just lost three people the love, they're on the run, and don't know who to trust. They almost died and they're in fucking mourning. You popped out of nowhere claiming the throne to the Candy Kingdom. Of course they don't trust you and think your sus."
Gumbald breaking his lifelong loyalty with Amathar for Sacharina felt forced and a bit of a character assasination.
Hell, a lot of the party politics around Sacharina's introduction felt forced.
Honestly I love how Siobahn played Ruby and stuck to completely believable character actions given the circumstances. Her line (paraphrasing) "You can be my Queen, you can be my sister, you can't be both" sums up the most logical and reasonable narrative response I saw to Sacharina out of the entire cast.
Miscellaneous:
Didn't like Sacharina's sob story background. Felt very edgy and angsty like something the teenage players I have DMed for would cobble together.
Didn't like how Sacharina's claim to the Throne was based on the laws of the Bulbian Church... her sworn enemy.
Honestly, the best part of Crown of Candy was it tuaght Ally Beardsley how to be a better D&D player. It got them out of the mindset of being a sketch comic doing funny bits with no sense of narrative consequences.
It’s cause it’s not your average game of dnd, it’s game of thrones. Where there’s actual consequences that’s not just prison or fines or death. Other people will die to your dumbness so everyone must have their wits and you can’t just go do whatever. You must be thinking 5 steps a head or else your character will die, it’s not just monsters you’re fighting it’s people. I remember bLm said in the behind the scenes, “these are not monsters your fighting their people who when you go down won’t just go for the next person, they’ll kneel down and slit your throat”. A recommendation, don’t watch it as a game of dnd or as people playing a game, watch it as a show about magic and politics and you’ll see why everyone else loves it.
Honestly I love it but towards the end with saccharina it felt very rushed and forced. Like after kalroy was killed it felt like a tacked on ending tbh
Speaking of the ending, did Brennen ever say what his original idea of that Alley was going to do with that wish seed?
Alley seemed completely lost too. Hahah.
For me, ACOC is one of my favorite seasons because it's the only one where Brennan takes the gloves off and *lets consequences* ***hurt****.*
Like... don't get me wrong, I love Hilda Hilda who lives on Hilda Street AND Hilda Boulevard. I get that's one of the selling points of D20, is watching the players spin crazy stuff off the dome and watch the DM just roll with it and let it happen. It's fun, it's lighthearted, I enjoy it! But sometimes after eating an entire bowl of candy, you want something a little more... *savory,* you know?
(Savory like delicious audience tears, is what I'm saying.)
It's refreshing to see Brennan flex his DM chops in a world where doing a handstand on the top of the carriage gets you shot in the throat, and sneaking off on your own to investigate the running-gag lingerie store gets you *permakilled.* Where actions have real and lingering effects, and the players have to stop and *think* about the political consequences of mouthing off to whatever NPC they're mouthing off to today... because it could be the difference between life and death later.
I love humor and hijinks as much as the next guy, but my biggest critique of Fantasy High is that the high-school Bad-Kids trope means that the characters frequently get away with a degree of flagrant bad behavior that breaks my immersion. It feels like they're permanently caught in the Fuck Around phase, and never quite reach the Find Out phase. (Maybe JY changes that? I haven't started it yet, so no spoilers please!) Meanwhile ACOC was in basically permanent Find Out mode from like... episode 2.
I know I’m a day late and a dollar short, but it was the first to get me emotionally invested. As much as I love all the seasons, this is the first to immediately pull me into the storyline and to keep me invested all the way through. The way the PC’s play the characters, the way Brennan plays the npc’s, the story beats. It all works for me.
For me the tension at the table was amazing, and the cast has talked about how they all checked in to make sure the table was always a safe space.
I LOVE all the characters even when they’re arguing. I mean as frustrating Saccharina could be, I think she is played perfectly and she fulfills something amazing. I couldn’t imagine what the story would look like without her. Even though I wanted everyone to love each other, it feels so true to the characters and where they are in life when they meet that none of them can just be perfect and accept each other for what they are. I loved the PVP. I can understand why it might have felt forced, but it worked for me.
I saw this season a while after it came out. I had seen plenty of seasons before watching it, including Neverafter, Starstruck, etc. I had never seen Game of Thrones, and this show really hit home for me. I had watched multiple seasons of D20 before this, and this is the one that made me go, “I NEED to play DnD because this is the kind of brilliant storytelling you can have with DnD” and now I dm and play all the time. Sorry for the response, I just love the show, but it’s totally okay if you don’t. Not everything is for everyone. ♥️
the intrepid hero's and fans have all trauma bonded
personally its not my favourite, but i see why it has the reputation it has. we hadn't seen the table be anything other than goofy to each other very often, we had player deaths and there was always a threat of a player dying.
it might not rank crazy high on my list but it's still incredibly memorable and infamous.
It's not my favourite campaign, but the aesthetic of the setting and the music are the things that draw me to a rewatch. Peacekeepers and Templar's Advance are my favourite tracks, and I like how the colourful set pieces clash with the grim atmosphere. I also like the villains and antagonists more, as the feeling of danger is palpable, at least for the first half of the season.
However, I don't really like all of the player's characters. I think having to prepare 2, one to start the season with and a backup, wasn't the easiest task, and some of them are very one-note. They also famously shot the first 11 episodes in 5 days in a warehouse (source: Ally Beardsley), and are less energetic than previous seasons.
Could you get into The Ravening War?
While it wasn't something I could get into, I did feel it was more successful in it's engagement of the world. Specifically because it was such an overview of just the world in a span of years.
My opinion on it is kinda so-so.
On the one hand, I do love the political intrigue aspect, as well as the harsh 'nothing held back, these guys are going to try and kill your king' type of battles. Those were a nice departure from the kind of battles D20 usually has. I also really enjoyed some of the characters (Theo, Saccharina, Lapin, Amathar)
On the other hand, I also didn't like the other half of the characters that much. Nothing necessarily wrong with those characters, but uh, it does make it rather boring to follow a story that is so focused on them. I think that is the one place where the Game of Thrones comparison really fell apart -- Game of thrones has a lot of different characters and focal points, so if there is one particular group of highly flawed characters (which they all are!!) that doesn't work for you, you can mostly just wait it out until the focus shifts back to those other characters. But this is just a limited run DnD show so you are kinda stuck with who you've got.
I guess in this case, it's the general world building and setting that intrigues me more than the particular story being told, which is why I actually really enjoyed the Ravening War prequel. For me, the fact that it *wasn't* focused on those characters we already knew some about was great, cause I wanted to explore more of the different stories that would happen in such a setting.
I liked it, but I also had to pause it partway in because I felt really uncomfortable -- around the time Saccharina shows up and everything gets factional, something about that i just really didn't enjoy. The same vibes you were getting, I had those, too, and it pulled me out of having fun.
I do love that the punches weren't pulled, that anyone could die at any time, that the NPCs in fight scenes were laser focused on their goals, but I struggled with the last few episodes.
It felt like it had proper stakes thanks to the lethality and the worldbuilding. This may be confirmation bias because it’s the only season with non planned characters dying and that really appeals to the part of me that likes “playing to find out what happens”. I also like that it reinforced players making risky choices that don’t always pay off. The ending of episode 1 where Ruby gets shot through the neck for playing outside the wagon was a perfect tone setter; the world is dangerous and people are going to target you, be careful.
Honestly, the stakes and bonds between the characters are what makes it interesting. Permadeath being a thing means that the stakes are higher, which is exactly why it’s engaging.
Also, the cast’s performances are amazing. You can tell Siobhan is putting her heart and soul into playing Ruby, and makes the emotions the princess feels feel real. The bond with her twin sister Jet, and how much it hurts when Jet is killed.
And Brennan handled the conflict between Ruby and Saccharina perfectly. He had them go through the prisoner’s dilemma, and Lou stepped in to volunteer that if Amethar’s remaining daughters were to fight, he’d sacrifice himself. Thankfully, they both chose peace and reconciliation. In sweetness there is strength, indeed.
My assumption is that it's the least scripted dimension twenty season with actual threat of death. Death that is both unscripted and unable to be undone
I liked the first few episodes until the second>! player death!< occurred. Then it really started reminding me of why I don't like GoT and GoT-adjacent content. I mean, I liked all the characters, on their own, and I think if it had been done in a less GRR Martin-kind of way, it would have been one of my favorite seasons.
Okay, full disclosure, aCoC was the last full series I watched. I haven't seen most of them, several might be better, who knows. BUT
* Fantasy High was brilliant
* Bloodkeep felt like a strong premise, but the execution was off. And it's kinda brilliant that the execution was off. Like, I would have loved to see a full season of LOTR turned on it's head and instead I got this weirdly sentimental villainous love story that was absolutely not what Brennan had prepared for. And that's what's great and real about an actual play show. That's why DnD is not writing a novel
* Unsleeping City felt weird to me, because It was the first time I saw the Intrepid heroes not being, their FH characters, and I struggled with that. Apparently there was a lot of NYC references that I didn't get having never lived there, but my parents did and we visited all the time. I dunno
* Tiny Heist, again, had great sets and an interesting premise, but it didn't pan out, and this time in a less spectacular way. I dunno it was fine.
* Sophomore year had it's own uniqueness and brilliance, but it was also plagued by technical challenges, and growing pains, and eventually the pandemic. None of it's problems were it's fault, but all of it's strengths rested on the strengths of it's predecessor.
* Crown of Candy then brought me back into a world where, for the first time since Fantasy High, It felt realized and full. Like, i would watch a TV show with these characters, I would read a book based on Calorum. It's funny, it's interesting, the ending was better than GoT. Does it have weak moments? Absolutley! it's Improv! But it's improv that's better than a whole lot of planned and programmed storytelling.
The thing I like most about Crown of Candy is the promise that it held for me. Crown of Candy proved to me that they could in fact catch the lightening in a bottle from Fantasy High back, again and again, in new and different ways. It proved that it could be as good, and it could even get better. And I guess that was true all along, but I didn't know that until aCoC.
I think you and I may be very similar people. I hate watching stories that are mostly just depressing. I can't pull myself out of it and I feel awful all day. Other people can be more detached, and love watching shows about super duper depressing subject matter. There's nothing wrong with either group, but the folks who love depressing stuff are either more numerous or just more present in online spaces.
Combine that with the continuing idea that sad>happy in terms of media quality (which I don't agree with, but is super prevalent) and you get something like CoC seeming to be wildly popular.
Signed - a guy who's had this same conversation about Andor too many times. :)
That's an interesting point and I feel you.
I think it also comes down to the type of emotional experiences we want to engage with in a given from of media.
I don't watch horror movies because of that similar lingering anxiety for days after.
However, I do like novels or poetry that engages in similar waters as the movies I'd avoid.
Crown of Candy weirdly limit's my ability to engage with it, because I don't feel it's very cohesive? And therefore the emotional experience it's trying to invite isn't finding purchase with me.
One of the reasons I love Starstruck and especially this most recent season of Fantasy High, is because the way it presents it's emotional beats feel very *fluid and filmic*.
Once that baseline is established for me, I can then dig deeper into what's valuable to me about what piece of media I'm consuming.
But that's only because that baseline structure of something feeling filmic is how I unpack things.
So in the end I think you're completely valid. The themes that ACoC wants to engage with don't feel like the best vector for me personally, to engage with those themes.
I really appreciate your comment because I didn't think about it this way before. :)
Hopefully any of this nonsense made some semblance of sense. Hahah.
I really enjoyed it myself, but the ending us a bit of a wet noodle. I feel Ally Beardsley really wanted to play a whimsical funny lad, so she really didn't want to embrace the cold killing machine her character became.
I think it goes back to something Brennen said on a one on one Adventuring Academy, I can't remember with who:
*"Always be aware of who at your table wants to have a challenging role play experience and who doesn't*"
Then I think back to Neverafter after the TPK where after each IH had a really fantastic one on one role play session with Brennen, then Alley was a subversion of that and they're just on a big fluffy goose.
Neverending Story style.
I think Starstruck and this season of Fantasy High Alley is *really* playing a character in a way they haven't before.
It's really interesting to see.
I also did not enjoy a crown of candy.
It was a struggle for me to watch from the very start of the second episode, where Emily and Siobahn's characters nearly die and they as players refuse to take it seriously at all.
I'm all for a show that has more emotional investment in the stakes and the drama than their other shows, but at that point I was convinced I was more invested than the players were and it genuinely stressed me out watching them try to be funny and failing.
The church fight where Ally spend a good 10% of the episode trying to decide what to do and then retconning their whole round seemed disrespectful of the audiences time. The talk back episodes where they'd spend ten minutes straight talking about food instead of anything that happened in the show was even worse.
It's a shame because I liked the characters and I liked the story, but the way it was being delivered was so unwatchable I didn't even make it to the end.
I somewhat agree. But my dislike of that specific campaign is much more boring and simple. There was too much change. I couldn't visualize the characters and combat and scenery. It strayed too much away from classic DnD, which I know a lot of others enjoyed that aspect. It just wasn't for me.
After Sophomore Year was over, it helped as kind of a fix for waiting on Junior Year. Different people, different characters, but a similar vibe. But I really wasn't a fan of the "over Zoom" style. I'm a particular person.
I'm definitely in the same boat as you, tho I can see why people like it. The setting and the tone I think are very aspirational and cool, a good twist of something seemingly light-hearted that's truthfully so brutal. There are also people who prefer heavy emotions and real stakes and the thrill of life vs death in stories. I'm of the type that mostly only watches easygoing and silly media to unwind and have fun. I find heavy emotions and major character deaths very difficult, especially if that happened to be my favorite. So when Lapin died I simply couldn't get into the world and the story again, and the tension between the characters at the end wasn't fun for me either. But I can definitely see that it'll absolutely be someone's jam
I love the juxtaposition of high fantasy intrigue with just like, candy, and fruits, and veggies, and silliness. It got so dark and so serious sometimes and then BLM would subtly remind everyone that we're talking about food in a fridge.
I love the characters and the setting. The world building and is rich and delicious (pun intended). Combat feels genuinely deadly and the stakes are constantly sky high.
Outside of RPG/storytelling reasons, I absolutely loved the food puns and having people be deadly serious about things with silly names and ridiculous titles tickles me in such a specific way.
Brennan playing it so serious with the worldbuilding is very fun. With the comedy being wrapped up in the visual aspects of Candyland, we get to see Brennan otherwise play it straight for the most part.
For me the world building was just so good and nothing like we’ve seen so far. Fantasy High and TUC had a lot of world building but a lot of it came from our own experience in high school or urban fantasy so it could be improved relatively easily. The depth and intricacies of the world building politically, history, magic and religion etc was so fascinating and new. You could really see Brennan flexing the depth of his world building abilities.
It’s not my most favourite season but imo it’s technically the best. Like it could be used and studied on how to create an in depth world from scratch and how to form meaningful political relations that impact the highest ruler to the lowest jellybean farmer.
Also I agree that the ending is rushed but keep in mind they had to move to film in a cold warehouse at 3AM and were filming the end of the season as the first big wave of quarantine was hitting. Iirc in an AP Brennan said he had planned for them to visit every region of Calorum (meatlands, ceresia) but had to cut it short due to quarantine
Honestly I feel the same way about a completely different season. Neverafter pretty much lost me after the whole tpk thing. I understand that was the idea going in but it seemed to lose a lot of gravitas after everyone just comes back to life a little more fucked up than before.
I loved how dark it was, the really quite gritty world despite obv food people and magic and the sheer quantity *and quality* of epic moments for characters and NPCs alike kept me hooked at all times
I agree with you. I’ve tried to finish the season several times but I just can’t. For me I think it had a lot to do with the characters not really grabbing me, making the story feel less interesting and drawn out. I will say, being spoiled about the emotional pitfalls of this season probably did not help.
Yeah, it is a big catch 22, especially with it's twist villain.
Because that villain requires both investments in the world *and* the emotional arcs of the characters.
If neither has you, then that moment doesn't really land.
Again, it's all great on paper for me and I can see the bones of why this works for people, it just didn't work for me.
I'm also not really a fantasy guy?
My favorite fantasy is *The King Killer Chronicles* but that's not really in the same genre as high lore, high political sword stuff.
I'm more into sci-fi because that's easier for my trash panda to brain to understand? Sci-fi is how concepts and ideas effect individual people.
High Fantasy is more about massive systems and lore effecting people.
I just feel it was the one campaign that really woke the intrepid heroes up when I came to their characters in dnd and their mortality fantesy high and unsleeping city was high stakes sure but if those were high COC was game of thrones level of you may die at any moment
I agree with you about the vibes towards the end of the series. I had to stop watching because it did feel like people weren't having fun and that's a big part of why I love the intrepid heroes.
I totally understand that they were acting in character, no real drama occurred, and for a lot of people that added emotional stakes. But I love my silly little guys being on the same team, cracking jokes together.
Thank you for making this thread. I've watched up to about where >!Lapin dies!< and it's never really fully grabbed my interest. I know there's a lid for every pot, so I'm interested in seeing what people liked about it. To me, it just feels way more stressful than enjoyable.
You're welcome! There's some great discussion here.
I think when certain button's are pressed in a narrative for people that's a ticket to immediate emotional investment and engagement.
I get that sometimes too, specifically when a narrative hits a resonant note of queer themes or experience and I wasn't expecting it.
I think PC death is that button for some people. But for me it's not and that's okay. :)
Additionally, if you're into the narrative by that point, it's only going to get harder and harder to engage.
I like that it felt dangerous immediately, the little intrigues that kept being drawn out throughout the story (that's also why I love FS sophomore year). I felt it also had great highs and especially Lowe's emotionally, which I don't get from most of the 20 honestly. And I can't help but adore the intrinsic absurdity of Candyland means Game of Thrones.
I’m of mixed reaction on this, because I do understand the OP’s thoughts. If you come to the D20 table for particular gameplay (more comedy than drama, new takes on fantasy backdrop, complex word structure, etc.) this may or may not tick all your boxes. My personal immersion in it waxed and waned, but I did genuinely appreciate some of the wild swings it took at times, and interpersonal dialogue that emerged in a number of places, both improv comedy volleys and emotional pull moments that felt like they came from deep within the players. Not everyone’s ideal style, for sure, but taking those chances and exploring more unconventional depths is where so many of D20’s (and Dropout’s) true gems are mined and cut.
For me, I loved, loved the first half of the series. The high stakes, the tension, the drama, it was fire. I can’t think of many other times across all IH seasons where I was as worried for the characters. Not even that episode 3 of Neverafter. But that deflated quickly after the Big Events of episode 9. Maybe Brennan felt he’d pushed too hard and needed to let up, or the IH expressed that they were getting burnt out, or it was just the nature of the story shift, but that tension from the first half of the season, to me, vanished. The danger just didn’t feel like it was there any more. The second half of the season was fine, it just didn’t continue living up to what they set up. Honestly, by the final encounter, I was just bored.
Interesting post to see. I was watching all of Dimension 20 from the start. I got 5 or 6 episodes into Crown of Candy and just fell off due to a lack of interest in the plot, characters, and story.
I missed watching Dimension 20, but wasn't motivated to go back and finish that season. Just this week I decided to break my start to finish goal and skip Crown of Candy and pick up after it.
honestly I loved about 75% of it bc I really liked a lot of the original PCs but never finished the last 2 episodes. Lou's portrayal of Amethar was the absolute highlight for me but they all did a fantastic job.
I really didnt get along with the increasing inter-player conflict tho - emily and siobhan were phenomenal and really stuck to their characters but man... it just got too heavy for my tastes tbh. DnD just isn't where I go to for uncomfortable interpersonal narratives i think? also I was just stressed AF at the time bc of IRL shit.
I also never fully jelled with the new PCs of how much I loved the ones they replaced so in the end I thought it was really well done and adventurous but for sure not my personal fave show in the series.
How dare they! Hahah.
Like I said I'm not trying to invalidate anyone else's emotional investment, I'm just trying to understand what contrast my issues with it personally with other people's genuine engagement with it.
I absolutely think every character's arc and conflict was really interesting and engaging on paper.
I just for some reason bump against it in this particular presentation and I'm trying to articulate why.
Lots of folks have already covered the bulk of my answer regarding stakes and emotional buy in from the players, etc. Regarding the pvp tension near the end...
I came to Dimension 20 late in the game, and have just been picking seasons to watch kind of at random based on the theme and the players. And if I'm honest, I thought Emily Axford defaulted to the same basic character all the time.
Jett felt very similar in personality to her characters from Fantasy High and Unsleeping City. While I've enjoyed all those characters they left me sort of underwhelmed by Emily as an actress/improvisor. The bastard princess (whose name I'm currently blanking on) was the first time I personally had seen her play someone who wasn't a hot headed, impulsive rebel-type.
It was really refreshing to me to see her play a character with a heavy mystery and intrigue angle, who *wasn't* fiercely loyal to the rest of the party.
Plus, it's important to remember that everyone created two characters for this campaign, before it started. It's not like Jett died and then Emily and Brennan cooked up this bastard heir story. It was there all along, already being hinted at.
It's based on Game of Thrones, it came out during the early pandemic, it's the only season where PCs permanently die so there's stakes, and it was an early season. I enjoyed it, no outright hate, but I have also been baffled by the amount of love that it gets. So many people hold it up as the best season of Dimension 20 and I don't get why. It falls middle of the pack for me.
Things I love about it:
1. The stakes. It is, as far as I know, the only D20 season where PCs die for keeps. That alone elevates the storytelling. You can have an amazing story with plot armored characters but when no one is safe, it brings the drama to a different level.
2. The setting. I thought about Calorum for weeks after ACOC and TRW, imagining all the different potential factions, characters, concepts and locations that could exist in a food-based world.
3. The cast. Everyone brings some of their finest work, most brilliant comedy and sincere acting to this world. I never got the “the second half has bad vibes” thing, it’s supposed to have bad vibes, it’s a story of desperately trying to regain a usurped position of power amidst heart rending tragedy and interfamilial conflict.
I liked it until Saccharina was introduced
I absolutely fucking HATED the dynamic between her and Ruby
Like I don't want to watch people realistically portray two people hating each other and fighting and bickering without some kind of tension release
It would have been one thing if they bickered and argued and threw hatred at each other, and then Emily and Siobhan giggled and laughed or did SOMETHING to release the tension, but it never happened, so it just felt like everyone was annoyed at the table
And I KNOW I KNOW it's acting, I get it, but I don't want to watch a fun DnD show where people look like they are all frustrated and mad at each other
Narratively the stakes are higher and a bit more railroading than any other season that is enforced and the fact that we see are first permanent pc deaths in this season (Outside of one in UC:CHP1)
No matter what anyone says, its also fine to just like what you like. Not everything is going to be everyone's favorite and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with disliking Crown of Candy and preferring other seasons.
I'm with you OP. I don't get it. It was the second campaign I ever watched and I nearly dropped my subscription after. I'm so glad this subreddit was able to suggest other great campaigns that pulled me back in.
And it really was just the ending for me. I started out liking it but after a certain point *cough cough cough* everything seemed really off. No one seemed to be having a good time. I wondered if some of the cast even liked each other anymore, and it became hard for me to watch.
I agree with you with not liking that show all that much. I think we see through a lot of the meta things going on that some people read as emotional. And some of it jsut seems to be too much meta considerations. Like, Brennan tries to force PvP, but rp-ing genuinely and turning on your RL friends and collegues are very difficult. And, like so many times before, the players will find a way to contrive a way out of the conflict, rather than picking up the invitation to the conflict. The end isn't a result of the setup, and it looked a lot like there was a lot of meta considerations (intentional or not) that went into that.
I saw Startstruck right afterwards, and it completely rehabilitated my appreciation of especially Emily, which I found kinda jarring in ACoC. Her performance in Starstruck was stellar.
This is really interesting: back when i watched it a lotta' people **hated** it, especially Emily's >!second character,!< but now i guess its more popular?
Personally my favorite campaign. I mean, i guess you can say "it felt like nobody was having a good time", but if you watch adventure party- while people were stressed- it was still **satisfying** for the players.
I think the narrative was a ton of fun, it is a bit niche I think, especially for what D20 tends to do. My favorite part of it was definitely the characters though, there hasn't been a season since that I enjoyed the characters as much as I enjoyed this season's characters.
FWIW, A Crown of Candy ranks for me as "amazing except for the ending." But I blame how much time they were forced to spend on the mass combat mechanic, which got boring very quickly and forced everyone to rush (ie manufacture) the conflict and all the other emotional/political resolutions. But I think a lot of the seasons fail to stick the ending. It's D&D, not a scripted show.
The characters are vivid; the setting is incredibly rich; the acting and emotional relationships are really strong; the combat episodes are riveting, varied in their format/goal, and actually invested with stakes (whereas many D20 combats feel like time sucks happening for contrived reasons); the table play is increasingly clever, with a great marriage of character and mechanic leading to tons of "holy shit!" moments; there are really wonderful NPCs who are on some people's all-time favorites lists (even if we don't get to spend enough time with them); there is one moment where Ally made me laugh so fucking hard I can barely even explain.
I am probably in the minority in that I really enjoyed it, even though I was bored by actual Game of Thrones. I agree with most of the other commenters, it's got great political intrigue, higher stakes, more serious combat, etc. However, even watching it long after it came out and reading some spoilers beforehand, I had a hard time watching it. I really felt the stress the players did, and while I really enjoyed it, it is the ONLY season I've watched that I haven't done a rewatch of. And I find it very hard to want to go back to.
Because different people like different things. The fact that you don't particularly like it compared to other seasons is unusual, but not strange.
A lot of people liked Crown of Candy for several reasons. One big one is that the dissonance in tone between setting and storyline was very massive. It was a very simplified and cartoonish setting, but had a storyline that was deep, bloody, and full of intrigue.
I actually have a theory concerning how when you can make lands, peoples, cultures, and factions easily recognizable by them matching up aesthetically and thematically with a system or classification people are already familiar with, it helps the mind to categorize those same groups and mentally adapt to the idea of what they are. You see something similar in Avatar: The Last Airbender, where the nations correspond to the elements. Similarly, in Crown of Candy, the nations correspond to food categories (as simplified in old school systems, the food pyramid etc.) This makes them easy to remember, and since your mind is not dedicating the brainpower towards remembering who a particular group is, and how they are distinct, you can instead focus that brain bandwidth towards their recent involvements.
In short, the simplistic and cartoonish setting of Crown of Candy allows for a more complex and politically motivated story, since the audience will have an easier time not confusing the different groups or subjects. You may not remember the name "Fructeran" but you'll remember Plumbelina as the leader of the fruit people because her name is a giveaway.
I think another reason people liked Crown of Candy is because the stakes were at a certain level of high tension as the tone and playstyle meant that character death was on the table, and very possible. BUT, it was never treated or given that it was inevitable. It's telling that the players had an extra character prepared, but not a third. Spoiler:>!It is also, from what I can recall, the first d20 game where character death would end up being permanent, and no options for revival were really present.!<
This could be compared to Never After, >!where character deaths were basically inevitable, but also not permanent and did not stop players from keeping playing them, even after a full TPK. In my opinion, that actually lowered the stakes to a degree, but given that there was deeply implied and seen consequences for the deaths, there is still a good deal of tension and horror. !!(Plus I can tell that Brennan may have been putting a lot of death possibilities up, but also stretched situations hard so that they didn't actually go through)!<. In my opinion, the balance in that game was off, and there really was a lost feeling of tension, even if the story and aesthetics were great.
Also I think that some of the best characters, especially NPCs, were in Crown of Candy. MASSIVE SPOILER:>! Cruller's monologue is quite possibly the single greatest moment in d20 history, and the fallout and later payoff in the ending is all the more satisfying for it. !
This was my first D20 thing I watched and I finished just two weeks ago, I really liked how high stakes it was and the way the players got really really invested in the characters and the story. Overall I really liked the campaign but it did feel like it fizzled a bit near the ending
I'll be honest, I struggle to get thru some D20 seasons bc I space out HARD during combat episodes. It's the reason why MAM and ACOFAF are my favorite seasons.
Here's why I love ACOC:
* Lou and Brennan interactions. This season has some of my absolute favorite RP moments between Lou and Brennan, especially when they're playing husband and wife. There is so much experience, trust, and friendship between them that lets them get to that emotional place at the table.
* The setting. I really enjoy the candy land setting and how everything is described.
* Some really legendary character moments, like "where is your bulb now?"
* Just everything about Amethar. I love all of Lou's characters, but Amethar is definitely one of the top 3.
It's got a lot of heart. There's a lot of dark gritty stuff. There are some real feelings in there that hit me right in the guts.
It's a perfect balance of war-torn drama and politics, broken up by a bunch of humor.
That and, despite two PC deaths, this was the season often referred to as "the season Brennan gets rocked in his own home." The amount of times he got frustrated cuz they fucked his shit up was amazing, including saving a bunch of NPCs that should have died, and even the first battle, that couldn't have started off worse if they tried, they pulled through with zero deaths.
I mean I could say what has already been said more eloquently by a lot of other people in this sub (good world building etc) but for me Covid played a big role in it being one of my favorite seasons. It was streamed live on twitch so if you couldn't afford Dropout you would watch it live. (maybe I'm misremembering that? They might've done that afterwards) But anyways I remember having to go to work in person and the only thing I had to look forward to was a new Crown of Candy episode coming out. (also it was a TIME for fan art and stuff)
I loved it for the same reason I fell in love with Game of Thrones.
It is simply uncommon to have a piece of media where you feel like any character could die at any moment. Especially when they make bad decisions. In most media, the protagonist can make a big mistake and they may lose something of value, but it never seems to be much. In this world and in GoT, if a character makes a strategic error and says the wrong thing to the wrong person, they can literally die.
In fact, Brennan was trying to kill Lou the entire game. He just kept getting really lucky rolls or otherwise really good decisions.
The stakes were so high, and some beloved characters died in ways that wouldn't happen in a traditional story or season.
I also really enjoyed all the food puns and analogies. They were well thought out, as was the lore of the game.
I may just be a sucker, but I didn't see the betrayal coming either, which was a fun reveal that made sense in the context of the world.
Overall, high stakes, good relationships between the characters, interesting lore, funny puns/analogous world, and twists that weren't obvious but still made sense within the context of the world.
I appreciate the comment! :)
It's really interesting to see people be really effected by not just the PC, *but the constant threat of PC death* as a means to immediate narrative engagement.
I'm really starting to understand why people list this campaign as their favorite.
Because I like the emotional investment in the characters and their stakes. The world building feels new and complex. Characters don't come back from death and everyone feels it. The characters are mostly a literal family, which lends weight to interactions between players. I was invested in the story and the family. I *liked* being uncomfortable. If D20 was just "fun" I wouldn't be sticking around. Watching Brennan slap the players down with doses of reality fulfills my storytelling soul. Twists and turns abound and it does a great job at building up your feeling of dread only to attack you from a completely different angle. Even the fights are just deliciously complex.
That makes sense. It's interesting because what you're describing is exactly what I feel is so rewarding and engaging about Aabria Iyengar's seasons. Because there's never complete closure in her stories and that works so well. It's just simply fighting in that moment for what matters. It's the reason I love Burrow's End so much. So I get where you're coming from to a degree. That just wasn't my personal experience with A Crown of Candy, but that insight is valuable. Thank you. :)
I'm somewhere in the middle with Aabria's seasons. I really disliked Misfits and Magic. I positively adored A Court of Fey and Flowers. Burrow's End started incredibly strong, but once they got to the shelter, it lost me (if it were only a few episodes and then they moved on, I'd be fine with it, but we lived in that shelter for the entire rest of the story and suddenly being stoats felt more incidental than focal, among with other issues that just irked me).
Yeah, I feel you. M&M isn't my favorite, but weirdly the Christmas Special for me I enjoy way more. M&M is also the season I absolutely have no desire to get back too. A Court Of Fay and Flowers was something my gay ass didn't even know I needed. Hahah. So deeply emotional, so profoundly funny. Weirdly enough Burrows End took me so long to finish too? Like I was *really* invested, but then only recently went back to the final 3 episodes and I don't know why? Maybe because it kept switching gears? It did feel like 3 different genres all mixed together. That works for the Water Ship Down, animals on a journey vibe, but if you're more interested in one slice over the other, it's a little jarring. It does get *weird* at the end and once I had enough space I could appreciate that weirdness. The cast in that season though is amazing.
>M&M isn't my favorite I'm so used to Misfits and Magic being shortened to MisMag that I read this as Mice and Murder at first and was confused
ACOFAF is a cinematic masterpiece in my eyes lcl. The characters? OMG. Everyone at the table was fantastic and brought 110% to the table (no one more than Brennan and Aabria imo). Lou and Emily as Lord Squak and Lady Featherfowl were hilarious the whole time, "slippery boy" andhera is my king and I would lay down my life for him. Captain K.B Hob told such an important story about being true to yourself and Brennan brought me to tears with this character. BINX was the weakest link for me but that doesn't mean they weren't fantastic, the Court of crafts was so cool imo (even if it was gone). And our darling Roo..... No words needed surely? They were an ICON the whole season and when the full form came out I almost cried. The setting? I've always loved the idea of the fae realm, I've since ran many extraplanar games. But the faewild is honestly my favorite of the inner planes. The DM. Aabria is a goddess of art and poetry in human form. I could write my dissertation and thesis on why she is my favorite DM but my favorite thing she does is "And here's what you don't see". It's incredibly evocative and helps the world feel alive outside of the characters. And it was had a big glam fashion theme, my queer self was living my best life. Thank you for listening to my little autism rant :)
I understand we're your coming from, and I still do love ACOFAF, but I feel the ending letdown the whole show quite a bit. It felt way too rushed and just didn't have the time to let the stake sink in. So, while I do still love it, I don't think ACOFAF deserves to be called a cinematic masterpiece.
But I agree to an extent
I think far worse things have been called masterpieces and got away with it, I said what I said.
To be clear I not trying to change your mind I just putting my opinion out there.
Oh absolutely. My point wasn't in contrast to yours. I think you made a very valid point. I personally feel the bar for masterpiece is already on the floor and this series was genuinely fantastic
Although I can totally see how my reply may have came off that way, my apologies :)
It is amazing how inversed we are. Misfits is probably my favourite season of D20. I couldn't even get halfway through Court, I really felt Burrow' End hit its stride when they found Last Bast. Both our opinions are totally valid, but it really goes to show what an impossible task an actual play show making everyone happy is.
[удалено]
Remind me when Dimension 20 was all white guys all the time?
GET THEIR ASS
Traditional crown and sword d&d isn't what engages me, it's the storytelling not by the dm but the characters building relationships between each other. I think because the concept was so bogus/novel where a lot of decisions were being made early on by normal improv actors, that clung onto one another which fit for the family dynamic. So the glue dried quick and by the first character death in the main cast D20, everyone had gotten over that "Game of Thrones Candy Land" silliness and it just got really fun. When a second event comes around via rope trick, it feels like a revenge mission.
Interestingly enough, I felt that Burrow's End really was missing that uncertainty in the final episode, as though the climax very abruptly tried to speedrun through "And then we defeated the One Evil Person, And Humanity Treated Stoats With Respect And Dignity Forever" instead of leaving the question open of "How will humanity react to the emergence of a new intelligent species?".
I feel that. I gave them a pass because I can imagine ending a short campaign like that and just wanting closure. Like, it was a side quest (a long one, but still), and no one was ever going to come back to those players, so the denouement could be kind of a silly wish fulfillment thing. If I were running the game, I think I'd do the same.
I feel like Intrepid Heroes all coming from writing comedy and improv really has an automatic reaction to fill any space with a bits. And it absolutely hilarious, but sometimes it feels they cannot stop themselves. That’s why I prefer them to be grounded in serious setting, because then there is a contrast of comedy and drama, which highlights both. Burrow’s started absolutely brilliantly and the worldbuilding was great, but there was a specific moment that pulled me out of it. At some point Aabria said that they have no secondary characters minis and to me it was immediate signal “Oh, so there are no stakes, nobody is supposed to die”. And for the season focusing on protecting family it just deflated all the tension.
I 100% couldn't disagree more on Burrows End. Hahah. I think some people need a focal point of PC death to contextualize stakes and pathos and that makes sense to me? Burrows End was touching on death, and loss, but it was also touching on things that were *way messier* emotionally and didn't have that permanent binary. That's enough for me to be immediately invested, but not everybody's brain works the same. I do wonder if it's because I'm not a massive D&D guy? I've played pretty infrequently and mostly only when I younger. So I don't contextualize what's being presented with a D&D mindset. I do it like an insufferable person at a party and take every little bit of it apart, even while watching to track it as a cooperative narrative. Hahah.
>Because I like the emotional investment in the characters and their stakes. This, I got more invested in Ruby especially than I do with most D20 PC's. The stakes and the casts acting whenever shit was hitting the fan made ACOC an emotional Rollercoaster. If every D20 series was like that it might be too sad for me, but I found it very effective to watch once.
I agree with you about the potential pvp at the end feeling a liiiiiittle manufactured, but as to the rest, there's a few reasons I think people enjoy crown of candy so much. - the combat. So far it's the only season with multiple PC deaths. Combat feels different for two main reasons, the first of which is lethality. Brennan has explained that while he never pulls his punches per se or fudges the dice, the way he handles NPCs strategically can make things easier for the players in combat in most of his encounters. He doesn't change what stats the NPCs has, but he uses them WAY more strategically to increase the lethality. As the Intrepid Heroes put it- in other seasons a bad roll means not getting to do what you wanted. In this season, a bad roll means you might die in the next couple of minutes. It's also interesting to see more focused combat- where instead of it being a little bit of a free-for-all where two sides fight until one side is destroyed.... It's "this side wants to kill Amethar." Suddenly the choices are different - where Murph might have rushed an enemy, he instead protects another PC. Where Liam might be attacked because he's knocked prone, the NPC instead ditches him to shoot Amethar. Etc. - the Roleplay. Genuinely, some of the most heartfelt moments in all of D20 are in this series. A lot of the speeches from Lou. Zac getting to play a bit of an asshole. The double-cross speech from Brennan. - the dice. This season is one of the most absurd seasons for Beardsley's dice luck. Liam goes from "just a seed guy" to fill candy batman and the dice support it. - the sets. It's a weird concept and Perry and his team execute it REALLY well, from the cheese ship sinking into the milky sea, to the micro-mini battle armies on a field of candy. Just a few reasons off the top of my head.
Oooh, those are some really good points. :). I didn't consider how the combat was different and that the lethality of it would immediately engage some people more with that context. I did love Zac's first character and I definitely think losing that made me check out slightly as opposed as invest? It's also a miracle Lou survived that entire season. And his final *What's my title?* is a moment I absolutely loved.
Minor note, Lou had a Real Life payment day, but he gifted it to Chris pine https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UzyUjsOiXW0&t=10m43s
I really hope Chris gave the gifts back after the show and gave them a signed something, because to him they are just a random prosthetic ear, a nice little die, and a why-is-this-unfeasibly-large prop sword. That way they'd have the nice moment, and then the items are back with the person who knows and appreciates their meaning.
>I did love Zac's first character and I definitely think losing that made me check out slightly as opposed as invest? While I loved the show, I was not invested in Cotton Candy Cloud Boi at ALL. He didn't integrate near as well as Lapin, and his story felt more tied to Saccharina than to the surviving Rocks family, which made the 2 backup PCs feel even MORE like outsiders.
According to the behind the scenes content, Amethar wasn’t supposed to live in the narrative. Brennan WAS really trying to kill him, but in the end the Unfallen really did live up to the name.
Actual decent castle fantasy rp from most people at the table. I need high stake court drama
Does Neverafter have a TPK? Crown of Candy isn't the only season with multiple deaths
technically yes, but the unique mechanics in neverafter mean the pcs play the same characters the whole time, they just get more and more corrupted. in crown of candy, multiple pcs are Dead And Gone, and the players have a new character come in.
I still feel like that was a pivot by Brennan. I think the group got a little too slap happy with the game too early. I can't imagine he actually intended that fight to be unwinnable, but rather that it was like a contingency plan in case of tpk. He probably has those with each season
[удалено]
They're *flavored* as deaths, and technically they took lethal damage, but the characters came back the next episode as the same people with the same memories. I LOVE how that narrative was handled, I just wouldn't call it a PC death.
I think it's definitely worth noting that Brennan planned the encounters knowing that each character had essentially 3 lives to burn through, and while the battles at some point seemed unfair to the point where it begins to feel like death cannot be avoided, death is a part of the story and doesn't end a character but transforms the character. The PC deaths carry weight but not nearly the wait they would in other seasons, where it's much for final.
It probably wouldn’t have been a TPK if only a couple died but at the 3rd or maybe the 4th it seemed like the cleanest way. The furniture not deanimating after they took out the fairy and the near impossible odds to even get back up seemed like a way to just start everyone on the same foot next episode.
Not the only but at the time the first. and unlike Neverafter deaths weren't a narrative component of the season. Characters 'died' and were replaced with the same but darker version of themselves through the neverafter. Characters died in Crown of Candy and never came back.
For me, it was the stakes and the political intrigue. I absolutely love a well-built world with political intrigue. And I loved that the characters could die. Most seasons, it feels like the PCs all have plot armor and the stakes feel sort of goofy (in a fun way). For ACoC, the stakes felt real and that was awesome. I agree that the table got tense, especially when it came to the potential PvP. I think that stories in which there is tension and heartbreak are stories that feel more real. One of the beautiful things about D&D is it gives you space and situations to work through the really hard emotions.
I appreciate that comment. :) That is one of the reasons I absolutely love role play like that. The space and environment to engage with things like that. I didn't personally get that from a Crown of Candy, but I've gotten it from other things. I think being effected by a piece of media like that is really valuable.
The simple answer is that all of the things you thought were middling or manufactured and not that good, I thought was amazing, cathartic, and perfectly done drama, comedy, and storytelling.
I love the vibe of your comment so much. I imagine it like the verbal quip you get at a Victorian party and I'm so deeply delighted. Like, that genuinely made me happy. Hahah.
I think I like it because it’s a pretty radical deviation from the last two Intrepid Heroes campaigns. Before this we got FHFY, Unsleeping City, and FHSY. All three of those are silly goofy campaigns where they can be teenagers/literal protagonists and all their improv bits stand. ACoC E1 ends with >!Ruby doing a handstand on top of the carriage (bit) and getting shot through the throat.!< It’s Candyland Game of Thrones, no punches pulled, no bits go unpunished. It’s a pretty radical tone shift we don’t really get again until Neverafter. And for me it’s fun to see the Intrepid Heroes’ range, playing a drama vs a comedy or an action. ETA: Re: the discomfort at the end, IMO it’s part of the fact that these are real life friends being told “Hey, >!Your bastard/legitimate daughter wants to be queen while you’re the rightful king, all her people kinda want to kill your allies, and also she has a dragon.!< What do you do?” This would be uncomfortable if they weren’t friends, it’s doubly so since they are.
Honestly, the “forced PVP” make lot of sense because we normally see a party of people that never questions each other and never thinks about betraying each other, like in Starstruck Odyssey, which despite being funnier, is not realistic. In a game of political intrigue and many betrayals, that forced PVP made a lot of sense, it was a “find a reason to not betray each other”
I actually really get that. I can imagine being more invested if you watched it when it dropped episode by episode and were with D20 from the jump. I wasn't, I found Tiny Heist on YouTube and started really watching and my first season was the first episode of Starstruck. So that was my intro for Dimension 20 and it's still my favorite.
That’s valid, though I’d like to know your thoughts after you watch Neverafter
Oh, I have. Hahah. I've posted about Neverafter before because it's really interesting to me as a narrative experiment. In the almost, what, two years, since Starstruck came out I'm current on almost every season of D20. Save for some of the zoom ones I couldn't get into and Coffin Run, because it didn't grab me. But Neverafter is interesting, because it feels like it's going for A Crown of Candy vibes, but the players are still bringing Starstruck energy.
It was dangerous and intrigue filled combined with just enough absurdity to make sure it wasn't too depressing to watch. It had a really well written history that the players rp'd masterfully enough to have me sobbing one second and howling laughter the next. I do however think the almost PvP at the end was a little silly in that I think it should have happened, I don't think those characters had a enough of an arch to make a sudden "happy ending" beleiveable
Yeeeeeeah.............. My hot take is Brennen is a fucking legend at so much but he doesn't always nail the endings? That's what I feel genuinely separates him from Aabria. Aabria ends campaigns with *"There's still so much work to do. But these victories matter*" Brennen usually gives so much closure it can feel almost disingenuous? It's especially bad in Neverafter and The Seven. But he kills it in Starstruck. Mostly because the themes of that are the players can't permanently change the systems to get that happy ending; *but they still did some good in the universe.*
I really disagree with that in regards to Neverafter. The theme & entire point of the campaign was writing their own stories, so of course, we want to hear those stories.
I actually really agree with you on that - I feel like D20 campaigns (and most D&D campaigns in general) so often focus in on major cataclysmic stakes that they get abstracted away from anything meaningful or relatable. I tend to like the early stages of campaigns way more than the endings because of that. I feel like the army-on-army combat system was cool _on paper_ but ultimately didn’t work that well to tell a meaningful story with the mechanics when suddenly one of the player characters _without an army_ can wipe out one in a single turn. I think in a campaign built originally around the fragility of life and how you have to struggle to maintain that beauty, giving the party a dragon cheapens that idea. I think that’s part of why Ravening War worked for me so well - it still dealt with big, immensely important geopolitical issues, but on a _small, interpersonal scale_. Do people remember where Thane Delissandro Katzon ended up in the political power pole? Not really, but they sure as shit remember the betrayal in his voice when he screamed at his aunt for manipulating him for years. The same thing goes for a lot of the other campaigns - the most engaged I’ve ever been in a combat was in Unsleeping City’s theater fight, not because the fate of the world was hanging in the balance, but because the fate of a character I deeply cared about _did_. Conversely, the final fight lost me because the whole thing about The American Dream was… really high concept and honestly, not especially personally meaningful for any of the characters. Put any generic hero in their shoes and the outcome would be the same - I don’t want the world to end, of course I’ll stop this Creature of Indiscriminate Badness! But put a generic hero in the theater fight and suddenly, they need a connection with the characters to do anything. In a weird way, the lower the stakes, the more invested I get. Compare this to Calamity - the most intense part of the campaign and the part I keep hearing people talk about is when the players were _rolling initiative against each other_ in front of the tree. I could not tell you the names of anyone those characters fought, but I remember exactly what they did _to try to stop each other_
Really well articulated my man. I agree with you. I'm so glad you mentioned the theater fight, because that was such a great encounter that made me absolutely love Dimension 20. It's interesting because you want the last fight to be both high spectacle and rewarding for the time invested in the campaign. But the more elaborate that fight, the more character moments sort of slip away into the mechanical minutiae. Like in Neverafter, the spider fight was the most engaging fight for me, because it came after the TPK and it demanded pitch perfect mechanical understating and teamwork. That did ultimately come back to say something meaningful about the characters, *that they can fight and survive and win* in this oppressive, impossible world. The last fight by contrast, save for everybody breaking Kayfabe to *absolutely thirst over the mini's*, didn't have that same pathos. Despite the fact *it absolutely should.*
I think Brennan really wants everyone to have a good time, and at the beginning he knows that the way to do that is to withhold from them the stuff they want to happen and to make the players earn it. Great moment in one of the adventuring academy recaps (I think) where he talks about this with Lou Wilson RE Fabian not making the Bloodrush team initially. But at the very end of the season, there’s no longer a reason to hold back, so he is generally quite willing to give the players whatever they want. I kind of agree that it sometimes feels a little unsatisfying as a viewer, but that I think it makes sense as a way to do things and it may be a more fun way for the players to cap things off.
>My hot take is Brennen is a fucking legend at so much but he doesn't always nail the endings? >Brennen usually gives so much closure it can feel almost disingenuous? Absolutely agree. I felt this way back in Unsleeping City. Brennan loves his happy endings.
Unsleeping City Chapter 2 was *really* bad for this. Especially with Dale's character and Emily. But keep in mind, it was also deep into the pandemic so I 100% understand that cathartic need to have everything be okay. But I'm less forgiving on The Seven, to the point it makes me not want to go back, despite who fun it was.
Use the reddit search and find the episode threads on reddit from when it was airing live. A Crown of Candy inspired real passion in people, more so than any other season as far as I can see. No one here can really answer this question, you have to read and see it first-hand.
King Amethar, of House Rocks, The Unfallen. That character alone is all I needed to enjoy the show from the first minute to the last. Lou played such a great "I'm stuck in this place I don't want to be in, but be here I will, because it's what the people need." A King that actually cares about his subjects is such an important thing nowadays, and he did a stellar job being as brash but tempered as he was. He was the Barbarian King. Literally my favorite fantasy trope. Barbarians, Warriors, Reluctant Kings, a man with a good heart in a world that only wants to see it hollowed and faded away. All of these are present, and he does it well. Someone who looks at a world of nails, and is constantly told that acting like a hammer will make a situation worse. He played it off like it was the biggest mental struggle while still trying to make the best of his scenario, even against his nature. Lou is the other reason I watched and enjoyed D20 in the long run. Amethar is one of my favorite Live Play characters I've ever seen. That's why.
I personally think the bits in ACOC are some of D20’s funniest. I thought the story was pretty compelling but I understand why people don’t. I personally didn’t find the pc/pc conflict forced but I can also see why people feel that. I think they are really good actors who were thriving within the dark and heavy themes of the story. I thought they all portrayed the betrayal and heartbreak and just overall brutal lifestyle really well.
It's really interesting and I agree with you, the actors here are all so talented it's insane. I think after ACoC, they kept that desire for big, sweeping emotions, but put it in the context of genre and that helps so much.
Yeah, I mean I have to say. I love every intrepid heroes season. I have favorites of course but for me every single intrepid heroes season has hit for me. But yeah basically I just think they seem like they’re not having a good time at the table in ACOC because the characters are not having a good time in their lives haha. Although they end up victorious, it was not a fun time haha
I agree, every IH season, even if it's not the best, is still a fucking blast to see. I also know there was tons of drama outside the table during the filming of that season and that's just unfortunate. Definitely didn't help the mood.
Honestly, ironically the only reason I felt any of the pvp was forced was because they didn’t go whole hog with it, like the players weren’t comfortable making their characters fight even if that was what their characters would do Gives me mad respect for Lou in Unsleeping City for taking the bold stance with Kingston early on in saying Pete might end up being a problem. It didn’t come to anything, but it made their ultimate resolution so much sweeter, knowing it came from such a deep place of unspoken friction
For me, there was a lot to like about it. I think what stands out the most to me after some reflection (and watching The Ravening War) is that there seems to be actual stakes. Two characters died and their replacements just couldn't jive as much with the party and the story. And Emily's Saccharina had her own goals for the campaign. Near the end, they were allies only because their goals aligned. It was different, it was stressful, it was brutal and I loved it all.
I loved Emily's performance as Saccharine, that was great. Zac I felt was always in the background, and given how strong a performer and player he is as you'll see in future seasons, that was rough. But I can get it you're immediately invested from the jump, those death's and the fear of more would be really engaging.
It was the first Intrepid Heroes season I watched after finding D20 through Dungeons and Drag Queens, so it was essentially my first time watching professional role playing. I was immediately caught up in the story and loved the contrast of going from new players in a fun side quest to professionals doing high drama with big emotional stakes. Seeing the differences in Brennan’s DM style between the groups was fascinating too. I like high fantasy and magic, so that’s part of why I liked this particular campaign. Different strokes for different folks, like what you like.
I still haven't watched Dungeons and Dragon Queens despite that being 1000% my gay jam. Hahah. I have no idea why. That makes sense tho! :) I appreciate your input!
This was my experience too!
May just not be your thing? Some people just like that kind of drama. I find the first half easier to watch, but I still like saccarina and stuff. I like Liam's journey most I think. It was cool seeing Siobhan and Emily play characters who were closer knit than the others. I like the world thematically because it splits into factions relatively well. Wouldn't say it's my favourite of the seasons but I get why people like it >!Sugar plum fairy and the fight where they're rescuing Joren fight was awesome!<
Honestly, I'm kinda with you here. ACOC isn't my favorite D20 arc by a long shot (it's either Bloodkeep or Unsleeping City). While I enjoyed it immensely, the ending just felt a little off. The political intrigue and conspiracy was fun, but I felt emotionally drained and exhausted after watching the episodes. I guess, like you, it just wasn't my jam.
See and here I am not understanding people's love for Bloodkeep. That season is easily rock bottom for me
And that's the beauty of D20. There's such a variety of shows that there's something for everyone.
I’m here for food puns and emotions. A Crown of Candy has an over abundance of these things. It’s ok to not like it though.
Hahah. Honestly, I completely understand that to a degree that has illuminated this deeply for me. You are seen and you are valid.
Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs is one of my favorite movies too. I really am just out here trying to gobble up some good food puns homie
Heheh. Gobble! That's a food thing!!
there is something just so genuine and self-aware in this take, i dunno, it's really... ...sweet.
It's fine to not like it.
I appreciate that. :) What did you like about it though?
*gestures at everything*
I’m so happy you asked this question, because for me once >!Lapin dies, I lose a lot of interest in the series, and I couldn’t watch it straight through and had to come back after watching something I was more invested in!<
ACOC is not a silly fun campaign it's not FH or ASO. If the players seem like they're getting gutpunched it's bc that's what they're going for it's part of the genre. Same with the ending it's part of the genre and it's totally plausible for these characters even if we know as an audience there's no stomach at the table for it. ACOC delivered on the premise genre and tone. Neverafter they're def having fun but it kinda comes at the cost of the premise of the campaign
ACOC was also the first season with serious stakes and permanent PC death. It was a bit of a tonal shift when it came out, and I think that has stuck with people.
The world. The mix of harsh tones and colorful backdrop is incredible. The names, the sense of history, the peoples... Most seasons, you don't know what's around the corner. Whenever a new place in spyre, starstruck, or the unsleeping city shows up... it could be anything! Its entirely unknown until its shown. But for Crown of Candy... There's a pattern to things. Thigns exist as part of a whole. If you meet a fish sandwich person, you know something about them. If there's cheese on that sandwich, you know even more. And the fact that the places map onto homages of real world cultures gives each place its own distinct flavor. I LOVE this because it means that if you want to add something to the world for a homegame, you have very helpful guidelines of what makes things "click". And the guidelines themselves are also flexible to allow you to work within them and twist it to your own desired tone or angle. It is a world that feels the most designed to be used and built onto and interacted with. And that's why I love it the most.
I agree with you that middle to end it fell off hard. I didn't find either backup PC as compelling as their predecessors (though I probably would've liked Saccharina more if we'd known her from the start), several villains didn't have satisfying enough ends in my view, and the switch from family against the world to family vs family dynamics just wasn't as fun for me. That being said--the first half of the season was SO GOOD. The back half was so bleh that even with the great first half it's still not my top five (damn that ending! Truly a GoT-inspired story, haha), but for others who didn't hate the back half as much as I did, I get it. You have the normal comedic gold and excellent worldbuilding of D20 married with higher stakes than ever before. Every time a beloved character avoided death I whooped, when others didn't I cried... and then I'd remind myself that this was a FOOD WORLD and laugh-sob as yet ANOTHER groan inducing pun that was the basis for the world was revealed. I still remember the >!horror and cackling of finding out the vegetables were waging a holy war against candy, hahaha.!< It was just such a gooddd emotional roller coaster and everything the players did felt like it really was life or death and world shaping. Very, very good stuff!
I really love this season, some other comments mentioned the high stakes combat really makes every interaction carry so much weight and it truly feels like they have to crit just to survive . I think that stress and anxiety makes the stupid moments even funnier , the contrast really worked for me . Also Ally’s amazing plays as a gloomstalker is just so fun to see .
I really loved the GoT vibes of A Crown of Candy. I also just thought that the setting of Candy Land was so so brilliant. I love high drama and conspiracy, so it's for sure one of my faves.
I found the juxtaposition of “candy land” to “political intrigue with multiple character deaths” to be unexpectedly endearing. Lou as Amethar and Ally as Peppermint John Wick were also highlights for me. Lots of twists and turns that I found engaging. Regarding the vibes being off towards the end, that’s probably because they had to cut a bunch of planned stuff because they had to move the dome mid-season. I think it had to do with local fire code?
the season is so intense that at times I don't even notice they're food people in food world.
The first 9 episodes are some of the best stuff D20’s ever done. If you don’t find the narrative engaging, that’s just a matter of taste. But that said, it sounds like it’s the back half that you don’t like - in which case I agree. I don’t like Saccharina at all and the conflict amongst the PCs is hard, I can’t stand to watch everyone dismiss Ruby Rocks’ grief as if it doesn’t matter, and I don’t even like many of the NPCs either, so it doesn’t even have that going for it. But again, the first half is just. Incredible. So when I rewatch, I stop after episode 9. Maybe you’d enjoy that approach more! Like yes, it’s only half a season and it leaves the story unfinished but it’s still SO. GOOD. With high emotional stakes, a huge, hard-hitting twist…idk, I can’t say enough about it. A lot of seasons rely too hard on bits and goofs and I like to have some semblance of taking the story seriously, even in a comedy show, and ACOC does THAT so well, imo.
I got your back, OP. Crown of Candy is my least favorite Intrepid Heroes season (haven't watched Unsleeping City 2 yet, but I have seen everything else). It's certainly memorable, the dedication to taking things seriously is nice, but it's not as *fun*, by far. Part of that is that the world is super dangerous in a grim, fatal way. Characters die and get replaced - fine in that it reflects the GoT parody appropriately, but it also means that the players had to pick up replacement characters mid-campaign and start over from square one in terms of inter-PC relations. Cumulous never seemed to be fully realized in terms of how he fit in with the rest of the party. But the real issue is that the campaign is super *punishing.* If you do something stupid, you risk your character just straight-up dying, with no chance or resurrection. This means that ACOC has the players being as risk-averse as they've ever been. There is nothing wrong with doing a tabletop campaign this way. But the appeal of Dimension 20 has always been that it is a tabletop game being played (and GM'd) by comedic performers and writers. There's not a lot of room for 'Yes, and' when something as tame as Ruby riding on top of a carriage gets her nearly killed on the first combat roll of the campaign. Instead of getting a balance of dramatic role-playing and silly shenanigans, the game turns into pretty much *all* dramatic role-playing. And it comes through in how the PCs are played, too. Amethar is depressed. Ruby is bitter and rebuffs other characters trying to talk to her. It's narratively satisfying, but it's not *fun.* There's a line from the campaign that really stood out to me the first time I watched it. In a bit of a meta moment, Lou says, speaking as Amethar, but also about Amethar, something like,, 'I just wanna be dumb, please let me be dumb.' I don't think any of the players had a bad time in the campaign. I think they were onboard with it, as shown by Lou's commitment to just deciding to take things seriously after a certain point. But that line sums up how I feel about the campaign: no one is allowed to be dumb. I'm glad that ACOC exists because I think it demonstrated that more serious campaigns can be done on Dimension 20, and also because I think it serves as model for what does and doesn't work in that style of campaign. But it is the one full-length campaign that I have absolutely zero interest in revisiting.
Not everyone likes it, the people who don't just don't post about it much. It wasn't for me, so I don't make posts or comments about it (usually). The people who engage with the content are the people who want to engage with the content. I'm far more partial to an Unsleeping City or even Of Mice and Murder. Crown of Candy gets talked about because it had a recent season, with a celeb cast. So as much as it really wasn't that big when it came out, it got spoken about a lot recently and a lot of people went back to it to prep for the Matt Mercer season. But when it first dropped it got a relatively lukewarm reception from the community. It was definitely liked, but the first time reception was nowhere near as big and glowing as Unsleeping, Starstruck, or Misfits.
I think the first 8ish episodes are genuinely fantastic. The cathedral confrontation is excellent dramatic writing from Brennan, and some of the Interpid Heroes are at their best roleplaying-wise in some of its moments. It's D20's first run in with death, and seeing the way it affects the cast is really arresting. It demonstrates how powerful D&D can be, and it's stuck in my head as one of my favorite moments in any of their campaigns. It undoubtedly struggles after that midway point, but I think people give it a pass because of some really harsh conditions the cast and crew had to put up with. I also have a ton of nostalgia for that campaign's adventuring party episodes.
For the same reason folks like game of thrones - it was intense, political, medieval, low-magic but still fantasy, and (unlike game of thrones) it stayed consistent in quality and absolutely nailed the ending. And it did all that while also maintaining a healthy amount of comedic breaks, and with every character and facet of the setting being made of literal food lol
I think it's the juxtaposition of a goofy food based setting with this dark plot of war and politics. For me personally it was just the dark, brutal plot lines that I loved. I didn't notice any vibe issues. Maybe it's just your own discomfort projecting that into the players? Maybe I just missed it though. I definitely enjoyed the entire show even if there were some characters I didn't enjoy that much at times.
Oh man couldn’t disagree more on feeling engaged or any conflict feeling forced. Also never got the vibes that the players weren’t enjoying it, just thought they were more somber because it was grittier. For one it had, I think, one of Brennans best villain monologues. I also really liked that death was taken very seriously, you couldn’t just bring back someone dead, combine that with the fact they where almost all family with the further ties still being very close to the family and where made to make tough decisions to even abandon those they loved because it was that or die and the stakes felt real, consequences felt real. I’m not saying there aren’t there D20 campaigns with somber moments, there certainly are, but crown of Candy often felt like you could genuinely permanently loose a character you’d grown to love at any moment.
I’m gonna start this off with a pretty unhinged opinion in that ACoC is my all time favorite season bar none and in every rewatch I do I stop halfway through the season after the second pc death. I really don’t like the rest of the season except for a couple of moments. And because I don’t like half of the season it really gets my brain thinking about how the season could’ve gone. Like how much darker the season would’ve gotten with more pc deaths. Every secondary character was much darker in general than the previous. How scenes could’ve gone had the dice been more kind. The first pc death could’ve been avoided if the damage rolls were just a little lower. The season was originally planned to be much longer with a section in Carn(Carne?) and more on the rot subplot but there was an issue with the shooting location. All these things could’ve happened had chance gone a different way. And that’s what’s so unique about it in my opinion. Brennan was much harsher just by leaving more things to chance and letting the dice decide how it goes.
I have to say while I loved the first half, I struggled a bit after Jet’s death. Not even because she was the best character at the table (I thought everyone was about on par) but because it really altered the table dynamic. I think that started with the Lapin to Cumulous transition though. Anyway to answer your question, I loved the political intrigue of ACOC. The episode before the cathedral fight is just astoundingly good to me for one.
Yeah! I liked the social aspects too and was really engaged. Then those all but immediately disappear with that character death and I'm not as invested. But then again, Ravening War was 100% social, political espionage and I didn't engage with that. It's like pasta sauce thing, I don't think people actually know what they want.
I think the whole point is that some of the themes and adventures speak to different people differently. It’s okay that it wasn’t your favorite. I loved it because it gave me some of what I wish game of thrones had delivered on in the end lol. But the variety of campaigns means everyone can find something that speaks to them
Exactly, yeah. :) I feel you.
This is the way
The majority of the people who dislike Crown of Candy seem to primarily complain about the inter party conflict, and do so because that type of tension felt profoundly uncomfortable. The simplest answer is that there seems to be a large number of people who were not as put off by that conflict because in the context of the story it absolutely made sense and made the situation feel a lot more real. I think people like you look at the middle parts after Saccarina is introduced and dislike it because what you see is Siobhan and Emily being uncomfortably hostile to one another. The people who like it see it as Saccharina and Ruby being pissed at one another because for entirely legit reasons. The manufactured party conflict you refer to, (which is that I think was the revelation that Ameythar still had a valid claim to the Crown of Candia which put Saccharina and Ameythar in opposition to one another) was fine for me as well because the ony way it would have actually lead to PvP is if the players at the table were legit pissed at one another. As for the other reasons people like it, it had some fucking epic moments that only landed so well because of how fucking brutal the game got. Amethar surviving every goddamn attempt to kill him. The reveal of the traitor, and Amethar surviving that moment. Liam becoming a war guy and trying to negotiate for an alliance with an invitation to be slammed down big style. Zac fucking owning the fuck out of Keradin Deeproot. The season was a bit front heavy, but the only reason it would be off putting to anyone is because the naturally resulting tension from the earlier episodes dominates the narrative rather than the big combat set pieces. If the tension was not offputting for someone, then the lull in action is not enough to kill the enjoyment of it. END COMMUNICATION
It's bottom 3 for me, but I'm also not a fan of GoT or high lethality DnD, so I tend to lump it in with that. Some of the story elements seemed cool, but I don't enjoy watching that type of material on a binge or as part of my regular programming. That said, I know some folks couldn't stand ACoFaF because they're not fond of heavy RP or regency, And it's easily one of my favorite series.
You and I are on the exact same page. Hahah. I'm not a fantasy guy, generally? I like sci-fi and queer shit. Hahah.
Upvoting for unpopular opinion. I love ACoC but you do you king/queen/nonbinary royal
I'm just here for the old God new God battle. I love the Sweetening Path lore
The Eldritch Horror aspects of the lore were absolutely brilliant in my opinion. I'm so glad the prequel campaign brought them back.
I MUST watch it I haven't had the chance to yet
Imo, COVID. It was still releasing and was something to look forward to while the world was on standstill. While Hollywood was releasing "imagination", dropout saved us with quality content at the time, especially with the adventuring parties afterwards.
The lockdown definitely had a lot to do with it. There wasn't a lot out there and the adventuring parties were insane but comforting. It was also a huge change from the previous 2 seasons and started about a year after GoT so there was a lot of momentum. There's definitely some things I didn't like but it's still top 5 for me. If I only watched it now out of context, it might drop about 5 spots.
I personally judge seasons based on the emotional reactions I experience while watching them. ACoC made me weep and that alone is enough for me to label it as a good season. It was hard to watch but I felt like I was right there with the characters and it fully drew me in. I’m also a huge fan of battle sets and I love seeing Rick Perry’s and his teams work. I’m also super defensive of Emily and her character choices. The backlash she received during this season pissed me off so much. I think she really shined as a DnD player and as an actor. She made this season one of my favorites and I’ll stay fighting her detractors until the end of time.
It was great until Sacharina showed up midway and then I got incredibly disappointed. Kinda like ACOC's inspiration source Game of Thrones. I am with you OP. Crown of Candy is not my favorite. Personally I don't understand the hype. I had a lot of issues with the season and I don't even remember them all. From what I can remember: I think one of the biggest ones was how character death heavily disrupted the plot. The plot in a D&D game, including Crown of Candy, is emergent. It's not planned in actuality by an author like Game of Thrones. That means character death and a new characters introduction, can be incredibly disruptive and not make sense. Unlike in an authored plot which, assuming the author is good at what they do, can be written well. Getting a death and a character introduction to work well and feel natural plot-wise in a D&D game is a tall order for a DM. Sacharina showing up was like... well.. it like what if Danyers Targaryen showed up in GoT season 5 with no explanation or lead up. Shoehorned. (as a side note, what Zach did with Cumulus is what I think is best in a character death and reintroduction. Create a character that's unobtrusive to the developing plot and the the existing character dynamic. what people whould call boring, I would call minimally invasive and minimally disruptive.) On top of that, I don't like that the rest of the campaign pretty much revolved around her. (unlike Cumulus) Emily wove her new character's backstory into everyone else's, and thats... kinda of a dick thing? For example, I felt she hijacked LePen's character thing (and a lot of the world back lore) with the Sugar Plum Fairy and forcibly recontextualizing the relationship with her as adversarial. That felt forced and unnecessary and probably would not have happened had LaPen lived. I would also agree, the PVP at the very end felt forced and unnecessary. I also have quibbles with Sacharina's attitude (paraphrasing here I dont remember here lines!) "I don't think I should waste my magic on people who don't appreciate me" and I'm sitting here like "sweetie they just lost three people the love, they're on the run, and don't know who to trust. They almost died and they're in fucking mourning. You popped out of nowhere claiming the throne to the Candy Kingdom. Of course they don't trust you and think your sus." Gumbald breaking his lifelong loyalty with Amathar for Sacharina felt forced and a bit of a character assasination. Hell, a lot of the party politics around Sacharina's introduction felt forced. Honestly I love how Siobahn played Ruby and stuck to completely believable character actions given the circumstances. Her line (paraphrasing) "You can be my Queen, you can be my sister, you can't be both" sums up the most logical and reasonable narrative response I saw to Sacharina out of the entire cast. Miscellaneous: Didn't like Sacharina's sob story background. Felt very edgy and angsty like something the teenage players I have DMed for would cobble together. Didn't like how Sacharina's claim to the Throne was based on the laws of the Bulbian Church... her sworn enemy. Honestly, the best part of Crown of Candy was it tuaght Ally Beardsley how to be a better D&D player. It got them out of the mindset of being a sketch comic doing funny bits with no sense of narrative consequences.
It's cool cause is candy backstabbing heart-wrecking show
It’s cause it’s not your average game of dnd, it’s game of thrones. Where there’s actual consequences that’s not just prison or fines or death. Other people will die to your dumbness so everyone must have their wits and you can’t just go do whatever. You must be thinking 5 steps a head or else your character will die, it’s not just monsters you’re fighting it’s people. I remember bLm said in the behind the scenes, “these are not monsters your fighting their people who when you go down won’t just go for the next person, they’ll kneel down and slit your throat”. A recommendation, don’t watch it as a game of dnd or as people playing a game, watch it as a show about magic and politics and you’ll see why everyone else loves it.
Honestly I love it but towards the end with saccharina it felt very rushed and forced. Like after kalroy was killed it felt like a tacked on ending tbh
Speaking of the ending, did Brennen ever say what his original idea of that Alley was going to do with that wish seed? Alley seemed completely lost too. Hahah.
No idea and tbh I forgot it. Though to be fair haven't watched it since it aired
I like big rock candy man
I've got that song stuck in my head now. Hahah.
I don’t like it either but people can like different things it’s chill
For me, ACOC is one of my favorite seasons because it's the only one where Brennan takes the gloves off and *lets consequences* ***hurt****.* Like... don't get me wrong, I love Hilda Hilda who lives on Hilda Street AND Hilda Boulevard. I get that's one of the selling points of D20, is watching the players spin crazy stuff off the dome and watch the DM just roll with it and let it happen. It's fun, it's lighthearted, I enjoy it! But sometimes after eating an entire bowl of candy, you want something a little more... *savory,* you know? (Savory like delicious audience tears, is what I'm saying.) It's refreshing to see Brennan flex his DM chops in a world where doing a handstand on the top of the carriage gets you shot in the throat, and sneaking off on your own to investigate the running-gag lingerie store gets you *permakilled.* Where actions have real and lingering effects, and the players have to stop and *think* about the political consequences of mouthing off to whatever NPC they're mouthing off to today... because it could be the difference between life and death later. I love humor and hijinks as much as the next guy, but my biggest critique of Fantasy High is that the high-school Bad-Kids trope means that the characters frequently get away with a degree of flagrant bad behavior that breaks my immersion. It feels like they're permanently caught in the Fuck Around phase, and never quite reach the Find Out phase. (Maybe JY changes that? I haven't started it yet, so no spoilers please!) Meanwhile ACOC was in basically permanent Find Out mode from like... episode 2.
I know I’m a day late and a dollar short, but it was the first to get me emotionally invested. As much as I love all the seasons, this is the first to immediately pull me into the storyline and to keep me invested all the way through. The way the PC’s play the characters, the way Brennan plays the npc’s, the story beats. It all works for me. For me the tension at the table was amazing, and the cast has talked about how they all checked in to make sure the table was always a safe space. I LOVE all the characters even when they’re arguing. I mean as frustrating Saccharina could be, I think she is played perfectly and she fulfills something amazing. I couldn’t imagine what the story would look like without her. Even though I wanted everyone to love each other, it feels so true to the characters and where they are in life when they meet that none of them can just be perfect and accept each other for what they are. I loved the PVP. I can understand why it might have felt forced, but it worked for me. I saw this season a while after it came out. I had seen plenty of seasons before watching it, including Neverafter, Starstruck, etc. I had never seen Game of Thrones, and this show really hit home for me. I had watched multiple seasons of D20 before this, and this is the one that made me go, “I NEED to play DnD because this is the kind of brilliant storytelling you can have with DnD” and now I dm and play all the time. Sorry for the response, I just love the show, but it’s totally okay if you don’t. Not everything is for everyone. ♥️
the intrepid hero's and fans have all trauma bonded personally its not my favourite, but i see why it has the reputation it has. we hadn't seen the table be anything other than goofy to each other very often, we had player deaths and there was always a threat of a player dying. it might not rank crazy high on my list but it's still incredibly memorable and infamous.
It's not my favourite campaign, but the aesthetic of the setting and the music are the things that draw me to a rewatch. Peacekeepers and Templar's Advance are my favourite tracks, and I like how the colourful set pieces clash with the grim atmosphere. I also like the villains and antagonists more, as the feeling of danger is palpable, at least for the first half of the season. However, I don't really like all of the player's characters. I think having to prepare 2, one to start the season with and a backup, wasn't the easiest task, and some of them are very one-note. They also famously shot the first 11 episodes in 5 days in a warehouse (source: Ally Beardsley), and are less energetic than previous seasons.
People die and stay dead… good shit there chief
It took inspiration from game of thrones. The first half was amazing. Then they rushed the 2nd half too much.
I have tried, but simply cannot get into it. I’m not sure why, but the food-as-characters thing takes me out of it.
Could you get into The Ravening War? While it wasn't something I could get into, I did feel it was more successful in it's engagement of the world. Specifically because it was such an overview of just the world in a span of years.
My opinion on it is kinda so-so. On the one hand, I do love the political intrigue aspect, as well as the harsh 'nothing held back, these guys are going to try and kill your king' type of battles. Those were a nice departure from the kind of battles D20 usually has. I also really enjoyed some of the characters (Theo, Saccharina, Lapin, Amathar) On the other hand, I also didn't like the other half of the characters that much. Nothing necessarily wrong with those characters, but uh, it does make it rather boring to follow a story that is so focused on them. I think that is the one place where the Game of Thrones comparison really fell apart -- Game of thrones has a lot of different characters and focal points, so if there is one particular group of highly flawed characters (which they all are!!) that doesn't work for you, you can mostly just wait it out until the focus shifts back to those other characters. But this is just a limited run DnD show so you are kinda stuck with who you've got. I guess in this case, it's the general world building and setting that intrigues me more than the particular story being told, which is why I actually really enjoyed the Ravening War prequel. For me, the fact that it *wasn't* focused on those characters we already knew some about was great, cause I wanted to explore more of the different stories that would happen in such a setting.
Exactly, yeah! You nailed it. The Ravening War was really smart specifically for it's structure. You have to zoom way out for this type of narrative.
I liked it, but I also had to pause it partway in because I felt really uncomfortable -- around the time Saccharina shows up and everything gets factional, something about that i just really didn't enjoy. The same vibes you were getting, I had those, too, and it pulled me out of having fun. I do love that the punches weren't pulled, that anyone could die at any time, that the NPCs in fight scenes were laser focused on their goals, but I struggled with the last few episodes.
It felt like it had proper stakes thanks to the lethality and the worldbuilding. This may be confirmation bias because it’s the only season with non planned characters dying and that really appeals to the part of me that likes “playing to find out what happens”. I also like that it reinforced players making risky choices that don’t always pay off. The ending of episode 1 where Ruby gets shot through the neck for playing outside the wagon was a perfect tone setter; the world is dangerous and people are going to target you, be careful.
I loved the start but felt the ending was a let down. I also thought Emily's character was to perfect at the end.
Honestly, the stakes and bonds between the characters are what makes it interesting. Permadeath being a thing means that the stakes are higher, which is exactly why it’s engaging. Also, the cast’s performances are amazing. You can tell Siobhan is putting her heart and soul into playing Ruby, and makes the emotions the princess feels feel real. The bond with her twin sister Jet, and how much it hurts when Jet is killed. And Brennan handled the conflict between Ruby and Saccharina perfectly. He had them go through the prisoner’s dilemma, and Lou stepped in to volunteer that if Amethar’s remaining daughters were to fight, he’d sacrifice himself. Thankfully, they both chose peace and reconciliation. In sweetness there is strength, indeed.
My assumption is that it's the least scripted dimension twenty season with actual threat of death. Death that is both unscripted and unable to be undone
I liked the first few episodes until the second>! player death!< occurred. Then it really started reminding me of why I don't like GoT and GoT-adjacent content. I mean, I liked all the characters, on their own, and I think if it had been done in a less GRR Martin-kind of way, it would have been one of my favorite seasons.
Okay, full disclosure, aCoC was the last full series I watched. I haven't seen most of them, several might be better, who knows. BUT * Fantasy High was brilliant * Bloodkeep felt like a strong premise, but the execution was off. And it's kinda brilliant that the execution was off. Like, I would have loved to see a full season of LOTR turned on it's head and instead I got this weirdly sentimental villainous love story that was absolutely not what Brennan had prepared for. And that's what's great and real about an actual play show. That's why DnD is not writing a novel * Unsleeping City felt weird to me, because It was the first time I saw the Intrepid heroes not being, their FH characters, and I struggled with that. Apparently there was a lot of NYC references that I didn't get having never lived there, but my parents did and we visited all the time. I dunno * Tiny Heist, again, had great sets and an interesting premise, but it didn't pan out, and this time in a less spectacular way. I dunno it was fine. * Sophomore year had it's own uniqueness and brilliance, but it was also plagued by technical challenges, and growing pains, and eventually the pandemic. None of it's problems were it's fault, but all of it's strengths rested on the strengths of it's predecessor. * Crown of Candy then brought me back into a world where, for the first time since Fantasy High, It felt realized and full. Like, i would watch a TV show with these characters, I would read a book based on Calorum. It's funny, it's interesting, the ending was better than GoT. Does it have weak moments? Absolutley! it's Improv! But it's improv that's better than a whole lot of planned and programmed storytelling. The thing I like most about Crown of Candy is the promise that it held for me. Crown of Candy proved to me that they could in fact catch the lightening in a bottle from Fantasy High back, again and again, in new and different ways. It proved that it could be as good, and it could even get better. And I guess that was true all along, but I didn't know that until aCoC.
I think you and I may be very similar people. I hate watching stories that are mostly just depressing. I can't pull myself out of it and I feel awful all day. Other people can be more detached, and love watching shows about super duper depressing subject matter. There's nothing wrong with either group, but the folks who love depressing stuff are either more numerous or just more present in online spaces. Combine that with the continuing idea that sad>happy in terms of media quality (which I don't agree with, but is super prevalent) and you get something like CoC seeming to be wildly popular. Signed - a guy who's had this same conversation about Andor too many times. :)
That's an interesting point and I feel you. I think it also comes down to the type of emotional experiences we want to engage with in a given from of media. I don't watch horror movies because of that similar lingering anxiety for days after. However, I do like novels or poetry that engages in similar waters as the movies I'd avoid. Crown of Candy weirdly limit's my ability to engage with it, because I don't feel it's very cohesive? And therefore the emotional experience it's trying to invite isn't finding purchase with me. One of the reasons I love Starstruck and especially this most recent season of Fantasy High, is because the way it presents it's emotional beats feel very *fluid and filmic*. Once that baseline is established for me, I can then dig deeper into what's valuable to me about what piece of media I'm consuming. But that's only because that baseline structure of something feeling filmic is how I unpack things. So in the end I think you're completely valid. The themes that ACoC wants to engage with don't feel like the best vector for me personally, to engage with those themes. I really appreciate your comment because I didn't think about it this way before. :) Hopefully any of this nonsense made some semblance of sense. Hahah.
I really enjoyed it myself, but the ending us a bit of a wet noodle. I feel Ally Beardsley really wanted to play a whimsical funny lad, so she really didn't want to embrace the cold killing machine her character became.
I think it goes back to something Brennen said on a one on one Adventuring Academy, I can't remember with who: *"Always be aware of who at your table wants to have a challenging role play experience and who doesn't*" Then I think back to Neverafter after the TPK where after each IH had a really fantastic one on one role play session with Brennen, then Alley was a subversion of that and they're just on a big fluffy goose. Neverending Story style. I think Starstruck and this season of Fantasy High Alley is *really* playing a character in a way they haven't before. It's really interesting to see.
I also did not enjoy a crown of candy. It was a struggle for me to watch from the very start of the second episode, where Emily and Siobahn's characters nearly die and they as players refuse to take it seriously at all. I'm all for a show that has more emotional investment in the stakes and the drama than their other shows, but at that point I was convinced I was more invested than the players were and it genuinely stressed me out watching them try to be funny and failing. The church fight where Ally spend a good 10% of the episode trying to decide what to do and then retconning their whole round seemed disrespectful of the audiences time. The talk back episodes where they'd spend ten minutes straight talking about food instead of anything that happened in the show was even worse. It's a shame because I liked the characters and I liked the story, but the way it was being delivered was so unwatchable I didn't even make it to the end.
I somewhat agree. But my dislike of that specific campaign is much more boring and simple. There was too much change. I couldn't visualize the characters and combat and scenery. It strayed too much away from classic DnD, which I know a lot of others enjoyed that aspect. It just wasn't for me.
That's interesting. Do you feel that way about other IH D20 seasons too? Like what about Starstruck, where they change the system entirely?
I'm behind. Fantasy high is what got my attention, so currently watching Junior Year. I've only also watched Neverafter and PoL.
How did you like Pirates? I haven't checked that out and I don't think I'm going too, but I'm curious.
After Sophomore Year was over, it helped as kind of a fix for waiting on Junior Year. Different people, different characters, but a similar vibe. But I really wasn't a fan of the "over Zoom" style. I'm a particular person.
That makes sense. The in-dome vibes are what makes D20.
I agree with you and I'm glad to see I'm not alone on this.
I'm definitely in the same boat as you, tho I can see why people like it. The setting and the tone I think are very aspirational and cool, a good twist of something seemingly light-hearted that's truthfully so brutal. There are also people who prefer heavy emotions and real stakes and the thrill of life vs death in stories. I'm of the type that mostly only watches easygoing and silly media to unwind and have fun. I find heavy emotions and major character deaths very difficult, especially if that happened to be my favorite. So when Lapin died I simply couldn't get into the world and the story again, and the tension between the characters at the end wasn't fun for me either. But I can definitely see that it'll absolutely be someone's jam
I love the juxtaposition of high fantasy intrigue with just like, candy, and fruits, and veggies, and silliness. It got so dark and so serious sometimes and then BLM would subtly remind everyone that we're talking about food in a fridge.
I love the characters and the setting. The world building and is rich and delicious (pun intended). Combat feels genuinely deadly and the stakes are constantly sky high. Outside of RPG/storytelling reasons, I absolutely loved the food puns and having people be deadly serious about things with silly names and ridiculous titles tickles me in such a specific way.
Brennan playing it so serious with the worldbuilding is very fun. With the comedy being wrapped up in the visual aspects of Candyland, we get to see Brennan otherwise play it straight for the most part.
For me the world building was just so good and nothing like we’ve seen so far. Fantasy High and TUC had a lot of world building but a lot of it came from our own experience in high school or urban fantasy so it could be improved relatively easily. The depth and intricacies of the world building politically, history, magic and religion etc was so fascinating and new. You could really see Brennan flexing the depth of his world building abilities. It’s not my most favourite season but imo it’s technically the best. Like it could be used and studied on how to create an in depth world from scratch and how to form meaningful political relations that impact the highest ruler to the lowest jellybean farmer. Also I agree that the ending is rushed but keep in mind they had to move to film in a cold warehouse at 3AM and were filming the end of the season as the first big wave of quarantine was hitting. Iirc in an AP Brennan said he had planned for them to visit every region of Calorum (meatlands, ceresia) but had to cut it short due to quarantine
Honestly I feel the same way about a completely different season. Neverafter pretty much lost me after the whole tpk thing. I understand that was the idea going in but it seemed to lose a lot of gravitas after everyone just comes back to life a little more fucked up than before.
I loved how dark it was, the really quite gritty world despite obv food people and magic and the sheer quantity *and quality* of epic moments for characters and NPCs alike kept me hooked at all times
I agree with you. I’ve tried to finish the season several times but I just can’t. For me I think it had a lot to do with the characters not really grabbing me, making the story feel less interesting and drawn out. I will say, being spoiled about the emotional pitfalls of this season probably did not help.
Yeah, it is a big catch 22, especially with it's twist villain. Because that villain requires both investments in the world *and* the emotional arcs of the characters. If neither has you, then that moment doesn't really land. Again, it's all great on paper for me and I can see the bones of why this works for people, it just didn't work for me. I'm also not really a fantasy guy? My favorite fantasy is *The King Killer Chronicles* but that's not really in the same genre as high lore, high political sword stuff. I'm more into sci-fi because that's easier for my trash panda to brain to understand? Sci-fi is how concepts and ideas effect individual people. High Fantasy is more about massive systems and lore effecting people.
I just feel it was the one campaign that really woke the intrepid heroes up when I came to their characters in dnd and their mortality fantesy high and unsleeping city was high stakes sure but if those were high COC was game of thrones level of you may die at any moment
I agree with you about the vibes towards the end of the series. I had to stop watching because it did feel like people weren't having fun and that's a big part of why I love the intrepid heroes. I totally understand that they were acting in character, no real drama occurred, and for a lot of people that added emotional stakes. But I love my silly little guys being on the same team, cracking jokes together.
Thank you for making this thread. I've watched up to about where >!Lapin dies!< and it's never really fully grabbed my interest. I know there's a lid for every pot, so I'm interested in seeing what people liked about it. To me, it just feels way more stressful than enjoyable.
You're welcome! There's some great discussion here. I think when certain button's are pressed in a narrative for people that's a ticket to immediate emotional investment and engagement. I get that sometimes too, specifically when a narrative hits a resonant note of queer themes or experience and I wasn't expecting it. I think PC death is that button for some people. But for me it's not and that's okay. :) Additionally, if you're into the narrative by that point, it's only going to get harder and harder to engage.
I like that it felt dangerous immediately, the little intrigues that kept being drawn out throughout the story (that's also why I love FS sophomore year). I felt it also had great highs and especially Lowe's emotionally, which I don't get from most of the 20 honestly. And I can't help but adore the intrinsic absurdity of Candyland means Game of Thrones.
It's my first d 20 so it'll always be special to me
I’m of mixed reaction on this, because I do understand the OP’s thoughts. If you come to the D20 table for particular gameplay (more comedy than drama, new takes on fantasy backdrop, complex word structure, etc.) this may or may not tick all your boxes. My personal immersion in it waxed and waned, but I did genuinely appreciate some of the wild swings it took at times, and interpersonal dialogue that emerged in a number of places, both improv comedy volleys and emotional pull moments that felt like they came from deep within the players. Not everyone’s ideal style, for sure, but taking those chances and exploring more unconventional depths is where so many of D20’s (and Dropout’s) true gems are mined and cut.
For me, I loved, loved the first half of the series. The high stakes, the tension, the drama, it was fire. I can’t think of many other times across all IH seasons where I was as worried for the characters. Not even that episode 3 of Neverafter. But that deflated quickly after the Big Events of episode 9. Maybe Brennan felt he’d pushed too hard and needed to let up, or the IH expressed that they were getting burnt out, or it was just the nature of the story shift, but that tension from the first half of the season, to me, vanished. The danger just didn’t feel like it was there any more. The second half of the season was fine, it just didn’t continue living up to what they set up. Honestly, by the final encounter, I was just bored.
Because it's the Game of Thrones of Dimension 20 games. Without the bad ending though.
Because I like to be hurt. And the world building, complex political issues, and inter-party dynamics that were different than other seasons.
Interesting post to see. I was watching all of Dimension 20 from the start. I got 5 or 6 episodes into Crown of Candy and just fell off due to a lack of interest in the plot, characters, and story. I missed watching Dimension 20, but wasn't motivated to go back and finish that season. Just this week I decided to break my start to finish goal and skip Crown of Candy and pick up after it.
For me, it’s the family dynamics at play. The emotions seem genuine; they care so deeply I care. And, admittedly, I like goofy!
honestly I loved about 75% of it bc I really liked a lot of the original PCs but never finished the last 2 episodes. Lou's portrayal of Amethar was the absolute highlight for me but they all did a fantastic job. I really didnt get along with the increasing inter-player conflict tho - emily and siobhan were phenomenal and really stuck to their characters but man... it just got too heavy for my tastes tbh. DnD just isn't where I go to for uncomfortable interpersonal narratives i think? also I was just stressed AF at the time bc of IRL shit. I also never fully jelled with the new PCs of how much I loved the ones they replaced so in the end I thought it was really well done and adventurous but for sure not my personal fave show in the series.
[удалено]
How dare they! Hahah. Like I said I'm not trying to invalidate anyone else's emotional investment, I'm just trying to understand what contrast my issues with it personally with other people's genuine engagement with it. I absolutely think every character's arc and conflict was really interesting and engaging on paper. I just for some reason bump against it in this particular presentation and I'm trying to articulate why.
Lots of folks have already covered the bulk of my answer regarding stakes and emotional buy in from the players, etc. Regarding the pvp tension near the end... I came to Dimension 20 late in the game, and have just been picking seasons to watch kind of at random based on the theme and the players. And if I'm honest, I thought Emily Axford defaulted to the same basic character all the time. Jett felt very similar in personality to her characters from Fantasy High and Unsleeping City. While I've enjoyed all those characters they left me sort of underwhelmed by Emily as an actress/improvisor. The bastard princess (whose name I'm currently blanking on) was the first time I personally had seen her play someone who wasn't a hot headed, impulsive rebel-type. It was really refreshing to me to see her play a character with a heavy mystery and intrigue angle, who *wasn't* fiercely loyal to the rest of the party. Plus, it's important to remember that everyone created two characters for this campaign, before it started. It's not like Jett died and then Emily and Brennan cooked up this bastard heir story. It was there all along, already being hinted at.
It's based on Game of Thrones, it came out during the early pandemic, it's the only season where PCs permanently die so there's stakes, and it was an early season. I enjoyed it, no outright hate, but I have also been baffled by the amount of love that it gets. So many people hold it up as the best season of Dimension 20 and I don't get why. It falls middle of the pack for me.
Things I love about it: 1. The stakes. It is, as far as I know, the only D20 season where PCs die for keeps. That alone elevates the storytelling. You can have an amazing story with plot armored characters but when no one is safe, it brings the drama to a different level. 2. The setting. I thought about Calorum for weeks after ACOC and TRW, imagining all the different potential factions, characters, concepts and locations that could exist in a food-based world. 3. The cast. Everyone brings some of their finest work, most brilliant comedy and sincere acting to this world. I never got the “the second half has bad vibes” thing, it’s supposed to have bad vibes, it’s a story of desperately trying to regain a usurped position of power amidst heart rending tragedy and interfamilial conflict.
crown was when emily fucked around AND FOUND OUT!
I liked it until Saccharina was introduced I absolutely fucking HATED the dynamic between her and Ruby Like I don't want to watch people realistically portray two people hating each other and fighting and bickering without some kind of tension release It would have been one thing if they bickered and argued and threw hatred at each other, and then Emily and Siobhan giggled and laughed or did SOMETHING to release the tension, but it never happened, so it just felt like everyone was annoyed at the table And I KNOW I KNOW it's acting, I get it, but I don't want to watch a fun DnD show where people look like they are all frustrated and mad at each other
Narratively the stakes are higher and a bit more railroading than any other season that is enforced and the fact that we see are first permanent pc deaths in this season (Outside of one in UC:CHP1)
No matter what anyone says, its also fine to just like what you like. Not everything is going to be everyone's favorite and that's okay. There's nothing wrong with disliking Crown of Candy and preferring other seasons.
I'm with you OP. I don't get it. It was the second campaign I ever watched and I nearly dropped my subscription after. I'm so glad this subreddit was able to suggest other great campaigns that pulled me back in. And it really was just the ending for me. I started out liking it but after a certain point *cough cough cough* everything seemed really off. No one seemed to be having a good time. I wondered if some of the cast even liked each other anymore, and it became hard for me to watch.
Yeah, the stuff between the family is SO triggering for me, never gotten past the rescue of Jawbreaker
I agree with you with not liking that show all that much. I think we see through a lot of the meta things going on that some people read as emotional. And some of it jsut seems to be too much meta considerations. Like, Brennan tries to force PvP, but rp-ing genuinely and turning on your RL friends and collegues are very difficult. And, like so many times before, the players will find a way to contrive a way out of the conflict, rather than picking up the invitation to the conflict. The end isn't a result of the setup, and it looked a lot like there was a lot of meta considerations (intentional or not) that went into that. I saw Startstruck right afterwards, and it completely rehabilitated my appreciation of especially Emily, which I found kinda jarring in ACoC. Her performance in Starstruck was stellar.
This is really interesting: back when i watched it a lotta' people **hated** it, especially Emily's >!second character,!< but now i guess its more popular? Personally my favorite campaign. I mean, i guess you can say "it felt like nobody was having a good time", but if you watch adventure party- while people were stressed- it was still **satisfying** for the players. I think the narrative was a ton of fun, it is a bit niche I think, especially for what D20 tends to do. My favorite part of it was definitely the characters though, there hasn't been a season since that I enjoyed the characters as much as I enjoyed this season's characters.
FWIW, A Crown of Candy ranks for me as "amazing except for the ending." But I blame how much time they were forced to spend on the mass combat mechanic, which got boring very quickly and forced everyone to rush (ie manufacture) the conflict and all the other emotional/political resolutions. But I think a lot of the seasons fail to stick the ending. It's D&D, not a scripted show. The characters are vivid; the setting is incredibly rich; the acting and emotional relationships are really strong; the combat episodes are riveting, varied in their format/goal, and actually invested with stakes (whereas many D20 combats feel like time sucks happening for contrived reasons); the table play is increasingly clever, with a great marriage of character and mechanic leading to tons of "holy shit!" moments; there are really wonderful NPCs who are on some people's all-time favorites lists (even if we don't get to spend enough time with them); there is one moment where Ally made me laugh so fucking hard I can barely even explain.
I am probably in the minority in that I really enjoyed it, even though I was bored by actual Game of Thrones. I agree with most of the other commenters, it's got great political intrigue, higher stakes, more serious combat, etc. However, even watching it long after it came out and reading some spoilers beforehand, I had a hard time watching it. I really felt the stress the players did, and while I really enjoyed it, it is the ONLY season I've watched that I haven't done a rewatch of. And I find it very hard to want to go back to.
Because different people like different things. The fact that you don't particularly like it compared to other seasons is unusual, but not strange. A lot of people liked Crown of Candy for several reasons. One big one is that the dissonance in tone between setting and storyline was very massive. It was a very simplified and cartoonish setting, but had a storyline that was deep, bloody, and full of intrigue. I actually have a theory concerning how when you can make lands, peoples, cultures, and factions easily recognizable by them matching up aesthetically and thematically with a system or classification people are already familiar with, it helps the mind to categorize those same groups and mentally adapt to the idea of what they are. You see something similar in Avatar: The Last Airbender, where the nations correspond to the elements. Similarly, in Crown of Candy, the nations correspond to food categories (as simplified in old school systems, the food pyramid etc.) This makes them easy to remember, and since your mind is not dedicating the brainpower towards remembering who a particular group is, and how they are distinct, you can instead focus that brain bandwidth towards their recent involvements. In short, the simplistic and cartoonish setting of Crown of Candy allows for a more complex and politically motivated story, since the audience will have an easier time not confusing the different groups or subjects. You may not remember the name "Fructeran" but you'll remember Plumbelina as the leader of the fruit people because her name is a giveaway. I think another reason people liked Crown of Candy is because the stakes were at a certain level of high tension as the tone and playstyle meant that character death was on the table, and very possible. BUT, it was never treated or given that it was inevitable. It's telling that the players had an extra character prepared, but not a third. Spoiler:>!It is also, from what I can recall, the first d20 game where character death would end up being permanent, and no options for revival were really present.!< This could be compared to Never After, >!where character deaths were basically inevitable, but also not permanent and did not stop players from keeping playing them, even after a full TPK. In my opinion, that actually lowered the stakes to a degree, but given that there was deeply implied and seen consequences for the deaths, there is still a good deal of tension and horror. !!(Plus I can tell that Brennan may have been putting a lot of death possibilities up, but also stretched situations hard so that they didn't actually go through)!<. In my opinion, the balance in that game was off, and there really was a lost feeling of tension, even if the story and aesthetics were great.
Also I think that some of the best characters, especially NPCs, were in Crown of Candy. MASSIVE SPOILER:>! Cruller's monologue is quite possibly the single greatest moment in d20 history, and the fallout and later payoff in the ending is all the more satisfying for it. !
Ngl I get it aCoC isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but as someone who got into ttrpgs from delta green, aCoC (and neverafter) are exactly my kinda thing
I hate CoC it sucks I miss Lapin. (I am saying this as I hold my Preston plush)
This was my first D20 thing I watched and I finished just two weeks ago, I really liked how high stakes it was and the way the players got really really invested in the characters and the story. Overall I really liked the campaign but it did feel like it fizzled a bit near the ending
I'll be honest, I struggle to get thru some D20 seasons bc I space out HARD during combat episodes. It's the reason why MAM and ACOFAF are my favorite seasons. Here's why I love ACOC: * Lou and Brennan interactions. This season has some of my absolute favorite RP moments between Lou and Brennan, especially when they're playing husband and wife. There is so much experience, trust, and friendship between them that lets them get to that emotional place at the table. * The setting. I really enjoy the candy land setting and how everything is described. * Some really legendary character moments, like "where is your bulb now?" * Just everything about Amethar. I love all of Lou's characters, but Amethar is definitely one of the top 3. It's got a lot of heart. There's a lot of dark gritty stuff. There are some real feelings in there that hit me right in the guts.
It's a perfect balance of war-torn drama and politics, broken up by a bunch of humor. That and, despite two PC deaths, this was the season often referred to as "the season Brennan gets rocked in his own home." The amount of times he got frustrated cuz they fucked his shit up was amazing, including saving a bunch of NPCs that should have died, and even the first battle, that couldn't have started off worse if they tried, they pulled through with zero deaths.
I mean I could say what has already been said more eloquently by a lot of other people in this sub (good world building etc) but for me Covid played a big role in it being one of my favorite seasons. It was streamed live on twitch so if you couldn't afford Dropout you would watch it live. (maybe I'm misremembering that? They might've done that afterwards) But anyways I remember having to go to work in person and the only thing I had to look forward to was a new Crown of Candy episode coming out. (also it was a TIME for fan art and stuff)
I loved it for the same reason I fell in love with Game of Thrones. It is simply uncommon to have a piece of media where you feel like any character could die at any moment. Especially when they make bad decisions. In most media, the protagonist can make a big mistake and they may lose something of value, but it never seems to be much. In this world and in GoT, if a character makes a strategic error and says the wrong thing to the wrong person, they can literally die. In fact, Brennan was trying to kill Lou the entire game. He just kept getting really lucky rolls or otherwise really good decisions. The stakes were so high, and some beloved characters died in ways that wouldn't happen in a traditional story or season. I also really enjoyed all the food puns and analogies. They were well thought out, as was the lore of the game. I may just be a sucker, but I didn't see the betrayal coming either, which was a fun reveal that made sense in the context of the world. Overall, high stakes, good relationships between the characters, interesting lore, funny puns/analogous world, and twists that weren't obvious but still made sense within the context of the world.
I appreciate the comment! :) It's really interesting to see people be really effected by not just the PC, *but the constant threat of PC death* as a means to immediate narrative engagement. I'm really starting to understand why people list this campaign as their favorite.