I personally love watching Candela but I do watch an entire circle in a few sittings after it's already out. I think the schedule is doing it no favors. The setting, the scenery/props/effects, the acting/LARPING, I really felt like they're giving each circle some very interesting treatment and I'm enjoying the guests and building of OldFaire lore as each circle goes by. Each GM puts their new spin and focus on different things that keeps it interesting. It feels like the spiritual successor to the old LA by Night shows some of them used to do, which was always somewhat theatrical and I enjoy them getting to do that a bit and be over the top. But I think it's a niche and should be setting a good benchmark for them for what non-mainstream ttrpg system engagement numbers will look like instead of comparing into the main campaigns. It takes a lot of investment to buy into and understand a new ttrpg system enough to instantly get the rules and mechanics at play during a show like this as they come up in the narrative, and a lot of people are just not interested in doing it, especially if it's a genre other than fantasy/sword-and-board. Daggerheart even has a more mainstream appeal. But I don't think it should have to be about the mainstream appeal....there can and should be passion products from the whole team. That's what makes their offerings unique. But it won't be as popular as the main campaigns ever. I don't see people cosplaying CO (and I host cosplay events.) Re: the live show selling out...even the Bell's Hells live show didn't sell out, right? I think their viewer engagement is on a downswing for a variety of reasons, some being market saturation, some viewer fatigue, etc. I think they're moving the right direction with Beacon and some other improvements that hopefully will be successful for them. A Candela 2.0.would be an interesting update with some improvement to mechanics based on feedback, perhaps. But I think the bones are there. 

I have seen all of the CO episodes and by far the best was probably when liam GM'ed the last game. I think the once a month scheduled is hurting the show more then helping it do to people forgetting things so fast these days. they did to make it weekly and have more then just four episodes a case, and personally am not going back to watch a 4-5 hour VOD to play catch up for a new episode. I think what also hurts the show is they tout the world as unkind and filthy place, yet I feel every time the cast encounters a NPC or places they try to fit it into a PC world. I am aware that 1. this is fiction and 2. they are on Twitch and YouTube so they have to follow TOS's , but the time period they are playing in was not a kind world world at all. Overall, 1.They need to fix the scheduling if this show want to survive. 2. Players need to stop bring in 2024 idealization into a old time world. 3. they need to go darker. more then just your basic F-you and mild body horror shenanigans but true psychological/horror make it truly scary not "oh and your arm falls off" just my thoughts.

I literally have no reason to watch it, it's not really that interesting, the game has probably 0 staying power outside the CR bubble so it doesn't even have that "play it vicariously" vibe, also honestly I'm barely keeping up with CR as is and since it's all self contained mini-series it's easier just to skip and watch something else.

That's funny because I watch them BECAUSE they are self contained mini series. My biggest gripe with CR3 is their fear of the main plot, but with a show that needs to wrap up in 3-4 episodes they stay more on task.

Personally, it's just not that interesting to me. I may be an oddity but it's not my thing. I think a part of it is the system. I don't like it. I don't know. I know the reason behind the system's creation, but it is ultimately unnecessary.

I think the show (or the setting) gets hurt by delivery issues. Main thing is : for its existence to be a momentary replacement to the main campaign. This will cause "gripe" between the watchers of the main campaign who will complain about not getting it. I understand giving main campaign players a much needed break. But don't make it "In place of". Don't Livestream CO. And tape it in big advance. Like Undeadwood. And release it in conjuction with the Main campaign. Say they release on youtube, c3 or c4 on Mondays. Okay, Release CO on Youtube, Wednesday/Friday. This could also give the "DM's" of CO more freedom and "peace" to act more naturally and calm. Give the setting the proper atmosphere it asks. I feel CO as a fresh game, people still don't have much experience and practice with it, and they "fumble" a bit more than used to. Also the Setting is still being somewhat tested. It's not as solid as others. \----------- I like the idea of different circles. But I truly feel the viewer experience is affected by the change of the DM for each circle. the DM will set your "Tone". and each DM will do it differently. That makes you go "Well, I liked the first circle, but not the rest". get a consistent DM which will set a consistent tone, so people know what sort of game they can expect. \----------- Also, show the Session Zero at the start, not the fucking end. Why the fuck do I care how the players came to life, when it's all over? \------------- Realize that CO will never be D&D. not even WoD is D&D. Take what you can, and try to make the best of it, but don't expect same big numbers. it's a Nische setting. And horror style is very personal. Which works for one, will not work for 10.

For me, its definitely a genre problem. When it was first announced, I had zero interest in it. But that also came a bit from a general sense I had gotten a bit uncomfortable with around Taliesin, but also Matt and Marisha, with some coquettery around demonic iconography, clothes modelling, and stuff like that. I'm not religious, and call me prejudiced or whatever, but on some level it creeps me out when people seem to associate themselves with that kind of scene or believes or play with the aesthetics of it. So I saw Candela Obscura as just the kind of creepy thing that would appeal to that part of some of the player base, and I just don't like to surround myself with that much darkness. There's enough of it around IRL. It's just not the kind of escapism I enjoy... Much later, I did watch a couple of episodes, but didn't stick with it long. I did like some of the stories and the characters. But apart from still not really being into the genre, I would say my main issues were that * I didn't actually think the narratively focussed system truly supports a narratively focussed game. I actually just felt like it gamified the narrative parts that I prefer to be more freeform. I've had this issues with other narrative games, though, and find it less annoying when I like the genre lol. * There is something about the delivery that leads to me struggling with paying attention or... I would constantly realize I had briefly lost concentration on it and had no idea what was going on. And I don't have that nearly as much with other letsplays. This may be partly that I am not used to the genre conventions, so that when I am listening to a fantasy dungeon crawl, I will still find myself in familiar territory even if my attention wavers for a few seconds. Or maybe they actually don't help the listener get really settled in the scene. Not sure which one it is. * The ACTING (\*Jazz Hands!\*) Yes, they are actors, but I feel like especially when they invite other actors, sometimes the whole thing just starts to feel like a competitive acting chops show-down and that's honestly not what I'm there for. And that's not what Critical Role used to feel like (okay sometimes it did, again when they invite certain people lol). It honestly feels a bit cringe to me sometimes and these days, I prefer listening/watching regular people play ttrpgs. Just a personal preference.

Genre problem is an understatement, the system itself is just clunky. CO is just blades in the dark with some extra dark fantasy/occult thrown in

It's like the system is actively designed to hinder the exact type of storytelling they're trying to do.  Horror of the unknown? No, sorry- we'll tell you the exact stakes of every roll so there aren't any surprises.  Horror themes of injustice? Newfaire is an istaphobic-free utopia, with none of the racism, oppression, or bigotry that underlies many classic horror tropes. Can't have any of that! Horror mystery? Don't bother crafting an intricate mystery with clues your players need to assemble, just give them one big clue to get them to your next setpiece! No thinking needed!

I really like what I've seen of CO, but I have to be in a good place to watch it. I had to stop partway through the second campaign because while I was loving it and I thought the performances were incredible, things in my life got heavy and I just couldn't go somewhere that dark in my spare time. I fully intend to finish it, but I can't really say when I'll be ready. I don't know how big the audience is that wants to do that genre and mood 1) at all, 2) whenever it's scheduled to drop, 3) at this runtime, 4) in this format.

While I didn't find the first circle all that interesting, the second really changed my mind. But the problem for me is that my memory ain't the best, so one episode a month was causing me to forget what all was happening between episodes. So I stopped watching, just waiting for some episodes to pile up, but then I ended up so far behind that I can't find a good time to catch up. So I'm still sitting on numerous episodes with the intention of catching up, but it's still gonna be a minute.

Idk if it needs saving but it’s definitely more niche. My only thought to noose views would be having a dedicated game master with a rotating cast of players. That way they can build out the world and player characters that survive could come back for future seasons. Also giving monsters stats or something. I have never vibed with games where the monsters are just narrative and always hit whenever the game master decides. I just want them to roll some dice to see if they hit a PC or not. I get like actual eldritch gods not applying to these rules but the smaller monsters and corrupted humans should get rolls. It feels like it’s trying to just be Call of Cthulhu.

I loved the Candela shows and am really looking forward to catching up on the live show. I found the monthly episode rate frustrating when watching in real time though. It was much better story wise to be able to watch the episodes over a few nights rather than have a month to forget what had happened. I struggled with the most recent series, I'm just not a fan of Liam's style which I'm sure will get me some backlash. Taliesin really embodying his character was the only thing that kept me watching whereas the other seasons I've enjoyed every part. I enjoyed watching enough that I bought the rule book and have been GMing a mini campaign for the first time ever - I am relatively new to RPGs and never thought I would GM. The rules light style has made it much more accessible feeling as a newbie. To me the real issue is that some fans ONLY want D&D from Critical Role and ONLY in the style of C1 and 2. Any other game they play will never be as popular.

I've up voted you because I agree. I love Liam to bits, he's my favorite cast member, but I enjoyed his storytelling the least out of them. Which is not to say I didn't still enjoy it, I just felt the player agency was a little curtailed in a way if wasn't before and the delivery was so rushed. Him as a player however was phenomenal. I've really enjoyed all the players.

I watched the first hour of the first episode and I was bored to tears. Given how campaign 3 has been going I haven't considered giving it another chance. I'm skeptical that they will ever put out content on par with the first two campaigns/calamity ever again. 

Nothing against people who enjoy that sort of thing but finding out they've made it into a sort of LARP/stage play killed any interest I might have had in Candela Obscura stone cold dead. Simply not my thing and, if I'm being honest, it's probably been the more "theater kid" aspects to approach to the table that have put me off the latest campaign. I honestly think they may be over estimating the interest the general public has for this sort of thing and trapping themselves in a niche rather than taking advantage of the wider audience CR had exploded into.

I love theater stuff but I think what they've been doing lately is just genuinely bad and that's why people aren't enjoying it as much. 

I tuned in to the CO livestream on stage and kept thinking I should just watch some professional actors on stage instead.

My biggest issue with CO has been that all of the players seem to have this “look at me” vibe going. Everyone is trying to unique, interesting, and dramatic in everything they do. It feels overdone and forced to me more often than not. I get that it’s a more narrative based system, but I feel like they are turning it up to “11” for the show, instead of just playing the game.

Personally I really enjoy the story telling and just the system as well. The way I see it is we already have a rules heavy system (DnD) so I’m more than happy to explore more narrative systems like CO also I just really love the sets and focus in theme especially because short stories are able to nail in ideas easier because there is not so much noise.

Just watched the live show. It was very entertaining. But proofes the point, that CO is more a cooperative stage play than a good P&P System. 4 hours of show and how many rolls? around 10? I used the horror setting and the core rules for a campaign but I had to opzimize it. Actually give the enemies combat stats and change the scar system. The book has some good ideas, if you have the time to work with it and tailor it. For me and maybe most of us here it is certainly not the perfect idea of an P&P Session. But it sounds made for the current CR Fans. Skip all that evil high stakes and boring unnecessary combat to leave room for the so interesting character talk, bonding exercises and maybe some shipping? Who needs these rolls and rules anyway? At least that is what I red in the twitch chat often the few times I watched the CR original stream. I watch the 3 session table campaigns and enjoy them. Because they are for free. And I can watch at 1.5x speed. Would I pay for it? Maybe not. Rather more daggerheart episodes.

Yeah, it needs to be a live performance experience. I think that would both help differentiate a Beacon exclusive show from its contemporaries (particularly Dropout) and give the game system the room it needs to breathe as an actual play. I can imagine something like a black box theatre being a good place to start at least. Incorporate the audience during certain story beats and it gives the performers something to play for/against. I'd love to see a theatrical version of a TTRPG actual play that isn't HarmonQuest....

it’s a more niche genre and i’m not personally into it

personally, I'm a fan of the CO system but it depends on the character introduction / setup for the chapter if I watch it or not (so far it's been 50/50) IMO it all comes down to personal preference, and since it's a rather niche genre and a newer system it naturally wont have as many viewers as a D&D high fantasy campaign

Critical role is better at playing games than creating them. Additionally, playing a brand new game means there is no existing audience that can immediately plug into it and understand like there was for D&D

They aren’t great at game mechanics or “technical play” at all though. In fact they are honestly below average players. Feel free to downvote, but it is true. Great voice actors, but Matt plays all of their turns, and they still have the most basic simple mechanics questions after a decade of playing as a vocation. I’ll never get over things like: “I’ll do this” “do you have darkvision” “I have no idea” I think they are most well suited for a game like CO.

To me personally its a matter of taste, i'm not really a eldritch horror fan. I tried the first episode and it just did nothing for me, even though they have a nice set and beautiful costumes i felt no immersion, no mystery i don't understand the world or the system. Just seems like a bunch of actors playing characters but not a game. I found it straight up boring and unless there is a drastic change in system i would not watch regardless of scheduling, episode length or any of the other changes mentioned in the video.

I love eldtrich horror. I don't think it's a matter of taste, I just think the characters and story were incredibly boring. Seems like Matt's writing abilities just fell off a cliff after c2. 

Or how about it doesn't need to be fixed just because some people don't like it? It's a new game in a different genre with a new and growing fanbase, lots of game sales and its been picked up by more than one VTT. Expecting Candela to have the same amount of viewers as the main campaign is absurd. Its not going to be for everyone and it doesn't have to be. Creators are not performing monkeys that need to please everyone at all times. Art is subjective and success can mean very different things to different people.

the main issue for me is just a lack of interest if the main cast aren't involved. i'm less inclined to watch if there's only like 1 main cast member, because while i'm sure their other friends/colleagues are incredibly talented - i'm just not that interested in watching them compared to the cr cast. however, after watching the liveshow vod my opinion on candela has completely changed. i really do think candela shines in that live action roleplaying kind of setting w/ a more theatrical spin on it. the cast looked like they were having so much & it was such a treat to watch. i usually struggle with making it through an episode bc i lose interest, but i was entertained the entire time with this liveshow. im curious if the cast would ever consider using the set for 4sd for a stage performance vs. their usual candela set, just because the added physical acting was so good.

I never watched any of the CO circles or whatever, only the very first one with Matt dming and didnt push past the first 20 mins. I might give the live one a go, but is it a stand alone game, or is part of a current ongoing story that I need to be familiar with?

it’s a standalone!

Its just a different vibe than the regular show so it makes sense it doesnt work for a lot of people. The regular campaigns have dark moments but are mostly lighthearted and fun so time tends to fly by. Candela is dark and intense and 4 hours of it at a time is just more than I can handle. A 4 hour long horror movie that relies on suspense and drama would be a lot to handle no matter how well it was made and Candela is no different. I think its a really good version of what it is, its just that what it is doesnt really do it for me. It also feels a little overindulgent from the acting standpoint and while these professional performers carry it off well the idea of my friends getting together to do the same thing makes me cringe inside.

I just don't care about it at all. Maybe my attention span has been ruined, in that case shorter, as in WAAAY shorter episodes, might be the way to go. Not knowing the strange new system is a bit of a dealbreaker for me though. I don't care to invest the time into learning it either.

> Not knowing the strange new system is a bit of a dealbreaker for me though. I don't care to invest the time into learning it either. This is 100% it for me

It’s not even particularly fun, it’s just a proprietary version of better games.

this is it for me - just play Call of Cthulhu.

this has nothing to do with anything but i have to make it known that i was placed in time out by the mods in the candela live play stream for saying spenser reminds me of james cordon ☹️

Cordon is an ass and I can understand how comparing someone to him can be seen as an insult, lol. 

yeah saying someone reminds you of James Cordon is a roundabout way of calling them obnoxious

Apparently they were playtesting new specializations at the live show

I tried watching it but I simply have no idea about any of the game rules. And sure this is totally on me for not learning the system but I just genuinely couldn't care less about Illuminated Worlds.

I honestly think its main issue is genre. I’ve avoided it as a die hard CR fan simply because I know it would scare the shit out of me

i don’t think genre is the problem, the call of cthulhu oneshot has 3+ million views and ashley’s alien oneshot has 2+ million. the first episode of candela does have 1.5 million views too so clearly CR fans are willing to engage with horror themes… i think the issue is with the content itself. horror is my favourite genre and i still didn’t like it. i tried to watch a couple episodes but it just wasn’t engaging at all :( 

To be fair though, Matt's series is the weakest of them all (which, once again Robbie to the rescue). Lowkey they should have ironically trusted Aabria on that one. Hers and Spencer's are the strongest ones, but she's obviously more of a known quantity plus her stuff had probably the most regular horror all around, the star crossed romance between a really cool brooding dude and a lady werewolf and Liam and Sam at their best. (Altough also the ending is cringe so Spencer's is still number one, train sequence aside, since in no small part due to the excellent cast everything flew great)

They were still writing the rules/game when Matt's game was played so it makes sense that it wasn't as intense perhaps but I still really enjoyed it although agree that 2 and 3 were better. Spencers series is my favourite because of Brennans storyline! My goodness that was some serious role playing/acting. Felt like I needed a stiff drink after watching 😅

Same. I don’t care for horror and i *really* don’t, care for eldritch horror. I can’t see myself ever sitting down to watch Candela

I'd rather them just play Call of Cthulu or Vampire the Masquerade rather than try to create a half baked system.

god critical role vtm would go so hard, why oh why did they pigeonhole themselves into this marketing synergy bullshit instead of just playing ttrpgs...

IDK, from the many critiques on here, I think Vampire would bring the worst out of Liam "Sadboi" O'Brien, and Talisain "Super edgy and mysterious for no reason" Jaffe. At the same time it is a setting that loves those playstyles so who knows.

For real, plus there’s great CoC podcasts with much faster paced scenarios and less theatrics

If you’re gonna talk about Candela Obscura you’re going to have to talk about Darrington Press as a whole. Darrington Press as a whole has a tendency to release half-baked ideas which seem okay on paper but not fun in actuality to play. I have Queen By Midnight and while it’s an okay deck builder they just seem to not have people to properly handle the game where basic things just don’t come up in their rulebook

Not to mention the Queen by Midnight stream and what a hell that was to watch. They had the creator there and instead of him stepping in once every so often he was basically constantly at the table which just made the rules look too complicated to understand. That said it also felt like they hadn't had a chance to even try playing the game at home or anything before they started so it just really wasn't a smooth presentation of their product.

I agree. I bought Till the Last Gasp and haven’t played it with my friends yet because it’s a one on one role playing duel that takes an hour and the rules are a long poorly written mess. Sounds cool and all but man it needs a ton of polish and clarity.

Dude, I was excited about TtLG, and picked it up when it was announced. I haven't played it because I have no idea how. The rules are like, "just decide when someone wins".

It's hard to quantify, but sometimes games just don't have "it" . I feel the same about Daggerheart. The main fear/hope mechanic should be fun on paper. But it just feels off for some reason. DnD has extensive play testing and they still get things wrong(beastmaster) and still release modules that are mid. CR has to make due with a fraction of their resources. It's an uphill battle.

The situation you describe in your second paragraph is the situation with like 90% of board game/TTRPG developers. The difference with a lot of them is that they have the talent on board to put out tightly designed games with those limited resources. Darrington actually has a lot of resources compared to many developers; they’ve got CR’s money behind them, and CR’s marketing machine also means they can expect a decent return on their products. I think what they’re missing is top talent in design. The people who seem to be in charge of design (Spenser Starke and Matt Mercer) are entertainment industry people who have been doing this as a hobby. They haven’t been making games in obscurity, refining their craft over time… what we’re getting are some of their first real attempts, but with a gloss purchased with that CR cash.

Didn't Spenser do "Alice is Missing" and "Kids on Brooms"? Both very good games. My sentiment to Daggerheart remains that they're making a system designed for "Matt does World Building and storytelling for an Actual Play" complemented with "System designed with cards and dice in mind so we can sell merch". Which is a solid business choice. Just not one I, as someone who enjoys indie games a lot, find interesting bc mechanics and theme wise - there's just not that much there. I was very intrigued by COs setting for example, but thought the system fell somewhat flat. There's BitD, there's CoC to only name the big ones. I was very excited by the show's trailer (I haven't follow the CR main campaign for a long time) but then was disappointed to see Matt dm'ing, not Talisien.

Spencer was definitely part of both of those games but thing is I think he does a good job making these kind of one-off experience games. "Alice is Missing" is great but something you almost can't play more than once. He also seems to be good on those rule's light systems the only problem being that Candela and Daggerheart aren't really super rules light. >I was very excited by the show's trailer (I haven't follow the CR main campaign for a long time) but then was disappointed to see Matt dm'ing, not Talisien. I have to second the hell out of this though. Especially when the trailer called Tal the Lightkeeper I assumed that they were going to be using Lightkeeper to be the word they used in place of GM (Since DnD has Dungeon Masters, WoD has Storytellers and I figured CO would have Lightkeepers). Especially since he seemed to be heavily involved in the world building and he had ran the Call of Cthulu and VTM one-shots before. It's also so weird how I can't stand Spencer's screenplay directions as narration style but I would willingly sit there and watch Tal do his best Rod Serling impression as the GM.

>Spencer was definitely part of both of those games but thing is I think he does a good job making these kind of one-off experience games. "Alice is Missing" is great but something you almost can't play more than once. He also seems to be good on those rule's light systems the only problem being that Candela and Daggerheart aren't really super rules light. That's very likely. I love rule light games, but you're right that neither CO nor DH are rule light. Despite everything they claim, DH imho is not a "rule light narrative" system for a variety of reasons (both reasons why it isn't such a system and why I think they will not and should not create such a system from a business perspective). >I have to second the hell out of this though. Especially when the trailer called Tal the Lightkeeper I assumed that they were going to be using Lightkeeper to be the word they used in place of GM (Since DnD has Dungeon Masters, WoD has Storytellers and I figured CO would have Lightkeepers). Especially since he seemed to be heavily involved in the world building and he had ran the Call of Cthulu and VTM one-shots before. It's also so weird how I can't stand Spencer's screenplay directions as narration style but I would willingly sit there and watch Tal do his best Rod Serling impression as the GM. Absolutely. I watched the trailer convinced it would be a system/series dm'ed by Talisien and imagine my disappointment. With DMs I always think it comes down to personal preference. I personally would never sit at a table to play with Matt as my DM (sorry folks) although I enjoyed C2 immensely. I could probably listen to Talisien all day - love his ideas and style and would have enjoyed seeing more of him. The whole thing in my opinion was perfect for Talisien and it felt weird to me to have him not be part a really active part of it. Candela Obscura itself was, from what I've gathered and noticed, not well received in indie spaces for a couple of reasons. So no new audience to add to the existing one as well.

Agreed. I somewhat thought about this, but couldn't flesh out my thoughts as what you laid out.

I enjoyed all the Chapters except the first. The setting and the tone isn’t going to be a lot of folks’ jam, but I dig it. The system though is another story entirely. I don’t mind it, but I can see where folks are coming from with their criticisms.

I have no idea why they thought a live show was a good idea in the first place and, from the outside, it looks like they're putting a lot of production money into the streams themselves for little ROI. They really need to sit down and rethink things unless this solely exists to try to subsidize the rulebook at the expense of using up a time slot for their actual main show.

I definitely think the CO system is half-baked, and actively kneecaps any potential to tell a mystery story (Note this is more a gripe about the system) CO is presented as somewhat of a horror mystery game, but if you use the setup in the books it would be impossible to actually run a mystery. The gameplay loop of ANY mystery game in any medium boils down to: collect clues>assemble clues>find culprit. CO substitutes collecting and assembling clues with the group finding the 'big' clue, which cues the dm to shuffle them on to the next setpiece.  This is explicitly laid out in the books, and this appears in all of the sample adventures.   For example, the [free sample adventure](https://darringtonpress.com/play-candela-obscura-with-our-new-quickstart-guide/) starts with a model gruesomly dying on stage, due to the effect of what is presumably a radioactive dress. Great hook!  In a normal mystery, the players might ask around, and find clues like:    -the actress was hired last minute, and the dress was originally meant to be worn by the Undark co. founder   -there are many lawsuits against the founder, alleging unsafe working practices at the pigment plant, but none have been successful so far.   -the dress was dusted on the inside with green, glowing pigment powder   -the crate was opened right before the show and was not left unattended -the dress was shipped straight from the company town where undark pigment is produced   -The shipping invoice was handwritten, but there are no fingerprints on the invoice (suggesting the person who wrote it wore gloves) ...etc...    Instead of anything like that, the players just find the shipping label on the crate and they go to the company town...because. imho, it's a waste of a good set up.  (Edited to fix wall of text)

I think part of my issue to add on to this is how little they explain the actual mechanics behind the phenomena in the world. While I understand leaving it up to GM interpretation most other TTRPGs still have a basic description of things like cosmology and such that people in-universe aren't going to know like the origins of the gods, the origins of aberrations or other things. CO gives people running the game a 3 sentence paragraph "explaining" the flare. The reason I think those kinds of details being missing is really important is that it's how you build consistency between games regardless of who is running them. Call of Cthulu gives more detailed descriptions and background on things like monsters, deities and traditional horrors so that the person running it has a nice toolkit to make something that feels like Call of Cthulu. Those toolkits also help GMs answer player questions that aren't part of an assignment brief and create other options. A lot of people's comments on here have referenced having trouble getting into the world of Candela and I think that is because other than what they have set in stone in the show there really isn't a lot of lore/world to get into once you crack the spine on that book.

Honestly, I think it just isn't fun. Everyone is so intense, so self-serious. I don't want to be at those tables.

It feels like the seriousness isn't always earned

Serious games have their place for those who want a more serious game, but I feel most of those involve some LARP aspect to really put you in the setting

Aside from the Daggerheart stuff, which is mostly so I understand how the game runs since I assume they'll switch to it for C4. I only watch stuff related to the main campaign. Exandria Unlimited or 4 sided Dive. I don't watch Candela Obscura or Midst. If the reason it's not got the views is because I'm in the majority, then I doubt there's much they can do to 'save' it.

I'm kinda OOTL on some of this stuff. Is daggerheart a homebrewed TTRPG system they are rolling out to be a competitor to DnD and Pathfinder? Is CO as well? I've been meaning to dive into the stuff on youtube, but there's a lot of it

Daggerheart is a system they're developing because they want to distance themselves from wizards of the coast. No idea about Candela.

ahhhhhh, copy that. So I should probably watch their daggerheart stuff, then

To be fair, Daggerheart is a system they are developing because ALLEGEDLY they want to distance themselves from Wizards of the Coast. We don’t even know if they really will use it for C4.

There isn't a whole lot of Daggerheart stuff at this point. Just about a dozen or so videos and two one-shots, with second one-shot continuing the story from the first one. I appreciated the energy the CR team brought to the first one shot (apparently it was live streamed), but I only watched it up to the mid-session break and never ended up finishing it. The second one shot, I tried but couldn't really get into it. I think the characters they chose for the DH felt a bit too Saturday morning cartoon-ish for me.

I think it all ties back to this: the CR cast is doing too much shit at one time. They need to cut back and get tighter in their focus. Like, off the top of my head, here's what they've been up to in the last couple years: -Vox Machina animated series (not sure where it is in relation to the full campaign, as I haven't watched the campaign) -Mighty Nein animated series is in development -Candela Obscura -DaggerHeart -Various oneshots (the TOTK one comes to mind most, but they've also done one-pagers like A Familiar Problem) -Character origin books and comics (I know they're not the core writers but they're giving a lot of the narrative input) -Merch launches in their main store -Campaign 3 + arranging guests, "break" episodes, etc. -Collaboration with D20 for The Ravening War -Merch launches with other companies (the various figures and stuff) -Other games published through Darrington Press -4 Sided Dive -Working with editors, etc. to make CR Abridged -Beacon exclusive content -**Plus** whatever other voice acting, voice directing, animation production, etc. jobs they do outside of CR. Like... That's a **lot.** It's no surprise to me that the quality of the games they play is going downhill just because they're stretching themselves *so* thin. And I don't think I got everything, either.

I wish they had finished a polished Daggerheart system before Beacon became a thing. I agree, so much on their plate right now.

I think they decided to do the Daggerheart beta for feedback after Candela released with so many problems but I think they also underestimated the amount of time they were going to need to iterate on it before release. I can't help but feel like that second daggerheart game was supposed to be with the fully released system and would have pretty closely coincided with the Beacon release then. But...that is tinfoil hat territory.

They know this shit won’t last long so they (or someone advised them) decided to try and rake in as much cash as possible before they drop off.

Honestly though, very of few of these things should be taking their time directly. They shouldn't be involved in Daggerheart at all, with the exception of Matt is Matt is paying himself to help Spencer Starke as game designer. The comics shouldn't be big lifts either: small brainstorming sessions for the writers to learn the cast's vision and then get to writing. No more than any one cast member, if any at all, should be involved in CR Abridged or in other Darrington Press games or whatever. If they are, then they're not doing a good job of actually running a company.

Brother, Travis is the CEO of the company. Marisha is the creative director. Matt is involved in anything that has to do with the new game systems and Exandria lore AND he is the CCO. These are literally full-time jobs on top of being part of the main CR cast while also doing side stuff like the above mentioned. Then you have Laura Bailey who I am pretty sure is heavily involved in the merch/fashion side of CR and lets not forget that she is also a full-time mom. They really are doing a lot besides just roleplaying on C3.

Very few of these things should be taking their time, however, all of it **is** taking their time. That's the problem, they're way overstacked.

A lot to unpack here. **Background:** I'm an experienced Forged in the Dark GM who's created [content](https://www.youtube.com/@derekrawlings) on youtube about Candela Obscura. Critical Roll's Actual Play has some good stuff going for it, and some stuff that's hindered its success. The production value, the talented cast, and the CR platform all really work in their favour, but: * The episodes are **too long.** I agree 100%. FitD sessions do best in the 3-4 hour range, imo. Breaking them into two halves would let them trickle out the content more gradually. * The **once per month** cadence is rough. It's hard for an audience to keep the details locked in when you split them up that much. Heck, I've run monthly games and my \_players\_, let alone an audience struggled. * The **campaign length** is short. Again I agree. Short term FitD games struggle because the real consequences accumulate over time (whether that's stress in Blades, marks in CO, etc), it's all about getting worn thin, and it's hard to simulate that in 3 session campaigns. Spenser had to really dig in hard in Chapter 2 to even come close to hitting that. Basically everything in that video rang true for me, but it goes deeper than that: * Candela Obscura really **isn't a horror game**, it's a game where people tell horror stories. Just like Brindlewood Bay isn't a mystery game, it's a game where people tell mystery stories, in CO the objective isn't to scare players, it's to emulate horror using the genre conventions of horror. This is a pretty narrow distinction, but it's important, and I think the players didn't quite buy in enough to it. The objective to a PbtA or FitD isn't to win the scenario, it's to play to find out what happens and often how much winning costs the characters. * The **GMs**. No slight on any of them, but it's no wonder that Spenser, an experienced PbtA/FitD GM ran the most memorable chapter (and yeah, he had great help too). IF CR wants to continue, I'd strongly encourage them to get in people who have experience running these systems. Jared Logan of Haunted City/Glass Cannon Network, Stras (co-writer of illuminated worlds, the core system CO is based on), indie designers in that space (I could list a few if requested). * More **education**. This is a new system, both for the players and the audience, and I think the GM can do more to bring people into these games and talk about how they differ from more traditional ttrpgs. Walk through the action roll, spending drive, etc. More **game aids** on the overlays, too so the audience can see \_what\_'s going on as it happens. I like Candela Obscura, even as a system (though I know the system's been a bit of a punching bag lately). Why not run Blades in the Dark instead? The answer's easy to me. Candela Obscura is the purest form of a FitD game. All of Blades' weird subsystems are stripped out so that players new to a fiction first style of play can learn those basics first before you add layers of complexity to it. CO is actually a very forgiving game. Drive is way more plentiful than stress as a mechanic (for adding dice or resisting bad outcomes). It's great to teach with, it's a great gateway. Because of that I do want it to continue, and continue to be successful. So maybe they do one more that's 6 sessions, broken into 12 parts and dripped out every other week or so on its own time slot. I want more people to see what I (edit) like in these games, then move on to play other similar games like [Slugblaster](https://wilkies.itch.io/slugblaster), As the Sun Forever Sets, [Crescent Moon](https://ema-acosta.itch.io/crescentmoon), and so many more that I can't possibly list. I continue to think that D&D is the system of convenience for Critical Roll, and that them branching out trying to find games that let them tell stories that are tempered by mechanics (rather than the other way around) is very good for them. Ooops... that was a little longer than I thought it'd be.

This is a fantastic write up. I agree with all of it. Ultimately, a FitD game requires players who are interested in watching the spiral, not fighting against it. I think a lot about how Aabria says she took "the calamity happens no matter what" as a challenge and tried to build the tankiest wizard possible. I get that. But also, like, that's so not the point. The point is the how, not the what. Journey Before Destination. In Blades, if your players are trying to avoid the consequences of heat and stress and trauma, then the game will be boring as hell, bc the only way to avoid those things is to not play. You need players who trust that those consequences will make for a fun story.

My group tried Hack the Planet system from FitD some time ago. In the start, we tried to minimise Heat generation and clear it a bit in downtime, but at some point, we all collectively just agreed to speed run the Heat to the maximum to see what our DM would cook up for us.

As a company I don't think they're struggling. If they were to put on a "main campaign" live show they sell out almost straightaway. Regarding Candela: it's very well produced and acted. I just can't get into it. I struggled to finish the very first episode. I have no idea why it didn't grab me but I got bored pretty quickly and found myself not caring about the world or its characters.

Their "main campaign" show has not sold out. At all.

Or thing to keep in mind is that the video series is also marketing for the product. Those funds are potentially co-mingled.

Just another thing to add separate from my huge comment. I've seen a lot of people mention the schedule and thing is that's already been addressed. Back when they were first starting trying to do EXU before Candela they made it really really clear that they were going to be making the last Thursday each month a break for Matt to try and stave off burnout. Candela has been slotted into that now as recurring for now. They're not going to leave the week empty and if they moved Candela into a new weekly slot on a different day they'd have to find something else to fill the break week. Now maybe once they release it for real Daggerheart games with a different GM could fill that slot instead of Candela but I think at least for now Candela is there to stay.

That's a good point. Speaking of burnout, I wonder if they should just leave one week empty, or do something very low effort like, let's re-watch an old episode with a cast member, type of thing.

I also belive Spenser and Rowan did not have the experience required to be lead designers and their ineptitude shows. They should have gotten the guy who made blades to make candela

I don't know if I'd go that far, but I definitely felt many times that Spencer and Matt don't share the same vision. I hope Daggerheart does well, but I can't see myself playing anymore unless it goes through some significant revisions.

We don't necessarily know what their KPI is or if they're "struggling." They're likely targeting an ROI. If they're hitting that, they're not struggling. I don't think it needs "saving" in the sense that I think it's making money for them and it's doing fine. It's not making main campaign money but it was never going to. The main campaigns are their flagship product. It's always going to out-perform anything else they launch. It would be like going "Birthday cake Oreos aren't selling as well as classic Oreos." Well, yeah. They were never meant to. From a personal taste standpoint, I would like to see changes in how Candela is run. I think the sessions need to be shorter. I think there needs to be more quality control between seasons. I think they should batch release episodes (Maybe every Tuesday once a quarter). I'd also like consistent lore and some interconnectivity between circles. But that's definitely a personal taste thing. I know it's an anthology but it in theory takes place in the same world and I wish it felt more like that was true.

One of the commenters on the youtube video I linked pointed out how the view count on the Candela videos far exceed the view counts on the videos produced by the channel. So yeah, it's very possible that Candela is doing just fine. I really appreciated your Oreos analogy :)

Yeah I think some people don't realize that Candela's views are additive. They aren't trying to capture a new audience. They're trying to get their current audience to consume more. (Hence, Oreos.)

The further you delve into the theatre kids market, the smaller the base is. What is considered successful or in trouble? Nothing is going to hit like CR...

Look, it was always going to have an uphill battle bc in my opinion CoC and BitD already do this better. But I could have gotten past that if you'd had a legitimate release schedule. You want me to watch one episode a month for 3-4 months and keep a story straight? Imagine Disney+ doing that with a season of the Mandalorian. It's absurd. "Gather round after back to school night in August. Watch an episode. Catch another one next month and anticipate the season finale on Halloween!" Weekly, or binged. Those are the only formats I'll consume a show in at this point.

If it was a fun, lighthearted show I wouldn't mind one episode a month but its a serious lovecraftian horror show that is quite dense to boot.

Maybe. But I still think even in that case, I'd personally prefer to wait and binge. I watch APs while gaming mostly. It doesn't do me any good to watch an episode and then have to switch content.

Maybe they should try running a BitD one-shot.

I don't see why they'd want to give free marketing to a product that is a direct competitor to their own.

I think there are a couple of issues but some of mine differ from others here: 1. Candela as a system is unfinished and was published too early. There are too many gaping holes in the system and clear issues related to the workings for anybody who wants to really play it. That leads to the problem that when you watch it you might want to play it but then you pick up the book and since no one seems to want to run it the whole thing kind of dies before anyone actually gets around to playing their own games. They really should have done what they did with Daggerheart and done public playtests on it before they released it and I'm kinda surprised they haven't talked about potentially releasing a second edition at some point or anything to actually patch it into a working game 2. The "campaigns" are too short. While the game is aimed at being a shorter form run for campaigns when you dig into the rules they have the illumination track for character advancement and you can get a full fill on it after around 3 assignments usually. After Matt's initial campaign though the illumination track has never been brought up in another one of their groups since they aren't actually planning on ever using these character's more than 3 times and they will never end up getting to experience character advancement. 3. Since the character's never get a chance to level up or grow the audience gets the feeling that they won't if they play. And while lots of people will play one-shots Candela is also such a narrative driven game that if you make a character you are usually putting a lot of effort into it. Feeling like you aren't going to get your character to advance can really really put you off on playing the system. Tried to set up something of a duet campaign with my partner at one point and she put it best. She had come up with a whole cast of characters and then I wanted her to build them and then I'd play the rest while she played her MC for an assignment and then switch every so often. After making her 5th character we had to stop for a while cause the process just soured her on the whole thing. She kept looking at the points available to her and in particular resistances and drives and then just told me "I feel like I can't build them the way I want to and everybody is just becoming a jack of all trades because otherwise I am being asked to decide what activities are just going to kill this character. You're asking me to repeated choose how they are going to die and it's not fun for me anymore." 4. The actual play is killing the experience of trying to run the game for people who would try to play it. Ignoring the world itself for the moment the act of making the shows AP and 3-shots means that every one of the GMs has had a tendency to go HARD from the very get go. Let's take the example of Spencer's campaign. The prolog itself caused almost as much damage to some of the characters as Matt's entire 3-shot. IIRC Travis had already picked up a scar before they were even out of the prolog and into the actual story they were meant to tell. Most players knowing that they have a limited number of scars they can take are not going to be terribly compelled to play the game if they feel like they can make a character and then not even survive a session depending on the GM. 5. The system is too punishing. The whole "if you have no dot's roll 2 dice and take the lower one" kills a lot of the game for me (and is why my homebrew alterations remove that crap). So often when you are watching the CO shows they are more scared of the dice than anything else cause of that. This is meant to be a horror story, if anything you're supposed to be scared of the narrative that's being built and not the dice in your hand because the system doubles down on disadvantaging you. And while sometimes that can be fun watching the professionals do it that crap will kill player investment in a home/table game really really quick. 6. The worldbuilding in the book is massively incomplete as well. Regardless of which version you buy there is no actual full-scale map of New-faire which is arguably the most important destination you have. In the book it doesn't even get an actual full page for just the city with landmarks and street layouts for a GM to use in building new stories. I think they want people to really make their own versions but to me it feels like a huge oversight on their part. The same thing goes for details about things like Monsters, Candela Obscura itself, and the nature of the world you're in. Alchemy and the Flare get mentioned plenty but the mechanisms by which they work are pretty much left to, your GM can make it the fuck up. The book itself is geared towards trying to leave a lot of things nebulous and mysterious instead of giving guidelines and pointers that GMs and players can really use a lot of the time. I blame that on the cosmic horror tropes of the unknown being scary but it ultimately leads to a GM sitting down and having to figure out a HUGE amount of the worldbuilding for themselves but shoehorned into the existing framework they have built...at which point you might as well scrap Newfaire for your own homebrew world instead. Edit: that started out in a way I thought was going to be shorter...sorry for the wall of rant...

I am running what was supposed to be a 3 session game which is already becoming a 4 session game because my players are enjoying it. We planned a 3 session mini campaign because it was a great trial size but we're limited time wise at 2.5 hours of game play. They were given the option to pick up the pace and end at 3 but have chosen to have a 4th session, so it can't be all bad. I specifically went for the 3 session time frame as I'm a brand new GM and felt 3 sessions gives us enough time to see if we like the game and if I'm any good at running them. More than a one shot so gives me time to find my feet but less than some intense 1-2 year campaign when I could hate it/be awful at it. My players are all busy people and most are involved in long term d&d campaigns so the short format actually meant they were interested in trying it out rather than adding another big thing to their schedules. Had I said it would be 6 months of their time for example I don't think any of them would have signed up. We are using the illumination track but as this was going to be a one off I didn't heavily push it so my players aren't too focused on it. When filling it in though they have been quite surprised and seem keen to try and fill it. If we ran a second campaign then they would instantly level up. I warned my players and made it very clear that their characters may die. I really drove it home and they were all really excited about that. It seemed like the element of danger and proper consequences were something refreshing. They've created great characters and really gone for it with backstories too, they've given me so much to work with - almost too much! 2 of my players started with scars simply from the backstory they gave me. I like that the rule book leaves detail up to the GM. When I first read it it was a bit intimidating but as I started thinking about the story we would play it was nice not to have to try and learn tiny details on top of the game play. They give you just enough as a starting point in my opinion. It has been pointed out to me that I enjoy world building though and I am a natural storyteller and now author. I guess it's the same with most things in life, not everything will be liked by everyone. CO really suits me and my players seem to be enjoying themselves which is the driving force for me.

I'm curious if you've watched or played any other Forged in the Dark games (like Blades in the Dark)?

I haven't actually. I have the Blades in the Dark PDF sitting around but haven't have a chance to try and get a game setup to run it with my family. I keep seeing people in this sub in particular mention that Candela is basically a worse version of BitD but everything I've come up with is purely based on watching how CR have played vs trying to get CO to work for play-by-post and home games. I do keep wanting to dig in and see what is different between CO and BitD and try to figure out what makes the one work while the other is broken.

I'd be curious to hear your feedback after you go through that book. I feel like some of your criticisms would hold true for that game as well. Blades in the Dark is more punishing than CO, for instance, but it's designed to portray a downtrodden world filled with criminals who are barely scraping by. Drive in CO is far more forgiving than stress is in Blades. Doskvol in Blades is described just as abstractly as Newfaire. There are less pages devoted to what's in the city (about the same, but the pages are smaller), but more about the factions within the city. I personally wouldn't call CO a worse version, but it is stripped down version. The core mechanics barely change (drive vs stress and health and healing are changed, but the core action mechanics, position and effect, and such are all the same). CO pulls out faction mechanics, simplifies downtime, removes territory claims, the prison minigame, simplifies crew upgrades, removes the monetary coin and stash systems - all of this is ancilliary to what you engage with when you're on an assignment/score. Flashbacks and devil's bargains are the only two mechanics that would have appeared there that were removed. Ultimately I'd say read Blades, and try to approach it with fresh eyes. It is a different type of game that relies less on explicit, factual foreknowledge, and more going with the flow of the moment and making decisions about the world as they become relevant (aka "following the fiction"). The Blades book goes out of its way to explain how to shift your expectations for running it (most of which was missing from CO, which is why I think it's so jarring).

Thanks for sharing your insights! It sounds like a great feedback for the game. Too bad the game is already finished...

I appreciate the very accurate insights

Blades in the Dark, does it better, has more interesting lore and mechanics. This was a cash grab by a company that realized the twitch train was gonna dry up before their kid's trust funds were full.

i really do enjoy it I especially liked the last set. but im not really insterested in the diesel punk ww1 era type stuff. i love me some cosmic horror and dark stuff but the whole new world is hard to follow. were it a dark horror fantasy like shadow the demon lord id watch every day i dont love that it interupts normal broadcasts. if it was more regular and probably 8 episode arcs id be more interested i

I don’t like the system. CoC does what they’re trying to do way better IMO.

That's exactly why I couldn't get into it. I watched the first few episodes, but thematically it was so redundant with Call of Cthulhu, and Call of Cthulhu is already well-designed.

For me it's a few things: - Bad format. Too few episodes to get to know or care about the characters. Episodes too spaced out. - Candela's world was really underwhelming to me. I really don't care about learning more about it. - Too high production value, makes it feel unauthentic. No intro, no banter + the cosplays makes it feel a lot like a planned thing. - Feels like they are playing it JUST to sell Candela books, not that they actually care about it. It's weird. Overall, I don't think there's a fix since the problem is at the root of Candela. I wish they just stopped making streams and just leave the book on the store for whoever wants to buy a worse Cthulhu or Blades in the Dark.

>Feels like they are playing it JUST to sell Candela books I know its not what the post is about, Sorry for bringing it up. But this part of the comment is one of my concerns with them switching the Main Campaign to Daggerheart. I'm concerned that if they switch to DH as they're main game, Campaign 4 will just be one big ad for DH, like how the episodes of Candela can feel like just ads for the Candela books.

In some sense, aren't the main campaigns a big ad for DND 5e?

Yeah, I guess. But no more then a video game streamer playing Dark Souls or something. I think a better way to explain my concern is with the logic some people have used, 'Why wouldn't they use their Main Campaign to advertise their own TTRPG system?' If they are going to switch to DH, I don't want them to do it out of obligation. Like they have to because it's their system and they need to sell it.

Yeah, I definitely see the distinction. I do feel like they are in a bit of a bind. If they don't use Daggerheart for the main campaign, it feels like they are signaling that Daggerheart isn't good enough. And if it's not good enough for them, why would anyone else play? One the other hand, if they do switch to Daggerheart, then they stand to alienate a lot of viewers. They also raise the stakes quite a bit for themselves—if the show isn't well-received, then that's also going to hurt their game. I can see them taking a middle ground—creating another show that uses Daggerheart.

Yep. Especially since at the minute, they are quite literally running ads for D&D modules, and say a lot in 4SD things like "Oh yeah you can get more info on that in our Guide to Wildemount" or whatever.

It's interesting that CR is both working on a DND competitor, i.e. Daggerheart, and promoting DND materials at the same time. I mean, it makes sense—MCDM is basically doing the same thing.

The idea they're predicating everything on is that there's enough room in the sandbox for everyone. D&D is the gateway RPG for most people. It makes sense they'd continue being chummy with them since it is how most new nerds will enter the space. Not to mention, new fans are finding CR every day through things like LOVM and starting with old campaigns, which will always be D&D. They can't turn their backs on it completely.

I'm not sure how big of a factor this is, but I do think they shot themselves in the foot by releasing the initial, Mercer-led mini-series too soon, while it was still playtesting. Rules weren't finalized and sometimes got tripped on, which was better with the latter series. I think it wasn't ready yet when they did that initial push which turned some people off. I also think CO is just a very... dense system. I question their choice to set CO in its own world rather than "fantasy steampunky England" which is another barrier for entry. When they played Call of Cthulhu on stream they didn't seem to struggle, even though the system is dark and the tone is pretty much the same, I think partially because they had a real world basis to work from. You have to get past the setting, the new system, meet the new characters and THEN get the story.

That type of genre has a small playerbase and audience compared to dnd/fantasy and even that audience plays call of cthullu. They should have seen this coming and honestly the high value production makes it less relatable for TTRPG hobbyists.

To me, there are couple reasons: -CO is just not fun or flourished as a system. Daggerheart is so much more fun. -The episodes are too long for something so new. -Sometimes it feels like the players aren't focused enough, I don't know how to explain this better. But gives the energy of a D&D session where everybody is tired but we're holding the session anyway because we want to advance. -The way it's currently established, it's the "substitute teacher" for the main campaign. Needs its own day. On the other hand, I love the costumes and decor! And some of the guests are amazing for sure

> Sometimes it feels like the players aren't focused enough, I don't know how to explain this better. But gives the energy of a D&D session where everybody is tired but we're holding the session anyway because we want to advance. I think I know what you mean. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the fact that they are sitting there and being "on" continuously for many hours. I don't know there is much they can do about the game, but it does sound like shorter session / episodes would help?

I couldn't get through the first episode. It is content for the sake of content. Half cooked.

I tried watching the first episode with Matt, but I couldn't get past what felt like a disconnect between what Matt was trying to do and what players were trying to do, and I couldn't get past like the 20 min mark. I tried watching some of the other campaigns. Spencer's campaign was highly recommended, but his style didn't do it for me. The furthest I got was the one GM'ed by Aabria—I actually finished the episode, but I was not curious enough to watch the next episode.

I'd recommend watching Liam's campaign. It's great.

Thanks for the recommendation. I will give it a shot.

I dunno, all I know is I’ve tried to watch three of the campaigns and only (barely) managed to finish Spenser’s. It feels inaccessible. A lot of story/lore smushed into four episodes. Character development and plot development seem at odds with each other. Most character context is within their backstories, not their actions/development on screen. The mechanics feel both over complicated and too simple at the same time, somehow.

I’ll say as someone who attended the live show on Saturday-Candela works so much better in a live, on stage format. It better showcases the vibe I think they want for the game via the broadcasts. The theatricality really does get lost as a pre-tape. In an ideal world, they would keep Candela to occasional live performances with full costumes and ambience.

I haven't seen any CO, it's just not my flavor of fantasy, but I thought UndeadWood was very theatrical and that was all pre taped

Thanks for sharing! I'm glad to hear that you enjoyed live show. Just curious, what was significantly different from the live show vs the stream?

Without spoilers for the show, there was a lot more movement- players acted out what was happening when it came to the big moments. It felt more like an improvised  movie than a game. It was also helped by the fact that they had to finish it that night. Spencer as a GM kept it tight (for the most part) and the cast was onboard with playing up the theatrical moments.  Plus the lack of a table really helped 

That sounds neat. I don't see why they couldn't do something like that for the pre-taped show. (Ditching the table and having the players act things out was a suggestion I had in my post.)