About the "But there are Dragons" fallacy. We as humans have a deep understanding of how people operate. A world without hate, without malice, and without conflict is a world that does not contain people. It's easier to believe in dragons than in a world free of conflict because we don't see monsters every day, but we do see people every day. We understand human nature implicitly. Human nature is imperfect and filled with nasty things like emotions and biases. If you're going to fundamentally change the way people work in your fantasy setting, you're going to have to do a *lot* of heavy lifting to explain why that is, because in fiction, the rule is "Things work like they do in the real world, unless shown otherwise." Most writers don't feel they are up for the challenge of rewriting basic human nature, and those that do will inevitably fail, since they themselves are bound by human nature. If Candela Obscura feels schizophrenic, this is why. It wants to rewrite human nature in order to create a world that doesn't have any of the icky things they dislike, while at the same time, trying to build a game around one of the most fundamental human emotions, fear. The two simply aren't going to jell.
Writers like Charles Stross in "Accelerando" have written worlds where lots of humanity are post-human, no longer physical, don't rely on scarce resources or live in homes with rooms separated by wormhole junctions spanning intersolar distances. Or worlds where humans are gone and androids still venerate and look up to the human past. And to some extent, still have some of those human behaviours. Or my biased personal favourite where early 2000s Doctor Who spun off an arc called Faction Paradox which spun off an arc called The City Of The Saved, a pocket universe with a galaxy sized city containing a non-biological reconstruction of every even vaguely human and every Time War history-changed version of a human that ever existed. And remakes of fictional characters as well. And the world is meant to be the arena for a character study, so they all behave like humans. For Candela Obscura or Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, it's one thing. But defenders of reboots of shows that commit the "But There Are Dragons" fallacy fail to realise the obvious counter - "because the source world was written with dragons AND a society and technology that so far only has differing groups of mono-cultural humans. You moron".
@@AtlasUnplugged I mean...it kinda fucking IS lazy. Evil Orcs are great, we've fought against them in two campaigns I play in but there were also non-evil Orcs. "Why are these Orcs evil?" "Just because..." "oh..ok..." vs "Why are these Orcs evil?" "they're not all evil but these ones are complete bastards because of X reason" "OH, yeah, fuck those guys!"
Good take. Another way to make your point (which does not diminish your point): hubris on the part of the Candela Obscura (CO) authors. It seems to me that the authors attempted to create, not a game, but rather a simulation of the authors' real-life ethics. In mechanical terms it is a massive reduction of player agency. In ethical terms it is the author's way of saying that their beliefs are so inescapably true that they are mandatory, not only in reality but also in your imagination. This tendency to refuse to allow competing ethics into imaginary worlds afflicts other IP's as well. This is why we can't have nice things since about 2015.
Castle Falkhenstein was a game set in a steampunk world that included mechanical computing, clockwork/steamwork prosthetics, and a somewhat cyberpunk vibe. Not surprising, as it was another Mike Pondsmith product, really. In one of the supplementary books that included ways to expand the setting, there was a section discussing drawing fantasy elements into the setting that went on for a couple of paragraphs before dismissing the idea of elves with steampunk cyberwear as just being stupid as well as saying that magic and the kind of techno-improvisation of the setting were fundamentally incompatible.
@@carlflaherty2215 Oh yes. Pondsmith, the writer of the Cyberpunk series of games that Cyberpunk 2077 is adapted from, was using that bit in Castle Falkhenstein to make fun of Shadowrun. At the time, Shadowrun was actually the more popular of the two systems. I am still a little surprised that Cyberpunk made the jump to television first.
I fear that daggerheart will be of similar quality when regarding the quality of rules and world building. Candela obscura sets a dangerous precedent of what is to come next from critical role. I feel they are much too afraid to offend anyone than make a decent product.
And that's bizarre to me given how much I love the Wildemount setting book! It's my favorite D&D setting, to the point I'm using it as my current 4e setting even though the book's designed for 5e.
I fear you're correct. But the Daggerheart ruleset -- what we know so far, with "hope" and "fear" -- already struck me as potentially overburdensome on GM's ability to improvise. It made me think it is a system designed for professional and/or very experienced GMs in mind. If every roll of 2d12 in the game carries a "with hope" or "with fear" narrative consequence, that's a HUGE burden on GMs to come up with that stuff on the fly when rolls are made. In DnD, it can already be challenging to come up with interesting negative consequences on a failure (other than "you fail"). To come up with "failing with hope," "failing with fear," "succeeding with hope," and "succeeding with fear" -- 4 possible outcomes from each roll -- UGH...no thank you.
When you have blind devotion from your customers (Critters), you get products like this. They copied other systems and offered no improvement. Waste of time.
I do think there's a place for games without much nastiness; like there's a place for cozy indie videogames. Like, AFAIK, people in war-torn countries, military barracks, prisons - they prefer playing Call of Cthulhu or DnD just to kill evil monsters, get cool stuff, and seduce princesses, not delve into political differences or somesuch that hits too close to home. (Or they give orcs russian accents and rofl-stomp them with extreme prejudice, for simple catharsis.) It's about knowing your players and communicating about the type of game you're playing, just like any other touchy subject. That said. You cannot have horror that doesn't make you feel things, you cannot have drama without conflict, and you cannot have conflict without things that characters find unacceptable and want to change. Two points to be made here: 1) there's a line where a setting without much conflict becomes shallow and artificial; 2) pick a game with conflicts that you want to deal with. Vaesen is a great example, actually: it has progress vs old ways, Christianity vs paganism, locals vs outsiders, order vs superstition... A lot of potential, without being toothless.
I would personally suggest if people want a cozy indie TTRPG Ryuutama is a great example of that. It's more around the journey and world building than fighting and killing monsters (it does still have that since its sort of a 'wholesome Japanese RPG adventure' in the vein of the first Dragon Quest games). The DM is also a 'player' in the world, there to help and guide with their own mechanics. All in all it's a cozy little adventure romp that actually has decent rules (which is more than can be said about a lot of indie TTRPGs).
This is the problem that seems to be in a lot of entertainment now. It's tiresome when people seem to want to project 'modern' ethics and 'current day' into something where it doesn't fit.
The problem with PbtA and adjacent systems like this one is NOT the fact it's hard to die or bonus points can be moved around from player to player making dice rolls even more insignificant -- It's that the game doesn't emulate or simulate the genre , setting, background or feel of the thing thru it's mechanics. In Steve Jackson's TOON RPG you cannot die either and the healing of PC's characters are considered OP but thats because its EMULATING or simulating the World of cartoons and so the mechanics try to support this. Plus --- this Alternative Social Utopia nice nice world is politically correct and not REAL.
It sounds like we've reached a state in RPGs equivalent to the streaming services' hollow and inoffensive content based on the popularity of similar, though high profit, products.
My interest in this game cratered when I heard it was essentially born out of the view that Lovecraft and his rich Cthulhu mythos is "problematic." It also didn't have a particularly long gestation period. It screams "rush job." I find it interesting that the same chap who designed this is also responsible for CR's other project, Daggerheart. I'm not particularly excited about that game either. I don't know what he's done before this but I've certainly never heard of him before and I'm just puzzled as to why you would hand such high profile projects to a relative newb. What is your most anticipated upcoming ruleset? Are you optimistic about MCDM?
I think he did Band of Blades, an alright take on the FitD ideas. CO, however, is his new system (though heavily inspired by FitD), and he apparently failed to grasp what makes those other games work. Kind of like a ton of "souls-like" videogames, few of which actually get it and are worth a look. Edit: Yep. "Lovecraft/Rowling are problematic, but we still want to make money off their work". As the saying around here goes, either take off the cross or put the pants back on.
@@user-jt1js5mr3f , true. Though he did turn his xenophobia into fuel for creativity, and he did start to change by the end of his life. What I mean is very subjective stuff, hard to articulate. There's got to be balance, where you use his ideas without shouting "WE'RE SORRY (money, please)" on every page, and without coming off as a hypocrite. Chaosium and others have been doing it for years, can't be that hard.
@@ЄвгенКорякін certainly, and when we play Call of Cthulu we agreed at session 0 to avoid role playing as problematic people. Candela works well for the show, I think, but it’s certainly Cthulu-lite. Unfortunate to hear that the stakes aren’t truly that high, as that’s the high point of fear in Cthulu
MCDM will turn out to be an overrated hack. As soon as people play an RPG where every attack always hits in combat it will destroy verisimilitude and a lot of people will stop playing it.
This is very common in the story games arena because they are typically made to run one type of tightly-defined story and they are marketed as Twitterati indulgences - all fad, no substance.
@@juddgoswick2024 I mean I could say the same about literally every other fucking OSR clone that gets shatout by some alt-right boomer shithead. "Oh look, it's D&D B/X...again...now with a slightly different coat of paint". Both the "Narrative focused Rules Lite Whimsical bullshit" design and the "OSR clone that does fuck all new and has no substance beyond a coat of pain" piss me off to no end. So yeah, fuck both of those design ideas.
@@juddgoswick2024 You just nailed it. These kind of products (and not just in RPGs) are made for the "hipster tourist" twitter set who can say to their fellow tourists "look I'm into the latest progressive thing" and show it in the background of a few RUclips videos and keep their sense of unearned superiority.
On rpgdrivethru most if not all negative comments/reviews have been removed for this. I’m assuming the fans have gone into overdrive protecting it and critcal role
10:40 In terms of setting, there is no setting! Honestly, the adversion to conflicts and stakes is galling at this point 17:36 Need to coin a phrase for systems like this. Like eunuch games or something.
In this instance you could call it self flagellating, auto castrating, pillow fisted, sterily isolated, conflict averse, and many other adjectives that have been used. I just call it a disappointment.
@@UltraTtrpger There's 'creating your own stories with help from the book' and there's 'the book gives me virtually nothing so I'm doing ALL the work'. For example see the recent 5e Spelljammer book which gave you literally barebones descriptions of things and was pretty much derided as '2 books of madlibs and 1 book filled with a kind crap adventure'. I'm sorry I'm paying for a *premium* product, I want shit in the book, I want a wealth of monster statblocks, location guides, world building tips for campaigns set in universe or similar. Here's the thing, imagination is fucking FREE but it does cost TIME, these sorts of books are meant to reduce the time cost to help faciliate the Imagination....but when you're left doing all the fucking work...that's a lot of time being eaten up...
@UltraTtrpger stories, sure. I homebrew my own settings and created some homebrew rules and monsters for various games. That being said, I do expect the games to lay out a framework for combat and monsters, etc. As I mentioned, I have only looked at a friend's copy, and when I mentioned it seemed incomplete and asked if there was a book he was missing, he agreed it seemed rushed which is a shame. They wasted time on space lecturing when it would have been better spent fleshing out their own rule set.
@@TobiasPatrick The release printed copy actually IS missing a rule...Indestructoboy bought this up, there was no rule for what happened if you got 4 scars...which is when your character actually dies. This was erratta'd into the PDF version but the print versions had already gone out.
I think the arrogance and audacity of trying to tell the players that this isn't allowed, and they shouldn't do this and that doesn't exist in the world, even though it makes no sense is unmatched and we have had a lot of that in recent years coming from writers in all possible media, video games, journalism, tv and film writing, comicbooks etc.. but to go and do that in an RPG? That is just absolutely outrageous. And that isn't even going into how the few episodes we have already showed how incredibly lacking and flawed the game's systems are.
Having watched the first "Circle" months ago on CR, I was impressed with the production value of the show, but wasn't a fan of the world setting. The actors played their parts well but I didn't see the show as an example of true actual-play -- it was an overhyped theatre production with the bare bones of a TTRPG added to the mix. Still, I thought I MIGHT check the game out when the final rules were printed even though after the first "campaign" I quickly lost interest in watching any more shows. Thankfully, I viewed a couple of reviews of the game including yours and am grateful that I did. The lack of rules regarding action limits what players can do, and it's clear the game has a certain moral and social agenda built in. Rather than writing reminders of the problematic nature of real-world issues they should probably stick to building a world with conflict and ways to resolve it and leave it up to players to determine how to play and what stories to tell. In the past, D&D, Vampire the Masquerade, Kult and other game systems have been criticized for printing material that was considered problematic. However, overtly trying to rectify the issues by railroading the terms of play doesn't seem an effective way to handle the problem. You easily swing into a totalitarianism mind-set that leaves little room for egalitarian discussion.
There are tiny OSR/NSR games that are far smaller in book size, have more depth to their worlds and have tons of roll charts for everything you can think of and if you want to use them as well.
For another take on this, look at Indestructoboys review...who says literally the same thing. Now some people may not like Jim and honestly I don't know where he sits on the political spectrum but Indestructoboy is left leaning and even *he* thought it was fucking morally preachy...
What you were saying reminds me of my early criticism of the Star Wars sequels and particularly the New order. They are supposed to be the bad guys but looking at their ranks, there seems to be no racial prejudice, women hold high rank in the military, I’m presuming gays shared similar equal status, I mean Hux certainly seemed to be coded that way. To all intents and purposes they seem to have the society that folks are apparently wanting to see, so in what way exactly are they villains?
I mean...the whole "human supremacist space nazies who committed a little bit of holocausting at the end of the first movie" wasn't enough material to justify them being the villains??? Like the first scene the new order was in had them massacre a village...
@@sudanemamimikiki1527you mean the same thing a lot of the people screeching for those things mentioned above would do if they were in a position of absolute power and the villagers held “PrObLeMaTiC!!!” ideals?
@@sudanemamimikiki1527 I think I understand where the OP comes from. If the bad guys are supposed to be irredeemable then why not let them be villains all the way, and have them be racist, misogynistc assholes too. It just feels **off** when the space nazi supremacists seem to be equal opportunity employers. It's like a narrative record scratch moment, you know?
@@tuomasronnberg5244 I mean Stalinist Russia was a fucking evil empire unto itself and it was ALSO equal opportunity at least gender wise...you have have equal opportunity and still be evil, though in that case it's more 'if you don't align with the ideals of/fail to please Stalin you get shipped off to the Siberian hellscape to be worked to death in a work camp after he has all the rest of your family shot'. You don't have to be racists or misogynistic....you just have to be a power mad asshole who will do anything to cling to power. THAT is what the New Order represents, they're equal opportunity evil willing to wipe out entire planets because they would rather not come under the rule of some mouldy old guy in a bathrobe trying to relive the glory days of the fucking Empire with him as the leader...
Seems like they were targetting new players that never played a TTRPG before. Their weak attempt to prove they stand with the rpg community while the OGL scaldal was ablaze and the whole time they were the prime objective of the whole situation. They just sat quiet & created this, Scamdella... sux ballz.
The PbtA games are my personal favorites. Not all of them are good, but the ones that are? Amazing. On the other hand, I've never been that interested in DnD. Too restrictive. I don't really have any interest in Candela Obscura though. So I'll take your word on how this turned out lol.
As someone interested in game design, I bought it to see if they had any interesting mechanics I might use in my own designs. I’m quite sure I will never play it.
Nothing can withstand successive bad products or bad starts, this might not hurt them on the first outing, but more than likely this will hurt their follow up releases.
So this game is really not a role playing game but just a system to emulate people Pretending to play a role playing game in front of cameras like those at Critical Role? If dice rolls have little or no real importance and characters can't really die then this " product " stinks.
I agree on the importance of dice rolls meaning something, though I think it unfair to say Critical Role “pretends” to play a role playing game. If anything, they embrace it further than most in this instance because it’s primarily roleplay. That’s just not everyone’s style. The rolls do mean plenty in their primary campaigns.
The product means so little to producing a role playing environment they started recording without the rules finalized, they didn't need the rules to create an "actual play" of their game. This is the biggest cash grab while attempting to create something separate from wotc and the trouble they've had.
I’ve run games, like “Tales from the Loop,” where characters can’t die. It’s doable, but different. It sounds like Candela Obscura has no *stakes* at all and is more a guide for pretending to play on a Twitch stream.
I have to ask where the film clips come from. I recognise Charles Gray, of course, but this is not his Blofeld incarnation, nor, I think, does it come from The Devil Rides Out, though I confess my memory of that is somewhat dim. As for the game under review, it appears to have no particular audience in mind but for some reason your comments make me think that if Suella Braverman were to write a horror RPG - and, quite frankly, what other genre would she write in, intentionally or otherwise? - it might not be too dissimilar to this.
Authorial-level rather than character-inhabiting is a valid form of roleplay, although it is very much a different experience and appeals to different desires.
It's absolutely fine for the world to not be enjoyable to you and the world will be perfectly enjoyable to other. The criticisms of the actual system mechanics is very valid though.
Some of the Blades rules (and no idea why they have removed what they have removed) and the premise of Vaesen, which works better with its own system (YZE).
Eh, its a standard thing. Every game has something. Honestly I see them as a canary in a coal mine. How they are written and their length serves to measure how the book will read/mindset of the creator
As very few people seems to know what RPG is about, that section is required. If it starts by RPG is a Collaborative Storytelling Exercise, I know I can skip it.
I felt the same thing coming from the 5e Vampire the masquerade. A game about being a monster, a leech, a parasite. And the book shyed away from this essence, truly a shame that Candela also have done it.
I agree with this review it’s fantastic and very much have the same opinions when me and some friends did a play through very derivative and we felt like it was holding our hand too much in places
I remember the video of the saying we are making a system for long campaigns and another system for shorts and one shots. I remember Matt saying it would be rad to have a new system then a month later we get the news. I don't see any of it lasting or played much.
It looks like a greedy vanity project to separate "critters" with more of their money whilst promoting their new company Darrington Press and nothing else. Due to their recent political leanings typically I avoid their content, and it seems like this new game of theirs has suffered as a consequence of them trying so hard to tick all those boxes. What a hot mess.
This games leanings seems a recent and appropriate example. Just look at the end product all because they wanted to cater to all the political correctness out there, to such an absurd degree it actually undermined the game they made.@@user-jt1js5mr3f
@@user-jt1js5mr3f"seemingly super liberal sugarbuddy no hurt feelings innoffensive" drek. In other words, not only does it lacks balls, but then in the most lazy way possible, beats you over the head with its message. It comes across as preachy. Its as bad as a Christian Movies.
I leafed through a copy of this game in a game store. Didn't read it enough to get a good feel of my own beyond that it felt "vanilla." After this review and reading through the barebone beta rules of Daggerheart, I think I understand why. I don't even care for this particular genre all that much and I still think this is lame. When I order steak, I expect a steak. I do not want a chef's salad and a snide backhanded apology instead. If I did not want a steak I would have ordered the chicken instead.
Nice overview... I'm looking forward to not ever touching that detritus. Sounds exceedingly twee as well! That's what happens when you try and pander to everything you could possibly pander too. LOOOL.
Every once in a while I find people who seem to read my mind and put my own reasons into words in a way I didn't put a lot of work into making myself, words that make sense and are hard to argue unless you simply disagree with the argument.
Well actually, what I'm hearing from your critique is that you don't like narrative roleplaying. As Candela Obscura tries to be exactly that, it was never going to be a game that you like. And did you really believe for a second, that a brand like Critical Role - successful for its storytelling - would develop games, that concentrate on the rule mechanics? I am not crazy about it either, but the long running success of Vampire shows that there is an interest for narrative roleplaying among gamers. So maybe Candela Obscura will find its fans among the gamers who prefer a rules-light approach and don't want to have a dice chart for every evantuality in the game. You also didn't really explain why it doesn't have any real game mechanics - apart from the commentary that it's not really deadly. This is a total valid opinion but CoC has been rightly criticized for being too deadly and making a longer campaign with the same characters impossible. And the fact that Pulp Cthulhu exists tells me that even the makers of Cthulhu think that horror can be done without the fear of dying in each session. In the end it comes down to design decisions. The same goes for their version of steampunk where everyone is nice to each other. Yes this doesn't mirror the reality of the victorian age. But on the other hand, we totally accept female warriors in fantasy settings although they really weren't a thing in the middle ages. Nobody is forced to use the candela obscura world exactly as described in the rule book. If you want to play it darker nobody is really stopping you.
Vampire is a game, with a narrative focus. It's still primarily a game, and about inhabiting the character immersively, not playing at the meta level and therefore, not really being roleplaying.
Opposing Storytelling and Mechanics miss the point. It’s not about that. You inhabit a Character in an imaginary world (the diegesis). From the point of view of your character there is no story. Conan doesn’t know he’s following a narrative path. He keeps his free will and the diegesis is his reality. In order to embody Conan, you need to ignore it too. It’s suspension of disbelief. That’s immersion. Conan doesn’t rely on rules or mechanics to take actions. When you play, the system doesn’t intervene at the decision making step. You can try to attempt anything. What limits the range of your actions is the diegesis (the physics of the world and your character’s abilities and knowledge). The system intervenes at the resolution step. Like in real life, you can only initiate action but the outcome is uncertain. You will face the consequences of those actions short medium and long term. Character Agency is the DNA of the medium.
@@theeyewizard8288 What a remarkably cogent and pointed critique. I myself was originally confused about the precise edges of the definitions of the ideas involved in Grim's opposition to Narrative games. (I posted a longer example of where I was confused on the discord, which I _think_ was noted as a potential topic for future discussion or a video.) Your explanation answers my question completely, though. Thank you.
@@theeyewizard8288 I really liked your analysis as it goes to the heart of the question. Yes, the inhabitants of the fictional world have no story. They are just living their lifes. But before we decide to play one of those inhabitants we will probably look at the rules of this world to see, what kind of adventures can be experienced here. Und the mechanics of the system plays a big role in this question: Do they try to stay close to the rules of our normal life? Do they focus on testing our survival skills? Or maybe do they focus on enabling epic stories (by probably sacrificing some of the realism)? Or maybe It's just all about making play easy and accessible. In the case of Candela Obscura it seems to me (without having it played yet) that the designers wanted to focus on the conflict between the player characters and the monsters without making it a slaughter house for characters that CoC sometimes can be. If that's sufficiently creepy for a horror game, remains to be seen. But horror comes in many flavours and degrees of gore. And anyway I don't think that the world of Cthulhu will be the main competitor. My bet would be on Vaesen the swedish folk horror game.
From what you and others have described of the game as much it is or is not, in not being offensive to anyone it is offendeding everyone with its lack of substance
Hate the system, but getting the worse of two dice when you have 0 is dice is ingenious and somewhat resembles having to roll two or more times and having to succeed on every roll on extremely difficult tasks in the Glory Road system.
... I know you take on the Archivist role, but you can get a refund on that thing, yeah? Edit: movies and television shows are like this. WOTC did it with their... lordy, I had to look up the Wikipedia page to remember the name of that ludicrous unsupportable infeasible economy world Never At War With EastAsia book, "Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel"... and now the non-majority game publishers are going the same way? Can civilisation stop collapsing now please?
Radiant Citadel at least had conflict. The idea was the whilst the central city hub doesn't have conflict, it's just that, a hub, you travel from there to planes that DO have conflict and that's where all the adventures actually take place, it seems like a lot of people didn't actually fucking *read* Radiant Citadel. Lancer works like this. The main Empire in Lancer is pretty Star Trek, it's a utopia where all needs are met...that doesn't mean there isn't conflict on the outskirts of said Empire or even political maneuvering from within said Empire. Lancer is sort of the Noblebright version of WH40ks Grimdark (though if you go digging there's enough dark parts in there...for example Harrison Armories sells the Ghengis MkII that has flamethrowers on it and is entirely meant for "heavy deforestation"...(here's a hint, that part about deforestation is a complete fucking lie...it's a warcrimes Mech)). Heck just look at Star Trek, the Federation is very much a Utopia...it just so happens that there are places outside of that which aren't...and some worlds which definitely aren't. I mean there's also god knows how many wars in the Star Trek universe as well. So yes, you CAN have a Utopia and have it be interesting...
@@luketfer I see your point, but with respect you're so horrifyingly wrong I'm horrified and you should be too. > Radiant Citadel at least had conflict. The idea was the whilst the central city hub doesn't have conflict Yes but *how likely is that* exactly? > is pretty Star Trek, it's a utopia where all needs are met > look at Star Trek, the Federation is very much a Utopia > it just so happens that there are places outside of that which aren't Bzzt. They introduced a non-replicator-capable currency of liquid latinum wrapped in gold capsules. We never got to see local politics, but there seemed to be an *awful lot* of people who were happy to sign on to ships as colonists. They had power struggles in Starfleet itself. The classic episode where Finney faked his death to get Kirk court-martialled. And that's classic, not TNG where the admiral of the year would do something stupid especially to, say, maintain some conspiracy Riker couldn't live with anymore. Note, by the way, the episodes that showed Starfleet Academy, like the ones with student intake and testing - they were filtering for the best of the best of the best, every officer was supposed to be MIB quality. You think the rest of the planet is like that, you're not even getting into the Academy. And that's before you get to the stupid reboots. Abrams garbage: the guy who played Mickey in "Doctor Who" signed on to Khan's plan to blow up Starfleet headquarters. STDiscovery: utter non-self-consistent trash start to finish. And they somehow destroyed and handwaved away the 29th century Timefleet of Braxton and the 31st century agency of Daniels. Explain how, especially when they could see their own futures. Strange New Worlds is more revisionist garbage feeding out of Discovery. And I will start a quest into Cool World to get a barrel of the deadly Dip if you even hint at that Lower Decks garbage and I would happily dip the whole thing into utter destruction. > So yes, you CAN have a Utopia and have it be interesting... *I* can find it interesting. But then again, I like building games where stuff doesn't get knocked down in the next raid. When I play RPGs, I like the builder and technician characters. My favourite parts of Stross's Accelerando were the utterly post-human world inside the coke-can-computerised starwisp or the foglet-maintained remake-fictional-characters-with-bodies Jupiter colonies after that. I like "The City Of The Saved" because it allows a reason to have a detective agency composed of absolutely nobody but remakes of Sherlock Holmeses and John Watsons; they're born into bodies that can't get sick, can't starve, can't die. And when do you think that's going to get turned into a television show? But this *stupid* society of braindeads here on this barely-compost-worthy Earth can't even accurately transpose Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" to the streaming screen without utterly undoing every single thing that made "Foundation" relevant. They turned the psychohistoric predictions into bollocks "almost magic" explained by a future-seeing psychic. My housemate watched the "Altered Carbon" series and I'd read the books years earlier and damn, but that was gutted and filled with stupidity stuffing. I understand that the average Grim Jim viewer/commenter might be able to enjoy an Utopian society. Just remind yourself that we live on a planet that is nowhere near sufficiently utopian for the average inhabitant to understand and enjoy Utopia. Just remind yourself one more time what the origin and initial meaning of the word "Utopia" really was.
@troffle No. Civilization can not stop collapsing; there's a lot more suffering we have to endure before things start fixing. Utopia works when it's not really Utopia. This is why Deep Space 9 worked.
Your assumption about Apocalypse Worls is incorrect. The characters are very much controlled by the players through the playbooks they choose and the actions they take in the story. Pbta and fitd games work very well in their own way.
@PostmortemVideo it's your assumption because it's not correct as I've already stated. You brOSR guys need to back off and just let people enjoy what they want.
"There are fish-monsters coming! Run!" "Bigot, how dare you use a slur." "Slur? They're not human, they're walking fish-men! We have to get out of here!" "Fish-men? Really? You're assuming they all identify as -AAAAAGHGHGHGH" The only use this game could have is to be played for yuks.
Unfortunately, I tapped out of the review the moment that you stated that, perhaps, the second greatest ttrpg gaming system ever devised, PbtA, behind only Call of Cthulhu, was terrible. Regardless of the merits or Candela Obscura, it's clear that we have such fundamental differences in our approach to gaming that this analysis would likely not provide me with any insight. An absolute antipathy towards Narrative-based roleplaying games is probably something with which you should lead when presenting a review of one. Another small suggestion, if I might: the mechanical clicking of the background music/effects becomes really rather distracting, almost to the point of being enough to induce a headache. I might be alone in that response, but it certainly was another element that made the decision to give up on the video at the 7:00 minute mark easier for me. Please know that I have no affection for Candela, or devotion to Critical Role, as I believe that they have been a detrimental force in the hobby, so please take these stylistic observations regarding presentation in that light, and not as the aggrieved reaction of a fanboy.
I don't have an antipathy to story led gaming, and I don't think PbtA supports that. I don't really think it's an RPG at all. Example of why, here (Apocalypse World specific) postmortemstudios.wordpress.com/2019/12/14/rpg-apocalypse-world-again/
As for PbtA, it's an inexplicable fad, and - in its vanilla form at least - probably _not_ an RPG, and easily one of the worst to ever get any traction.
CR brought in a lot of new blood to the hobby. How can that be a detriment? Only negative thing I can find is the Mercer effect on DM’s where players only think you are a good DM if you are as good as Mercer.
@@PostmortemVideo Nah. It's absolutely an RPG in its greatest and most fundamental form. No other character or narrative has ever compelled me more than those that I've uncovered through PbtA-based systems, specially Avatar. If you're actually interested in roleplay, rather than pointless slogs through bland, repetitive combat as sport a la D&D 5E, PbtA systems afford that in spades.
@@martinjrgensen8234 The people who have been grafted into the hobby are generally those who are attracted to the performative superficiality of Critical Role, which no actual table emulates. Others have been brought in by Stranger Things, as well, and the people themselves oftentimes seem to wish to impose on the hobby, and alter it in order to render it more palatable to them based on faulty expectations. The "Mercer Effect" is merely one symptom of that misalignment between expectations and reality.
Regarding much of what I’ve read and some of what I’ve seen myself on CR, I’m beginning to suspect Matt Mercer may not be a DM at all, but merely a good scriptwriter and showrunner.
Yea I honestly don’t think Matt is that great of a DM. I think he’s a great actor and good writer, and he knows a ton about dnd, but he doesn’t really use the actual game systems to create drama the way that someone like Monty from dungeon dudes does.
For me, it's not necessarily the inclusion of pronouns, it's the inclusion of pronouns *everywhere* AND that non-binary pronouns are so overly-represented that it very clearly lets you know what the principal goal of publishing the book actually was (social activism). They didn't set out to make a great game. They set out to proliferate an ideology using a game system as their vehicle.
I guess opinions are yours to ha e but all these criticism videos seem so linear. U say it removes immersion, but i say thats more down to the gm and Pc ability to actually imagine make and pull off a thrilling narrative. I feel all these criticism vids are so focused on the need for rules which just highlight a lack of inability to fully immerese into the narrative. Is it you have to think to much to create the story? I feel watching critical role on thier performances it is a full roller coaster of all sorts of emotion, deception the corruption of higher powers and i believe is only limited by the gm and players annulus to imagine. And as for the safety nets.... have you seen the world we live in, you don't add that shit therewill be protestors on your door. Any way 4th critic i have seen that just sounds butt hurt. 🤜🏽🤛🏽
We're reviewing a game, not a particular GM or set of players. Some people can paint with their toes, but using your hands is easier. The world being the way it is is all the more reason for escapism.
Too many games are being dumbed down for the Twitch generation, old school gaming which requires you to understand rules and use your brain are things of the past.
@PostmortemVideo this video is... confusing. After taking a look at the game I can say that it is actually mediocre, and that it serves the needs of a particular group who plays scripted games in public, more than those of private customers who want to just play, but all I can understand from your video is that you don't like AW, which is another game, not this one. Also you mostly don't like it for reasons which I find baffling, but it doesn't really matter. I'm not commenting to defend AW system and i will not even say my opinion about it. The point is that this doesn't feel like a review at all, and your personal opinion about AW, lovecraft, barker and what's horror, don't help understand a thing about the game. What I could understand from the video is so vague that it could be interpreted in at least two ways, which is one way too much. No discrimination in an horror game... Ok, so what? Is the theme of the game the meaning of horror in a society with no discrimination? That would be super interesting... But your video doesn't let me understand if that's the case. It just tells me that you liked the Matrix more, which is irrelevant at best. Also the "there are dragons" thing doesn't actually work the way you say. "There are dragons" is something you say to justify plot holes or inconsistencies, not to justify a premise. In this setting "there are dragons" is as true as "having a favoured pronoun is ok". Any judgement on the matter is a purely esthetic one. You can accept it, like it or belittle it with faux psychology. I have an opinion on the matter as well, but again, totally irrelevant for the purpose of this comment. You say it is easier to accept a dragon that a society that has different problems from ours, but that is really just your problem, not a universal truth... Really, came in to know more about a game, came out knowing more about you.. it is poetic and beautiful, but also disappointing.
Are you suggesting that the inclusion of preferred pronouns, safety tools to ensure lines aren’t crossed, and generally telling players not to use roleplay as an excuse to be terrible somehow takes away from the horror?
If that isn't what you meant, you could just say that. But fine, I'll rephrase. What about the inclusions of preferred pronouns, safety tools, and telling players that roleplay isn't more important than the comfort of others at table takes away from the horror/game?
I've NEVER seen a "review" of a game that opens up a paid product and shows every page for the viewer to see, while not discussing anything on the pages shown. This video is not transformative, used the entire work unnecessarily-it is a blatant violation of copyright. I can't imagine why you did that. It's not required for your critique. Bizarre, unprofessional behavior on your part.
are you SERIOUS right now? first off, he discusses the game throughout the video. secondly, are you actually saying you think that anyone could or would read this book or play the game by watching the video? wait until you learn that anyone can scan a book to make a PDFa and that I'm sure many, many people already HAVE done that with this particular game. and that's still less efficient than just uploading the official PDF to a torrent site, again a thing that has happened dozens to hundreds of times by now. in short: what the heck are you even talking about RN?
@@devon674 Also, showing off the inside of the book showcases the artwork and layout. I often pay attention to both because it helps me get inspired by the former (I'm a sucker for great artwork and have bought books just for the art alone) while the latter makes it easier to digest the book's contents and looks stuff up if (and more importantly WHEN) you need them.
I mean yeah, from 2011 to 2017 my full time job was selling the TTRPGs I wrote and published, so I know very well that showing off art and layout can only help in making these sales.@@theatheistbear3117
About the "But there are Dragons" fallacy. We as humans have a deep understanding of how people operate. A world without hate, without malice, and without conflict is a world that does not contain people. It's easier to believe in dragons than in a world free of conflict because we don't see monsters every day, but we do see people every day. We understand human nature implicitly.
Human nature is imperfect and filled with nasty things like emotions and biases. If you're going to fundamentally change the way people work in your fantasy setting, you're going to have to do a *lot* of heavy lifting to explain why that is, because in fiction, the rule is "Things work like they do in the real world, unless shown otherwise." Most writers don't feel they are up for the challenge of rewriting basic human nature, and those that do will inevitably fail, since they themselves are bound by human nature.
If Candela Obscura feels schizophrenic, this is why. It wants to rewrite human nature in order to create a world that doesn't have any of the icky things they dislike, while at the same time, trying to build a game around one of the most fundamental human emotions, fear. The two simply aren't going to jell.
Writers like Charles Stross in "Accelerando" have written worlds where lots of humanity are post-human, no longer physical, don't rely on scarce resources or live in homes with rooms separated by wormhole junctions spanning intersolar distances. Or worlds where humans are gone and androids still venerate and look up to the human past.
And to some extent, still have some of those human behaviours.
Or my biased personal favourite where early 2000s Doctor Who spun off an arc called Faction Paradox which spun off an arc called The City Of The Saved, a pocket universe with a galaxy sized city containing a non-biological reconstruction of every even vaguely human and every Time War history-changed version of a human that ever existed. And remakes of fictional characters as well. And the world is meant to be the arena for a character study, so they all behave like humans.
For Candela Obscura or Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel, it's one thing. But defenders of reboots of shows that commit the "But There Are Dragons" fallacy fail to realise the obvious counter - "because the source world was written with dragons AND a society and technology that so far only has differing groups of mono-cultural humans. You moron".
@@AtlasUnplugged I mean...it kinda fucking IS lazy. Evil Orcs are great, we've fought against them in two campaigns I play in but there were also non-evil Orcs. "Why are these Orcs evil?" "Just because..." "oh..ok..." vs "Why are these Orcs evil?" "they're not all evil but these ones are complete bastards because of X reason" "OH, yeah, fuck those guys!"
Good take. Another way to make your point (which does not diminish your point): hubris on the part of the Candela Obscura (CO) authors.
It seems to me that the authors attempted to create, not a game, but rather a simulation of the authors' real-life ethics. In mechanical terms it is a massive reduction of player agency. In ethical terms it is the author's way of saying that their beliefs are so inescapably true that they are mandatory, not only in reality but also in your imagination.
This tendency to refuse to allow competing ethics into imaginary worlds afflicts other IP's as well. This is why we can't have nice things since about 2015.
"I've always hated elves in my Cyberpunk."
Amen Jim!
Castle Falkhenstein was a game set in a steampunk world that included mechanical computing, clockwork/steamwork prosthetics, and a somewhat cyberpunk vibe. Not surprising, as it was another Mike Pondsmith product, really. In one of the supplementary books that included ways to expand the setting, there was a section discussing drawing fantasy elements into the setting that went on for a couple of paragraphs before dismissing the idea of elves with steampunk cyberwear as just being stupid as well as saying that magic and the kind of techno-improvisation of the setting were fundamentally incompatible.
@@bearnaff9387There was also SHADOWRUN (which is what I think @erc1971erc1971 was talking about).
@@carlflaherty2215 Oh yes. Pondsmith, the writer of the Cyberpunk series of games that Cyberpunk 2077 is adapted from, was using that bit in Castle Falkhenstein to make fun of Shadowrun. At the time, Shadowrun was actually the more popular of the two systems. I am still a little surprised that Cyberpunk made the jump to television first.
Bright with Will Smith is basically a Shadowrun movie. It's not very good. So much opportunity was missed.
When self deprecation offends a brit, you know a game goes too far lol
“The book is a moral busybody.” Dude, I just did a spit-take and barely managed to miss my keyboard. You’re killing me. 😂😂😂
I fear that daggerheart will be of similar quality when regarding the quality of rules and world building. Candela obscura sets a dangerous precedent of what is to come next from critical role. I feel they are much too afraid to offend anyone than make a decent product.
And that's bizarre to me given how much I love the Wildemount setting book! It's my favorite D&D setting, to the point I'm using it as my current 4e setting even though the book's designed for 5e.
I fear you're correct. But the Daggerheart ruleset -- what we know so far, with "hope" and "fear" -- already struck me as potentially overburdensome on GM's ability to improvise. It made me think it is a system designed for professional and/or very experienced GMs in mind. If every roll of 2d12 in the game carries a "with hope" or "with fear" narrative consequence, that's a HUGE burden on GMs to come up with that stuff on the fly when rolls are made. In DnD, it can already be challenging to come up with interesting negative consequences on a failure (other than "you fail"). To come up with "failing with hope," "failing with fear," "succeeding with hope," and "succeeding with fear" -- 4 possible outcomes from each roll -- UGH...no thank you.
When you have blind devotion from your customers (Critters), you get products like this. They copied other systems and offered no improvement. Waste of time.
As a fan of critters, the actual furry alien eating machine movie, I find it offensive that shitical troll has hijacked this term
@@RdWarrior-x8y I will back any movement that takes the term back. You make a good point!
I do think there's a place for games without much nastiness; like there's a place for cozy indie videogames. Like, AFAIK, people in war-torn countries, military barracks, prisons - they prefer playing Call of Cthulhu or DnD just to kill evil monsters, get cool stuff, and seduce princesses, not delve into political differences or somesuch that hits too close to home. (Or they give orcs russian accents and rofl-stomp them with extreme prejudice, for simple catharsis.) It's about knowing your players and communicating about the type of game you're playing, just like any other touchy subject.
That said. You cannot have horror that doesn't make you feel things, you cannot have drama without conflict, and you cannot have conflict without things that characters find unacceptable and want to change. Two points to be made here: 1) there's a line where a setting without much conflict becomes shallow and artificial; 2) pick a game with conflicts that you want to deal with. Vaesen is a great example, actually: it has progress vs old ways, Christianity vs paganism, locals vs outsiders, order vs superstition... A lot of potential, without being toothless.
I would personally suggest if people want a cozy indie TTRPG Ryuutama is a great example of that. It's more around the journey and world building than fighting and killing monsters (it does still have that since its sort of a 'wholesome Japanese RPG adventure' in the vein of the first Dragon Quest games). The DM is also a 'player' in the world, there to help and guide with their own mechanics.
All in all it's a cozy little adventure romp that actually has decent rules (which is more than can be said about a lot of indie TTRPGs).
Should we put some horror in our horror ttrpg? ehh.
OH but make sure they know we're morally superior! Yes of course!
This is the problem that seems to be in a lot of entertainment now. It's tiresome when people seem to want to project 'modern' ethics and 'current day' into something where it doesn't fit.
The problem with PbtA and adjacent systems like this one is NOT the fact it's hard to die or bonus points can be moved around from player to player making dice rolls even more insignificant -- It's that the game doesn't emulate or simulate the genre , setting, background or feel of the thing thru it's mechanics. In Steve Jackson's TOON RPG you cannot die either and the healing of PC's characters are considered OP but thats because its EMULATING or simulating the World of cartoons and so the mechanics try to support this. Plus --- this Alternative Social Utopia nice nice world is politically correct and not REAL.
It sounds like we've reached a state in RPGs equivalent to the streaming services' hollow and inoffensive content based on the popularity of similar, though high profit, products.
This. exactly .
Critical Roll IMO is aimed at those with the mind of a 10 year old just be nice and dont say anything "bad"
My interest in this game cratered when I heard it was essentially born out of the view that Lovecraft and his rich Cthulhu mythos is "problematic."
It also didn't have a particularly long gestation period. It screams "rush job."
I find it interesting that the same chap who designed this is also responsible for CR's other project, Daggerheart. I'm not particularly excited about that game either.
I don't know what he's done before this but I've certainly never heard of him before and I'm just puzzled as to why you would hand such high profile projects to a relative newb.
What is your most anticipated upcoming ruleset? Are you optimistic about MCDM?
I think he did Band of Blades, an alright take on the FitD ideas. CO, however, is his new system (though heavily inspired by FitD), and he apparently failed to grasp what makes those other games work. Kind of like a ton of "souls-like" videogames, few of which actually get it and are worth a look.
Edit: Yep. "Lovecraft/Rowling are problematic, but we still want to make money off their work". As the saying around here goes, either take off the cross or put the pants back on.
It's not wrong to say that Lovecraft was problematic. He was.
@@user-jt1js5mr3f , true. Though he did turn his xenophobia into fuel for creativity, and he did start to change by the end of his life.
What I mean is very subjective stuff, hard to articulate. There's got to be balance, where you use his ideas without shouting "WE'RE SORRY (money, please)" on every page, and without coming off as a hypocrite. Chaosium and others have been doing it for years, can't be that hard.
@@ЄвгенКорякін certainly, and when we play Call of Cthulu we agreed at session 0 to avoid role playing as problematic people.
Candela works well for the show, I think, but it’s certainly Cthulu-lite.
Unfortunate to hear that the stakes aren’t truly that high, as that’s the high point of fear in Cthulu
MCDM will turn out to be an overrated hack. As soon as people play an RPG where every attack always hits in combat it will destroy verisimilitude and a lot of people will stop playing it.
I cant see this game being talked about in a year.
This is very common in the story games arena because they are typically made to run one type of tightly-defined story and they are marketed as Twitterati indulgences - all fad, no substance.
Oh I don't know. Just wait until "hey, remember when last year we all thought Candela Obscura was a stinker? Well, meet the new stinker...".
@@juddgoswick2024 I mean I could say the same about literally every other fucking OSR clone that gets shatout by some alt-right boomer shithead. "Oh look, it's D&D B/X...again...now with a slightly different coat of paint".
Both the "Narrative focused Rules Lite Whimsical bullshit" design and the "OSR clone that does fuck all new and has no substance beyond a coat of pain" piss me off to no end.
So yeah, fuck both of those design ideas.
@@juddgoswick2024 You just nailed it. These kind of products (and not just in RPGs) are made for the "hipster tourist" twitter set who can say to their fellow tourists "look I'm into the latest progressive thing" and show it in the background of a few RUclips videos and keep their sense of unearned superiority.
@@ironwolf56 Dude, you sound so silly
On rpgdrivethru most if not all negative comments/reviews have been removed for this. I’m assuming the fans have gone into overdrive protecting it and critcal role
Oh dear, sounds likely.
Candela Obscura: the horror game with no horror, and no game.
10:40 In terms of setting, there is no setting! Honestly, the adversion to conflicts and stakes is galling at this point
17:36 Need to coin a phrase for systems like this. Like eunuch games or something.
In this instance you could call it self flagellating, auto castrating, pillow fisted, sterily isolated, conflict averse, and many other adjectives that have been used. I just call it a disappointment.
"5E-like"
Next gen.
Excellent explanation of why we have rules.
Rules are overrated. 😂😂😂
I have only read parts, but it seems the only horrifying thing about the game is the cost when you basically have to create the game yourself.
So you think people shouldn't take any initiative to create their own stories???
@@UltraTtrpger There's 'creating your own stories with help from the book' and there's 'the book gives me virtually nothing so I'm doing ALL the work'. For example see the recent 5e Spelljammer book which gave you literally barebones descriptions of things and was pretty much derided as '2 books of madlibs and 1 book filled with a kind crap adventure'. I'm sorry I'm paying for a *premium* product, I want shit in the book, I want a wealth of monster statblocks, location guides, world building tips for campaigns set in universe or similar.
Here's the thing, imagination is fucking FREE but it does cost TIME, these sorts of books are meant to reduce the time cost to help faciliate the Imagination....but when you're left doing all the fucking work...that's a lot of time being eaten up...
@UltraTtrpger stories, sure. I homebrew my own settings and created some homebrew rules and monsters for various games. That being said, I do expect the games to lay out a framework for combat and monsters, etc. As I mentioned, I have only looked at a friend's copy, and when I mentioned it seemed incomplete and asked if there was a book he was missing, he agreed it seemed rushed which is a shame. They wasted time on space lecturing when it would have been better spent fleshing out their own rule set.
@@TobiasPatrick The release printed copy actually IS missing a rule...Indestructoboy bought this up, there was no rule for what happened if you got 4 scars...which is when your character actually dies.
This was erratta'd into the PDF version but the print versions had already gone out.
@@UltraTtrpgerwhy the fuck would I buy this trash? It’s literally cheaper to buy Call of Cthulhu, a system that has actual horror mechanisms.
I think the arrogance and audacity of trying to tell the players that this isn't allowed, and they shouldn't do this and that doesn't exist in the world, even though it makes no sense is unmatched and we have had a lot of that in recent years coming from writers in all possible media, video games, journalism, tv and film writing, comicbooks etc.. but to go and do that in an RPG? That is just absolutely outrageous.
And that isn't even going into how the few episodes we have already showed how incredibly lacking and flawed the game's systems are.
Having watched the first "Circle" months ago on CR, I was impressed with the production value of the show, but wasn't a fan of the world setting. The actors played their parts well but I didn't see the show as an example of true actual-play -- it was an overhyped theatre production with the bare bones of a TTRPG added to the mix. Still, I thought I MIGHT check the game out when the final rules were printed even though after the first "campaign" I quickly lost interest in watching any more shows. Thankfully, I viewed a couple of reviews of the game including yours and am grateful that I did. The lack of rules regarding action limits what players can do, and it's clear the game has a certain moral and social agenda built in. Rather than writing reminders of the problematic nature of real-world issues they should probably stick to building a world with conflict and ways to resolve it and leave it up to players to determine how to play and what stories to tell. In the past, D&D, Vampire the Masquerade, Kult and other game systems have been criticized for printing material that was considered problematic. However, overtly trying to rectify the issues by railroading the terms of play doesn't seem an effective way to handle the problem. You easily swing into a totalitarianism mind-set that leaves little room for egalitarian discussion.
There are tiny OSR/NSR games that are far smaller in book size, have more depth to their worlds and have tons of roll charts for everything you can think of and if you want to use them as well.
So a quick cash grab nock off to take advantage of the OGL scandal, that's been squirted through a filter of sensitivity readers.
From what I've observed. This works better as an analog cthulhu dating simulator.
For another take on this, look at Indestructoboys review...who says literally the same thing. Now some people may not like Jim and honestly I don't know where he sits on the political spectrum but Indestructoboy is left leaning and even *he* thought it was fucking morally preachy...
I'm far left, but a more old-school, non-identitarian left.
MY whole group (except my wife) has really a big problem with story games. That is, why we have rules ;-)
What you were saying reminds me of my early criticism of the Star Wars sequels and particularly the New order. They are supposed to be the bad guys but looking at their ranks, there seems to be no racial prejudice, women hold high rank in the military, I’m presuming gays shared similar equal status, I mean Hux certainly seemed to be coded that way. To all intents and purposes they seem to have the society that folks are apparently wanting to see, so in what way exactly are they villains?
I mean...the whole "human supremacist space nazies who committed a little bit of holocausting at the end of the first movie" wasn't enough material to justify them being the villains???
Like the first scene the new order was in had them massacre a village...
Humans who didn't get kidnapped to be indoctrinated as Storm Troopers did ok, everyone else to murdered/enslaved....
@@sudanemamimikiki1527you mean the same thing a lot of the people screeching for those things mentioned above would do if they were in a position of absolute power and the villagers held “PrObLeMaTiC!!!” ideals?
@@sudanemamimikiki1527 I think I understand where the OP comes from. If the bad guys are supposed to be irredeemable then why not let them be villains all the way, and have them be racist, misogynistc assholes too. It just feels **off** when the space nazi supremacists seem to be equal opportunity employers. It's like a narrative record scratch moment, you know?
@@tuomasronnberg5244 I mean Stalinist Russia was a fucking evil empire unto itself and it was ALSO equal opportunity at least gender wise...you have have equal opportunity and still be evil, though in that case it's more 'if you don't align with the ideals of/fail to please Stalin you get shipped off to the Siberian hellscape to be worked to death in a work camp after he has all the rest of your family shot'.
You don't have to be racists or misogynistic....you just have to be a power mad asshole who will do anything to cling to power. THAT is what the New Order represents, they're equal opportunity evil willing to wipe out entire planets because they would rather not come under the rule of some mouldy old guy in a bathrobe trying to relive the glory days of the fucking Empire with him as the leader...
Seems like they were targetting new players that never played a TTRPG before. Their weak attempt to prove they stand with the rpg community while the OGL scaldal was ablaze and the whole time they were the prime objective of the whole situation. They just sat quiet & created this, Scamdella... sux ballz.
So basically it’s Disney Cthulhu
Disney once managed to make The Black Cauldron, so not even that. CBeebies Cthulhu.
But from Walmart and heavily discounted.
FORGODSAKE NO DON'T SAY THAT NOOOOOOOO
The PbtA games are my personal favorites. Not all of them are good, but the ones that are? Amazing.
On the other hand, I've never been that interested in DnD. Too restrictive.
I don't really have any interest in Candela Obscura though. So I'll take your word on how this turned out lol.
As someone interested in game design, I bought it to see if they had any interesting mechanics I might use in my own designs. I’m quite sure I will never play it.
If you want something similar for that purpose, get Blades in the Dark or Dungeon World.
And FIST! Wich is a great compromise between PBTA and dnd OSR playstyle
Nothing can withstand successive bad products or bad starts, this might not hurt them on the first outing, but more than likely this will hurt their follow up releases.
Sort of a slightly jauntier Downton Abbey?
So this game is really not a role playing game but just a system to emulate people Pretending to play a role playing game in front of cameras like those at Critical Role? If dice rolls have little or no real importance and characters can't really die then this " product " stinks.
I agree on the importance of dice rolls meaning something, though I think it unfair to say Critical Role “pretends” to play a role playing game. If anything, they embrace it further than most in this instance because it’s primarily roleplay. That’s just not everyone’s style. The rolls do mean plenty in their primary campaigns.
The product means so little to producing a role playing environment they started recording without the rules finalized, they didn't need the rules to create an "actual play" of their game. This is the biggest cash grab while attempting to create something separate from wotc and the trouble they've had.
I’ve run games, like “Tales from the Loop,” where characters can’t die. It’s doable, but different. It sounds like Candela Obscura has no *stakes* at all and is more a guide for pretending to play on a Twitch stream.
You described how D&D feels to me.
@@Lwilibert that it’s just for roleplay and the rolls don’t matter? I think you haven’t had very good games
I have to ask where the film clips come from. I recognise Charles Gray, of course, but this is not his Blofeld incarnation, nor, I think, does it come from The Devil Rides Out, though I confess my memory of that is somewhat dim.
As for the game under review, it appears to have no particular audience in mind but for some reason your comments make me think that if Suella Braverman were to write a horror RPG - and, quite frankly, what other genre would she write in, intentionally or otherwise? - it might not be too dissimilar to this.
Rocky Horror.
I had no idea. Never seen it. Gray is the archetypal satanist, even when not playing a satanist, so it could just as easily have been Dallas.
There is a very real possibility we may all be part of Suella’s Extreme Horror LARP in a year’s time. We’re about to enter Session Zero Hope.
Thanks Jim for the Charles Gray intro/extro I immideately thought of 'The Devil Rides Out' and to me that's why the vid gets a Thumbs up!
This is getting an immediate X card.
Authorial-level rather than character-inhabiting is a valid form of roleplay, although it is very much a different experience and appeals to different desires.
It's not role-playing, it's not inhabiting and embodying a character. Its collaberative storytelling.
@@PostmortemVideo Many roleplaying games describe themselves as collaborative storytelling. You know that.
@@hawkname1234 So they're Storygames which label themselves RPG for marketing purpose.
You got me with the Jeeves and Wooster opening.
I had few hopes for this. I suspected a cringe and weak game... It's even worse than that.
It's absolutely fine for the world to not be enjoyable to you and the world will be perfectly enjoyable to other. The criticisms of the actual system mechanics is very valid though.
I love Apocalypse World. But I also love how much you hate it.
I've tried to like it and work with it. Just no.
I was worried about this game all the way back to when folks were saying it was just a copy of blades.
Some of the Blades rules (and no idea why they have removed what they have removed) and the premise of Vaesen, which works better with its own system (YZE).
No game needs a What Is An RPG section ever again.
Eh, its a standard thing. Every game has something.
Honestly I see them as a canary in a coal mine. How they are written and their length serves to measure how the book will read/mindset of the creator
As very few people seems to know what RPG is about, that section is required. If it starts by RPG is a Collaborative Storytelling Exercise, I know I can skip it.
I’m also going to add in a weird way. It reminded me of a Cassandra Clare novel and I don’t mean that as a compliment
Laughed out loud at "even as an Englishman. . ."
its so bad, I have never seen a more obvious DM-centric, ego trip of a game.
I felt the same thing coming from the 5e Vampire the masquerade. A game about being a monster, a leech, a parasite. And the book shyed away from this essence, truly a shame that Candela also have done it.
My optimism about dagger heart just dropped a lot.
0:12 You got Bear GenX GM to do a cameo? 🙊
😂 "That man has no neck!"
Great, now all the RHPS adlibs are stuck in my head. 😂
I agree with this review it’s fantastic and very much have the same opinions when me and some friends did a play through very derivative and we felt like it was holding our hand too much in places
I find that the only conflict with the game (in the process of reading the rulebook) is greed and corporation.
I remember the video of the saying we are making a system for long campaigns and another system for shorts and one shots. I remember Matt saying it would be rad to have a new system then a month later we get the news. I don't see any of it lasting or played much.
It was a rushed cash grab written for actors to showcase their improv and character acting skills.
Love the Jeeves & Wooster intro! *CHA'ALT*
It looks like a greedy vanity project to separate "critters" with more of their money whilst promoting their new company Darrington Press and nothing else. Due to their recent political leanings typically I avoid their content, and it seems like this new game of theirs has suffered as a consequence of them trying so hard to tick all those boxes. What a hot mess.
What recent political leanings?
This games leanings seems a recent and appropriate example. Just look at the end product all because they wanted to cater to all the political correctness out there, to such an absurd degree it actually undermined the game they made.@@user-jt1js5mr3f
@@user-jt1js5mr3f"seemingly super liberal sugarbuddy no hurt feelings innoffensive" drek. In other words, not only does it lacks balls, but then in the most lazy way possible, beats you over the head with its message. It comes across as preachy. Its as bad as a Christian Movies.
@@user-jt1js5mr3fyou know exactly what their leanings are
-_-
Maybe you can ask Trump to make an RPG?
But first they want you to buy a random article of clothing. Trash peddlers.
I think it's a pretty awesome BiTD mod - a little too heavy on the moral lectures though.
I leafed through a copy of this game in a game store. Didn't read it enough to get a good feel of my own beyond that it felt "vanilla." After this review and reading through the barebone beta rules of Daggerheart, I think I understand why.
I don't even care for this particular genre all that much and I still think this is lame. When I order steak, I expect a steak. I do not want a chef's salad and a snide backhanded apology instead. If I did not want a steak I would have ordered the chicken instead.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: a game for the 'participation trophy' people.
Nice overview... I'm looking forward to not ever touching that detritus. Sounds exceedingly twee as well! That's what happens when you try and pander to everything you could possibly pander too. LOOOL.
Every once in a while I find people who seem to read my mind and put my own reasons into words in a way I didn't put a lot of work into making myself, words that make sense and are hard to argue unless you simply disagree with the argument.
Well actually, what I'm hearing from your critique is that you don't like narrative roleplaying. As Candela Obscura tries to be exactly that, it was never going to be a game that you like. And did you really believe for a second, that a brand like Critical Role - successful for its storytelling - would develop games, that concentrate on the rule mechanics? I am not crazy about it either, but the long running success of Vampire shows that there is an interest for narrative roleplaying among gamers. So maybe Candela Obscura will find its fans among the gamers who prefer a rules-light approach and don't want to have a dice chart for every evantuality in the game.
You also didn't really explain why it doesn't have any real game mechanics - apart from the commentary that it's not really deadly. This is a total valid opinion but CoC has been rightly criticized for being too deadly and making a longer campaign with the same characters impossible. And the fact that Pulp Cthulhu exists tells me that even the makers of Cthulhu think that horror can be done without the fear of dying in each session. In the end it comes down to design decisions.
The same goes for their version of steampunk where everyone is nice to each other. Yes this doesn't mirror the reality of the victorian age. But on the other hand, we totally accept female warriors in fantasy settings although they really weren't a thing in the middle ages. Nobody is forced to use the candela obscura world exactly as described in the rule book. If you want to play it darker nobody is really stopping you.
Vampire is a game, with a narrative focus. It's still primarily a game, and about inhabiting the character immersively, not playing at the meta level and therefore, not really being roleplaying.
Opposing Storytelling and Mechanics miss the point. It’s not about that. You inhabit a Character in an imaginary world (the diegesis). From the point of view of your character there is no story. Conan doesn’t know he’s following a narrative path. He keeps his free will and the diegesis is his reality. In order to embody Conan, you need to ignore it too. It’s suspension of disbelief. That’s immersion. Conan doesn’t rely on rules or mechanics to take actions. When you play, the system doesn’t intervene at the decision making step. You can try to attempt anything. What limits the range of your actions is the diegesis (the physics of the world and your character’s abilities and knowledge). The system intervenes at the resolution step. Like in real life, you can only initiate action but the outcome is uncertain. You will face the consequences of those actions short medium and long term. Character Agency is the DNA of the medium.
@@theeyewizard8288 What a remarkably cogent and pointed critique. I myself was originally confused about the precise edges of the definitions of the ideas involved in Grim's opposition to Narrative games. (I posted a longer example of where I was confused on the discord, which I _think_ was noted as a potential topic for future discussion or a video.) Your explanation answers my question completely, though. Thank you.
@@bearnaff9387 You're very welcome ^^
@@theeyewizard8288 I really liked your analysis as it goes to the heart of the question. Yes, the inhabitants of the fictional world have no story. They are just living their lifes. But before we decide to play one of those inhabitants we will probably look at the rules of this world to see, what kind of adventures can be experienced here. Und the mechanics of the system plays a big role in this question: Do they try to stay close to the rules of our normal life? Do they focus on testing our survival skills? Or maybe do they focus on enabling epic stories (by probably sacrificing some of the realism)? Or maybe It's just all about making play easy and accessible. In the case of Candela Obscura it seems to me (without having it played yet) that the designers wanted to focus on the conflict between the player characters and the monsters without making it a slaughter house for characters that CoC sometimes can be. If that's sufficiently creepy for a horror game, remains to be seen. But horror comes in many flavours and degrees of gore. And anyway I don't think that the world of Cthulhu will be the main competitor. My bet would be on Vaesen the swedish folk horror game.
From what you and others have described of the game as much it is or is not, in not being offensive to anyone it is offendeding everyone with its lack of substance
Hate the system, but getting the worse of two dice when you have 0 is dice is ingenious and somewhat resembles having to roll two or more times and having to succeed on every roll on extremely difficult tasks in the Glory Road system.
... I know you take on the Archivist role, but you can get a refund on that thing, yeah?
Edit: movies and television shows are like this. WOTC did it with their... lordy, I had to look up the Wikipedia page to remember the name of that ludicrous unsupportable infeasible economy world Never At War With EastAsia book, "Journeys Through The Radiant Citadel"... and now the non-majority game publishers are going the same way?
Can civilisation stop collapsing now please?
Radiant Citadel at least had conflict. The idea was the whilst the central city hub doesn't have conflict, it's just that, a hub, you travel from there to planes that DO have conflict and that's where all the adventures actually take place, it seems like a lot of people didn't actually fucking *read* Radiant Citadel.
Lancer works like this. The main Empire in Lancer is pretty Star Trek, it's a utopia where all needs are met...that doesn't mean there isn't conflict on the outskirts of said Empire or even political maneuvering from within said Empire. Lancer is sort of the Noblebright version of WH40ks Grimdark (though if you go digging there's enough dark parts in there...for example Harrison Armories sells the Ghengis MkII that has flamethrowers on it and is entirely meant for "heavy deforestation"...(here's a hint, that part about deforestation is a complete fucking lie...it's a warcrimes Mech)).
Heck just look at Star Trek, the Federation is very much a Utopia...it just so happens that there are places outside of that which aren't...and some worlds which definitely aren't. I mean there's also god knows how many wars in the Star Trek universe as well.
So yes, you CAN have a Utopia and have it be interesting...
Radiant Citadel had a ton of conflicts. A brewing coup, falling-apart leadership, etc. And that was before you got to the adventures.
@@luketfer
I see your point, but with respect you're so horrifyingly wrong I'm horrified and you should be too.
> Radiant Citadel at least had conflict. The idea was the whilst the central city hub doesn't have conflict
Yes but *how likely is that* exactly?
> is pretty Star Trek, it's a utopia where all needs are met
> look at Star Trek, the Federation is very much a Utopia
> it just so happens that there are places outside of that which aren't
Bzzt.
They introduced a non-replicator-capable currency of liquid latinum wrapped in gold capsules.
We never got to see local politics, but there seemed to be an *awful lot* of people who were happy to sign on to ships as colonists.
They had power struggles in Starfleet itself. The classic episode where Finney faked his death to get Kirk court-martialled. And that's classic, not TNG where the admiral of the year would do something stupid especially to, say, maintain some conspiracy Riker couldn't live with anymore.
Note, by the way, the episodes that showed Starfleet Academy, like the ones with student intake and testing - they were filtering for the best of the best of the best, every officer was supposed to be MIB quality. You think the rest of the planet is like that, you're not even getting into the Academy.
And that's before you get to the stupid reboots.
Abrams garbage: the guy who played Mickey in "Doctor Who" signed on to Khan's plan to blow up Starfleet headquarters.
STDiscovery: utter non-self-consistent trash start to finish. And they somehow destroyed and handwaved away the 29th century Timefleet of Braxton and the 31st century agency of Daniels. Explain how, especially when they could see their own futures. Strange New Worlds is more revisionist garbage feeding out of Discovery.
And I will start a quest into Cool World to get a barrel of the deadly Dip if you even hint at that Lower Decks garbage and I would happily dip the whole thing into utter destruction.
> So yes, you CAN have a Utopia and have it be interesting...
*I* can find it interesting. But then again, I like building games where stuff doesn't get knocked down in the next raid. When I play RPGs, I like the builder and technician characters. My favourite parts of Stross's Accelerando were the utterly post-human world inside the coke-can-computerised starwisp or the foglet-maintained remake-fictional-characters-with-bodies Jupiter colonies after that.
I like "The City Of The Saved" because it allows a reason to have a detective agency composed of absolutely nobody but remakes of Sherlock Holmeses and John Watsons; they're born into bodies that can't get sick, can't starve, can't die. And when do you think that's going to get turned into a television show?
But this *stupid* society of braindeads here on this barely-compost-worthy Earth can't even accurately transpose Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" to the streaming screen without utterly undoing every single thing that made "Foundation" relevant. They turned the psychohistoric predictions into bollocks "almost magic" explained by a future-seeing psychic. My housemate watched the "Altered Carbon" series and I'd read the books years earlier and damn, but that was gutted and filled with stupidity stuffing.
I understand that the average Grim Jim viewer/commenter might be able to enjoy an Utopian society. Just remind yourself that we live on a planet that is nowhere near sufficiently utopian for the average inhabitant to understand and enjoy Utopia. Just remind yourself one more time what the origin and initial meaning of the word "Utopia" really was.
@troffle No. Civilization can not stop collapsing; there's a lot more suffering we have to endure before things start fixing.
Utopia works when it's not really Utopia. This is why Deep Space 9 worked.
@@troffle So what, exactly, was your problem with Radiant Citadel? I guess I'm just trying to find an actual critique hidden in this rant.
it really is a beautiful book, though, incredible production quality, gorgeous art, attractive layout.
Your assumption about Apocalypse Worls is incorrect. The characters are very much controlled by the players through the playbooks they choose and the actions they take in the story. Pbta and fitd games work very well in their own way.
Control ≠ Inhabit
@theeyewizard8288 it's the same thing idiot.
Its not, and it's not an assumption either.
@PostmortemVideo it's your assumption because it's not correct as I've already stated. You brOSR guys need to back off and just let people enjoy what they want.
@UltraTtrpger you can enjoy what you want, and I can criticise it. It's still not assumption, it's experience
"There are fish-monsters coming! Run!"
"Bigot, how dare you use a slur."
"Slur? They're not human, they're walking fish-men! We have to get out of here!"
"Fish-men? Really? You're assuming they all identify as -AAAAAGHGHGHGH"
The only use this game could have is to be played for yuks.
Unfortunately, I tapped out of the review the moment that you stated that, perhaps, the second greatest ttrpg gaming system ever devised, PbtA, behind only Call of Cthulhu, was terrible.
Regardless of the merits or Candela Obscura, it's clear that we have such fundamental differences in our approach to gaming that this analysis would likely not provide me with any insight.
An absolute antipathy towards Narrative-based roleplaying games is probably something with which you should lead when presenting a review of one.
Another small suggestion, if I might: the mechanical clicking of the background music/effects becomes really rather distracting, almost to the point of being enough to induce a headache. I might be alone in that response, but it certainly was another element that made the decision to give up on the video at the 7:00 minute mark easier for me.
Please know that I have no affection for Candela, or devotion to Critical Role, as I believe that they have been a detrimental force in the hobby, so please take these stylistic observations regarding presentation in that light, and not as the aggrieved reaction of a fanboy.
I don't have an antipathy to story led gaming, and I don't think PbtA supports that. I don't really think it's an RPG at all.
Example of why, here (Apocalypse World specific) postmortemstudios.wordpress.com/2019/12/14/rpg-apocalypse-world-again/
As for PbtA, it's an inexplicable fad, and - in its vanilla form at least - probably _not_ an RPG, and easily one of the worst to ever get any traction.
CR brought in a lot of new blood to the hobby. How can that be a detriment? Only negative thing I can find is the Mercer effect on DM’s where players only think you are a good DM if you are as good as Mercer.
@@PostmortemVideo Nah. It's absolutely an RPG in its greatest and most fundamental form. No other character or narrative has ever compelled me more than those that I've uncovered through PbtA-based systems, specially Avatar.
If you're actually interested in roleplay, rather than pointless slogs through bland, repetitive combat as sport a la D&D 5E, PbtA systems afford that in spades.
@@martinjrgensen8234 The people who have been grafted into the hobby are generally those who are attracted to the performative superficiality of Critical Role, which no actual table emulates.
Others have been brought in by Stranger Things, as well, and the people themselves oftentimes seem to wish to impose on the hobby, and alter it in order to render it more palatable to them based on faulty expectations.
The "Mercer Effect" is merely one symptom of that misalignment between expectations and reality.
Safety Rules are for the birds.
They didnt need a hard cover book for this game. A leaflet could have conveyed the same info. I expected more from one of this generations best DMs.
Regarding much of what I’ve read and some of what I’ve seen myself on CR, I’m beginning to suspect Matt Mercer may not be a DM at all, but merely a good scriptwriter and showrunner.
Yea I honestly don’t think Matt is that great of a DM. I think he’s a great actor and good writer, and he knows a ton about dnd, but he doesn’t really use the actual game systems to create drama the way that someone like Monty from dungeon dudes does.
Pronouns. That's all I need to know. Pass. Hard.
Yeah! And down with all that slavery abolition snowflake nonsense too!
Abolitionism makes a great conflict and source of story in a game, but you have to have slavery to abolish.
For me, it's not necessarily the inclusion of pronouns, it's the inclusion of pronouns *everywhere* AND that non-binary pronouns are so overly-represented that it very clearly lets you know what the principal goal of publishing the book actually was (social activism). They didn't set out to make a great game. They set out to proliferate an ideology using a game system as their vehicle.
Just play Call of Cthulhu and actually have a great game
I guess opinions are yours to ha e but all these criticism videos seem so linear. U say it removes immersion, but i say thats more down to the gm and Pc ability to actually imagine make and pull off a thrilling narrative. I feel all these criticism vids are so focused on the need for rules which just highlight a lack of inability to fully immerese into the narrative. Is it you have to think to much to create the story? I feel watching critical role on thier performances it is a full roller coaster of all sorts of emotion, deception the corruption of higher powers and i believe is only limited by the gm and players annulus to imagine. And as for the safety nets.... have you seen the world we live in, you don't add that shit therewill be protestors on your door. Any way 4th critic i have seen that just sounds butt hurt. 🤜🏽🤛🏽
We're reviewing a game, not a particular GM or set of players. Some people can paint with their toes, but using your hands is easier. The world being the way it is is all the more reason for escapism.
Too many games are being dumbed down for the Twitch generation, old school gaming which requires you to understand rules and use your brain are things of the past.
One of the best TTRPG ever made in human history.
Please complete your sentence. It lacks a subject.
@@liberalhyena9760 free subject.
@PostmortemVideo this video is... confusing. After taking a look at the game I can say that it is actually mediocre, and that it serves the needs of a particular group who plays scripted games in public, more than those of private customers who want to just play, but all I can understand from your video is that you don't like AW, which is another game, not this one. Also you mostly don't like it for reasons which I find baffling, but it doesn't really matter. I'm not commenting to defend AW system and i will not even say my opinion about it.
The point is that this doesn't feel like a review at all, and your personal opinion about AW, lovecraft, barker and what's horror, don't help understand a thing about the game. What I could understand from the video is so vague that it could be interpreted in at least two ways, which is one way too much. No discrimination in an horror game... Ok, so what? Is the theme of the game the meaning of horror in a society with no discrimination? That would be super interesting... But your video doesn't let me understand if that's the case. It just tells me that you liked the Matrix more, which is irrelevant at best.
Also the "there are dragons" thing doesn't actually work the way you say. "There are dragons" is something you say to justify plot holes or inconsistencies, not to justify a premise. In this setting "there are dragons" is as true as "having a favoured pronoun is ok". Any judgement on the matter is a purely esthetic one. You can accept it, like it or belittle it with faux psychology. I have an opinion on the matter as well, but again, totally irrelevant for the purpose of this comment.
You say it is easier to accept a dragon that a society that has different problems from ours, but that is really just your problem, not a universal truth...
Really, came in to know more about a game, came out knowing more about you.. it is poetic and beautiful, but also disappointing.
Are you suggesting that the inclusion of preferred pronouns, safety tools to ensure lines aren’t crossed, and generally telling players not to use roleplay as an excuse to be terrible somehow takes away from the horror?
Loaded question that assumes motivations and receptions. Try again.
If that isn't what you meant, you could just say that. But fine, I'll rephrase.
What about the inclusions of preferred pronouns, safety tools, and telling players that roleplay isn't more important than the comfort of others at table takes away from the horror/game?
The first affects immersion, the second and third run counter to the necessities and nature of horror.
I've NEVER seen a "review" of a game that opens up a paid product and shows every page for the viewer to see, while not discussing anything on the pages shown. This video is not transformative, used the entire work unnecessarily-it is a blatant violation of copyright. I can't imagine why you did that. It's not required for your critique. Bizarre, unprofessional behavior on your part.
What an absurd thing to say.
are you SERIOUS right now? first off, he discusses the game throughout the video. secondly, are you actually saying you think that anyone could or would read this book or play the game by watching the video? wait until you learn that anyone can scan a book to make a PDFa and that I'm sure many, many people already HAVE done that with this particular game. and that's still less efficient than just uploading the official PDF to a torrent site, again a thing that has happened dozens to hundreds of times by now.
in short: what the heck are you even talking about RN?
@@devon674 Also, showing off the inside of the book showcases the artwork and layout. I often pay attention to both because it helps me get inspired by the former (I'm a sucker for great artwork and have bought books just for the art alone) while the latter makes it easier to digest the book's contents and looks stuff up if (and more importantly WHEN) you need them.
I mean yeah, from 2011 to 2017 my full time job was selling the TTRPGs I wrote and published, so I know very well that showing off art and layout can only help in making these sales.@@theatheistbear3117