Our current game is in the Feywild right now. It's pretty tame, like out of a fairy tale, but it is also the realm of the gods in the homebrew setting we are using. I very much get Narnia vibes from it.
No, nor have I done anything in an equivalent (or at least somewhere presented as an equivalent - There's an argument that you could run The Undercity in Heart: The City Beneath as a fae realm - travel seems to operate on similar 'logic' to how stories and folklore typically present travel in fae realms, but our one shot of that didn't really get that into it so it didn't really feel like a fae realm, more of a surrealist horror) and I think you _could_ justifiably run the Aniworld in an Animon Story campaign as a fae realm, but I've and I don't think if my players decide to travel into it I'll be running it in that way - Maybe. I've established a kind of dream analogy to how Animon work and what they are...)
After 2 1/2 years the 5e game I run is careening toward a denouement in the Feywild. The party has been harassed and the Menagerie Coast tormented by a fey incursion since pretty much session 1. I'm looking forward to creating my own weird incarnation of the Plane of Faeries!
Honestly, that's a critique of Bards as a whole. They're a cool concept, but some abilities like countercharm don't come up enough, so people (both DMs and players) often forget about it when they actually could be used. Obviously that's not the designers fault, but they should give more incentive to use charms so that you can use and remember countercharm
@@Melina_Evarblume_Seelie it's kind of ironic, one of the strongest classes with a lot of great and versatile features, also has arguably the worst base class feature in 5e.
@@Melina_Evarblume_Seelie I feel countercharm is one of those abilities that got ported over from earlier editions without fully thinking through how it would function in the new version.
@@l0stndamned Absolutely. It makes perfect sense if your DM uses charms (although an action for a round is a little rough), but it's entirely useless if they don't. Just a few improvements/conversions and additions to monsters/magical enemies would make it so cool. It's a shame.
Even more so considering how useless countercharm is on paper - spend your action every round to MAYBE help people if there is an attempt to charm them AFTER you do it - it's why they changed it in the playtest and 2024 PHB. Scanlan is one of the few bards I've seen that could in-theory be doing RAW countercharm all the time, since he's got that Jaskier-esque "I walk alongside and sing at the party all the time" vibe.
Tips for more Matt-ism: - If a mountain is rocky use the word "cragulous". That word doesn't exist but Matt uses it all the time to describe rocky mountains. - If something is really large, describe it as "heavy". Even if it's just a wide empty cavern. The cavern is heavy. - If something is rotting, it's smells sweet and citrus-like. Always citrus-like.
I think there's a couple interesting things during your coverage of the combat: 1. Regarding the "Why wouldn't every enemy caster have counterspell?" question, an important facet of the answer should be "Because it's not your job as DM to shut down and then murder the spellcaster PCs. You're supposed to be creating interesting challenges for them to overcome, not turning their characters into chunky red paste and laughing about it. Every spellcaster having counterspell isn't fun for the PCs, and honestly, it sounds like a pain in the butt to run as a GM." 2. Action Economy is king in 5E. Matt may not have expected this fight to be tough, but Vox Machina was also down a PC for the entire fight and with the counterspells flying around, half the party was essentially losing every turn. Of course it was hard. This is a huge thing to look out for when balancing encounters (and also a very powerful tool for making those special encounters extra tough). Every lost action makes the fight that much harder.
Some possible reasons for an npc caster to not have counterspell: 1) the caster does not have to battle other casters often (casters are rare, wizards of high enough level are unionised etc.) so learning counterspell instead of something with greater utility is a waste of effort, 2) the caster is lower-level or multi-class and hasn't trained enough in a relevant class to get the spell, 3) the caster has low wisdom and didn't think it would be important, 4) abjuration is seen as one of the less "cool" branches of magic in-universe so folks aren't interested in learning that sort of thing or 5) the caster is the apprentice of a wizard who is paranoid about being backstabbed by their followers, so only teaches them anti-magic stuff once they've proved their trustworthiness.
After a combat where I ended up counterspelling a player to the point they didn’t participate in a fight, I introduced a new house rule. Counter spell is now a contested roll. When someone casts counter spell, both sides roll a d20 and add there spell ability modifier. If one side as cast at a higher level, they get the difference as a bonus to their roll. (E.g they cast a banishment spell and a 3rd counter spell. The one casting banishment would get a plus one). Who ever rolls higher has there spell take effect. And counter spell can no longer be counted. This way it becomes like a wizard duel rather than preventing them from playing.
Mildly related - I can 1000% verify how little fun it is being the spy every time in Spyfall. I played five games in a row, and was the spy every time. Fifth game I just said, 'I defect' and threw my spy card in the center before anyone asked questions. So I get this analogy quite easily.
Excited that this is the first episode that I am finally caught up on Critical Role Demystified. Although I probably should have spent more time catching up on campaign 3 since I'm just at episode 54.
For Spyfall (A great game, but obviously terrible luck on Supergeek's part), my advice is that the player who was Spy the previous round is dealt the next round's card first (to increase the chance they aren't the spy). I also do a house rule where if someone is a Spy twice, on the third round, they deal the cards after picking a guaranteed location card, to ensure they aren't going to be the Spy again (the rest are shuffled and dealt normally). (Edited for clarity)
I'm not sure why this particular scenario made my brain lock up because... technically if you're pulling from a larger stack it's a smaller fraction of the stack, but if you don't reshuffle every time you deal you actually have already determined who the spy is once you finish shuffling (say if the spy is 3rd in the stack, then the 3rd player to pick has a 100% chance of being the spy)... provided you're dealing them out rather than randomly picking from a fanned out stack ahaha. But that also feels so wrong to me XD
@@merchantarthurn I keep the spy on bottom of each deck (hiding the location cards behind it), so I can count out how many players there are while still ensuring the spy card is in there. Then, the cards are shuffled and delt one to each player. It's probably a Monty-Hall fallacy, but it just feels like if there are more cards available, the person will have a lower chance of being the spy again. If it's the mulligan, the player just takes any card but the bottom, and the rest are shuffled after. Not sure if that explanation made more sense. More to the point, the friends should have paused the game, explained the rules, and let SG look at the locations page a bit before just throwing him in blind.
One of games I play in is an Exandria Campaign and we're about to head into the Feywild in a couple sessions so these videos are really well timed for me to help get hyped about it!
I like this channel. I don’t know how much text has to be in a comment to let the algorithm know I’m engaging with the video more than just watching it. But I am. And I gladly do it if there’s anything I can (realistically) do to help this channel grow.
It is impressive how players often think of three sided challenges in terms of "kicking the door" and not in terms of Rock-Paper-Scissors. It is something that we expect to be learned organically; for example, a group of martials is more effective against golems, a group with divine magic is more effective against undead, a group with more firepower is more effective against high numbered mobs. It is basically in the party composition to have that kind of adaptability... and yet players love to misjudge threats by panicking or jumping the gun. 🤔
I dunno. The last time the CR cast tried to solve things with Boulder Parchment Shears it ended in a giggle fit that so bad Matt had to call for a break.
Great video as always! If it's the c2 fight I am thinking of, it is at the very end and they are fighting less combatants than the pixie fight and all 7 players (plus maybe an ally NPC?) were at the table.
6:20 I do see merit in the DM breaking down a spell or ability with the players purely on the grounds of interpretation. There's countless ways that a players interpretation can be different from the DM's and nothing creates a Player vs DM atmosphere than the DM rightfully making a call on a rule that is drastically different to the player. So especially for things that the experienced DM knows aren't so clearly black and white, I appreciate the times when a DM can pause game play for this. Not every time but especially when a player is saying "I don't know how this works" because how it works is heavily influenced by how the DM thinks it works. Also the DM may need the refresher themselves and this a great way to subtly do that.
With the learning the abilities thing. Due to the fact that I'm still learning how these things work in TTRPGS, I'm so thankful that my players do look it up themselves but also I look them up as well so it'll forced me to actually understand the machanics better and how things are suppose to work vs how they could be abused or interpted. Part of me thinks that Matt does the reading from the book for the viewer to understand how the machanics work RAW but also to make sure it doesn't take forever to look it up because if the player doesn't know how to look it up, it will take FOREVER! As I feel like I'm doing when I'm trying to look it up. So I think it's a little less "annoyed" and more "AH! This is a good time for you to get an feel for this and maybe I should make sure myself so I can do the proper ruling." His annoyance tone has a very different feel than from that part and I really think he just was genuinely thinking that maybe this was a good time to get a better grasp again because he himself had no reason to look it up either until now. Cus Feywylds. Feywylds do weird shit and can confound even the most logical of logicals. right now my feywylds is probably the safest xD but I'm playing it more like where a lot of fairytales come from so it's whimsy with some danger (cus undead) and everything is chaotic outside of the Grimmswood/Feywylds. to where it's unsettling, "peaceful silence. Though I have another world where the Feywylds are closer to how the Druids and Celtic lore would view it as it's both where the Fae are as well as the dead. So it'll be intresting to play around with that when I get the chance. (neither version are typcial Faywylds of DnD 5e.)
Could not disagree with the counterspell take more. The players are aware they have counterspell so do something else. If Matt did this all the time then sure it would feel bad, but this is one fight where there are tons of counterspells. You have weapons, you can wild shape if you’re Keyleth. Scanlan can use his vestige to attack and still use cutting words or counterspell himself to burn more of their counterspells. There are absolutely options available to them.
Additionally, personally, I feel like the feel of the fight, how frustrating it was, really fits the enemy they were fighting. It's an emasculating experience, getting shut down by these tiny creatures. I think that's worth something.
I wasn't sure exactly what the pixie fight would entail, but I had a strong suspicion it would be wildly frustrating for the players, just because my trope-sense was tingling. And Matt delivered! I'd argue that sometimes tactical frustration is thematically appropriate ... just so long as you employ it very very sparingly.
I remember being frustrated in this session because it seemed like they could have just talked to the Pixies and avoided the whole conflict but maybe things would have gone sideways anyway since it's the Feywild.
I still make fun of my players for repeatedly telling me how cool it would be to run some adventures in a Drow city. I promised them I could make it happen and I spoke to each of them together and individually about what Drow are like and what parts of Drow "lore" they consider most important and interesting. Then I built a city, with 3 major houses vying for power and 3 minor houses more subtly trying to turn the tables on the larger houses. Every house had at least 1 diabolical political maneuvering as well as at least 2 secrets for the party to uncover. After all this build up, and months of preparation on my part, the 12th level party is admitted to the city as outsiders. Looked down upon but tolerated due solely to their strength and thus their potential usefulness to anyone clever and bold enough to attempt to manipulate them. They spoke to a guard captain, and 1 representative of a major house and 1 merchant member of a minor house before deciding that "Drow being assholes sounded cool until they started being assholes to us" and left the city after a few hours. I wish I'd had a logical reason to include an invisible, impassable wall.
The strength of counterspell, and its frustration for players when it's used against them a lot, is part of why I like the changes to counterspell that are being tested where it involves a constitution saving throw from the target to resist being countered, plus you don't lose the spell slot of a spell that is countered so you don't waste your big resources when you do fail the save. Pretty much any time I watch a D&D stream, I can't help but feel that counterspell is way too powerful to the point of being an absolute necessity, nerfing it a little I think is a very good idea. I don't know how well the changes work in practice, but I think it's at minimum moving in the right direction.
-What I do about pet NPC's- I gave my players the opportunity to earn stewardship of land from a political leader pretty early on in the game. As they came across NPC's that they liked, they had a place to send them (if the npc is willing). Now every once in a while, I get to have them run into 2-3 people and interact, makes it fun for me and hopefully feels meaningful to them
I honestly like the idea of the pixie fight cuz its a combat thats more of a puzzle than a fight. Pixies have few hit points and dont do much damage so unlike most fights they have its really just about figuring out ways to get around all the counterspells and polymorphs and stuff, rather than hacking at hit points. Its a puzzle for the spellcasters to think outside the box the same way a fight with a flying/burrowing creature or a teleporting rogue would be a puzzle for melee characters. Maybe the spellcasters need to use things that aren't spells, or try to get out of range or out of sight of the counterspells, or strategically try to use up the pixies 'reactions before the spellcasters turns. The fact that CR is a consistent weekly campaign and they tend to have a lot of combats means not only is it not a big deal if one fight is annoying and frustrating, but also matt needs to really work to make combats feel fresh and different from one another, and a puzzle fight like this is a good way to do it. It probably could have been done better, maybe the pixies should have had fewer hp, maybe the players were approaching it too much like a regular combat, but if so, oh well. They'll have another normal fight soon and I think it was worth the risk.
The transitive property of badassery sounds so based and I can understand where this thinking coming from, but its also stupid to me. Maybe because I've played so many games over the years to see encounters with much lower CR almost wipe the party and with much higher CR be cake walks because of various factors. I've also watch so many animes that loves to destroy this concept making making weaker character win fights against much stronger opponents. So I don't see why it would be hard to have a reason why a strong group wants the party to take out a different group. Now it might be a little hard to have them admit to the players WHY.
I also wanted to point to something to prove that just because person A can beat person B and person B can beat person C, that doesn't automatic means C loses to A. But I couldn't think of any until now. Star Wars. Anakin can stomp Dooku, Dooku can stomp Obi-wan and Obi-wan's defensive style can outlast and overcome Anakin.
When a Pc doesn't know their feature, I always ask: "How's it work?" and then I look it up too. Then I know how _they think_ it works, and how it _actually_ works. With the lycanthropes, I would've gone a different way. I'd have said they *can't* fight the pixies, they are bound by a pact not to harm them (though I'd have made the Pc's work a little bit for this info, so they know the Lycans don't want to admit this) through some fey nonsense, their patron or leader or whatever swore not to harm the pixie's, but the reverse isn't true, and the Pixie's are exploiting the loop hole. (I would also have it so that the Lycans were the aggressors in the past, and that they _could_ break the bargain, but then they would earn the ire of the Pixie's patron, and so they are foisting that on outsiders who are going to leave the feywild soon anyway). Those Pixies sound nasty.
I don't understand how you have less than 50 k subscribers like I know another bunch of channels I watch and I'm like man this guy's content is so much I don't want to see better cuz I feel like that's insulting but like the demystified series is one of my favorites I always look forward to it
This episode/arc kind of felt like Matt prolonging their time in the feywild because he wanted it to be memorable. I think that's why much of it is cut for the cartoon.
Its kind of a feywild problem in general, and a few other places like haunted houses. Like...I know I should play like an intelligent person who doesn't want to die via Ghost or Fariy. BUT ALSO I came here for adventures and I want to talk to the dang Ghost and Fairy.
The way I see counterspell is why would you take that if you're just going about your day as a mage? Why would the NPC assume they would regularly get into positions where they need to counterspell, especially if their neighbors have counterspell and are their friends?
I occasionally pull the safety net from my casual players. I do allow people who pull up the answer on their phone to pass over the phone to the player who needs help. Now If I can get them just to read the highlights. September is going to be interesting.
as someone whose played a fair bit of Pokémon and some other games where its not always a binary "this beats that" I'm normally more of the mindset of "what are they good at what are they bad at what can I use against them" if you got two people using the same gear methods and strategies like two brawlers and one of them is just bigger and stronger then yeah the weaker guy probably isn't gonna win if he fights like a brawler, but with games like Pokémon having type advantage can be a big difference in how effective you are or aren't against another team or opponent. or even just how your fighting like a wizard against a barbarian it looks like the barb is gonna win in a slugging competition, then the wizard casts fly gets a safe Hight up and just keep peppering the barbarian that lacks the range to keep fighting. power speed and flexibility in tactics are kind of the big 3 in a fight. this is why in the analogy you used with Spider-Man the hulk and super-man Spider-Man might have a bit of an edge in the fight with super-man over the hulk. sure the hulk is stronger in brute force then Spider-Man but Spider-Man has better agility and is more versatile in his skillset and thinking then the hulk who tends to just brute force things
I've never really bought the argument that GMs should avoid counterspell because it takes away player agency. Yes, it's annoying to be counterspelled, but it doesn't take any agency any more than missing your attack or finding out the enemy is immune to the damage type you were using or the enemy making a saving throw does. Sometimes your actions just don't work out. The players still have agency to act on their turn, they just might be in a weaker position than they want to be. Compared to being Petrified, Paralyzed, Stunned, Banished, Possessed, even Restrained, Counterspell is a very minor inconvenience. And if enemy is heavy on counterspells and that gives your martial players a chance to shine, is that really so bad?
Generally, I think when you want a player or players to have a cool moment, it’s better to give them something that plays to their strengths than to put the rest of the party down. While the outcome might be similar, those two situations are very different in practice. Mainly because the latter actively makes one or more players do better at the expense of others.
@@Aplesedjr I think DMs not using certain kinds of spells or abilities generally rewards players for metagaming. If the players are aware that the DM will never use charm spells on them, then they can choose their spells, abilities and make items in such a way that they don't have to worry about charm. Moreover, it punishes players who choose abilities, races, or classes that help protect against charm because those abilities effectively do nothing. "Playing to their strengths" and never their weaknesses means that characters with defensive abilities never get to use them. Moreover, you can't have a heroic moment if there aren't any stakes. If the monsters are just big bags of hit points that don't do anything interesting, then there are no cool moments beyond how quickly you can deplete their HP. You can't create tension if you aren't ever willing to give the enemy the advantage.
29:35 the same thing happened to me. i think we played 4 rounds and i was the spy for the first 3 of them. after the 4th round when i finally wasn`t the spy i looked back on the first 3 rounds and understood what i was supposed to do. never played another round though.
It is silly to think players wont go and 'push the button' like of course they are going to do the fun option. Heck, my character almost died (would have if it weren't for the GM making up some stuff to save me) but my reasoning for getting into trouble was it would be funny, and like it was in a way but the point is players are going to do the most entertaining option
something I saw today said "running your own RPG campaign is like buying your cats an expensive cat tower to play on and then watching them sit in the box it came in, eating packing peanuts"
Marisha asked if she could ritual cast stuff fairly often, and the answer was always no. Is that because she was a druid and they don't ritual cast things? Or the kinds of spells she was trying to cast? Or some other reason?
Only spells that are specifically flagged as ritual spells can be cast as such. Usually these are like field effect spells (Identify, Detect Magic, etc.). Healing or restorative spells are definitely not ritual spells.
I actually think it’s gonna line up just about perfectly so they’re overlapping! I won’t know for sure until we get there and see how much story they cover in season 3, but my guess is that cartoon-first viewers mostly won’t be spoiled by my videos. (That’s certainly my hope, because then I can use screenshots from those episodes in my videos and get some good synergy going!)
I think the pixie fight with all the counterspelling was fine. The party is in a magical world fighting against magical creatures and tried to out-magic them. You say that this made the caster PCs helpless, unable to contribute. Why not throw a dagger or swing a staff? Better than doing no damage because you got counterspelled again.
Because that isn't what they built their characters for, and it sucks to not be able to use your class features in a class-based TTRPG. When you use counterspell too liberally, you're basically one step away from just outright handing your player a Commoner stat block instead of a character sheet. Your first point about the setting is just outright stupid too, nobody said anything about the world they were in being low magic or it being strange that the pixies all cast spells. The criticism levied at this fight is that it's a common mistake for new DMs to make, which is underestimating the value of the action economy in 5E in particular.
I'm a little shock to hear you don't like NPCs having class level. Why is that? Is it not in the base rules to give NPCs class level? I've never touch 5e but every other edition (except 4th) the main way you increase the power of monsters is to give them class levels. 4th edition doesn't do this because characters and NPCs are basically built on completely different systems. Is this not in 5e but people so used to it in older edition port it over?
In the DMG it talks about how some people’s instinct is to build out NPCs like player characters, but that often results in having too much to manage while running the rest of the game. Focusing on a few key elements in a stat block makes the process a lot easier than having to deal with spell slots, and is the reason why 5.5 has a lot more monsters with 1/day abilities.
@@emmakane6848 interesting and I don't know how to feel about that as I instantly had 2 opposite reactions to reading that. On one side I can see wanting to make sure new GMs don't get overwhelm. on the other having a rule that says don't do this because its too hard to GMs that have been doing this for 20 years insulting. Also this kind of simplifying the rules while making it popular completely turned me off to the game.
@@arthurmarshall6825 I usually give the important NPCs a couple of class abilities or magic items listed in their actions. I almost never give them a full PC stat block with full class levels - that's a misuse of my prep time and my attention during the encounter itself. Who cares that the NPC has 27 things they can do? Half of them will be irrelevant to the encounter, another quarter will be repeats or variants of other actions I could take, all of them I'll need to keep track of - relevant or not - and the encounter is going to last 3-6 rounds anyway. What I actually need and what will actually improve my encounter is a short and easily readable list of varied and impactful actions well suited to the situation. Plus the characters can talk, move and interact with their environment to change narrative positioning, which doesn't require adding anything to the stat block. That's plenty. It's like going to a restaurant where they only serve six kinds of ramen, rather than one with a ten page long menu with everything from French onion soup, to enchiladas, to sushi. It's simpler, sure, but in this case that's a GOOD THING. Complexity is not a virtue, it's a design choice, and sometimes it's the wrong one.
@@dziooooo I was with you until I felt personally attack so I'm going to push back. Simpler in this case is a good thing FOR YOU. Its NOT a good thing for everyone. Yes complexity is a design choice and for me it is a virtue. I have a friend whom tried 5e and decided he didn't like it and wouldn't play again. It wasn't complex enough for him to join. Both of us grew up playing very crunchy games and we got good at them with the complexity being part of the joy. I also played some very simple games and they were not for me. I do understand complexity can be a struggle for some. We are in games with people like that. Sometimes we have to slow down for them and that's fine. I'm never going to play 5e. I'm here because the lessons Mike talks about can be applied to a wide range of rpgs. And sometimes those lessons get into design choice where I throw my opinion in.
@@arthurmarshall6825 interpreting anything at all in my comment as a personal attack is absurd. I was talking about game design, I don't see what it has to do with you personally, I had nothing at all to say about you. Complexity is a design choice of the author and a personal preference of the players. In terms of preferences, there is no right and wrong, you like what you like and there's no "virtue" in choosing either. But in terms of design? You absolutely CAN have unnecessary complexity which makes the overall design worse. I believe that adding very complex stat blocks for NPCs in D&D encounter design is a poor choice, unless we're talking about giving an NPC one level of Warlock or something (which would result in the kind of stat block I use actually). Otherwise it's a waste of resources which can be much better used to improve other aspects of the encounter, and it adds very little of value compared to what it "costs" to implement. I would also recommend considering a less patronizing tone. The way you're talking about complexity being a struggle for some people and you, smart as you are, graciously slowing down for them sounds extremely condescending. That may not be your intent, but you should be aware that's how it sounds. (Now that part WAS about you, not intended as an "attack" though, just some friendly advice...)
“Be sure you’re registered to vote, it’s very important, especially this year”? Uuughhhh! Quit shoving your politics down our throats and stick to DnD!! lol jkjkjk
Professionals who do not know there character bothers me. So I stopped watching them long ago. I just check out "best moments" because they have talent despite there lack of skill.
Have you ever played or run a game in the Feywild?
Our current game is in the Feywild right now. It's pretty tame, like out of a fairy tale, but it is also the realm of the gods in the homebrew setting we are using. I very much get Narnia vibes from it.
No, nor have I done anything in an equivalent (or at least somewhere presented as an equivalent - There's an argument that you could run The Undercity in Heart: The City Beneath as a fae realm - travel seems to operate on similar 'logic' to how stories and folklore typically present travel in fae realms, but our one shot of that didn't really get that into it so it didn't really feel like a fae realm, more of a surrealist horror) and I think you _could_ justifiably run the Aniworld in an Animon Story campaign as a fae realm, but I've and I don't think if my players decide to travel into it I'll be running it in that way - Maybe. I've established a kind of dream analogy to how Animon work and what they are...)
currently playing (a shock as a forever DM) as an Eladrin "fae knight" swashbuckler/hexblade in Wild Beyond the Witchlight.
After 2 1/2 years the 5e game I run is careening toward a denouement in the Feywild. The party has been harassed and the Menagerie Coast tormented by a fey incursion since pretty much session 1. I'm looking forward to creating my own weird incarnation of the Plane of Faeries!
I am currently running through Wild Beyond the Witchlight…. Sooooo sorta? Like, it’s not “The Feywild™ “ proper, but it is a feywild demiplane thing
Garmeli: "Here is everything we must avoid!"
Vox Machina: "Got it, list of attractions to visit."
This is when Travis knew he had to be a werewolf.
I'm gonna be real with you... He knew before this. He's been very vocal about loving werewolves
And a pixie
Travis playing petrified for that long is doubly impressive when you know he has ADHD
tbf sometimes ADHD lets you Commit to the Bit™
@@Sootielove good point hehe
@@Sootielove and it's always fun
"Liam was actually excited about being a kitty cat"
This is the moment Frumpkin was born😅
Druid PC when Liam?
@@IamtheLexxAlready had one, technically
In defense of Sam not having been able to use Countercharm before: when has that ability ever come up? Like at all?
Honestly, that's a critique of Bards as a whole.
They're a cool concept, but some abilities like countercharm don't come up enough, so people (both DMs and players) often forget about it when they actually could be used.
Obviously that's not the designers fault, but they should give more incentive to use charms so that you can use and remember countercharm
@@Melina_Evarblume_Seelie it's kind of ironic, one of the strongest classes with a lot of great and versatile features, also has arguably the worst base class feature in 5e.
@@Melina_Evarblume_Seelie I feel countercharm is one of those abilities that got ported over from earlier editions without fully thinking through how it would function in the new version.
@@l0stndamned Absolutely.
It makes perfect sense if your DM uses charms (although an action for a round is a little rough), but it's entirely useless if they don't. Just a few improvements/conversions and additions to monsters/magical enemies would make it so cool.
It's a shame.
Even more so considering how useless countercharm is on paper - spend your action every round to MAYBE help people if there is an attempt to charm them AFTER you do it - it's why they changed it in the playtest and 2024 PHB.
Scanlan is one of the few bards I've seen that could in-theory be doing RAW countercharm all the time, since he's got that Jaskier-esque "I walk alongside and sing at the party all the time" vibe.
Classic "cavernous maw" when you try imitating Matt
Tips for more Matt-ism:
- If a mountain is rocky use the word "cragulous". That word doesn't exist but Matt uses it all the time to describe rocky mountains.
- If something is really large, describe it as "heavy". Even if it's just a wide empty cavern. The cavern is heavy.
- If something is rotting, it's smells sweet and citrus-like. Always citrus-like.
@@OccidentalAviancan’t forget “blueish arcane energy” whenever someone casts an unspecified spell.
"The transitive property of badassery" love it ❤
Reaches into my dice bag for my set of non-transitive d6s "Let's play a little game..."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intransitive_dice
Ooooooh thank you for my evening reading!
I think there's a couple interesting things during your coverage of the combat:
1. Regarding the "Why wouldn't every enemy caster have counterspell?" question, an important facet of the answer should be "Because it's not your job as DM to shut down and then murder the spellcaster PCs. You're supposed to be creating interesting challenges for them to overcome, not turning their characters into chunky red paste and laughing about it. Every spellcaster having counterspell isn't fun for the PCs, and honestly, it sounds like a pain in the butt to run as a GM."
2. Action Economy is king in 5E. Matt may not have expected this fight to be tough, but Vox Machina was also down a PC for the entire fight and with the counterspells flying around, half the party was essentially losing every turn. Of course it was hard. This is a huge thing to look out for when balancing encounters (and also a very powerful tool for making those special encounters extra tough). Every lost action makes the fight that much harder.
Yeah, Grog being petrified before the fight even started is the main reason it was so hard because hve was a third of the party martial power
Some possible reasons for an npc caster to not have counterspell: 1) the caster does not have to battle other casters often (casters are rare, wizards of high enough level are unionised etc.) so learning counterspell instead of something with greater utility is a waste of effort, 2) the caster is lower-level or multi-class and hasn't trained enough in a relevant class to get the spell, 3) the caster has low wisdom and didn't think it would be important, 4) abjuration is seen as one of the less "cool" branches of magic in-universe so folks aren't interested in learning that sort of thing or 5) the caster is the apprentice of a wizard who is paranoid about being backstabbed by their followers, so only teaches them anti-magic stuff once they've proved their trustworthiness.
6) The npc is has it, but also has other reactions (like the shield spell) that grant a tactical choice to both sides of the combat.
After a combat where I ended up counterspelling a player to the point they didn’t participate in a fight, I introduced a new house rule.
Counter spell is now a contested roll. When someone casts counter spell, both sides roll a d20 and add there spell ability modifier. If one side as cast at a higher level, they get the difference as a bonus to their roll. (E.g they cast a banishment spell and a 3rd counter spell. The one casting banishment would get a plus one).
Who ever rolls higher has there spell take effect. And counter spell can no longer be counted.
This way it becomes like a wizard duel rather than preventing them from playing.
smart house rule. clever still makes it useful and gives a valid reason to ether use counter spell or not as a caster.
@@wolfyblackknight8321 Yeah exactly just makes it more like a wizard battle.
Mildly related - I can 1000% verify how little fun it is being the spy every time in Spyfall. I played five games in a row, and was the spy every time. Fifth game I just said, 'I defect' and threw my spy card in the center before anyone asked questions. So I get this analogy quite easily.
Excited that this is the first episode that I am finally caught up on Critical Role Demystified. Although I probably should have spent more time catching up on campaign 3 since I'm just at episode 54.
Demistify me brother!
For Spyfall (A great game, but obviously terrible luck on Supergeek's part), my advice is that the player who was Spy the previous round is dealt the next round's card first (to increase the chance they aren't the spy). I also do a house rule where if someone is a Spy twice, on the third round, they deal the cards after picking a guaranteed location card, to ensure they aren't going to be the Spy again (the rest are shuffled and dealt normally).
(Edited for clarity)
I'm not sure why this particular scenario made my brain lock up because... technically if you're pulling from a larger stack it's a smaller fraction of the stack, but if you don't reshuffle every time you deal you actually have already determined who the spy is once you finish shuffling (say if the spy is 3rd in the stack, then the 3rd player to pick has a 100% chance of being the spy)... provided you're dealing them out rather than randomly picking from a fanned out stack ahaha. But that also feels so wrong to me XD
@@merchantarthurn I keep the spy on bottom of each deck (hiding the location cards behind it), so I can count out how many players there are while still ensuring the spy card is in there. Then, the cards are shuffled and delt one to each player. It's probably a Monty-Hall fallacy, but it just feels like if there are more cards available, the person will have a lower chance of being the spy again.
If it's the mulligan, the player just takes any card but the bottom, and the rest are shuffled after.
Not sure if that explanation made more sense.
More to the point, the friends should have paused the game, explained the rules, and let SG look at the locations page a bit before just throwing him in blind.
Tbh tho sam is one of the best at understanding his spells and abilities, especially in campaign 1
One of games I play in is an Exandria Campaign and we're about to head into the Feywild in a couple sessions so these videos are really well timed for me to help get hyped about it!
I don't know why, but I really noticed the bgm you used in this video. It sounds great
I like this channel. I don’t know how much text has to be in a comment to let the algorithm know I’m engaging with the video more than just watching it. But I am. And I gladly do it if there’s anything I can (realistically) do to help this channel grow.
I love these critical role videos it's just nice to hear a perspective from a DM and how someone could learn from These.
It is impressive how players often think of three sided challenges in terms of "kicking the door" and not in terms of Rock-Paper-Scissors.
It is something that we expect to be learned organically; for example, a group of martials is more effective against golems, a group with divine magic is more effective against undead, a group with more firepower is more effective against high numbered mobs.
It is basically in the party composition to have that kind of adaptability... and yet players love to misjudge threats by panicking or jumping the gun. 🤔
I dunno. The last time the CR cast tried to solve things with Boulder Parchment Shears it ended in a giggle fit that so bad Matt had to call for a break.
@@Boundwithflame23 😂😂😂
Just rewatched that episode this week.
This is a good channel. This is a good series. I like Mike.
You can do stuff when polymorphed. You can attack, hide, dash, hurt yourself enough to get depolymorphed, etc.
Great video as always! If it's the c2 fight I am thinking of, it is at the very end and they are fighting less combatants than the pixie fight and all 7 players (plus maybe an ally NPC?) were at the table.
Also the party had several characters able to use counterspell themselves, so counter-counterspell made it less of an issue.
Travis holding still for so long is one of my favorite bits of the whole show
Yay, CR Demystified
This fight just shows us how action economy is the most important aspect of TTRPG battles.
6:20 I do see merit in the DM breaking down a spell or ability with the players purely on the grounds of interpretation. There's countless ways that a players interpretation can be different from the DM's and nothing creates a Player vs DM atmosphere than the DM rightfully making a call on a rule that is drastically different to the player. So especially for things that the experienced DM knows aren't so clearly black and white, I appreciate the times when a DM can pause game play for this. Not every time but especially when a player is saying "I don't know how this works" because how it works is heavily influenced by how the DM thinks it works. Also the DM may need the refresher themselves and this a great way to subtly do that.
With the learning the abilities thing. Due to the fact that I'm still learning how these things work in TTRPGS, I'm so thankful that my players do look it up themselves but also I look them up as well so it'll forced me to actually understand the machanics better and how things are suppose to work vs how they could be abused or interpted. Part of me thinks that Matt does the reading from the book for the viewer to understand how the machanics work RAW but also to make sure it doesn't take forever to look it up because if the player doesn't know how to look it up, it will take FOREVER! As I feel like I'm doing when I'm trying to look it up. So I think it's a little less "annoyed" and more "AH! This is a good time for you to get an feel for this and maybe I should make sure myself so I can do the proper ruling." His annoyance tone has a very different feel than from that part and I really think he just was genuinely thinking that maybe this was a good time to get a better grasp again because he himself had no reason to look it up either until now. Cus Feywylds. Feywylds do weird shit and can confound even the most logical of logicals.
right now my feywylds is probably the safest xD but I'm playing it more like where a lot of fairytales come from so it's whimsy with some danger (cus undead) and everything is chaotic outside of the Grimmswood/Feywylds. to where it's unsettling, "peaceful silence. Though I have another world where the Feywylds are closer to how the Druids and Celtic lore would view it as it's both where the Fae are as well as the dead. So it'll be intresting to play around with that when I get the chance. (neither version are typcial Faywylds of DnD 5e.)
Could not disagree with the counterspell take more. The players are aware they have counterspell so do something else. If Matt did this all the time then sure it would feel bad, but this is one fight where there are tons of counterspells. You have weapons, you can wild shape if you’re Keyleth. Scanlan can use his vestige to attack and still use cutting words or counterspell himself to burn more of their counterspells. There are absolutely options available to them.
Additionally, personally, I feel like the feel of the fight, how frustrating it was, really fits the enemy they were fighting. It's an emasculating experience, getting shut down by these tiny creatures. I think that's worth something.
I wasn't sure exactly what the pixie fight would entail, but I had a strong suspicion it would be wildly frustrating for the players, just because my trope-sense was tingling. And Matt delivered! I'd argue that sometimes tactical frustration is thematically appropriate ... just so long as you employ it very very sparingly.
I remember being frustrated in this session because it seemed like they could have just talked to the Pixies and avoided the whole conflict but maybe things would have gone sideways anyway since it's the Feywild.
Ehh maybe, but pixies are bastards 99% of the time and would likely have tried to fuck with vm in some way.
I just wanna say that Spider-Man has beaten Hulk several times.
I still make fun of my players for repeatedly telling me how cool it would be to run some adventures in a Drow city. I promised them I could make it happen and I spoke to each of them together and individually about what Drow are like and what parts of Drow "lore" they consider most important and interesting. Then I built a city, with 3 major houses vying for power and 3 minor houses more subtly trying to turn the tables on the larger houses. Every house had at least 1 diabolical political maneuvering as well as at least 2 secrets for the party to uncover.
After all this build up, and months of preparation on my part, the 12th level party is admitted to the city as outsiders. Looked down upon but tolerated due solely to their strength and thus their potential usefulness to anyone clever and bold enough to attempt to manipulate them. They spoke to a guard captain, and 1 representative of a major house and 1 merchant member of a minor house before deciding that "Drow being assholes sounded cool until they started being assholes to us" and left the city after a few hours.
I wish I'd had a logical reason to include an invisible, impassable wall.
19:47 I remember that feeling in our game of Mage!
this upload really had me asking myself: is it thursday yet?
The strength of counterspell, and its frustration for players when it's used against them a lot, is part of why I like the changes to counterspell that are being tested where it involves a constitution saving throw from the target to resist being countered, plus you don't lose the spell slot of a spell that is countered so you don't waste your big resources when you do fail the save. Pretty much any time I watch a D&D stream, I can't help but feel that counterspell is way too powerful to the point of being an absolute necessity, nerfing it a little I think is a very good idea. I don't know how well the changes work in practice, but I think it's at minimum moving in the right direction.
-What I do about pet NPC's- I gave my players the opportunity to earn stewardship of land from a political leader pretty early on in the game. As they came across NPC's that they liked, they had a place to send them (if the npc is willing). Now every once in a while, I get to have them run into 2-3 people and interact, makes it fun for me and hopefully feels meaningful to them
I honestly like the idea of the pixie fight cuz its a combat thats more of a puzzle than a fight. Pixies have few hit points and dont do much damage so unlike most fights they have its really just about figuring out ways to get around all the counterspells and polymorphs and stuff, rather than hacking at hit points. Its a puzzle for the spellcasters to think outside the box the same way a fight with a flying/burrowing creature or a teleporting rogue would be a puzzle for melee characters. Maybe the spellcasters need to use things that aren't spells, or try to get out of range or out of sight of the counterspells, or strategically try to use up the pixies 'reactions before the spellcasters turns. The fact that CR is a consistent weekly campaign and they tend to have a lot of combats means not only is it not a big deal if one fight is annoying and frustrating, but also matt needs to really work to make combats feel fresh and different from one another, and a puzzle fight like this is a good way to do it.
It probably could have been done better, maybe the pixies should have had fewer hp, maybe the players were approaching it too much like a regular combat, but if so, oh well. They'll have another normal fight soon and I think it was worth the risk.
I think this fight was nade for grog. And he was the one petrified.
Which was realy bad
Man I miss critrolestats
The transitive property of badassery sounds so based and I can understand where this thinking coming from, but its also stupid to me. Maybe because I've played so many games over the years to see encounters with much lower CR almost wipe the party and with much higher CR be cake walks because of various factors. I've also watch so many animes that loves to destroy this concept making making weaker character win fights against much stronger opponents. So I don't see why it would be hard to have a reason why a strong group wants the party to take out a different group. Now it might be a little hard to have them admit to the players WHY.
I also wanted to point to something to prove that just because person A can beat person B and person B can beat person C, that doesn't automatic means C loses to A. But I couldn't think of any until now. Star Wars. Anakin can stomp Dooku, Dooku can stomp Obi-wan and Obi-wan's defensive style can outlast and overcome Anakin.
When a Pc doesn't know their feature, I always ask: "How's it work?" and then I look it up too. Then I know how _they think_ it works, and how it _actually_ works.
With the lycanthropes, I would've gone a different way. I'd have said they *can't* fight the pixies, they are bound by a pact not to harm them (though I'd have made the Pc's work a little bit for this info, so they know the Lycans don't want to admit this) through some fey nonsense, their patron or leader or whatever swore not to harm the pixie's, but the reverse isn't true, and the Pixie's are exploiting the loop hole. (I would also have it so that the Lycans were the aggressors in the past, and that they _could_ break the bargain, but then they would earn the ire of the Pixie's patron, and so they are foisting that on outsiders who are going to leave the feywild soon anyway). Those Pixies sound nasty.
I don't understand how you have less than 50 k subscribers like I know another bunch of channels I watch and I'm like man this guy's content is so much I don't want to see better cuz I feel like that's insulting but like the demystified series is one of my favorites I always look forward to it
This episode/arc kind of felt like Matt prolonging their time in the feywild because he wanted it to be memorable. I think that's why much of it is cut for the cartoon.
“Make sure you registered to vote. It’s very very important especially this year.“I wasn’t expecting that but it’s completely true.
Its kind of a feywild problem in general, and a few other places like haunted houses.
Like...I know I should play like an intelligent person who doesn't want to die via Ghost or Fariy.
BUT ALSO I came here for adventures and I want to talk to the dang Ghost and Fairy.
You know what episode I'm waiting to be demystified? Here's a hint they were drinking something with the same name as the enemy they were fighting.
The way I see counterspell is why would you take that if you're just going about your day as a mage? Why would the NPC assume they would regularly get into positions where they need to counterspell, especially if their neighbors have counterspell and are their friends?
I occasionally pull the safety net from my casual players. I do allow people who pull up the answer on their phone to pass over the phone to the player who needs help. Now If I can get them just to read the highlights.
September is going to be interesting.
as someone whose played a fair bit of Pokémon and some other games where its not always a binary "this beats that" I'm normally more of the mindset of "what are they good at what are they bad at what can I use against them" if you got two people using the same gear methods and strategies like two brawlers and one of them is just bigger and stronger then yeah the weaker guy probably isn't gonna win if he fights like a brawler, but with games like Pokémon having type advantage can be a big difference in how effective you are or aren't against another team or opponent. or even just how your fighting like a wizard against a barbarian it looks like the barb is gonna win in a slugging competition, then the wizard casts fly gets a safe Hight up and just keep peppering the barbarian that lacks the range to keep fighting. power speed and flexibility in tactics are kind of the big 3 in a fight.
this is why in the analogy you used with Spider-Man the hulk and super-man Spider-Man might have a bit of an edge in the fight with super-man over the hulk. sure the hulk is stronger in brute force then Spider-Man but Spider-Man has better agility and is more versatile in his skillset and thinking then the hulk who tends to just brute force things
I've never really bought the argument that GMs should avoid counterspell because it takes away player agency. Yes, it's annoying to be counterspelled, but it doesn't take any agency any more than missing your attack or finding out the enemy is immune to the damage type you were using or the enemy making a saving throw does. Sometimes your actions just don't work out. The players still have agency to act on their turn, they just might be in a weaker position than they want to be. Compared to being Petrified, Paralyzed, Stunned, Banished, Possessed, even Restrained, Counterspell is a very minor inconvenience.
And if enemy is heavy on counterspells and that gives your martial players a chance to shine, is that really so bad?
Generally, I think when you want a player or players to have a cool moment, it’s better to give them something that plays to their strengths than to put the rest of the party down. While the outcome might be similar, those two situations are very different in practice. Mainly because the latter actively makes one or more players do better at the expense of others.
@@Aplesedjr I think DMs not using certain kinds of spells or abilities generally rewards players for metagaming. If the players are aware that the DM will never use charm spells on them, then they can choose their spells, abilities and make items in such a way that they don't have to worry about charm. Moreover, it punishes players who choose abilities, races, or classes that help protect against charm because those abilities effectively do nothing. "Playing to their strengths" and never their weaknesses means that characters with defensive abilities never get to use them.
Moreover, you can't have a heroic moment if there aren't any stakes. If the monsters are just big bags of hit points that don't do anything interesting, then there are no cool moments beyond how quickly you can deplete their HP. You can't create tension if you aren't ever willing to give the enemy the advantage.
29:35 the same thing happened to me. i think we played 4 rounds and i was the spy for the first 3 of them. after the 4th round when i finally wasn`t the spy i looked back on the first 3 rounds and understood what i was supposed to do. never played another round though.
It is silly to think players wont go and 'push the button' like of course they are going to do the fun option. Heck, my character almost died (would have if it weren't for the GM making up some stuff to save me) but my reasoning for getting into trouble was it would be funny, and like it was in a way but the point is players are going to do the most entertaining option
something I saw today said "running your own RPG campaign is like buying your cats an expensive cat tower to play on and then watching them sit in the box it came in, eating packing peanuts"
Marisha asked if she could ritual cast stuff fairly often, and the answer was always no. Is that because she was a druid and they don't ritual cast things? Or the kinds of spells she was trying to cast? Or some other reason?
Druids are like Clerics. They can rit-cast a spell if that spell is a ritual, AND they have that spell memorized that day.
Only spells that are specifically flagged as ritual spells can be cast as such. Usually these are like field effect spells (Identify, Detect Magic, etc.). Healing or restorative spells are definitely not ritual spells.
Do you think you will start talking in this serie about the content of the season 3 of the legend of vox machina before it starts?
I actually think it’s gonna line up just about perfectly so they’re overlapping! I won’t know for sure until we get there and see how much story they cover in season 3, but my guess is that cartoon-first viewers mostly won’t be spoiled by my videos.
(That’s certainly my hope, because then I can use screenshots from those episodes in my videos and get some good synergy going!)
@@SupergeekMike I hope it will line up smoothly ^^
Commento algoritmo hehe
Tbh, though. Spider-Man could probably beat the Hulk. At least if it’s their MCU versions.
I get th FOMO out but i have plenty of time think of my ratio al character to just walk onand not my want to poke everything with 10 foot pole.
Who else learned from this video that they've apparently been pronouncing bona fides wrong their whole life
I think the pixie fight with all the counterspelling was fine. The party is in a magical world fighting against magical creatures and tried to out-magic them. You say that this made the caster PCs helpless, unable to contribute. Why not throw a dagger or swing a staff? Better than doing no damage because you got counterspelled again.
Because that isn't what they built their characters for, and it sucks to not be able to use your class features in a class-based TTRPG.
When you use counterspell too liberally, you're basically one step away from just outright handing your player a Commoner stat block instead of a character sheet.
Your first point about the setting is just outright stupid too, nobody said anything about the world they were in being low magic or it being strange that the pixies all cast spells. The criticism levied at this fight is that it's a common mistake for new DMs to make, which is underestimating the value of the action economy in 5E in particular.
@@masterofastra It's ONE fight. It's not like it happens most fights. Oh, boo hoo, I can't use my spells reliably for one fight.
I'm a little shock to hear you don't like NPCs having class level. Why is that? Is it not in the base rules to give NPCs class level? I've never touch 5e but every other edition (except 4th) the main way you increase the power of monsters is to give them class levels. 4th edition doesn't do this because characters and NPCs are basically built on completely different systems. Is this not in 5e but people so used to it in older edition port it over?
In the DMG it talks about how some people’s instinct is to build out NPCs like player characters, but that often results in having too much to manage while running the rest of the game. Focusing on a few key elements in a stat block makes the process a lot easier than having to deal with spell slots, and is the reason why 5.5 has a lot more monsters with 1/day abilities.
@@emmakane6848 interesting and I don't know how to feel about that as I instantly had 2 opposite reactions to reading that. On one side I can see wanting to make sure new GMs don't get overwhelm. on the other having a rule that says don't do this because its too hard to GMs that have been doing this for 20 years insulting. Also this kind of simplifying the rules while making it popular completely turned me off to the game.
@@arthurmarshall6825 I usually give the important NPCs a couple of class abilities or magic items listed in their actions. I almost never give them a full PC stat block with full class levels - that's a misuse of my prep time and my attention during the encounter itself. Who cares that the NPC has 27 things they can do? Half of them will be irrelevant to the encounter, another quarter will be repeats or variants of other actions I could take, all of them I'll need to keep track of - relevant or not - and the encounter is going to last 3-6 rounds anyway. What I actually need and what will actually improve my encounter is a short and easily readable list of varied and impactful actions well suited to the situation. Plus the characters can talk, move and interact with their environment to change narrative positioning, which doesn't require adding anything to the stat block. That's plenty.
It's like going to a restaurant where they only serve six kinds of ramen, rather than one with a ten page long menu with everything from French onion soup, to enchiladas, to sushi.
It's simpler, sure, but in this case that's a GOOD THING. Complexity is not a virtue, it's a design choice, and sometimes it's the wrong one.
@@dziooooo I was with you until I felt personally attack so I'm going to push back. Simpler in this case is a good thing FOR YOU. Its NOT a good thing for everyone. Yes complexity is a design choice and for me it is a virtue. I have a friend whom tried 5e and decided he didn't like it and wouldn't play again. It wasn't complex enough for him to join. Both of us grew up playing very crunchy games and we got good at them with the complexity being part of the joy. I also played some very simple games and they were not for me. I do understand complexity can be a struggle for some. We are in games with people like that. Sometimes we have to slow down for them and that's fine.
I'm never going to play 5e. I'm here because the lessons Mike talks about can be applied to a wide range of rpgs. And sometimes those lessons get into design choice where I throw my opinion in.
@@arthurmarshall6825 interpreting anything at all in my comment as a personal attack is absurd. I was talking about game design, I don't see what it has to do with you personally, I had nothing at all to say about you.
Complexity is a design choice of the author and a personal preference of the players. In terms of preferences, there is no right and wrong, you like what you like and there's no "virtue" in choosing either. But in terms of design? You absolutely CAN have unnecessary complexity which makes the overall design worse. I believe that adding very complex stat blocks for NPCs in D&D encounter design is a poor choice, unless we're talking about giving an NPC one level of Warlock or something (which would result in the kind of stat block I use actually). Otherwise it's a waste of resources which can be much better used to improve other aspects of the encounter, and it adds very little of value compared to what it "costs" to implement.
I would also recommend considering a less patronizing tone. The way you're talking about complexity being a struggle for some people and you, smart as you are, graciously slowing down for them sounds extremely condescending. That may not be your intent, but you should be aware that's how it sounds. (Now that part WAS about you, not intended as an "attack" though, just some friendly advice...)
Hah! Finally first!
Show me a candidate that is worth voting for and I'll show you a country that shouldn't have its own government.
“Be sure you’re registered to vote, it’s very important, especially this year”? Uuughhhh! Quit shoving your politics down our throats and stick to DnD!! lol jkjkjk
Professionals who do not know there character bothers me. So I stopped watching them long ago. I just check out "best moments" because they have talent despite there lack of skill.
Their...lol