When Players Clash: How Brennan Lee Mulligan Handles Player Conflict (A Crown of Candy)

Dimension 20's a Crown of Candy is an absolutely incredible show... With a lot more depth underneath the surface than you might think
Don't forget to check out the new channels!
YT: / @yeahimajaymer
Twitch: / yeahimajaymer
WATCH NEXT:
TTRPG Deep Dives: • TTRPG Deep Dives
Player Character Inspiration: • Player Character Inspi...
3 rules that change D&D as a whole? Oh yeah, you betcha.
//TOOLS & PRODUCTS I USE IN MY GAMES:
○ Tabletop Products and High Quality Maps (1985): 1985games.com?ref:jay-martin
○ High Quality Customizable Colored Miniatures (HeroForge): www.heroforge.com/tap/?ref=pl...
○ 3D Printed Customized Minatures for Tabletop Simulator Integration (Eldritch Foundry): eldritch-foundry.com/?stage=0
○ High Quality Sharp Edge Dice (Only Crits): www.onlycrits.com/?sca_ref=13...
○ Battle Maps, Dice Trays, and More! (Yarro Studios, Use Coupon Code PLAYYOURROLE335 for 20% Off!): yarrostudios.com/?ref=sdxxeue97w
//TOOLS & SERVICES I USE FOR VIDEOS:
○ Where I find my music (Epidemic) - www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
○ Content Analyzation and SEO Research Tool I Use (TubeBuddy)- www.tubebuddy.com/PYRole
For Business Inquiries: [e-mail]
TIMESTAMPS:
Come support my business:
Patreon: / playyourrole
PYR Ambience: / @pyrambience6931
TikTok: / play_your_role
Instagram: / roleyourplay
Twitter: / playyourrole3
** ABOUT ME **
Hello! My name is Jay, and I am a long-time veteran of storytelling and a semi-seasoned DM! I began playing Dungeons and Dragons roughly 5 years ago and began my first ever game as the DM. I figured things out by watching online games and fumbling my way through the rules, and never looked back! I've fallen in love with TTRPG's in general and want to share my experience and thoughts with the world and community I love so much. I currently DM two separate games regularly, and continue to learn every day.
** ABOUT THE CHANNEL **
Play Your Role is a project with the intention of helping inspire and coach players and DM’s alike to add story beats and dramatic moments into their games through basic writing concepts, interesting player character inspirations, and discussions on how to effectively roleplay in a way that helps (not hinders) everyone else's roleplay at the table!
TOPICS IN THIS VIDEO
• Dungeons and Dragons
•
• Dimension 20
•
• Pathfinder
•
• A Crown of Candy
•
• TTRPG
HASHTAGS
#pathfinder
#TTRPG
#dimension20
#ACrownofCandy
#storytelling
DISCLAIMER: Links included in this description might be affiliate links. If you purchase a product or service with the links that I provide I may receive a small commission. There is no additional charge to you! Thank you for supporting my channel so I can continue to provide you with free content each week!
5th edition,character creation,d&d 5th edition,dungeon & dragons,dungeon master,dungeons & dragons,dungeons and dragons,dungeons and dragons for beginners,how to,how to gm,how to pc,how to player character,player character,player character inspiration,player character inspritation,role playing,tabletop games,tabletop roleplaying,tabletop rpg,dnd character creation one dnd playtest one d&d,pathfinder,pathfinder2e,Dimension 20, Crown of Candy, Brennan Lee Mulligan, Zac Oyama, Lou Wilson, Crown of Candy

[@briannenurse4640]

I don't think Siobhan and Emily were ever actively upset with each other, but I do think they both got very emotionally invested in the character conflict.

[@mikejednorog3383]

Scrumper and moonshine. Never

[@TheOneNotTheOnly]

Yeah. There are just really good actors and role players

[@therevoltingslob2564]

Yeah Ruby was already an angsty teen before she lost her twin sister and best friend, and now she’s facing a new sister who will potentially be monarch so she’s taking Jet’s spot in multiple ways And Saccharina is a lonely young woman who has never experienced having a loving biological family and she really pines for that once she gets the chance not really understanding why the Rocks family isn’t ready for a new sister at this point Not to mention all the political pressure on top of that already precarious alliance I don’t think the people behind Ruby and Saccharina felt any true animosity, just that they knew there was no logical world in which those two would get along without a lot of friction first

[@spillymcspillmore3426]

Yep. I watched a video (think it was adventuring party, but might have been something else) where Siobhan and Emily discussed the Ruby/Sacaria dynamic. There were lots of emotions, but they were consistently checking in with each other to make sure it was all staying in the dome and bleeding into real-life friendship.

[@Figgy5119]

They were simply roleplaying. Brennan has them look only at him so their decisions aren't influenced by looking at each other's expressions.

[@yiledute]

yeah, it seemed obvious to me. This looked just like a good story in the making.

[@Zoe_K]

There's actually quite a bit of discussion in the "Adventuring Party" episodes from Siobhan and Emily the rest of the cast about how they managed their character conflict during this campaign, and how much they all were still friendly and enjoying the fictional conflict. They all had a lot of communication off camera, before and after the show, checking in, telling each other they loved each other, etc. Brennan and the rest of the cast and crew often discuss the importance of safety and trust at the table, and he gives a Lot of advice on how to foster that healthy environment both in Adventuring Party, Adventuring Academy, etc. They still joked that they were stressed out or worried because they were so invested in their characters and the story, but I believe you can really feel that it didn't bleed through to the real relationships of the players. (Still really enjoyed this video and your previous dimension 20 videos! Please note my comment isn't a criticism of your points or your hard work! Its completely understandable to not have watched ALL the hours and hours of bonus content about the show, but I just wanted to help out because your speculation might cause some confusion!)

[@ahealthkit2745]

Aftercare is legit important! I feel that in my own sessions. There's been some real rough moments, especially with characters getting mind control'd or just making decisions that other players disagree with, but that conversation outside of the game is super important to fostering those good feelings while still engaging in some fun, serious fictional conflict.

[@mariacomet]

Glad you pointed this out. I was VERY surprised by the "there's no interviews I can find" comment in the video as they have a ton of behind the scenes content of all the Adventure Party story line.

[@haileygalbraith6260]

You are such a sweet person, I can feel it. This is so wholesome and I wholeheartedly agree

[@ashleeknowlton5805]

Exactly. I think what it really boils down to is it really emotionally invested acting.

[@PhilosopherWR]

When the players are professional actors (like hold actual degrees in theater), you're bound to get really convinced of the emotions they're portraying. I love seeing the actresses from The Worst Witch being friends in interviews because it's so trippy. I'm used to seeing them being bitter rivals on the show.

[@revenantravings]

Siobhan did say that in that final confrontation, it would've been more in character to strike, but she didn't want to do that to her out of game friend. They weren't fighting out of game, they're very good friends that care about each other, to the point that character choices were pushed aside to preserve that. It's actually a really great example of how 'it's what my character would do' only works if everyone's having fun.

[@daphneglasurus7886]

I have trouble accepting this to be true with Ruby. She felt responsible for pushing Jett towards the silly adventure that ended up getting her killed so it sure felt believable that the character would eventually learn her lessons and not want to cause another sister’s death.

[@DraconisSmith]

In adventuring party episodes, in which they talk about previous episodes. They explain that there is a constant checkup as a team and as coworker/friends irl Emily and Siobhan are very good friends and they expected this conflict as soon as Jet's death was known lol. It's all just very good acting not only for the audience but to the DM as well.

[@DraconisSmith]

Of course you did a great job analyzing from your perspective as you always do given the amount of information you knew of. And if you had known we, more than likely wouldn't have had this great analysis.

[@RaRaBravura]

Exactly, there are so many adventuring parties to be reference for this context. Even adventuring parties in other seasons. The crew are pretty open about their feelings and how they discuss with each other on set even texting when they go home.

[@DraconisSmith]

@@RaRaBravura As far as that goes, they are very inspiring in both being able to keep emotion under control and understanding the context within their friendship of what's off-limits and what isn't.

[@camo770]

Genuinely love Brennan as a DM. I hope to be as good as him one day

[@PlayYourRole]

He remains in my top 3 inspirations of all time ngl

[@AlexGoldhill]

I hope to be as good a person as him.

[@snakebitcat]

The secret to being a great GM isn't trying to be like Brennan. It's taking inspiration from him (and other GMs that do stuff you appreciate) and being the best You that you can be.

[@HereBeDragonsYT]

I've been a DM for over 30 years, and I hope to be as good as him one day, too.

[@bubbajoezappern]

Dont compare yourselves to dms like him. The odds of you having as good players as him is small. And you should find your own style you are comfortable with and have fun.

[@iduno3592]

Totally agreed, this is a really important thing to discuss and think about. I believe character conflict is necessary, if everyone always agrees on everything... you are all playing the same character. When you start to reach the point where you can't tell if its the players or the characters that are upset you need to slow things down and distinguish that line. A lot of this is up to the DM to mediate and check in but there is also a lot that players can do to communicate the distinction between them and their character. [ STORY TIME BELOW ] As someone who does a lot more DMing than playing, I have had to deal with character conflict becoming player conflict. I try to check in and make sure its not hurting the players personally but its really hard to tell when its gone too far. This is why when I was playing a character that was a grumpy old detective who was keeping an eye on some criminals (the rest of the party), I made sure to tell people out of character all of the things I loved about their characters and that my opinions of them were seperate from my characters.

[@ahealthkit2745]

Something my play group discovered through experience is that, there are certainly many factors that lead to a character conflict developing into a player conflict. There are many things the GM can do to mediate, divert and thwart a brewing player conflict without truly having to draw the curtain back. I find that player conflict brews as a result of a character conflict growing overtly personal. And that's usually because there's something beyond character conflict which is rubbing both players the wrong way. The way the GM adjuciates various rolls, how they describe actions other players take, and whether or not they are biased towards one side all can play a heavy-handed role in turning what might be an innocent character conflict into a dire, out-of-game verbal fight. However, there are also definite scenarios where the soft-hand approach of avoiding incendiary language fails, and the problem is really due to some schism of perspective between the conflicting players. In our play group at least, this rarely happens, but from experience, has occurred because of a player choosing to do what they believe their character would do, to the detriment of the party. If the player in that opportunity chose not to do what they did, the encounter the rest of the party had would've been considerably less impactful, less dire and less exciting. The conflict between players was resolved immediately out of game at the end of the session, when that player explained the thinking behind their choice. The upset players understood their reasoning and found it valid, but admittedly was still concerned about what might happen to that player's character. The GM also stepped in and pointed out that it was a good thing, because it makes them motivated to find them and save them. Another encounter we've had is when a player character was hit with a status effect the whole table was sure would leave them permanently stuck as a bad guy character. The player conflict was about two of the players deciding weither or not to kill the affected player. The affected player, rightfully, was upset and worried about not being given an opportunity to escape from this terrible fate. The players out of the game discussed it at length, and eventually the player came around and believed that if they died during the encounter, it would be unfortunate, but the other players had perfect justification for it. The other players admitted they where just kidding about killing their character as a first resort, and in-game, they ultimately saved the affected PC and convinced the alchemist they hurt to help cure them. Ultimately, I totally agree with you! Player conflict is a two-way street, and the GM is sort of like traffic lights. They can mediate conflict, but ultimately it's the players themselves who have to choose to be good actors. They need to be willing to draw the curtain back when things get too heated, so they can explain themselves and work out a solution that appeals to both sides but that doesn't erase the fun aspects of the character conflict.

[@kingskelett6265]

The decision-contest between Ruby and Saccarina is a concept that is rather relevant in political science, called for example "security dilemma". The concept is rather simple, both 'players' have to make a decision, go forward and back down. This can happen in sequence, so one players decides and the other reacts, or simultaneosly. In this case, Ruby and Saccarina have the decision to make. Go forward, in this case attack the other, or back down. Now in political science, all four outcomes have a value assigned for both players depending on their actions. Should they both have chosen the same outcome they both get the same value, however if one backs down they receive the lowest value while the other receives the highest. The theory behind this is that people would tend to go forward, even if the value for both going forward is lower than both backing down, because backing down but having the other go forward results in the worst outcome for the own side. So it is not just a question of what you want to do, but also a question of if you want to risk the worst outcome. In this example, either of the ladies of Rocks could have easily chosen violence. Just because it would have been the safer option, paradoxic as it sounds. Brennan explained that, if either backs down, they leave themselves open. Which is why it is so important and also so great that both of them chose to make peace.

[@ahealthkit2745]

Very interesting insight and something that has definitely come up in my own session a few times! Thanks for commenting!

[@Sarahscopic]

I was going to say in a similar vein, Brennan set up a Prisoner's Dilemma here lol

[@z-beeblebrox]

I'd like to point out a nuance here: it is most LOGICAL, on analyzing the outcomes, for participants in the Prisoner's Dilemma to Betray rather than Cooperate. However, IN PRACTICE, humans are more likely to choose Cooperate rather than Betray. So Siobhan's and Emily's answers in fact aligned with human nature

[@Blucham]

I remember Emily discussing the scene where she got to act as Jett’s ghost, talking with her sister Ruby. It was a sweet moment where they could offer each other some closure. Apparently Emily had to restrain herself from saying something like “Oh and by the way, be nice to your new sister!” 😆 They were both just staying true to their characters, and enjoyed playing up the conflict. But your analysis of everything else was still excellent!

[@gettingmeyer7418]

You should watch the adventuring party episodes talking about this campaign for more insight on the player interactions, it's quite illuminating and fun!

[@TheClosetExtrovert]

I'm really becoming fond of ttrpg scenes and mechanics that acknowledge points of contention both in and above the board. One example I think of right away is the game Follow, where the players are all undertaking a quest portrayed through various scenes, and at the end of each "phase" the group votes on whether their current goal succeeds or fails. The key here is that there's two rounds of votes in each phase; one for if the characters feel they succeeded, and one for if the PLAYERS think the characters succeeded. Then both sets of votes are tallied and used to determine what actually happens. It's a clever way to have drama and conflict without there being Drama and Conflict!

[@z-beeblebrox]

Having just watched Crown of Candy, I'd argue that it lives VERY much in the "Don't try this at home" camp of Actual Plays. Like, if you're a GM getting your friends together to play a campaign, and you're thinking "ooo I should make it super lethal like CoC" ....don't. On some level this advice is true for almost all APs, but for something like this especially it is incredibly important for you to understand that these are professionals with acting experience who know how to amplify and heighten emotions like anger without actually being angry, and additionally there is a whole team behind them not just supporting technically, but also to make sure everything is on the level emotionally. And while yes, using the Prisoner's Dilemma as a form of conflict resolution is smart and potentially helpful way to cool off a heated table, under no circumstances should you seek to put your table in that state to begin with unless the players ALL know exactly what's going on and are cool with it, both beforehand AND in that moment.

[@spudsbuchlaw]

OSRA players when 5e players tell eachother not not make their campaigns lethal: 😬

[@z-beeblebrox]

@@spudsbuchlaw It's different if you're going into a system where being lethal is part of the expectation and gameplay, and of course it's also VERY different if you're doing this with a group who actually LIKE lethal campaigns. I've personally never encountered an OSR group that isn't older and looking for something that reminds them of the 90s rpgs they played as teens. Not to say younger groups aren't out there, but that's what I've observed. Generally speaking though, most average people are not prepared for that, especially if they watch more APs than they play ttrpgs - or if they're just new in general - and also: 5e is honestly not a great choice for realism. APs need to use dnd because it's recognizable and they're catering to viewers over the table, but IRL always look for the system that works best for what you want, don't try to bend the will of 5e to your whims. That's how you end up with a million broken house rules

[@spudsbuchlaw]

@@z-beeblebrox okay, theres a lot here, so let the Autopsy begin: First of all, its is worth noting that while lethality is a part of OSR, it is not Lethal. Source: Games like Into The Odd, Knave, and even ADnD 1e, as well as the Blog post "The Myth of OSR lethality" by Mythic Mountains RPG, which states in its thesis "OSR games Aren't Lethal, modern players have incorrect Game assumptions. Its about agency, not lethality." Id recommend reading in full if interested. Second, you suggest that OSR groups are a lot older. While yes, there Is a definitive part of the OSR that is older and Nostalgic, thats most wave 1 (kinda 2) shit. Modern OSR and _especially_ New School Revolution, or NSR, a branch of OSR geared more towards non Tolkein RPGs and honestly distancing themselves from those older more...conservative people. As someone whos played in these spaces, I can tell thats not the case (Hell, looking at the profiles of people in discord will tell you that alone). Another Source: Ben Milton @QuestingBeast Its worth noting that the Old School Renessaince is NOT the "Old School Revival". Perhaos in wave 1, the age of the Retroclone, that was true. Its all about advancing old ideas in modern forms nowadays. Games like Dungeon Crawl Classics showed that early on, but games like Maze Rats, Black Hack and Troika all evolve the format.

[@z-beeblebrox]

@@spudsbuchlaw Okay, that's all very interesting but: "it is worth noting that while lethality is a part of OSR, it is not Lethal."

[@spudsbuchlaw]

@@z-beeblebrox I am not saying its not Lethal. Im sayings its Lethality is not an inherent fact, but a consequence of agency(see: The Myth of OSR Lethality). Its a tricky naunce, but the idea that first time players wouldnt enjoy this kinda of game or couldnt is simply absurd. In actually, introducing it early on, DCC style may prove benficial for a game where lethality and frequent character death is a part of the plan!

[@HenriqueErzinger]

They are both trained, accomplished actors. The conflict was entirely in character, and it made sense for the story. I don't really agree with the way you portrayed Brennan's play: he never put any weight to one choice or the other, he made the final decision a pure prisoner's dilemma, and made clear that the one who decided to attack, in case the other didn't, would be victorious. Both of the players even said in a post-game interview that they really considered going for it.

[@ThatKaylaPerson]

Watching it, while we don't get the full scope of the situation, I never thought that the two PC's were necessarily upset with each other. And I would even go as far as to say that Emily's character wasn't actively a real threat. Sure, she was on top of a dragon that just wiped out a whole battle field, but her character was so desperate to be part of their family, to feel that love of a family, I never once doubted what she was going to write on that piece of paper. Ruby, on the other hand, once Jett died, she had a chip on her shoulder. She was changed by that moment. Obviously and blamelessly so. Her sister was murdered and Ruby herself almost died because of their curious nature, falling back into old routines just because they came home. And just as quickly as her sister was gone, a new one entered the picture. Then, she lost her twin a second time when the shadow was stripped away from her. All while Saccharina is there in her face, begging for love and acceptance. It's not to say that Siobhan was wrong. She was invested in her character. As cliche as it is, she was doing what her character would have done, making those same choices. I would like to think that by Saccharina playing more of a supporting role during the final battle while everyone gets their revenge on the smaller scale, it spoke to something in Ruby's heart. Who knows. But ultimately, I never once thought that it was the people who were upset with each other. Brennan just DM'd it in a way that truly spoke to the gravity of the moment. I saw it more as a 'do we keep on fighting and continue the war or do we actively choose peace' moment.

[@3ndlessL00p]

9:40 didn't Ruby get the kill on Senator Ciabatta, literally the guy that got the killing blow on Jet? I will check, but I'm pretty sure she was the one. Liam got Keradin, Brassica and even Plumbeline. But Ruby got Ciabatta. Edit: I checked and yes, it happens at 1:44:20 in the last episode. She even gets him with the same poisoned Watersteel Dagger that killed her sister. After Saccharina once again set up the kill, roasting Ciabattas whole unit with her dragon.

[@Sage_6reen]

Yeah ruby absolutely got her moment

[@HenriqueErzinger]

She absolutely did.

[@tysondennis1016]

Yep, Ruby avenged her sister.

[@Jindomess]

I really love this. I am catching up on D20 and don't know the context yet. But I really love the way he took it the next step and said "let's talk about this" without taking too much choice away from the characters

[@TricksterPrince]

They were never fighting, if you watch Adventuring Party, they are legit just playing the game as their characters and getting into the game. They talk a lot about these subjects in Adventuring Party.

[@branmuffinyogurt9368]

You look fantastic! And thank you for the time taken to show how Brennan really shows off his stuff when it comes to meaningful moments like this. I hope I can get even a fraction of this amount of delicious tension in my games I play or dm in the future

[@boah6110]

The fact that this campaign made Lou smoke cigarettes sums it up perfectly

[@majorzipf8947]

This was such an incredible moment in my the game. ACOC was the first ever D20 show watched and it blew my mind. And while I get what you’re getting at, which is a very important lesson for players and DMs, I don’t think there was actually any conflict between the players. Something I’ve noticed about D20 is that the players LOVE to have PC conflict while not carrying any of that into a personal place. That said, your point absolutely still stands. It’s a good take on how to handle conflict between players that started with conflict between characters.

[@palesamokete2229]

The episode where They had to save Liams father from hanging, towards the end of the mission, when Siobhans character went to the tent to discover the war plans, before Their character went in the tent, Emily(or her charcter) told Siobhan(or her character ) to not go in, in which Siobhan responded with " Don't tell me what to do! ". My point is, the way Siobhan responded Emily made me feel a type of way where I was like is this a roleplay response or a real one. (in addition to then Characters where nowhere near eachnother.) This video helped me realise all of the heat between their characters was not all in my head, and was explained even deeper than I could have understood on my own. Thank you. I hope you enjoy what Matt Mercer has in store for the Second edition. Thank you for this video!

[@wjatschd237]

Nice beat box :) Love Brennan and your video, thankksss

[@noeliesmith515]

Recently discovered your channel due to your Critical Role content, but I’ve branched out to your other videos because the insight and advice you give has really helped me as I play with my own group. There’s a chance I might dm somewhere in the near future, so the video on handling conflicts was something I was very grateful to see and I just want to thank you for your videos and other content

[@giudalberto]

Actually my first question was:"How did you learn to beat box so well?" 😂😂😂

[@tysondennis1016]

Brennan is a philosophy major. He knew what he was doing when he made Siobhan and Emily make the prisoner’s dilemma. And they both made the best choice, with Ruby finally accepting Saccharina as a sister, understanding that she will never replace Jet. And as both Ruby Rocks and Saccharina Ghee chose peace, everybody got their happily ever after. Especially as Brennan goes out of his way to reward his players for going out of their way to do good. Other examples include the Bad Kids treating Jawbone, a drug-addicted werewolf like a person, and that resulted in him becoming the school’s guidance counselor, and a very good one at that. Or when Sofia saved a random cat, that cat became her warlock patron. Even in Calamity, he chose to reward Travis’ character Cerrit for being the only member of the party to refuse to succumb to hubris and help Asmodeus by allowing Cerrit to return to his family. In sweetness there is strength, indeed.

[@vesselthanatos3033]

i cannot be the only one who wants an official playbook for a campaign set in Calorum

[@tysondennis1016]

Same.

[@3ndlessL00p]

The background music playing over the clips from 8:00 is distracting and playing a bit too loud to hear the second clip.

[@SereneIceDragon]

My character and a good friend of mine's character ended up hating each other during a campaign. Long story but he basically wanted my character dead to steal everything from her. As we argued in character we messaged each other to make sure we were comfortable and reiterated we loved each other and the characters and it was just roleplay. It got intense but it was so fun. In a game I'm DMing I make sure everyone makes it known this is just rp, and my players remind each that it's not personal and we chat a lot out of game. Despite not everyone having been friends prior to, they get along great and the in-character arguments don't cause tension between players because we fostered a positive relationship beforehand.

[@HowItRolls]

These are some valid points and I would like to try to apply this to my sessions.

[@Flushedfox]

8:55 dim20 is not "scripted" but is HEAVILY planned out and guided in a way that feels mostly natural. There are events that Brennan plans to happen and whether the PCs are there to witness it or not is potentially up to them. He knows all of their characters well enough that he can pretty expertly guide the players to where they need to go and work with them if they seem to deviate from where he thought they were going. I know a few other commenters already pointed this out but you should really watch the adventuring party aftershow because all of the players talk about this conflict. Theyre all actors and are very much acting. It feels very intense but they know what theyre doing. I like your analysis anyway you do bring up good points but i dont think that saccarina and ruby necessarily wanted the other one dead in the final battle (and someone else also brought up that ruby did get her revenge in the end too). I like that you talk about how the characters and players are only somewhat separated yet still connected.

[@morganbush7775]

YO THIS IS PLAY YOUR ROLE????? YOUR EDITING STYLE HAS GROWN SO MUCH!!!!! ITS SO GREAT!!!!!

[@asperRader]

I do think turning it into a Prisoner's Dilemma thing, where it's widely known the most effective outcome is to keep things right, made it feel less authentic than if he hadn't gone that far.

[@diamondedge83]

All of this was adressed in Adventuring Party, they were very much in constant chats with each other about their role playing, making sure everything was copacetic. Brennan totally wanted PVP at the end, using "the prisoner's dilemma" when he told them not to look at each other, but they didn't let him have his way.

[@jarvisebon3273]

Ahh didn’t see the piece of paper thing coming. Good tool for suspense and uncertainty. Love to use that on my players one time. 😆

[@ahealthkit2745]

I mean damn, that line Siobahn said was pretty fricken real.

[@karatekoala4270]

I am often used by my DMs for secret plots and conflict. Mainly cause I can pull off the con. #countofmontecristo

[@ahealthkit2745]

I am often used by my DMs to exposit important plot details and aspects of interfactional conflict. Mainly cuz I can't lie and I have a huge mouth. #liarliarpantsonfire

[@sifuculreif6448]

I do have one philosophical sidenote: I don't think a story needs resolution to be interesting. The interest comes first, that's what we call "the hook". Cowboy Beebop, for instance, is hailed as one of the best anime ever, but it canonically ends as a cliffhanger.

[@Minus_Yt1]

That beatboxing went hard ngl

[@benpalmer1583]

I disagree to the extent that A Crown of Candy's conflict is viewed as a conflict between players and the extent to which character conflict bleeds to player conflict, but perhaps that is just the lens of this video in dealing with the bleed. As for the discussion of that final conflict between their characters, the outcome coming out to an effective prisoner's dilemma where they were to not look at each other- I viewed more as a way to stop nonverbal communication between players, resulting in decisions that reflect the uncertainty of the others' action more so than pulling them out to talk about a player conflict.

[@Snordehartet]

Love a narrative Prisoner's Dilemma

[@sleepyspartan1367]

So, I had this experience. My character was heavily injured and was holding someone they thought could be an enemy at gun point due to experiences as person who takes part in anti-terrorism military operations. This lead to a conflict due to character ideals where my character was willing to harm another PC because violent action was taken leading them to drop their primary weapon and restoring to an rocket launcher (this system is mostly armour vehicle combat) and had one of the other characters not got involved I would have used that weapon on the the two PCs I was engaged with as my character was trained to respond to violence with violence and being attacked by two people made none lethal action or less excessive weapons not an option

[@archeryguy1701]

I definitely think that there is dramatic value in player conflict, but I do think it's important to make sure that everyone is involved, whether it's one player trying to initiate something with another player or the DM trying to start a fight between players. I had one guy I played with a few times, and he was all about the player conflict, but it was usually in ways that caused problems. First time was a game I was DM'ing for the first time and it was most of the table's first time playing. And like session 1 or 2, he was immediately causing issues with other PC's. Everybody else being pretty new, they weren't comfortable engaging, and this guy kind of bullies his way over everybody else. Another game I only heard about, he was just a player, but was again doing his own thing and actively working against the other players.... and then he (the player) got irked when he got into trouble doing his own thing, and everyone else was all, "Eh, whatever." Last time I played with him was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. He was DM'ing. I came up with what I thought was a really cool Warlock concept. My PC inadvertently got tied to my patron, and the concept was that the patron would occasionally give the character someone he needed to kill. Sometimes it would be bad people that probably deserved it, sometimes it was people that seemed like good people. If my PC didn't do it, the patron would do it, but it was usually in a way that resulted in a lot of collateral damage. So I was playing the DnD trolley question... does my character actively go kill another character, or stay out of it, knowing that my inaction would probably result in a lot more deaths? Well... the guy DM'ing decided that the way to tie me into the party is the patron gave me the task of killing another PC. Which created a scenario in which I go through with attempting to kill another player's character (which probably wouldn't go over well), or ignore the directive, which would have put the pressure on the DM to either actively take the punitive action or ignore the whole thing entirely. But ultimately, this was never discussed with me, and he never established the group's comfort with this sort of player conflict. Fortunately, I died that first session, and that was the last time I've played with that guy. So... I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it, but I do think you need to know how to approach it and be sure your players are good with it.

[@swanngames3619]

Jay is actually low key decent with the beat boxing

[@antonimielczynski9154]

damn I guess I was first here. Though realised 9 minutes in - Jay's head distracted me xD

[@ShonuffCor]

DUDE that white unpainted model behind you..with the warped base..WHAT IS THAT? who makes it??

[@Sage_6reen]

I was always so confused by how dismissive Saccharina was of Caramelinda. She seemed so interested in discovering her family and getting to know them at first but at the same time thought supplanting Caramelinda was gonna be cool and was confused why there was so much friction. I get we needed the drama but it felt like a weird gap in saccharinas awareness

[@Zarsla]

I viewed it more in the fact that Carmelinda in her mind wasn't her family. Like she's the other wife, and Saccharina was the child of the 1st wife, it's going to be uncomfortable and discomforting.

[@acelilumelody4445]

There was never any real conflict, you can see by how lighthearted it all turns after the intense scenes. Brennan and zac could do a masterclass on tension diffusal after intense scenes. Brenna tends to email characters their roles for the episode. They only know THEIR role and not the other players, but they all have a vague heads up on where he wants to steer them.

[@lydiasteinebendiksen4269]

I run by a consent based pracrise. Firstly, you may not have your character take hostile action against another without both players consenting. This is alreaddy the case, but I prefer someone saying no and the table working out what happens instead rather than people leaving the table, so I make consent explicit. Secondly, nobody can use DM inspiration. A reward for good roleplay being used to screw over another player feels bad, and turns the wholesome recognition of good play into punishing players who aren't "playing right" if people who play one waycan use that to win a fight against players who play a different way. Lastly, I give ample opurtunity for the rest of the table to interfere if possible, as a lot of the time players getting to air the characters hostile intent is enough, and a third party breaking them off is a good way to minimise damages that may upset players.

[@federicopalacios7439]

My friends fought the other day and one of them got mad at me for not handling the situation. I told him they were clearly not playing in character and just fighting each other, so I decided to ignore what they did. They always fight outside the game, so I told them to sort their shit out and stop ruining my games. I had characters antagonize each other before, and it created awesome moments, but that little fight they had was entirely personal.

[@nightstrike90]

Only player conflict I ever had was a cleric played by my friend that kept casting Silence on my character whenever he tried to talk to important people. Yes he usually failed but the point was that he should have had the right to try and not been RP blocked by another player, and the GM agreed. He made a house rule "No casting Silence on another player unless they're charmed or possessed" and after that, I started having way more fun

[@retributive]

I enjoy your other analysis, but this one felt poorly researched and also like you're stretching to make a point. I think the only reason Brennan had them make their choices privately and then only look at him was so they couldn't read each others faces or metagame (even accidentally) only to generate drama for the show. D20 cast come into the game knowing each other, that they are in a show, and that the show is about improvised story telling. None of us actually know these people and their relationship, but given that they've both talked about this on Adventuring Party and that they're actors (most D&D players aren't), this video paints a false narrative. Saying that you don't know the people involved personally but also telling us exactly what Brennan is doing to mediate a potential conflict doesn't add up.

[@QueerChangling]

during the short rest for naddpod emily says this required a lot of work to not destroy their friendship and was really tough due to the character bleed. so if you see bleed check in with your players and take a break if you need it!

[@BiggerinRealLife]

Calling it: half drunk. Based on speech patterns. Cheers! 🍻

[@3ndlessL00p]

Yup. Seems a bit tipsy and ranting.

[@sirpentss744]

You also need to remember the dimension 20 cast have been friends for years, they are all profesionals especially brennan who used to deal with these sorts of situations as a camp councilor Your party is most likely not made of profesional improv actors and a dm who has made a career based on his writing, so if you wanna do character conflict it is probably best that you start with something small and see how comfortable everyone is and then build it up as opposed to just jumping off with "my character is going to try to murder your character"

[@hatandhistea6334]

So, around 8th minute the music a little bit too loud and it was so hard you hear you and the d20 video. So, keep it in check, bcs besides that it's a great video!

[@ExtremelyToxic]

Griffin McElroy mentioned

[@theMrLife]

Bald is cool. I like it. I wear it too.

[@TheOneNotTheOnly]

Don’t know how you can make a “in-depth” breakdown of the actors and their characters with out watching their 20 episodes of behind the scenes interviews that are on adventuring party.

[@kaazdov]

the music was too loud at times

[@nickmurdaugh9856]

Hey, the bald is a good look on you.

[@zellak-pr7pu]

i ran an all Drow campaign, it resulted in PvP and no one wanted to play D&D again for about 5 years because of the fallout.

[@rstlr01]

Bro, went to prison and got hard! Or maybe just trying out for the reboot of prison break!

[@rhiarose9436]

Still a 10!

[@okami-shaman9548]

Sorry, it has been a few days since the rebrand, and i have been trying to get used to it . Just..... the previous design was easier to distinguish at a distance. The color, the shape, the text not being so detailed.. it worked. This current itteration does not for me. The content is still great though.

[@Barthenn]

I don't necessiraly think you have a portion of yourself in each character though I use to think that. and will most of the time do that I don't think that it is either necessary or always happen. Your character can be created from tropes and then maybe you are channeling a character from a Book, TV shows or movie or a family member or friend. Your characters don't necessarily have a part of you inside them. Also context matters and both party are not always as involved emotionally about a conflict. One player might consider a deal breaker while the other just see it as having fun. Sometimes both party won't back down. It's a case by case scenario. I think it preferrable to have less table drama than more unless people are really into roleplaying. I would encourage more drama but reading people comments and other website makes me think that so many people at tabletop rpg aren't able to sepparate themselves from their character which is a red flag.

[@17joren]

Your music was a little loud for the volume of your voice and the CoC clips :/

[@Joe.The.Pirate]

Wtf you can beatbox?!?!

[@richardd3367]

Hm, so apparently shaved your head too close to your speech center and now it's all tangled ["spoilerler-lert"]; jk--looks good!

[@arcane_snail]

Hi Jay! I've been binge watching all your ttrpg content and adored them all so far, but this one I strongly disagree with. After watching the first time, I left it be, but seeing more of your videos and the way you discussed for example Scanlan's bardic lament irked me to come back to this. The thing is, you were 100% right when analyzing Sams rant as him venting through his character, but holding no malice towards his actual friends at the table. I think you showed great respect for him I really admire and appreciate. But when it's women making similar choices, oh they must be feuding. It's not just you, I've seen this sort of double standard all over in the dnd live play space. I'm sure it wasn't at all intentional, but as a woman who's struggled to find accepting tables when I first started playing it suuuucks to see over and over how our flaws we give our characters are assumed to be the players bad side seeping through. When they were playing as ruby and jet no one thought they were that attached on the hip irl, but suddenly when theyre characters dont get along its clearly personal matters the ladies are caught up in. Not only is this video disrespectful to Emily and Siobhan, it ultimately diminishes the weight of the conclusion. Brennan wasn't baby sitting two grown women having a cat fight, he was zooming in on their character conflict as a miniature version of the world at large. Hope or vengeance? New paths or the same old? And being the wonderful story tellers Emily and Siobhan are, they gave us the cathartic end to the party's story. I hope that you listen to some of the feedback others left in the comments as well, and gain new perspective to look at these awesome moments with.

[@leecoffill8425]

Too bad I'll never watch it because I'm not paying for KZbin

[@chubbysolaireeaterofpussy3192]

ngl bro i kinda like the bald look