Your fun is wrong!
Dungeons & Dragons has seen an incredible resurgence over the last couple of years, thanks to the success of 5th Edition, and to shows like Critical Role, a live D&D stream on Twitch which has introduced thousands to the world's best role-playing game (RPG.)
Now, just with that sentence alone, I've likely caused half of you to immediately start picturing the show and reliving your favourite moments, while the other half are in a Grog-like rage, itching to inform me (and everyone) that Critical Role (CR) is NOT D&D! I've been privy to a few such discussions and have been told (bluntly and in a less-than-polite manner) more than once that how they play D&D on CR is wrong. There are several arguments:
It's too scripted
They're actors, not real D&D players
It portrays an unrealistic idea of what a game session looks like
Matt doesn't let the characters die / Matt makes it too easy
Matt fudges the rules/dice rolls/everything
It's too long/not long enough
Granted, some of these observations are perhaps, at least, partially accurate (it really doesn't portray a typical game session), what those who harp on CR fail to understand is that they, and you, and I, have no business telling Vox Machina (the name of the adventuring group in Critical Role) that they are "doing it wrong."
One of the things I love most about D&D is that there really is no wrong way to play it. Yes, there are game mechanics and rulebooks, and it's usually a good idea to stick to them or at least use them as a guide. But no two groups are going to play the game the same way, and that's actually a really good thing! As a DM, I've played with every type of player you can think of. I've also had different types of DMs as a player. I used to know a DM who made everyone at this table put their hand on their head if they were speaking OOC (out of character). Otherwise, everything you said was credited to your character. Personally, I hated the idea, and couldn't imagine playing in such a rigid setting. Other people loved it, however, and they had a very successful campaign. just because that style of play wasn't right for me, however, doesn't mean I would say that he/they were wrong. When I DM, I tend to be more of an enabler and less of a rules lawyer. I want my players to try things and be creative, and I'll happily bend (or even break) some rules if it will advance the story or make for a more memorable moment. Ala Matt Mercer (CR's DM), "You can certainly try!"
I understand, however, that my style won't appeal to every player, and that's fine.
Sadly, this idea of "doing it wrong" didn't start with Critical Role. Dungeons & Dragons has been around for decades and has gone through several revisions and new versions, some more popular than others. It has also spawned other rpg systems, such as Paizo's Pathfinder, which is based on D&D version 3.5 and OGL (open game license) content. Pathfinder has seen incredible success, and Paizo is likely to see even more with the release of the Starfinder game system. For many players, 3.5 was/is the gold standard of game systems. I played 3.5 for years and loved it. When D&D 4th Edition came along, many people rejected it wholesale and chose to stick with 3.5 or ventured into the world of Pathfinder and never looked back. I'll be the first to admit that 4th edition had it's problems, and they were many. Though I wouldn't go as far as some who heralded 4th as the death of D&D, I can understand the dislike. It completely changed how the game is played. I ran a campaign in 4th. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it. It was... different. I still have my 4th edition books and will likely keep them. There are still 4th edition players out there, just as there are people running 3.5 games, Pathfinder games, and even 1st and 2nd edition D&D. None of these people are wrong for playing different versions, but there are players and DMs that swear by each of these who will insist that everyone else is wrong. I've had conversations with self-titled 3.5 "purists" who swear they will never go anywhere near 5th edition because 3.5 is perfect. So not only do we have those who insist that different is wrong, but those who say that new is wrong, too.
As Mike Mearls literally just pointed out, however, sales of the 5th edition Player's Handbook have completely eclipsed sales of 3.0 and 3.5. Clearly, 5th is doing something right, and is introducing a new generation of players to the wonder and excitement that is Dungeons & Dragons. Shows like CR, as well as other streams including those on D&D's own twitch channel such as Force Grey, Maze Arcana, and Girls, Guts, Glory just to name a few, have certainly contributed to the rise in popularity, and I don't think anyone can call that 'wrong'. Granted, your game session will likely look nothing like any of these streams, but so what? Like I said above, every session, every group, every DM, every style of play, is different, and none of us should take it upon ourselves to point to any other group or player or DM and say "that's wrong!"
Play D&D your way, and let others play their way, and we can all enjoy the game together, because that's really what it is about.
