My video review of Castles & Crusades!

[treant_on_fire]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUXERsl ... ature=plcp

[Treebore]

Never thought of C&C as making for a "more down to Earth game", but seeing you put it that way I have to agree.

In the future you may want to write your self an outline to follow. It would help you, or should help you, be more focused about what you want to say, with greater clarity, give better examples, such as when you were trying to explain the INT Prime Fighter customization. I think with a bit more of preparation, such as the outline, you could have given a much tighter and clearer example. If you weren't doing this by yourself I would suggest scripting it, even making "prompt" cards. I guess you could still do that with sheets of paper in front of you on your table, and just write them in large script and flip through them yourself.

So that is my biggest "critique" of what you did. You were all over the place, having to repeat yourself several times, or clarify what you already said. So I think better prep will cut that way down and make your presentation much more coherent.

That aside I like that you not only covered the PH, but the M&T and CKG as well. I also liked your perspectives about several things, not only "down to Earth" but the XP per HP point about the M&T, ease of conversion, etc... Again, I think if you had done some prep work, and followed at least an outline, you could have given more examples of what you liked of each book, and still fallen within the same time frame you have now.

I also got the feeling you haven't run C&C much, if at all, because if you had I think you would have given your examples from an "in play" perspective. As it is I got the feeling you have only read it. Primarily because you never gave an in play perspective.

Still, good review, and like I said, even as "old" a player as I am of C&C (7+years), you gave me some new perspectives, which is something I always really appreciate. Thanks!

[Omote]

Pfft! I thought that was a great review. I'm glad to have some more positive reviews of C&C on the 'tube. The internets is all about just record n' go. Forget scripts, lighting, and a bunch of ::yawn:: flowery dialogue. THIS IS THE INTERNETS!

~O

[IronWolf]

I enjoyed the review. Thanks for posting!

[Treebore]

Pfft! I thought that was a great review. I'm glad to have some more positive reviews of C&C on the 'tube. The internets is all about just record n' go. Forget scripts, lighting, and a bunch of ::yawn:: flowery dialogue. THIS IS THE INTERNETS!

~O

I am not talking "flowery", I am talking more effective. I agree it is a good review, but if he had given himself an outline he could have said even more, more effectively, and stayed within the time he used doing it this way. I would guess he is doing this with an eye towards doing it even better in the future for other products he likes, so just some suggestions to start down that road.

If he is doing it just this one time, because C&C impressed him enough to do it, then he definitely accomplished it. But I am betting he wants to do it for other things.

[Sir Ironside]

Your a good looking dude.

[treant_on_fire]

Thanks for the positive comments and the constructive criticism.

While I don't intend to actually script my reviews since that would come across as unnatural, I've pondered the arguments and preparing an outline before doing my videos is probably the best way to go.

[Lord Dynel]

Good review, hoss!

[mbeacom]

Great review. I'll provide a counterpoint. I agree that scripted reviews come across as being less natural. I actually quite liked your style and wouldn't recommend scripting anything. Maybe a loose outline, but rather than putting it out to read as you talk, I would simply study it a bit and then wing it. The main reason is because I don't want a review that feels like a presentation. When I watch a review like this, I want it to feel like you are a friend, and we've just sat down together and I ask you, "So, tell me about C&C, what is it like?" and then the review should feel like your candid answer to that question. I like reviews that feel like I'm having a conversation with a friend and your review did a great job of that. Secondly, C&C is a system that is designed to make it very easy to wing it while running the game, so it seems appropriate you should wing the review as well.

If I had to make one quibble (assuming you want a critique of some sort which you may not and that's fine), it would be that when you were talking about the CKG, you started flipping through the pages and kind of got distracted and lost your momentum. But otherwise, excellent. Keep up the good work. I plan to watch the rest in your D&D variants series. Thanks!

[treant_on_fire]

Great review. I'll provide a counterpoint. I agree that scripted reviews come across as being less natural. I actually quite liked your style and wouldn't recommend scripting anything. Maybe a loose outline, but rather than putting it out to read as you talk, I would simply study it a bit and then wing it. The main reason is because I don't want a review that feels like a presentation. When I watch a review like this, I want it to feel like you are a friend, and we've just sat down together and I ask you, "So, tell me about C&C, what is it like?" and then the review should feel like your candid answer to that question. I like reviews that feel like I'm having a conversation with a friend and your review did a great job of that. Secondly, C&C is a system that is designed to make it very easy to wing it while running the game, so it seems appropriate you should wing the review as well.

If I had to make one quibble (assuming you want a critique of some sort which you may not and that's fine), it would be that when you were talking about the CKG, you started flipping through the pages and kind of got distracted and lost your momentum. But otherwise, excellent. Keep up the good work. I plan to watch the rest in your D&D variants series. Thanks!

It's hard to resist the Charm effect of RPG books sometimes... Just be grateful I had another save on the 2nd round, or the rest of the video might have been just me reading the book and forgetting there was a camera!

I'm glad you're saying you liked the 'casual conversation' style, it's what I was going for. And if I had an outline, it would certainly be more like the order of the subjects I'll bring up, and now any specific sentences/script and such.

At the risk of putting a spotlight on it myself, I think my review of Crypts & Things was my weakest one so far since I was all over the place and did not have concrete ideas to share at that moment. I should have redone it I believe, but now it's out there. On the other side of the coin, I'm very pleased with my review of Lamentations of the Flame Princess, and that happened to be the one where I organized my thoughts a bit more before doing it.

So all that to say, I intend to keep the style like a friendly conversation, I'll just make sure to avoid repeating myself while I do it, or jumping back and forth in my arguments.