excuse me this is just a half thought and i try to not engage in cr discourse if i can help it, but i think it's really interesting that a big critique of cr2/cr2 ending is the "main character syndrome," that is put on taliesin jaffe with Molly becoming the big bad Lucien, all to be revived at the end back into Kingsley, a PC. now with cr3/the end of cr3, a big complaint is the interference of cr1 and cr2 characters to the plot, and Vax returning to the living- returning to Keyleth and all of VM. i guess when i watched those moments for the first time my reaction was appreciation for matt mercer and his dynamic with the players. like yes taliesin, but especially liam o brien gave so much trust in matt to do right by his story that he helped make in cr1, and when vax died, yes there was closure to his story in cr1, *and* there was trust between players so that nearly ten years later, matt finally gives vax back (with the dice being in their favor also), in a 'thanks for letting me hold him for this part of the story, thanks for putting your trust in me'. and with molly/kingsley, the same happened. molly died and lucien was (re)born, and again matt took this pc and taliesin basically had to say 'ok i trust you with this entire person i created and lived as', and then again by the end of the campaign, matt gave kingsley back to taliesin, a 'thanks for letting me borrow him, thanks for trusting me with his story, thanks for holding the grief of the character for as long as you did'.
what a great gift for a player to give a gm and vice versa. for me, that type of communal storytelling is the best part of ttrpgs and why this format of storytelling is unique. it surprises me that people were so strongly adverse to that, i guess.
