D&D 5E Justin Alexander's review of Shattered Obelisk is pretty scathing

[Ancalagon]

Really?

I mean, I guess I've seen a split.

Reviews of actual D&D adventures (and to a lesser extent other products) have tended to be relentlessly positive, to the point of avoiding all but the mildest critique and often intentionally downplaying things that turn out to be quite serious flaws for a lot of people using the adventures.

I've been wanting to write a review of the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. It's an interesting adventure, with a fair amount of value in it, but it also has a number of flaws... I wonder if that is why there are few reviews of it on the web?

 

[QuentinGeorge]

FYI, There's now a post addressing one of the criticisms of his review.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Thirded? Fourthed? Not sure, but interested.

As far as the writers are concerned, I'm getting really concerned about Amanda Harmon's work. She did some really good stuff on Starfinder, from what I hear, and I gave her a break on Strixhaven, given that she had just come over, but this is starting to make me nervous.

I've not been impressed with any of the recent hires to be honest.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I find critical reviews useful as a potential purchaser, particularly with reviewers such as JA, SlyFlourish and others who also post ways to improve an adventure's short-comings.

Reviews that pay lip service, like the ones we suffered through during Marvel movies only end up hurting the industry and causing distrust IMO.

This book's story tangent in the 2nd act just felt completely off-kilter and not a storyline I felt would work for me as DM. I had resided to not buying the product - I feel validated after reviews such as this.
This is in contrast to ToD which suffered some errors but it's over-arching storyline appealed to me and thus any shortcomings could be worked through. And I'd prefer those short-comings to be identified within a review.

 

[Smackpixi]

i don’t want to carry WoTC’s bag here but so much of this boils down to, “not the way I would have done it”. JA and WoTC have vastly different design goals. He’s not wrong, but what he wants is just not what they cared about when making the book. The glowing reviews truely are stupid, but if you’re gonna lambast it, first must accept books goal was just to toss out adventure ideas to play with.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I haven't read Shattered Obelisk so cannot comment on it's quality, but I find it very disturbing just how many people are willing to let Justin Alexander do their thinking for them.

I certainly disagree with him on one point - the original Lost Mines was not good. Whilst it is reasonably well presented, it was dull, generic and uninspired.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I haven't read Shattered Obelisk so cannot comment on it's quality, but I find it very disturbing just how many people are willing to let Justin Alexander do their thinking for them.

I take it your position is that JA's review is not worth any measurable consideration. I've seen some of his SKT remix ideas and from my perspective they are pretty decent. I've also read a few articles of his on certain D&D mechanics and he makes some good points. Whatever else, from my perspective when it comes to D&D, he is a useful voice.

I certainly disagree with him on one point - the original Lost Mines was not good. Whilst it is reasonably well presented, it was dull, generic and uninspired.

On this I agree in terms of story, but what it did have is elements (encounters, locations, characters, ideas) to make it a good adventure in the hands of a storyteller.

 

[delericho]

I always find JA worth reading, but don't always agree. In this instance, I was already very much on the fence about "The Shattered Obelisk", and this has tipped me into 'no'.

Which is a shame, as it was the only one of the 2023 releases that I had been interested in.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I take it your position is that JA's review is not worth any measurable consideration.

No, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's. It just concerns me the number of people who treat his opinions like Word of God. Not his fault, but Cult of Personality is always harmful.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

No, his opinion is as valid as anyone else's. It just concerns me the number of people who treat his opinions like Word of God. Not his fault, but Cult of Personality is always harmful.

No one here is doing that, it seems pretty clear everyone is discussing the points he is raising. The only people even approaching the "authority" fallacy are those who are discounting his opinion because they don't like him or he's too strident.