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

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad

I did. I certainly recall "this lock is highly complex and thieves attempting to pick it suffer a -20% to their open lock roll." It came up a few times in higher level stuff. It was frickin impossible to get OL to a reasonable level to begin with, and once it was it seemed impressive locks started showing up with greater predicability.
As always you have DM's that think if everything isn't hard and everything isn't a pain in the ass then it's not fun. It's not true and while the overall game should move forward and get harder some things should simply become trivial. But if your DM doesn't do sandboxes and everything is on rails your basically doing poor man's bounded accuracy anyway. As the player rises the difficulty rises and nothing ever changes except the actual amount of damage dice but you might as well just play the whole game at one level and give up that poor illusion of leveling.
 

Tiefligs are hellspawn. They can be good. If that doesn’t satisfy, nothing will.
Tieflings aren’t hellspawn or devils: they’re humanoids. Part of the lore of tieflings is that they can be completely innocent: they are a tiefling because of a pact entered by their ancestors.

So no, tieflings beings good is not evidence that devils aren’t necessarily evil.
 


Tieflings aren’t hellspawn or devils: they’re humanoids. Part of the lore of tieflings is that they can be completely innocent: they are a tiefling because of a pact entered by their ancestors.

So no, tieflings beings good is not evidence that devils aren’t necessarily evil.
I 100% concur. well it might not be a pact, it might be a few drops of fiendish ancestry. The blood of mortals - mortals having free will - overwhelms the fiendish influence.
 

The "cage of names" effect is something I have seen happen as well, but is definitely something that can be worked around-- although some workarounds are easier and more feasible than others.

Playing with a home game with friends rather than an online game with strangers makes it easier to move your PC away from the generic idea of the names of your character's class or mechanics, because you know what kinds of communication is necessary to convince them your PC is an 'avenger', rather than a 'paladin' (for example). When you play with strangers and have no idea what their feelings and thoughts are on the matter-- when some of those players may be unable to not just put "Rogue" and "thief" together-- your battle is much more uphill.

I have also found that as silly as it might seem... re-writing the class progression in Word and just replacing all the terms you don't want to use with a name you do makes it easier to get others to go along with it. The Returned player in my Theros game uses the Hexblade Warlock subclass, but because their patron is not a magic weapon from the Shadowfell (like the Hexblade defaults to) but rather is the goddess Klothys... I re-wrote the advancement chart and called it a Thanatarch-- a death lord. And by doing so and always identifying the character as a Thanatarch, none of the other players have ever called him a Hexblade or wondered about a magic item patron.

This is especially true when dealing with multiclass characters-- if the player is going to MC, I usually ask them how they intend to progress in the classes before the game even starts and then write up their progression in a new chart... usually giving this Frankenclass a new name. One that is evocative of what this class combination is meant to represent. And again, players around the table who know how I work and what I put together are usually more easily inclined to follow along... whereas trying to get random players online to use the terminology would probably be like pulling teeth (and which is why I don't play online with strangers.)

And then of course at the end of the day... if we all just focus on our character's stories and personalities and desires and what they want (rather than focus on merely their mechanics)... how these characters are portrayed makes it easier to get others out of the mindset of "That's the Barbarian", "that's the Monk", and instead think of them as "That's the Brelish warforged with the blown circuits" and "that's the Firespeaker of Purphoros".
 

I ran Lost Mine twice, and the original is still one of my favorite Top 10 D&D adventures from any era. The second time I spliced it with the other starter set as there is tons of overlap. I had plans to introduce Phandelver as a no-man's land between Venomfang and the White Dragon as they fought over territory, but the campaign ended when Covid started. I am disappointed to hear the Obelisk is so poorly thought out, as that is exactly what designers are supposed to do.
 

They advertised the product in interviews literally saying it was like Ocean's 11, which it isn't. Maybe the people writing these adventures should take a step up and get some perspective. Maybe take a more pragmatic view of advertising then just feeling like saying it's something it isn't is necessary to sell something.
It features a treasure, a mcguffin, several poweful groups after said treasure, a vault. It certainly has heist elements and could be ran as a heist depending on how you tackle the four villain lairs. Breaking into the Xanathar’s lair for instance to get the key without confronting him. Or robbing the Cassalanter’s villa.

I could care less though. It’s not like heist adventures are some kind of protected art form (or even particularly well developed one at that point). The book isn’t going to send anyone into anaphylaxis.
 

I believe the idea is that even when improvising, the DC is based on your adjudication of the difficulty of the task, not the skill of the PC attempting it. No reason that philosophy would be different if you're improvising.
Sure, but when designing an adventure, it's usually most useful for the DM to know what numbers will challenge their PCs.

I also prefer those to match the in-game fiction, so examples of what sorts of challenges merit what numbers are definitely useful too.
 

Sure, but when designing an adventure, it's usually most useful for the DM to know what numbers will challenge their PCs.

I also prefer those to match the in-game fiction, so examples of what sorts of challenges merit what numbers are definitely useful too.
Sure. I just feel your second point is more important than than your first.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top