Book of the Righteous Dethroned!

[Krieg]

What, in particular, would you like to see in my review? I'd be willing to add more to it, if I thought I left something important out.

I honestly don't think you should change your review in the least. You obviously put a lot of thought into it, so much so that you solicited at least one outside opinion before you submitted it.

Just because your opinion doesn't work for me doesn't mean it is without value.

Stick to your guns, there is absolutely nothing wrong with generating a little controversy!

 

[baseballfury]

A game book that is useful in a game is a fine criteria to judge a product.

Sure it is, but the criteria shouldn't be based on the peculiarities of you and your campaign. If I wrote a review of, say, Paradigm's mind flayer book (Unveiled Masters, IIRC) that said this: "I have never used anything from this book because mind flayers are not in my campaign setting; I give this book a 2." Who would take that seriously? It would not be Paradigm's fault that I didn't use mind flayers in my campaign. The fact that Mr. Greathouse didn't use anything from BoTR says more about him than the book.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Sure it is, but the criteria shouldn't be based on the peculiarities of you and your campaign. If I wrote a review of, say, Paradigm's mind flayer book (Unveiled Masters, IIRC) that said this: "I have never used anything from this book because mind flayers are not in my campaign setting; I give this book a 2." Who would take that seriously? It would not be Paradigm's fault that I didn't use mind flayers in my campaign. The fact that Mr. Greathouse didn't use anything from BoTR says more about him than the book.

But since I do use gods in my campaign (extensively!), I thought the fact I hadn't been able to use anything was worth mentioning.

It's not the reason I rated it poorly, nor is it a large portion of my review. It's something like 1% of the review by word count....

 

[JoeGKushner]

There's been some interesting discussion here with some good and some bad pointed out.

However, the most interesting thing is that no one else has reviewed the book.

Now I love the book and even have two little snippets on Green Ronin's Tree of Knowledge thign but I've already done a review.

Say what you will about his review, but he wrote one and has defended it.

 

[Crothian]

Wow, Joe, good job calling people out. I've reviewed it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Wow, Joe, good job calling people out. I've reviewed it.

I don't think it's calling people out. It's just a statement. Lots of complaining, very few people willing to do anything about it. Some of the posts here are longer than the required length of a review but still no reviews.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I considered asking people to post their own reviews in preference to ranting on this thread, but I decided I don't have the standing to call for reviews when I've posted so little myself.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I considered asking people to post their own reviews in preference to ranting on this thread, but I decided I don't have the standing to call for reviews when I've posted so little myself.

I have no problem with the review itself. People get different mileage out of RPG books just like they do fiction. These books aren't facts they're works whose value lies between mechanics, which even the official peopel can't get right 100% of the time, and utility, which varies from inspiriation to hand holding.

I'd love to see more reviews from more people.