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

[jasper]

Next up- Justin Alexander reviews White Plume Mountain.

WHAT IS THIS???!!?!?? F------.

This just in. CBS new is reporting a well known critic of D&D was found dead at his keyboard with a copy of white plume mountain open. IS D&D DEADLY?

 

[MerricB]

not sure how much more value one playthrough adds over a thorough read-through, playthroughs can vary widely between groups and DMs

It's pretty significant. Seeing how something works (or doesn't) in play compared to just reading it brings up a lot of issues.

Yes, you'll always have different opinions on how well it works - which is why it'd be great for the RPG hobby to have more reviewers. But the scale just isn't there to make it worthwhile.

Cheers,
Merric

 

[MerricB]

I do appreciate the difficulty, and yours were some of the earliest and best 5E reviews I've read (mainly for DMsGuild stuff). But while recognizing the difficulty and knowing that playing through before reviewing is too much to ask, I really don't think it's too much to ask at all to have the reviewer at least have read the book they claim to be reviewing. If they haven't had the book long enough to read it, okay - then they haven't had it long enough to review it, and shouldn't.

Definitely!

 

[Lanefan]

Such a critique is certainly consistent with Justin Alexander’s expressed preferences. Personally, if we concede for the sake of argument that text does suggest that the hydra must have been sealed in there for centuries (that still seems to be debated), I’d consider it a minor mistake, worth an “I thought this was weird so I changed it” at most.

Even though it's perhaps a minor mistake, it still indicates the authors didn't think this through as fully as required; and on seeing an error like this my first question becomes "What else did they miss?".

 

[MerricB]

And then you gotta think: Did the DM MAKE it play well, using their own skills, and did the adventure actively fight them doing it - but they pulled it off anyway? Or did it help them? AND what part of THAT can be properly objectified (and not just DM-preference or Table preference).

This is a major part of why you also need to pay attention to the reviewer.

Like, if I want a review of a mostly linear adventure, I don't go to Justin Alexander, since I know he much, much prefers a different style - and I like linear adventures when that's the best format.

I know that in my case, I can walk right past incredibly poorly designed encounters just because the story was cool.

It's been a real experience writing about Shadow of the Dragon Queen, because though I think the adventure is mostly quite competent, the deviations from established Dragonlance lore send me up the wall!

Cheers,
Merric

 

[Lanefan]

Talking of errors in adventures, I have just come across this: "roll a d12 three times per day of game time, checking for encounters each morning, afternoon, and evening or night. An encounter occurs on a roll of 16 or higher."

I'm not going to bother saying which adventure it is (other than it's not this one), this kind of thing is pretty common, and always as been.

Just because errors like this happen frequently doesn't make them acceptable.

 

[SJBMKE]

Let's not open the door for that particular subject, or you'll risk summoning... him

I am glad I am in an empty office right now because the way I just CACKLED would have gotten security called on me. LOL

 

[FitzTheRuke]

It's been a real experience writing about Shadow of the Dragon Queen, because though I think the adventure is mostly quite competent, the deviations from established Dragonlance lore send me up the wall!

I'm having fun running Shadow of the Dragon Queen. JA did a review of it and (if I remember it right) I think it was pretty spot-on on the problems with the adventure, but expressed more severely than I find those problems to be when running it. No surprise there!

 

[Ancalagon]

I haven't played it yet, myself, but in a read through I would agree with all of these criticisms. And I enjoyed running Tyranny of Dragons in practice, too!

(I hope you will not take this as an "aha, got you!" but a frank attempt at discussion.)

The criticism that @MerricB have listed for this adventure (the factions/NPCs from the early game don't matter, the adventure is uninspiring), and which you agreed with (please, correct me if I misunderstood your post!), are criticisms that the Alexandrian review also had.

I also thought MerricB had a very good point about how an inspiring but flawed adventure* is worth rescuing, which is a way of thinking that seems to be shared by Alexander, given the massive efforts he's given in reworking some of these adventures. And that's his final assessment - not worth fixing, better to homebrew the continuation of the campaign yourself.

*a great example of that I've done personally was the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish - it has several problems, but they are worth tackling given the pretty good material there is in there too.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Well that's an emotional rollercoaster.

Just spent two days wondering what Jason Alexander had to do with D&D and realizing it the 'Justin', not Jason over and over only to finally open the thread and find actual Seinfeld memes, only THEN to have them referencing Wayne Knight.

What is going on @_@