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

[Clint_L]

That said, I don't run the long AP-style adventures that WotC put out these days. To me an adventure is just that: a 1e-style standalone thing that is self-contained and doesn't expect or insist upon any setting or plot implications beyond itself; those are left for the DM (and maybe the players) to sort out within each campaign, usually during downtime between adventures.

I tend to feel the same way, but it really depends on the group. The core of my home group, some of whom you've met, having been playing together for about five years now, and we get each other pretty well, so I can go full sandbox and rely on them to role-play their characters and help build the story. And that pales in comparison to your gang!

On the other hand, I also run new mini-campaigns for beginners at my school, and whenever I go too sand-boxy with them the games tend to stall. So I understand the point made above about why WotC tend to skew a bit in that direction, though I think the original LMoP squared that circle pretty effectively, which is why it is considered such a classic (it probably helps that it is about the size of one of those 1e modules that I grew up on, so I am very comfortable with that format).

I think Call of the Netherdeep also does a pretty good job of building a story that allows some room for play while also maintaining narrative cohesion. My big criticisms of it are that I think the ending is too prescribed (but that is easily fixed) and the rival system doesn't really work for me and also involves the DM meddling in the story more than I prefer. However, even if rivals are a bit of a swing and a miss, from my perspective, I'm always glad to see someone taking a swing! That's how new ideas happen.

I always get suspicious when there is particularly pointed criticism of Critical Role products because, let's face it, there is a small but vociferous contingent of folks who have decided that CR is not for them, no matter what, and immediately respond negatively to anything associated with them. Similarly, praise of CR has to be taken with a grain of salt because there is a large and vociferous contingent who will champion them no matter what. I find it hard to get objective criticism of their stuff, and as a fan I have to question my own motives, as well.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That said, I don't run the long AP-style adventures that WotC put out these days. To me an adventure is just that: a 1e-style standalone thing that is self-contained and doesn't expect or insist upon any setting or plot implications beyond itself; those are left for the DM (and maybe the players) to sort out within each campaign, usually during downtime between adventures.

I like the Adventure-Path style epic stories now-and-then, but I really wish that they'd put out more of the style that you're talking about. Gone are the days when they're willing to put out 32pg adventure pamphlets, but Tales from the Yawning Portal and Radiant Citadel work. (My problem with Candlekeep is simply that I think that cramming 13 adventures into that book caused most of them to be edited for "space" down to the point where many of them are not very good - I don't blame the authors, I blame the process).

I'd love to see an anthology book with "only" like 4-6 adventures. Short, but with "room to breathe" (by which I mean Stuff That You Might Not Use - alternate paths that the PCs can take, etc).

 

[Myrdin Potter]

I was happy to note that the writing team was only 6 people instead of the 12 to 15 that plauged too many recent adventures (makes it really hard to keep consistent). I did think some of the changes to the original adventure were silly and placing the to be discovered locations on the poster map really puzzled me. However, I read it (running it now but still in the original content) and I felt it flowed much better than the last several years of book that suffered from too many cooks (writers).

 

[mamba]

I was happy to note that the writing team was only 6 people instead of the 12 to 15 that plauged too many recent adventures (makes it really hard to keep consistent).

I guess it helps that they only had to write half an adventure… if you expand those 6 to a full adventure, you are back at 12

 

[Myrdin Potter]

I guess it helps that they only had to write half an adventure… if you expand those 6 to a full adventure, you are back at 12

The 6 includes the original module. But that might have been just Chris Perkins (no quick online way for me to check).

Still much lower writer count than the average for the past while. I really do not get why they need more than 2-3 for their books. They really are not that long.

 

[Monayuris]

I’m starting it and ran one session of the post LMoP content.

Post LMoP is pretty bad.

Fortunately, myself and my players are good at making things work.

So the first chapter with all the crime investigations… the investigations are just filled with pointless ‘skill challenges’. They don’t do anything other than give players a reason roll dice.

The module also pushes an npc on the group who’s sole purpose is to solve everything for that players.. What happened to actually designing an investigation that doesn’t require a GM fiat to work?

 

[occam]

Do you think it’s a good thing that explaining the muddled layout and organisational issues of this adventures requires pages of text?

“This adventure isn’t badly crafted, as I will show in this 15,000 word explanation!”

Making an error is simple; pointing out and explaining that error always takes more effort. Cf. any well-developed legal system.

But if you're saying that the posters to this thread have collectively written a whole lot of words addressing the mistakes in Justin's review, then I suppose I agree with you.

(Note that I'm not arguing that Phandelver and Below is perfect; I pointed out a couple of errors myself in this thread, and I agree with some of the criticisms, such as the poorly-established swerve into Far Realmsy stuff after the Lost Mine portion of the adventure. But the point you made above doesn't support an argument one way or the other.)

 

[tomBitonti]

Reading over the adventure, and reading the criticism, I'm finding that Alexander is not wrong, but he gives a poor review nevertheless. The adventure does have a lot of problems, but Alexander doesn't focus on the important ones.

In the case of the dungeon with the Hydra, the problems are more:

(*) The writing is oversimplified and repetitive.

For example:

Ruxithid the Chosen stands on the mezzanine behind the status. When the characters confront Ruxithid, read the following:
This goblinoid figure is taller and broader than the other goblins you've encounters ...
Ruxithid the Chosen
The goblin standing on the sanctum mezzanine is Ruxithid the Chosen ...

(*) The dungeon design is too linear. It looks like a triangular spiral, but its a line with rooms to either side.

(*) There is no foreshadowing of the encounter with the Hydra, there is no way to avoid the encounter.

For example, there might be tales of a beast which wakes and arises from a nearby lake, to gorge itself and cause devastation, before disappearing into the lake. No lair was ever found. Folks with high knowledge skills will be able to figure out that the creature is a hydra, but one that is unusual that it hasn't moved elsewhere. (Why? Because the hydra was corrupted by the desecrated crypt. The hydra could be given slightly modified abilities to show this.)
Within the dungeon, the upper level can be described as dusty and dry. A good example of a well fashioned dwarf halls. The lower halls could be described as damp, dripping with moisture and smelling of rot. There is something amiss in the lower halls! An unforeseen menace treads these halls ...

TomB

 

[edosan]

I like the Adventure-Path style epic stories now-and-then, but I really wish that they'd put out more of the style that you're talking about. Gone are the days when they're willing to put out 32pg adventure pamphlets, but Tales from the Yawning Portal and Radiant Citadel work. (My problem with Candlekeep is simply that I think that cramming 13 adventures into that book caused most of them to be edited for "space" down to the point where many of them are not very good - I don't blame the authors, I blame the process).

I'd love to see an anthology book with "only" like 4-6 adventures. Short, but with "room to breathe" (by which I mean Stuff That You Might Not Use - alternate paths that the PCs can take, etc).

I was really hoping that Yawning Portal was going to be the first of many...seeing that there are decades of adventures available it seemed like a no-brainer to pick out 5-6 good adventures from the past, spruce them up and add new art and put out a new hardcover. If they had done that once a year I would be a happy man.

Unfortunately I am finding the whole "adventure path" paradigm is not working for me, especially paired with WOTC's style which seems to be more geared toward making an interesting read that being playable at the table. Maybe it's just me but I frequently find information to access quickly as well as what I'd consider rookie design mistakes.

Many of you don't mind buying a sixty dollar book, looking through it, and deciding "sure, I like some of this stuff but I'm going to spend as much time as it takes to whip it into playable shape" and that's great. I hope your players appreciate all the work you do but if I'm going to buy a book it's because I am hoping the writers are going to do that heavy lifting for me. I spent way too much time trying to make Dragon Heist work for me and I'd rather not go there again.

 

[Andvari]

Jerry seems to like it over at theseinfeldian.net.