Atlas Games' Penumbra D20 Scenarios: Are They Any Good?

[Knightfall]

En Route was a series of books that I used a lot. There are plenty of creative encounter ideas and it is great when the DM is not looking for an adventure just something shorter.

The En Route books are intriguing, but I've balked over them several times. I've always found encounter anthologies not to be worth my time.

Still, the third En Route book is v.3.5 compatible, so I might look seriously at that one. How much of the other two would have to be changed to make them v.3.5 compatible?

A Few Days to Kill was a very fun module that we played through.

This one has gotten a lot of praise... and votes. And I like the premise. The PCs are adventurer commandos, right?

In general they're good. We played and enjoyed Three Days to Kill and In the Belly of the Beast. I own a lot of these other ones and like them OK. I don't like The Last Dance, The Ebon Mirror, or The Tide of Years.

The Tide of Years seemed very interesting to me, but I'm not sure I want to risk my campaign world's history in order to use it. Time travel adventures make me nervous.

The Last Dance also looks very intriguing, but I'm not sure I'm a good enough DM to run such an adventure. It seems VERY different.

 

[Crothian]

The En Route books are intriguing, but I've balked over them several times. I've always found encounter anthologies not to be worth my time.

Still, the third En Route book is v.3.5 compatible, so I might look seriously at that one. How much of the other two would have to be changed to make them v.3.5 compatible?

Obviously DMs that like little encounters as the PCs travel will find these much more useful then those who don't. As for compatibility it depends how much of a stickler you are for exact rules. I found them easy enough to use as is and make a few changes on the fly, but then I make up stats all the time and don't care if the stats agree with what is in another book.

This one has gotten a lot of praise... and votes. And I like the premise. The PCs are adventurer commandos, right?

Basically, yes

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Maiden Voyage is perhaps my favorite 3E adventure ever. The Last Dance, though confusing in places, is great, too. I'm pretty sure Belly of the Beast was Mearls, and I liked it quite a bit.

I own most of those products, but don't remember most of them.

 

[Knightfall]

I am a big fan of Atlas games, and was disappointed when they cancelled the line.

I'd say they explored some pretty unusual adventure ideas, and are certainly not the standard adventure, each relying on new ideas and provocative plot twists. They have more in common with other games than with typical Hack and Slash D&D.

I discovered Atlas Games books after the announcement of 4e, so I believe the line had already been cancelled at that point.

The adventures didn't interest me at first because I thought the scenarios were part of a implied campaign setting. It wasn't until after I bought Touched by the Gods that I realized that AG's books were designed to be generic... to be used in any campaign setting.

Still, I've waited until now to delve into the adventure scenarios.

This said, the ones I would not recommend are
Thieves in the Forest (meh)
Lean and Hungry (oriental)

I really liked 'Lean and Hungry' as a very nicely constructed dungeon with a lot of flavour. But, yeah, it's not obvious from the blurb that it assumes an Oriental setting, though probably it wouldn't be hard to adapt to a different campaign of compatible themes.

Hmm, it just goes to show that no two gamers are exactly alike.

Lean and Hungry likely wouldn't be my first choice since I haven't developed my oriental subcontinent very much yet.

 

[Treebore]

Converting 3E to 3.5? So easy I don't know why people act like its hard. Ignore any mention of Scry and Alchemy skills are the biggest step. You may want to change those skills into something else. I usually changed them over to Knowledge: Plane "X" skills. After that, just pay attention to your 3.5 PH any time buff spells or Haste are mentioned in a 3E product, since some things were changed about them.

Those are the biggies, everything else is pretty minor and easy to ignore.

Certainly no reason to write it off for simply being 3E.

 

[Knightfall]

Converting 3E to 3.5? So easy I don't know why people act like its hard. Ignore any mention of Scry and Alchemy skills are the biggest step. You may want to change those skills into something else. I usually changed them over to Knowledge: Plane "X" skills. After that, just pay attention to your 3.5 PH any time buff spells or Haste are mentioned in a 3E product, since some things were changed about them.

Those are the biggies, everything else is pretty minor and easy to ignore.

Certainly no reason to write it off for simply being 3E.

Yes, but not all 3pp d20 material is designed the same. The stuff that doesn't introduce a lot of customized rules is very easy to convert but the Penumbra scenarios aren't just straight adventures. Some of them have customized rules designed specifically for the scenario, which could change the complexity of converting them.

I guess that's what I'm wondering. How different do the custom v.3.0 rules included with some of the adventures change the rules from the core? What can be ignored and what is vital to the adventure's overall design if I feel I need to change the adventure significantly for my campaign world?

I'm not worried about skills, feats, or differences in buff spells.

I guess I just wasn't clear about what I was asking.

 

[QuaziquestGM]

I checked the ones that I've personally used or perused.

The main thing to understand about the tone of these products, is that they are perfectly willing to allow bad things to happen to PCs and even campaign worlds. They are sort of "old school" in a way.

As a GM, you will have to decide if a few angry demigod level creatures and some lingering curses are things that you want the pcs to have to deal with.

Also, you must decide if you are willing to writeoff the interior of a continent or a coastline, relabeling it "apocalypse caused by PCs in progress"...

Even the "Beginner" modules in this set are designed to cause insufficiently cautious and/or foolish pcs problems, possibly fatal ones.

 

[pogre]

I owned most of these and Three Days to Kill was my favorite as well. I thought a lot of the encounters in the En Route series were way too goofy (ymmv).

 

[Minicol]

I guess that's what I'm wondering. How different do the custom v.3.0 rules included with some of the adventures change the rules from the core? What can be ignored and what is vital to the adventure's overall design if I feel I need to change the adventure significantly for my campaign world?

Honestly, in this case I believe you are retty safe, as I don't recall them using lots of rules. On the other hand, some of the plot twists can be damaging to a world.

There is the demi-god thingie, there is the "mirror" adventure, there is the "tide of years" adventure. All of them good ideas, but if you already have a detailed world, they can sometimes cause problems.

 

[Minicol]

I really liked 'Lean and Hungry' as a very nicely constructed dungeon with a lot of flavour. But, yeah, it's not obvious from the blurb that it assumes an Oriental setting, though probably it wouldn't be hard to adapt to a different campaign of compatible themes.

From the blurb maybe not, but just the cover is a big tip-off.

After that, when they start referring to daimyos and katanas and terracota warriors ...