City State of the Invincible Overlord -- Is it really that good?

[Akrasia]

Three reviews at ENWorld give this thing 5/5. The one review at RPGnet gives it a 5/5 (at least in the written part of the review -- the reviewer appears to not have modified the default '3' in the 'review summary' part).

It almost sounds too good to be true.

(a.) Definite 'old school' feel maintained. Inspiration from Lankhmar, Hyboria, etc. (None of the PC and/or 'techno-magic' nonsense found in other current 'hip' city books.)
(b.) Minimal 'crunch' and statblocks. Since I use C&C anyway, this is a definite plus in my books.
(c.) A huge city that is Lawful Evil! That is so cool. Good cities are boring.
(d.) Tonnes of adventure hooks and colourful NPCs.
(e.) Modularlity -- unlike so many other city books out there, this one can be easily tweaked to fit into most campaign worlds (including homebrews!).

Does anyone out there own this baby? Is it really this good?

 

[Krieg]

As long as old skool city demographics and in-jokes aren't a problem then I was definitely give it an emphatic "yes".

 

[trancejeremy]

Well, since I wrote one of the reviews, I pretty much weighed in already, but yes.

e) might be a problem, since it's a bit different from other worlds. It's a bit more male-dominated and well, evil (slavery is common) than most published fantasy settings

 

[tetsujin28]

I said this over at rpgnet, as well, but the I think the original was one of the greatest things, ever. Like gaming's version of peanut butter and chocolate.

 

[Treebore]

It is the best city supplement done since Waterdeep in the old days. And it is an "evil" alignment city. I also wrote one of the ENworld reviews. IT is better done then the Zhentil Keep boxed set, considering the difference in size/scope of the products.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I like City-State. I don't love it, though. Here is my criticism. It honestly feels like a thousand random places thrown in together as a city. Whereas it is supposed to be open enough so that the GM can add enough spice to do so as he wishes, it does not seem like a revolutionay product or anything. I guess what I am saying is that just about any clever GM could get 5 of his GM friends (or come to ENWorld) and say 'everyone submit 20 locations' and get the same effect. It seems that every shopkeeper has a crapload of money they are sitting on or a bunch of magic items. There does not seem to be much interplay between the NPCs (such as the ogre who runs the hat shop is plotting to kill his neighber, the dwarf, who runs the belt store).

Like I said, I enjoy it but one of my criticisms is that it leaves a GM with a LOT of work to do.

 

[danbuter]

I like it a lot. If nothing else, it will provide you with a ton of urban encounters. It is kinda generic, but that's what I want. Too much individual character pretty much ruins any product for me.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I think it really is that good. It retains much of the original, adapting it for 3.5. I find it to be one of the best city books ever made for a RPG. Usable not just as a base of operations, but also as a setting for adventures.

 

[howandwhy99]

Like I said, I enjoy it but one of my criticisms is that it leaves a GM with a LOT of work to do.

I own the Mayfair Games boxset. It is very good, but it does fail where KoS mentions. I suppose you could broaden the size of the city and include "non-encounter" areas quite easily. I don't know about the JG hardbound book of the same name, but I do plan on purchasing it when it goes down in price.

Does anyone know if there are significant differences between these two versions and the original?

 

[NewJeffCTHome]

Well, since I wrote one of the reviews, I pretty much weighed in already, but yes.

e) might be a problem, since it's a bit different from other worlds. It's a bit more male-dominated and well, evil (slavery is common) than most published fantasy settings

Aren't most fantasy settings male-dominated? The exception sometimes being the elven kingdoms, which can often have queens leading them.