Orcus of Necromancer Games says "You were right, I was wrong"

[Dannyalcatraz]

In addition, there is the consideration that things within the game itself may remove the ability of PCs to generate particular effects, either temporarily or "permanently", including (but not limited to):

1. Sunder
2. Rust Monsters
3. Disenchanters
4. Spellthieves
5. Confusion effects
6. Level Draining effects
7. Stat Draining effects
8. Wish/Alter Reality effects
9. Expenditure of charges

 

[Hierax]

Better late than never, applause to Orcus for getting these games out there!

I'd love to get them when I get some cash.


Lots of talk here about modules in general but are there any on topic comments/reviews about these particular new Necromancer modules themselves?

Are they on par with the rest of the Necromancer stuff, specifically how do they compare to others, say like Rappan Athuk and Abysthor?

 

[Twowolves]

I find FoM is a hot/cold spell; some players always keep one on hand for grappling beasties, but others never bother with it. More to the point, they don't have more than one casting prepped.

It's a rock to the DM's scissors. It not only stops grapplers (like the dreaded Evard's Black Tentacles) but it stops Web, Entangle, Hold Person/Monster, hindering terrain, even lets you swing that mace underwater with no penalties. It's one of those spells that saves your bacon so many times and in so many situations that I (and the groups I've interacted with) think it almost a no brainer. You are pretty much guaranteed to run into one of these types of encounters (critters/spells/environments) in any adventure.

But that is obviously my limited experience.

 

[The Shaman]

Its only bad design if you assume the PCs should be able to overcome every obstacle put in their way. Personally, in most of my worlds, I just design things in a way that seems reasonable to me and its the PCs problem to overcome. If I was a vampire I jolly well would have a hard to get to coffin, especially if I was clever and intelligent and had hundreds of years to prepare it.

Well said.

I like to work from the assumption that most adversaries are at least as smart as the adventurers, and plan accordingly.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well said.

I like to work from the assumption that most adversaries are at least as smart as the adventurers, and plan accordingly.

that sort of thinking leads to one big problem (inless your me, becuse I am a a god of DMing ) and that is there are 3-6 minds against one. I mean if you are the smartest guy in your group (witch of cource I am ) you still have to be smart enought to out think the combined intelagence of the whole party...

of cource if you are a super Genius like me, and wile E cayotie, then no problem...

 

[The Shaman]

that sort of thinking leads to one big problem (inless your me, becuse I am a a god of DMing ) and that is there are 3-6 minds against one. I mean if you are the smartest guy in your group (witch of cource I am ) you still have to be smart enought to out think the combined intelagence of the whole party...

of cource if you are a super Genius like me, and wile E cayotie, then no problem...

As the referee, you have access to far more information than the players and unlimited resources at your disposal. If you can't challenge pretty much any group of players, well then, you probably shouldn't be behind the screen.

In my humble opinion and all that.

 

[Angellis_ater]

Two questions - first of all, I'll re-iterate my question in a different light (since it didn't get answered earlier) - was it unfeasible, 1½ year ago to write these modules under the OGL, but for 4E like Goodman Games does? OR were these completed for 3.5 rules and assumptions more than 1½ year ago and you wanted to redefine enough stuff to make it "4E rules, 3.5 feel" and were thus screwed by the GSL? Second question - Why couldn't you release "4Erules->3.5feel" rules modifications under the OGL?

 

[Greg V]

Two questions - first of all, I'll re-iterate my question in a different light (since it didn't get answered earlier) - was it unfeasible, 1½ year ago to write these modules under the OGL, but for 4E like Goodman Games does? OR were these completed for 3.5 rules and assumptions more than 1½ year ago and you wanted to redefine enough stuff to make it "4E rules, 3.5 feel" and were thus screwed by the GSL? Second question - Why couldn't you release "4Erules->3.5feel" rules modifications under the OGL?

I can't speak for the others, but the writing for the Slumbering Tsar series was completed about 4 years ago.

 

[Filcher]

Ouch. That's patience.

 

[Orcus]

Orcus limited interaction with this thread reinforces my 'fire and forget' theory.

It also showcases one of the reasons why EN World isn't 'hip' anymore.

Orcus, unless I'm misreading this, isn't a community supporter and doesn't 'hang' around here.

He doesn't have to. The Necromancer forum is great even if the Necromancer website is terrible.

Those companies that were able to carve niches out for themselves were able to bring the fans to them. En World is awesome but it is not the heaven for the publishers, especially the little guys who grew into the big guys, that it once was. It's almost a PDF only crowd outside of a few notable exceptions but that's how the 4e market itself it.

And the big player in the 4e market also has it's own forum.

Oh come on now, Joe I havent responded because it seemed like there wasnt much to say to the whole tulip conspiracy thing. Plus, I put it out there for people to discuss. I dont want to shape the conversation. But if my non-posting is going to be interpreted as an "I dont care" move, then here I am posting. Caring is one thing I do do.