[Scoop?] Libris Mortis: The Book of the Undead, from WotC


log in or register to remove this ad

Joshua Dyal said:
I think that might be a typo, though -- the other scoop thread that was just closed reported it as Librim Mortis.

It's "libris" in my copy of Dungeon. That's not to say that Dungeon staff couldn't have made a typo.
 


This sounds cool, but the 2E Van Richten Guides set a very high bar vis-a-vis content.

I'd like to see few new undead humanoids -- we've really got them covered at this point -- but lots more templates, more "ecology" issues, a nice crunchy chapter on necromancy (including time spent on "good" necromancers), some stuff that makes the undead spookier -- it could simply be a general DM advice chapter, if it's really well written -- and so on. I'd also like such practicalities handled as which undead can speak addressed.
 

Sounds Very Intresting. Guess I'll have to wait a while and see first if this is a real project and not a blunder by some editor at paizo. Then there's a longer wait to see if it is any good.
 

I don't think it's a blunder by Paizo, there's a feat from the book in the newest installment of the adventure path. The feat is pretty sweet for evil clerics, it makes negative energy heal you and positive energy hurt you.
 

Hypersmurf said:
But just saying "Libris Mortis" by itself is... odd.
My guess would be that the person who came up with it knew "ex libris" and "rigor mortis" and then put them together.

I would call it <i>Nil Nisi Malum</i> but sadly my witty classical allusions would probably remain unappreciated. :)
 

Hypersmurf said:
But just saying "Libris Mortis" by itself is... odd.

WotC's imperfect comprehension of latin aside, i'm willing to give them all kinds of credit for not going with the obvious-and rather cliche, IMHO-title of Necronomicon for this book.
 

ohGr said:
WotC's imperfect comprehension of latin aside, i'm willing to give them all kinds of credit for not going with the obvious-and rather cliche, IMHO-title of Necronomicon for this book.
That's undoubtedly somebody's trademark too.
 


Remove ads

Top