> S&C on the other hand was bad. The basic premise was ok (the "main"
> villian trying to start the war) and the starting parts weren't too bad.
> But the backdrop of the "ultimate bad guy" was, to put it bluntly,
> rediculous. The resolution was especially stupid. Here you have a guy
> who would toast the players without a second thought as soon as he is
> aware of them. But instead he lets them run rampant through his place
> (to "test his followers", yeah, right) and when they finally meet him he
> just chides them a bit, asks them to return anything they looted
> (without checking other than visually), and LETS THEM GO. Give me a
> break! Ludicrous!! (I was trying to not give out TOO much about the
> plot in case anyone is, unfortunately, playing through this)

I've not read S&C, but I can speak for the Sword of Roele and Warlock
of the Stonecrowns.
The Sword of Roele had a great idea behind it - the search for the
sword fo the last Emperor, and all the history and so on that that
entails, but it fell down in the execution. What had the feel of an
epic quest became a standard linear AD&D 'weirdly-named-monster-hack'
involving a load of entirely inappropriate plot elements none of
which had much of a BR feel about them. Sorry, but it weren't exactly
my cup of tea. :-(
Warlock was better, having a more 'Birthrighty' feel about the whole
thing, and elements that would have required tweaking to set outside
Cerilia (SoR could've been set anywhere really). Even so, it was
little more than a glorified dungeon-hack, with very little other
elements. Not a bad one, but still not particularly good (sorry
guys).
Legends was a bit different. It is true to say that the scenarios
were short, fairly simple and linear, but then as short adventures to
'fill out' the Random Domain Events table, that's all they should be.
While short and simple, they were, for the most part, adventures that
were suited mainly for Birthright, and which were not just hack'n
slash - treacherous plots at grand parties, tournaments, advisors
vying for attention, traitorous lieutenants and the like. I think, on
the whole, that Legends was a great deal better as a set of
adventures than the singly-published ones, which have been a
disappointment (although I wouldn't include King of the Giantdowns as
an adventure, more of a regional sourcebook - and a very good one at
that - with adventure seeds).

My (slightly more than) 2GBs. ;-)


John Rickards

"He who is looking for something has lost something."
"And he who is not looking?"
"He gets run over."



PS. Dan. Hahahahaha.