Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: was Atzlan - now adventures and required sourcebooks
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 15:30:11 GMT
> From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training"

> >made until at least we get another adventure related to this lot
> >[there was a rumor of an atzlan one ??
> Well, I expect there'll be one that REQUIRES Aztlan...
i assumed as much.

> Don't you just hate that? When they expect you to buy a sourcebook so that
> you can play an adventure? I still have Celtic Doublecross lying around
> unplayed because I don't have (or want) Tir Nan Og. (I mail-ordered it, how
> would I know?)
i can understand, having read Tir-na-nog but not the adventure, well.
It is the one place i wondered about putting up a GM enfoeced 'NO
ENRTY' arround, even FASA issued a warning about the game unbalancing
possibilites of the new magic rules in it they are so hard!.

> I got as far as "Downtime in Dublin", then realized how short that
> particular chapter would end up with me knowing absolutely zilch about
> Dublin 205x...

> And isn't there another adventure that also requires a 'location' sourcebook
> to play? (And I don't mean Seattle Sourcebook.) Or at least nearly so?
> Imago+London? Can't remember.
Imago suggested Virtual realities, London and Grimoire2 !!!
The only group i know of that played it gave up 1/2 way through as
they didn't use the player info on the back cover.

There is a recent one that needs Denver to be at all runnable.
The NAN ones don't fall simply because they are in the sourcebooks
they require.

> MxM


Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about was Atzlan - now adventures and required sourcebooks, you may also be interested in:


These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.