I checked out the reviews on this website, and noted that the original 3 books got high ratings, while the hardcover Book of the Damned got terrible reviews.
If the hardcover is basically a reprint of the original 3 books, then why the bad reviews? What is the difference between the two? I ask because I am considering what to buy, either the original 3 or the new hardcover.
I tried posting this on the product discussion forum, but nobody answered.
The hardcover has some more info than the three paperbacks, and corrects some things that needed updated.
So, why the poor reviews in comparison to the original 3?
Easier to find what you're looking for in the three. They did cover 3 different realms of topic, so if you're looking for book 2 stuff it's in the middle of the combined book.
That, and the players options were, for some, nerfed or changed around quite a bit, in ways not everyone enjoyed.
Still, the core of it is the same, the hardcover is more recent and up to date, so ... Up to you.
I imagine the hissy-fit people threw over Folca has something to do with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reason for bad reviews is lame gamers. Simple as that.
I bought the book. So far, all I can see is demonic deities for GM purposes, and really bad art.
I imagine the hissy-fit people threw over Folca has something to do with it.
Background for those resolutely determined to read 319 posts on the subject.
i tried to write a review, but after 3 plus tries only to get deleted for no fricking good reason, i wrote something short and told them to pm me for details.
I could find better art on deviant art without even trying. The first 2 chapters were almost entirely useless for GM's AND players.
Appendix I haven't read yet, but chapters 3 and 4 are okay.