Immortals and Immortals? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Immortals and Immortals?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zombiegleemax
Jun 05, 2004 13:23:32 What I'm looking for is as much information as I can get on the differences between the Immortals Boxed Set and Wrath of the Immortals.
I'm pretty familiar with the IBS and I know the history behind both. I also know that IBS can easily be used with the Rules Cyclopedia (I've always liked it myself).
So what I'm looking for really are the basic play differences and which version you liked better and why?
#2
zombiegleemax
Jun 05, 2004 15:58:31 Without going into exhaustive detail, Wraith of the Immortals had a revised, though somewhat simplified rules set.

It did not include mental attacks or 3D movements rules that were in the original Immortals set. Also, the way AC increased with PC progression was changed.

But the second set had better abilities and the system in which characters acquired them was better too.

Both sets were good in their own way. I used a hybrid of the two, incorporating the best of both sets.
#3
zombiegleemax
Jun 06, 2004 3:20:17 Thanks for the information, that sounds like what I've always heard and seen. Both systems work just as well with the RC, the IBS was more detailed but more complex, while WotI was easier to play but was lacking in the details department.
Did WotI have the demons or any other monsters? Some of the things I liked best about the IBS was that it was complex enough to allow you to do just about anything you wanted and that it didn't focus on Mystra (a setting I never really liked).
#4
zombiegleemax
Jun 06, 2004 4:34:17
Originally posted by vader42xx
Did WotI have the demons or any other monsters? Some of the things I liked best about the IBS was that it was complex enough to allow you to do just about anything you wanted and that it didn't focus on Mystra (a setting I never really liked).

WotI has demons, they're called fiends here. It also has monsters, but the list is not as complete as in the IBS, IIRC.

Also, if you don't like Mystara, you won't be too happy about WotI. The two maps are Mystaran, and the adventure book describes a world-wide conflict involving the gods of Mystara. The rules book details all the major Mystaran gods and the parts they play in this world.

I myself like WotI. My personal grudge with it is that they omitted Demogorgon from the Immortals' stats list, he's mentioned a few pages later in a (complete?) index of every immortal ever mentioned in D&D books. Oh well, at least I can always fall back on the IBS.

Glorfinden
#5
zombiegleemax
Jun 06, 2004 5:51:28 In that case WotI is certainly not worth tracking down for me. I'm just glad the IBS works so well with the RC as is.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax Jun 05, 2004 13:23:32	What I'm looking for is as much information as I can get on the differences between the Immortals Boxed Set and Wrath of the Immortals. I'm pretty familiar with the IBS and I know the history behind both. I also know that IBS can easily be used with the Rules Cyclopedia (I've always liked it myself). So what I'm looking for really are the basic play differences and which version you liked better and why?
#2 zombiegleemax Jun 05, 2004 15:58:31	Without going into exhaustive detail, Wraith of the Immortals had a revised, though somewhat simplified rules set. It did not include mental attacks or 3D movements rules that were in the original Immortals set. Also, the way AC increased with PC progression was changed. But the second set had better abilities and the system in which characters acquired them was better too. Both sets were good in their own way. I used a hybrid of the two, incorporating the best of both sets.
#3 zombiegleemax Jun 06, 2004 3:20:17	Thanks for the information, that sounds like what I've always heard and seen. Both systems work just as well with the RC, the IBS was more detailed but more complex, while WotI was easier to play but was lacking in the details department. Did WotI have the demons or any other monsters? Some of the things I liked best about the IBS was that it was complex enough to allow you to do just about anything you wanted and that it didn't focus on Mystra (a setting I never really liked).
#4 zombiegleemax Jun 06, 2004 4:34:17	Originally posted by vader42xx Did WotI have the demons or any other monsters? Some of the things I liked best about the IBS was that it was complex enough to allow you to do just about anything you wanted and that it didn't focus on Mystra (a setting I never really liked). WotI has demons, they're called fiends here. It also has monsters, but the list is not as complete as in the IBS, IIRC. Also, if you don't like Mystara, you won't be too happy about WotI. The two maps are Mystaran, and the adventure book describes a world-wide conflict involving the gods of Mystara. The rules book details all the major Mystaran gods and the parts they play in this world. I myself like WotI. My personal grudge with it is that they omitted Demogorgon from the Immortals' stats list, he's mentioned a few pages later in a (complete?) index of every immortal ever mentioned in D&D books. Oh well, at least I can always fall back on the IBS. Glorfinden
#5 zombiegleemax Jun 06, 2004 5:51:28	In that case WotI is certainly not worth tracking down for me. I'm just glad the IBS works so well with the RC as is.