The Inside Scoop on Gaming

Introduction

Most of us know the old saying "Don't judge a book by its cover," and most of us know that clichés, while of course overused, have a foundation in truth and wisdom. When approaching Privateer Press' first d20 release, The Witchfire Trilogy, Part I: The Longest Night, keeping the old saying about books and covers in mind will help get us past the admittedly slick and attractive visual presentation--and into a book that ultimately does not hold up to the promises of its cover.

Overall, The Longest Night is a substantial product: 64 pages of campaign source and adventure material by Matt Staroscik, solidly presented with an attractive layout and top-notch interior artwork. The Introduction works like a mini-campaign world supplement, detailing the Iron Kingdoms, the city of Corvis, and the intriguing hook of the setting--steampower and firearms. Corvis receives enough attention to bring the essence of its gritty, mysterious atmosphere alive. We find intriguing elements such as an engineer's union, steamjacks, an elitist wizards guild, an Undercity lost to the swamp, and a surrounding wilderness called Widower's Wood (for good reason, too). We also get some helpful sidebars that further flesh out the setting: Crime & Punishment in Corvis, Firearms, and Steampower--the latter two suggesting some new skills, such as Craft (gunsmith) or Profession (steam engineer). After the Introduction comes the adventure itself, divided into three Acts and comprising the bulk of the product. The Longest Night then finishes off with three appendices detailing the monsters, NPCs, and dramatis personae encountered in the adventure. Of special distinction here is the Thrall, a type of undead similar to skeletons but given different functions and power levels depending upon the series of necromantic tattoos inscribed on its bones. As you can see, the 64 pages are packed with material that brings a great amount of detail, flavour, and originality to the setting in which the adventure takes place. This is the product's strongest virtue, showing the admirable care and effort put into developing Corvis and the Iron Kingdoms.

Yet The Longest Night also reveals numerous problems: enough, in fact, that the product as an adventure begins to suffer under dedicated scrutiny. The plot and general adventure design own certain flaws that could prove difficult for beginning DMs and players to work through. The handling of the d20 rules mechanics often proves either sloppy or incomplete. Finally, the editing--for all aspects of the product, including plot, rules mechanics, layout, and writing--appears inattentive, which leads to concerns regarding internal consistency. As I mentioned above, The Longest Night looks absolutely delicious . . . but this attractiveness only veils the troubles with the actual content.

Looking Beyond the Cover . . .

Adventure Design

While The Longest Night does construct a viable and rich background story for the adventure, one filled with betrayal and sacrifice and revenge and shadowy manipulators of events, that story becomes the star of the show instead of the PCs. The Longest Night has a story to tell, and it makes sure that the PCs fall in line at all costs. In the Introduction, Staroscik suggests that the DM will see how the adventure has a "natural flow" (4)--but the PCs should not be "forced" into a pre-determined order of events, "unless there is a major plot point at stake" (4). Staroscik in numerous places constrains the PCs into specific courses of action, especially when the situation involves dealing with particular key NPCs such as Father Pandor Dumas (the PCs' main Corvis contact, as well as their employer) or Watch Captain Julian Helstrom (who hires the PCs as agents at one point).

As a first example, let us look at the encounter between the PCs and main villain in her hideout: no matter how the PCs arrive to meet the main villain, they will inevitably all end up incapacitated by apparently endless hold person spells cast by the villain (or by a trap--the exact situation is unclear), allowing her to escape; this should be easy for the villain, "a 10th level sorcerer in most ways" and the PCs only "at best second level" (35); the end result being that the PCs must stay caught in the hideout and find another exit (the villain conveniently casts stone shape to seal off the original entrance), while the villain will always get away to ensure the plot's integrity.

Moreover, after the PCs complete a "major plot point" and return to Corvis, they have several options for how to proceed in dealing with the main villain: take justice into their own hands, tell the authorities, do further covert surveillance, or even abduct her. The first and fourth options are labelled as utterly unsatisfactory (the first as "the worst possible scenario" [32]); the second option results only in ridicule and disbelief; the third option, though, is the best, and the PCs will be "rewarded for their patience" (32)--meaning, they end up in the villain's hideout, in the unlucky hold person situation just detailed above. In fact, Staroscik encourages the DM to do everything possible to avoid or thwart options one and four, and a justification of DM "cheating" (32) to stop a course of action by the players only entrenches the sense that The Longest Night's "natural flow" funnels the PCs into doing things a certain way, despite their best efforts to the contrary. Why would the PCs go through all the work of tracking down the villain only to end up held and trapped in the catacombs beneath the temple, if they knew what inevitably lay in store for them?

By the time we reach the adventure's climax, the PCs have become little more than spectators while high-level NPCs take centre stage. Admittedly, the PCs get to play a significant part in the undead invasion of Corvis at the end, and Staroscik does provide some effective and exciting encounters for the PCs here--but any actions by the PCs are mere drops in a bucket . . . and they simply must get to the temple for the finale. Once there, the PCs merely watch as the main villains appear and deliver the plot's closing events. Yes, the PCs must make a crucial choice at the end. They do not, however, at all understand the true significance of that choice, nor can they, even after all of their earlier investigating that forms the primary action of the adventure. A vital element of solid adventure design involves allowing the PCs to construct the story as they go, allowing them to be the protagonists. The Longest Night forgets this principle in several places, relying too heavily on DM fiat and the NPCs for the sake of the story's "natural flow."

The Rules

Another important aspect of a good adventure involves the handling of the rules, especially now with the advent of the d20 system. Quite often in The Longest Night, skill checks are treated in a cursory fashion, too often asking the DM to come up with the appropriate skill for a situation or employing improper terminology. For example, in Area 14 of the witches' tomb (Act II), the PCs encounter 12 half-burned candles arranged in a circle around some caskets, and the text then reads, "Any character making the appropriate skill check will know that takes about four hours" (30). A few questions arise: what exactly takes four hours? what is the appropriate skill here? what is the DC? I offer only one example of a recurring issue to point out that the questions left unanswered by the text are rather significant ones for the DM, who should not need to do this sort of extra work with a published adventure (see other instances on pages 7, 9, 10, and 43). Furthermore, Staroscik appears to misunderstand how the Track feat and the Wilderness Lore skill should work together. Several times the text reads something like "needing only a Track roll of DC 10" (31), when the act of tracking itself is decided by a Wilderness Lore check. While I may be focussing on apparently minor rules issues here, think of a new DM running The Longest Night as her first adventure: the potential for confusion and frustration looms if she must spend time puzzling out precisely what is needed in a specific situation.

The DM's confusion and frustration will only increase when she gets to the handling of the statistics for monsters and NPCs--that is, if she knows what problems to look for in the first place. Appendix A: Creatures is riddled with inaccurate statistics that require a great deal of attention and revision from the DM if things are to get put straight. Creatures have Initiative bonuses ( 2 is the favoured bonus) when they do not have either a Dexterity modifier or the Improved Initiative feat; hit points, attack modifiers, armour class, and saves are frequently not adjusted properly for ability modifiers or hit dice/level; finally, some of the monsters do not have feats such as Alertness or Weapon Finesse that would seem appropriate in comparison to similar creatures from the Monster Manual (I am thinking of the Gorax or Razorbat, for example).

In Appendix B: NPCs, the inaccurate statistics continue, but more importantly Staroscik avoids using the NPC classes from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide as the proper templates for characters such as Thugs and Merchants and the City Watch (see DMG 36, which suggests that the NPC classes "represent the rest of the people in the world around the PCs who don't train to go on adventures"). The Merchant, for instance, apparently constitutes an entirely new NPC class, instead of being represented by the Commoner or Expert classes (see DMG 39)--once again making life difficult for the DM.

The most serious issues, however, come with Appendix C: Dramatis Personae, and I will focus upon Alexia Ciannor (the adventure's main villain) to point up the consequences of poor handling of the rules. Alexia, the description informs us, is seventeen years old and "a prodigy" (62) as a 10th-level sorcerer. A seventeen-year old 10th-level sorcerer feels just a bit far fetched, prodigy or not. (Chapter 6: Description in the PHB lists the starting age for a human sorcerer as 15 1d4 years.) This allows her to cast 5th-level spells, meaning that she represents a very powerful enemy--especially for a party of 1st- or 2nd-level PCs. Yet her Charisma score is listed as 14, meaning that she technically cannot cast 5th-level spells (apparently Staroscik got mixed up between Intelligence and Charisma in this case: Alexia's Intelligence is 17)! Furthermore, Alexia's alignment is stated as neutral, which of course does not in any way match the rather evil acts in which she engages during the adventure (grave robbing, raising the dead, fashioning an army of 500-plus undead and unleashing it upon Corvis). Finally, as far as her spells are concerned, we are informed simply that "Alexia knows a wide variety of spells" (62). No spell list is provided. The DM can establish from the adventure that Alexia at least knows blindness, hold person, hold portal, sleep, and stone shape (a 5th-level spell that she cannot cast); she may perhaps know spells such as dimension door (at the end, Alexia simply vanishes "to parts unknown" [54]) or teleport (another 5th-level spell) or even animate dead (we never learn precisely how Alexia could build an army of 500-plus undead; besides, this is also a 5th-level spell). Moreover, I would be remiss if I did not point out that Alexia can know only one 5th-level spell as a 10th-level sorcerer (PHB 49). The DM should never be responsible for developing an NPC's spell list in a published adventure--which must also be done with Father Pandor Dumas (6th-level cleric) and Vahn Oberen (12th-level wizard). The handling of Alexia's statistics and character information creates some possibly crucial rules conflicts and leaves significant gaps, particularly if a DM is not attentive to these problems. Either Staroscik and his proofreaders did not fully understand the rules when writing The Longest Night, or they were a bit lazy with the details, and neither option is acceptable because a DM will need to spend a decent chunk of time fixing all of the errors with the monsters and the NPCs.

Editing

The mishandling of the rules, though, stands as simply the most significant issue when we consider the editing of The Longest Night as a whole. As regards the layout, we sometimes get illustrations in places that bear no relation at all to the surrounding text, particularly the swamp squid (I assume) on page 26, the devil rat (I assume) on page 32, the statue on page 38, the sign for a bar called The Falling Star on page 41 (linked to text about the trip out Fort Rhyker), and the razorbats on page 44. With regard to the razorbat, although we find its statistics in Appendix A: Creatures, it makes not a single appearance at all in the adventure. This represents a curious situation, for the steamjack--so much a part of the atmosphere of the Corvis setting--is omitted from Appendix A. As well, the descriptions of the maps are at times confusing: the exact location of The Quad in Corvis remains a mystery even after rereading; the entire Fort Rhyker section comes across as nearly unplayable because two bridges (walkways?) and how they work does not make clear sense--an area map of Fort Rhyker would greatly help here, specifically to show the location of the "great chasm" (42) its bridges supposedly straddle.

Finally, the text of The Longest Night in places requires more attention. For instance, when the PCs encounter Alexia in her hideout (discussed above), we learn that she will "set off a magical trap constructed for just such an occasion" (35) and that this trap will "discharge automatically" (35) if the PCs enter the room with Alexia in their control. Nowhere, however, do we get the specific statistics for this trap or any indication of where it is located: essential information for perhaps disarming or avoiding it (though at 1st or 2nd level, and Alexia a 10th-level sorcerer, this could prove difficult for the PCs). A few times we come across text obviously meant to be read aloud but not contained within a greyed box (pages 22, 48, and 51), and throughout we find improper terminology for magic items and spells ("longsword 1" instead of " 1 longsword," or "continual light" instead of "continual flame," with neither magic item nor spell names consistently italicised). While some of these matters may appear trivial at best, when weighed together they serve as evidence of a book flawed at its heart.

Conclusion

Despite my negatively critical approach here, I do want to say in closing that The Longest Night displays a wealth of energy and honest effort that should not go unrecognised. The author obviously enjoys and feels passionate about the story that he wants to get told, and the setting of Corvis and the Iron Kingdoms holds much intrigue and potential. Yet The Longest Night ultimately suffers from a divided focus: does it want to be a campaign supplement or an adventure? It succeeds much more readily as the former, which ends up turning the setting and Staroscik's story of witches and betrayals and grave robbing and revenge into the main attraction. When The Longest Night wants to be a low-level adventure (for characters of 1st to 3rd level), however, it proceeds to restrict and deter PC autonomy, let alone pit the PCs against adversaries far beyond their power to affect in a meaningful way. If the second instalment of The Witchfire Trilogy seeks to improve upon the first (and it should!), then it must address a number of key issues that encompass all aspects of a published adventure, right down to a seemingly inconsequential matter such as proper third edition Dungeons & Dragons notation. The Longest Night thus in fact falls far short of the perfection so many claim for it . . . the many who dig no deeper than its cover.

[Coda: Although this review constitutes my first for RPG.net, I will produce more in the coming weeks--as time and commitments allow, of course. I felt compelled to enter the review arena by the consistently (and excessively) glowing praise of The Longest Night that persisted in either ignoring or treating far too lightly some significant issues with the product (see Justin Bacon's recent review on RPG.net, to which mine serves as somewhat of a response). Just because a product looks good is no justification for neglecting the actual content, particularly if other d20 products out there are regularly judged primarily for their content more so than their presentation.]

The Witchfire Trilogy, Part I: The Longest Night
The Witchfire Trilogy, Part I: The Longest Night Capsule Review by Garrett Williams on 24/05/01 Style: 4 (Classy and well done) Substance: 3 (Average) A slick, stylish, and energetic d20 product, but fraught with problems that may frustrate attentive GMs. Product: The Witchfire Trilogy, Part I: The Longest Night Author: Matt Staroscik Category: RPG Company/Publisher: Privateer Press LLC Line: d20/Iron Kingdomes Cost: US $9.95 Page count: 64 Year published: 2001 ISBN: 0-9706970-0-7 SKU: WF001 Comp copy?: no Capsule Review by Garrett Williams on 24/05/01 Genre tags: Fantasy	Introduction Most of us know the old saying "Don't judge a book by its cover," and most of us know that clichés, while of course overused, have a foundation in truth and wisdom. When approaching Privateer Press' first d20 release, The Witchfire Trilogy, Part I: The Longest Night, keeping the old saying about books and covers in mind will help get us past the admittedly slick and attractive visual presentation--and into a book that ultimately does not hold up to the promises of its cover. Overall, The Longest Night is a substantial product: 64 pages of campaign source and adventure material by Matt Staroscik, solidly presented with an attractive layout and top-notch interior artwork. The Introduction works like a mini-campaign world supplement, detailing the Iron Kingdoms, the city of Corvis, and the intriguing hook of the setting--steampower and firearms. Corvis receives enough attention to bring the essence of its gritty, mysterious atmosphere alive. We find intriguing elements such as an engineer's union, steamjacks, an elitist wizards guild, an Undercity lost to the swamp, and a surrounding wilderness called Widower's Wood (for good reason, too). We also get some helpful sidebars that further flesh out the setting: Crime & Punishment in Corvis, Firearms, and Steampower--the latter two suggesting some new skills, such as Craft (gunsmith) or Profession (steam engineer). After the Introduction comes the adventure itself, divided into three Acts and comprising the bulk of the product. The Longest Night then finishes off with three appendices detailing the monsters, NPCs, and dramatis personae encountered in the adventure. Of special distinction here is the Thrall, a type of undead similar to skeletons but given different functions and power levels depending upon the series of necromantic tattoos inscribed on its bones. As you can see, the 64 pages are packed with material that brings a great amount of detail, flavour, and originality to the setting in which the adventure takes place. This is the product's strongest virtue, showing the admirable care and effort put into developing Corvis and the Iron Kingdoms. Yet The Longest Night also reveals numerous problems: enough, in fact, that the product as an adventure begins to suffer under dedicated scrutiny. The plot and general adventure design own certain flaws that could prove difficult for beginning DMs and players to work through. The handling of the d20 rules mechanics often proves either sloppy or incomplete. Finally, the editing--for all aspects of the product, including plot, rules mechanics, layout, and writing--appears inattentive, which leads to concerns regarding internal consistency. As I mentioned above, The Longest Night looks absolutely delicious . . . but this attractiveness only veils the troubles with the actual content. Looking Beyond the Cover . . . Adventure Design While The Longest Night does construct a viable and rich background story for the adventure, one filled with betrayal and sacrifice and revenge and shadowy manipulators of events, that story becomes the star of the show instead of the PCs. The Longest Night has a story to tell, and it makes sure that the PCs fall in line at all costs. In the Introduction, Staroscik suggests that the DM will see how the adventure has a "natural flow" (4)--but the PCs should not be "forced" into a pre-determined order of events, "unless there is a major plot point at stake" (4). Staroscik in numerous places constrains the PCs into specific courses of action, especially when the situation involves dealing with particular key NPCs such as Father Pandor Dumas (the PCs' main Corvis contact, as well as their employer) or Watch Captain Julian Helstrom (who hires the PCs as agents at one point). As a first example, let us look at the encounter between the PCs and main villain in her hideout: no matter how the PCs arrive to meet the main villain, they will inevitably all end up incapacitated by apparently endless hold person spells cast by the villain (or by a trap--the exact situation is unclear), allowing her to escape; this should be easy for the villain, "a 10th level sorcerer in most ways" and the PCs only "at best second level" (35); the end result being that the PCs must stay caught in the hideout and find another exit (the villain conveniently casts stone shape to seal off the original entrance), while the villain will always get away to ensure the plot's integrity. Moreover, after the PCs complete a "major plot point" and return to Corvis, they have several options for how to proceed in dealing with the main villain: take justice into their own hands, tell the authorities, do further covert surveillance, or even abduct her. The first and fourth options are labelled as utterly unsatisfactory (the first as "the worst possible scenario" [32]); the second option results only in ridicule and disbelief; the third option, though, is the best, and the PCs will be "rewarded for their patience" (32)--meaning, they end up in the villain's hideout, in the unlucky hold person situation just detailed above. In fact, Staroscik encourages the DM to do everything possible to avoid or thwart options one and four, and a justification of DM "cheating" (32) to stop a course of action by the players only entrenches the sense that The Longest Night's "natural flow" funnels the PCs into doing things a certain way, despite their best efforts to the contrary. Why would the PCs go through all the work of tracking down the villain only to end up held and trapped in the catacombs beneath the temple, if they knew what inevitably lay in store for them? By the time we reach the adventure's climax, the PCs have become little more than spectators while high-level NPCs take centre stage. Admittedly, the PCs get to play a significant part in the undead invasion of Corvis at the end, and Staroscik does provide some effective and exciting encounters for the PCs here--but any actions by the PCs are mere drops in a bucket . . . and they simply must get to the temple for the finale. Once there, the PCs merely watch as the main villains appear and deliver the plot's closing events. Yes, the PCs must make a crucial choice at the end. They do not, however, at all understand the true significance of that choice, nor can they, even after all of their earlier investigating that forms the primary action of the adventure. A vital element of solid adventure design involves allowing the PCs to construct the story as they go, allowing them to be the protagonists. The Longest Night forgets this principle in several places, relying too heavily on DM fiat and the NPCs for the sake of the story's "natural flow." The Rules Another important aspect of a good adventure involves the handling of the rules, especially now with the advent of the d20 system. Quite often in The Longest Night, skill checks are treated in a cursory fashion, too often asking the DM to come up with the appropriate skill for a situation or employing improper terminology. For example, in Area 14 of the witches' tomb (Act II), the PCs encounter 12 half-burned candles arranged in a circle around some caskets, and the text then reads, "Any character making the appropriate skill check will know that takes about four hours" (30). A few questions arise: what exactly takes four hours? what is the appropriate skill here? what is the DC? I offer only one example of a recurring issue to point out that the questions left unanswered by the text are rather significant ones for the DM, who should not need to do this sort of extra work with a published adventure (see other instances on pages 7, 9, 10, and 43). Furthermore, Staroscik appears to misunderstand how the Track feat and the Wilderness Lore skill should work together. Several times the text reads something like "needing only a Track roll of DC 10" (31), when the act of tracking itself is decided by a Wilderness Lore check. While I may be focussing on apparently minor rules issues here, think of a new DM running The Longest Night as her first adventure: the potential for confusion and frustration looms if she must spend time puzzling out precisely what is needed in a specific situation. The DM's confusion and frustration will only increase when she gets to the handling of the statistics for monsters and NPCs--that is, if she knows what problems to look for in the first place. Appendix A: Creatures is riddled with inaccurate statistics that require a great deal of attention and revision from the DM if things are to get put straight. Creatures have Initiative bonuses ( 2 is the favoured bonus) when they do not have either a Dexterity modifier or the Improved Initiative feat; hit points, attack modifiers, armour class, and saves are frequently not adjusted properly for ability modifiers or hit dice/level; finally, some of the monsters do not have feats such as Alertness or Weapon Finesse that would seem appropriate in comparison to similar creatures from the Monster Manual (I am thinking of the Gorax or Razorbat, for example). In Appendix B: NPCs, the inaccurate statistics continue, but more importantly Staroscik avoids using the NPC classes from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide as the proper templates for characters such as Thugs and Merchants and the City Watch (see DMG 36, which suggests that the NPC classes "represent the rest of the people in the world around the PCs who don't train to go on adventures"). The Merchant, for instance, apparently constitutes an entirely new NPC class, instead of being represented by the Commoner or Expert classes (see DMG 39)--once again making life difficult for the DM. The most serious issues, however, come with Appendix C: Dramatis Personae, and I will focus upon Alexia Ciannor (the adventure's main villain) to point up the consequences of poor handling of the rules. Alexia, the description informs us, is seventeen years old and "a prodigy" (62) as a 10th-level sorcerer. A seventeen-year old 10th-level sorcerer feels just a bit far fetched, prodigy or not. (Chapter 6: Description in the PHB lists the starting age for a human sorcerer as 15 1d4 years.) This allows her to cast 5th-level spells, meaning that she represents a very powerful enemy--especially for a party of 1st- or 2nd-level PCs. Yet her Charisma score is listed as 14, meaning that she technically cannot cast 5th-level spells (apparently Staroscik got mixed up between Intelligence and Charisma in this case: Alexia's Intelligence is 17)! Furthermore, Alexia's alignment is stated as neutral, which of course does not in any way match the rather evil acts in which she engages during the adventure (grave robbing, raising the dead, fashioning an army of 500-plus undead and unleashing it upon Corvis). Finally, as far as her spells are concerned, we are informed simply that "Alexia knows a wide variety of spells" (62). No spell list is provided. The DM can establish from the adventure that Alexia at least knows blindness, hold person, hold portal, sleep, and stone shape (a 5th-level spell that she cannot cast); she may perhaps know spells such as dimension door (at the end, Alexia simply vanishes "to parts unknown" [54]) or teleport (another 5th-level spell) or even animate dead (we never learn precisely how Alexia could build an army of 500-plus undead; besides, this is also a 5th-level spell). Moreover, I would be remiss if I did not point out that Alexia can know only one 5th-level spell as a 10th-level sorcerer (PHB 49). The DM should never be responsible for developing an NPC's spell list in a published adventure--which must also be done with Father Pandor Dumas (6th-level cleric) and Vahn Oberen (12th-level wizard). The handling of Alexia's statistics and character information creates some possibly crucial rules conflicts and leaves significant gaps, particularly if a DM is not attentive to these problems. Either Staroscik and his proofreaders did not fully understand the rules when writing The Longest Night, or they were a bit lazy with the details, and neither option is acceptable because a DM will need to spend a decent chunk of time fixing all of the errors with the monsters and the NPCs. Editing The mishandling of the rules, though, stands as simply the most significant issue when we consider the editing of The Longest Night as a whole. As regards the layout, we sometimes get illustrations in places that bear no relation at all to the surrounding text, particularly the swamp squid (I assume) on page 26, the devil rat (I assume) on page 32, the statue on page 38, the sign for a bar called The Falling Star on page 41 (linked to text about the trip out Fort Rhyker), and the razorbats on page 44. With regard to the razorbat, although we find its statistics in Appendix A: Creatures, it makes not a single appearance at all in the adventure. This represents a curious situation, for the steamjack--so much a part of the atmosphere of the Corvis setting--is omitted from Appendix A. As well, the descriptions of the maps are at times confusing: the exact location of The Quad in Corvis remains a mystery even after rereading; the entire Fort Rhyker section comes across as nearly unplayable because two bridges (walkways?) and how they work does not make clear sense--an area map of Fort Rhyker would greatly help here, specifically to show the location of the "great chasm" (42) its bridges supposedly straddle. Finally, the text of The Longest Night in places requires more attention. For instance, when the PCs encounter Alexia in her hideout (discussed above), we learn that she will "set off a magical trap constructed for just such an occasion" (35) and that this trap will "discharge automatically" (35) if the PCs enter the room with Alexia in their control. Nowhere, however, do we get the specific statistics for this trap or any indication of where it is located: essential information for perhaps disarming or avoiding it (though at 1st or 2nd level, and Alexia a 10th-level sorcerer, this could prove difficult for the PCs). A few times we come across text obviously meant to be read aloud but not contained within a greyed box (pages 22, 48, and 51), and throughout we find improper terminology for magic items and spells ("longsword 1" instead of " 1 longsword," or "continual light" instead of "continual flame," with neither magic item nor spell names consistently italicised). While some of these matters may appear trivial at best, when weighed together they serve as evidence of a book flawed at its heart. Conclusion Despite my negatively critical approach here, I do want to say in closing that The Longest Night displays a wealth of energy and honest effort that should not go unrecognised. The author obviously enjoys and feels passionate about the story that he wants to get told, and the setting of Corvis and the Iron Kingdoms holds much intrigue and potential. Yet The Longest Night ultimately suffers from a divided focus: does it want to be a campaign supplement or an adventure? It succeeds much more readily as the former, which ends up turning the setting and Staroscik's story of witches and betrayals and grave robbing and revenge into the main attraction. When The Longest Night wants to be a low-level adventure (for characters of 1st to 3rd level), however, it proceeds to restrict and deter PC autonomy, let alone pit the PCs against adversaries far beyond their power to affect in a meaningful way. If the second instalment of The Witchfire Trilogy seeks to improve upon the first (and it should!), then it must address a number of key issues that encompass all aspects of a published adventure, right down to a seemingly inconsequential matter such as proper third edition Dungeons & Dragons notation. The Longest Night thus in fact falls far short of the perfection so many claim for it . . . the many who dig no deeper than its cover. [Coda: Although this review constitutes my first for RPG.net, I will produce more in the coming weeks--as time and commitments allow, of course. I felt compelled to enter the review arena by the consistently (and excessively) glowing praise of The Longest Night that persisted in either ignoring or treating far too lightly some significant issues with the product (see Justin Bacon's recent review on RPG.net, to which mine serves as somewhat of a response). Just because a product looks good is no justification for neglecting the actual content, particularly if other d20 products out there are regularly judged primarily for their content more so than their presentation.]