Under the Black Cross presents the reader with a very interesting problem. Whilst there are many gaming supplements that have had flaws of one kind or another, I cannot conceive of any possible reason why anyone might have wanted to commission or write Under the Black Cross.
This volume is a three-section Chronicle, with the obligatory irrelevant second Story, a concept introduced with Bitter Crusade. Covering the expansion of the Teutonic knights and the vampiric influence behind them in the early thirteenth century, the story takes the characters from Magdeburg to Transylvania by the peculiarly roundabout route including Acre. Throughout this extended trip the Storyteller is given no clue as to why the characters should be participating in these plots. Perhaps the reason for this is that the scenarios behind the various Stories are unengaging, which makes it difficult to provide players with suitable motivation. In the opening story, for instance, the characters are supposed to be drawn into solving a crime, a common enough saw in role-playing game supplements, but with the added originality of no real reason given why the players might wish to get involved. In fact, as I read it the players it would be more to the players’ advantage not to get involved, particularly, if they are working for several of the factions suggested in the introduction.
On the off-chance that someone might actually play this sometime, I shall not give away any further information on the plots, but they are strictly pedestrian, showing little imagination. The general tone of the stories is that players will be railroaded by the expediencies of plot, regardless of what they want to do. The second act actually has a line “Whether they are following rumors, Lupescu or the patterns of fate in the city, the characters eventually come to the small monastery of the Apostles…” Motivation? The plot says it has to happen, so it has to happen regardless of whatever the players do. Whilst Vampire Chronicles are famous for this flaw, the characters still had rather more free will in, say, the Giovanni Chronicles than in Under the Black Cross.
These problems are compounded by the fact that not only is the book poorly conceived and poorly researched, it is also pretty poorly written. Lines like “Jurgen, like the great kings of the Dark Medieval, is both ruler and general.” just made the reviewer cringe. Characterisation is also poor. “Thieving Ravnos gypsy juggler” and “Woman with sword” seem to be considered adequate character concepts.
So what is the purpose of this book? Ostensibly, it is to give the Storyteller “the chance to put your player’s coterie center stage for the continued transformation of the Dark Ages setting.” and sets out to do this with a story ostensibly based around the conflict between Lord Jurgen and Vladimir Rustovitch. The term ‘ostensibly’ is used advisedly, particularly since the plots contained within this Chronicle seem mostly irrelevant for this purpose.
This is only a very brief survey of how bad this book is. A very full list of all its flaws could be rather long. So, should anyone want to buy this book? I think you should be able to answer that question for yourself.
Go to forum!
(Due to spamming, old forum discussions are no linked.)