Lords of Darkness - Reception

Reception

The original Lords of Darkness was a Gamer's Choice award-winner.

Jim Bambra reviewed Lords of Darkness for Dragon magazine No. 151 (November 1989). Bambra felt that the style of presentation for the fictional pieces describing the undead in action "is far superior to the dry style adopted by many supplement writers". He noted that four of the adventures lack maps, reducing their usefulness as plug-in scenarios, and that two adventures "are set in castles that cry out for at least schematic diagrams to show their layouts". Bambra felt that the quality of the adventures also varies greatly, and that while most are "fairly good", he continued " few are so thin and underdeveloped that I wondered why they were included". He contended that the adventure dealing with zombies is "the worst of the lot", partly because the characters would be facing "opponents who are likely to stomp them into the ground", but called the mummies' tomb and the lich's lair "fine examples of the dungeon designer's art". He called the optional Horror Check rules "a laudable attempt to instill fear of the undead but not sufficiently developed to be effective", because "the system isn't integrated into the AD&D rules in a satisfactory manner, as characters will deteriorate to the stage where they are unable to function effectively—a situation contrary to the spirit of the game and more in keeping with the grim tone of Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu game". Bambra said the accessory "expands greatly on the background of undead in the AD&D game and provides a source of short adventure settings." He also said it was a good resource in terms of "new necromantic spells" and "information on the ecologies of the undead", but concluded: "its lack of maps and the underdevelopment of some of its adventures make it a merely useful rather than essential item."