Crusader's Companion Necromancer

[Jackal]

Hello all, it has been too long, but Castles & Crusades has called me back!

In catching up on all that I have missed, I found the Crusader's Companion, and then found it to be something of a mystery.

I dug up two versions out there:

http://www.castlesandcrusades.com/downl ... panion.pdf

https://www.trolllord.com/downloads/pdf ... panion.pdf

The former seems to be more polished, while the latter seems to be more complete.

Do they differ in any other way, and am I missing the "full version" out there, somewhere?

Finally, I see a class spell list for Necromancers, but I do not see a Necromancer class in the Companion. Am I missing it somewhere?

Thanks for the assistance!

[bulletmeat]

The latter pdf (created by Peter on 05/11) has wizard school specialists on pg. 46/47.
The former pdf (created by Reaper on 04/13) seems to simply talk about necromancy spells.
Seems like two different takes on the companion.

I'm not sure if it's the same Peter but there was an update from 2018: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11215&hilit=crusader%27s+companion

[Jackal]

Thanks for the information, and I agree. What confuses me most is the Necromancer spell lists seems to imply there is a specific Necromancer class (much like the Pyromancer in the same Companion), but I see no such class.

[Go0gleplex]

I could be mistaken; But the Black Tome of Narutus from the Haunted Highlands material has the Necromancer within its pages I believe. The information within the Companion may be building from that.

[serleran]

There have been several necromancers proposed.

One of them is here: http://www.trolllord.com/forums/viewtop ... f=8&t=3312

[Jackal]

Thanks for the thoughts all, they are much appreciated. Seems there are more than enough Necromancers to go around.

On another note, howdy serleran, it's been a long time. How goes the gaming?

[serleran]

Hey,

I don't get in much tabletop gaming, not counting board games, as our group disbanded and it seems the new one is likely to... wife's been having weekly forced overtime which kills Saturday and the people we game with are interested in RPGs but not a campaign (and I am not interested in one-shots; take too long and aren't worth 3 hours of play.) But, I still read stuff and write it when I feel like it (not so much the latter.)

Guess that's the pits of living 90 miles from any sort of "real" town. No one will come here and timing has just been off.

[Tadhg]

Welcome back, monsieur!

Good to see you 'round here!

[Peter]

The former seems to be more polished, while the latter seems to be more complete.

Do they differ in any other way, and am I missing the "full version" out there, somewhere?

The one on TLG's site is probably the preferable one.

That version I piled in every OGC source I could find. I also used d20 sources to fill in some gaps. Some of the conversions I did could probably use some better treatment. I had never played or ran a game of C&C nor 3E (Still haven't played 3E ).

The second version, I condensed a lot of things. Example: Instead of a bunch of races, I wrote up some tables on how to use monsters as races. I also started removing material that was already covered in official books. The problem with this version is that I started adding in random generic stuff (like Adventure Seeds) for whatever reason and there is some unfinished conversions in it. Also, the pdf export seems to have lost some pages.

This is the current version https://www.dropbox.com/s/l0i4ldemedchy ... n.pdf?dl=1
I started with a blank slate and slowly added old material to it, while being more careful with converting and consistent formatting. It is incomplete and I'm not sure when/if it will ever be. C&C isn't really my thing anymore, I moved back to BECMI.

I could be mistaken; But the Black Tome of Narutus from The Haunted Highlands material has the Necromancer within its pages I believe. The information within the Companion may be building from that.

This is the correct answer.