Mylolothian

ok. Thank you. That now makes alot more sense as to the nature of the scenario structure.

yes, clearly level 7 was a bit on the low/undoable side. but that was me having gotten it in act 2, wanting to finish it in act 2. And I'm sorry, but wasn't that last statement a bit on the douchey side? unless the battle for caed nua was added in after the expansions were released, then why would i expect that balancing it would depend on allies from an expansion set that clearly is not owned to make it reasonable? From everything I have read about it, I am disappointed with the nature of the encounter and how it was constructed. who said anything about having an easy battle? I merely stated some things I was expecting, like all the party members sitting around at the castle to be on the battlefield, not just the current active party. If the text was to be believed, the dozens won handily (guns vs mages), and yet there were still a clump of mages there. I also expected to have some control over the base units to perform basic maneuvers. Still, thank you for taking the time to reply.

ok. soo.. let's say that you didn't get the expansion. and that means 10k gone and only one allied side. kinda unwieldy fight, no? I can't get to twin elms because of the water.. (still act 2), and what of the party members that are just hanging out in the keep? was expecting to see them on the battlefield. other than the dissappointment that the 10k got ( yes, shows up in morale text, but... really? that's it?) I guess I was expecting alot more troops. and was dissappointed that even though I sent the dozens after the battlemages, mages still showed up on the battlefield. needless to say, Got my ass handed to me hard at L7. Going to progress as I can and see what opens up. just disappointing if I am only going to get one set of allies because the game is coded that you need the three from expansion packs.

Meanwhile the structure and ideology of the Leaden Key reminds me somewhat of the Tres in Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum, which is itself a satirical representation of a hermetic society. It seems more to share the qualities these usually have: the idea of guarding great otherwordly truths and secrets even from themselves, being these secrets that should not be revealed to the world lest they put it in danger, or put the secrets themselves at risk of being corrupted and distorted through misinterpretation and misapplication instead and so on. Great book. But wasn't the TRES a created orginazation in response from several seperate hermetic orders to the Plan? that's how I took it anyways. in regards to the comparisons with scientology, well.. I wouldn't want to cast such aspersions at the folks of Obsidian, but.. anything's compossible.