The second of the classic Gold Box games. Curse is a direct sequel to Pool of Radiance. It is the second of four games that form a series (the next installments being “Secret of the Silver Blades” and “Pools of Darkness”).

It is unique as far as I know for being directly based on the published D&D novel of the same name (by Kate Novak and Jeff Grub). It is sometimes considered a sequel to the book, with the various characters from the story making guest appearences with a lot of “something similar happened to me” dialogue.
I can see two main reasons why it was likely done this way. The best reason from a story perspective being that novels are generally better developed stories than, well, almost every other type of story telling. That’s the same “good” reason why so many movies are derived from novels. A writer may spend months crafting characters, world, setting and story and delve deeply into all aspects. (I do NOT believe novels are always the best version of any story! But the above is a clear advantage to the format).
The more cynical reason is the name may be known and consumers may snap at the associated product. So for this computer game, SSI and TSR may have thought all those fans of the book would be interested in the game.
I don’t think the result was hugely successful. Too much of what made the book work was too involved and complex for this early game with simple graphics and game play. And structurally you sort of follow in the footsteps of the book characters. I think this might have worked if you actually played the original protagonist, but then of course it wouldn’t be a sequel to Pool of Radiance.

Nonetheless the game can be a lot of fun. There was a period from 1988 (when Pool of Radiance came out) until 1998 (when Baldur’s Gate came out) when I thought Gold Box games were the best version of D&D done for computer. No doubt, by the end of that period the engine was looking pretty dated. But it was turn-based AD&D that captured much of the feel of a miniatures table top game.
There were other D&D games during this time, some were actually very good. But Gold Box were my favorite.
Features (along with creatures, spells and magic items) continued to be added to the end of the Gold Box era, but Curse of the Azure bonds adds two things that were MOST important to me. All other improvements were secondary.
— First was the “Fix” command. This was a part of the “Encamp” menu. It cast all available healing spells on the party and rememorized all previously memorized spells (with the appropriate passage of time). Wow did this simplify things! Healing and rememorizing after a battle was *by far* the most tedious part of PoR. From here it will not be an issue in any later Gold Box game.
— Second was the addition of the Paladin and Ranger classes. For me, its all about Paladins. I like playing Paladins. I probably never played a party without one (Well, the Krynn games also added Knight of Solamnia which was very similar. I probably ran some teams with Knights instead of Paladins!). But I would never *have to* play without a Paladin again.

My plan is to “continue” my team from PoR into Curse. Actually, because the party leader is a Paladin I will recreate my team rather than transfer them. But that first post should be up this weekend.
And I have very much enjoyed this trip of nostalgia with these old games! The gameplay and look is notably dated in a way Infinity Engine games don’t seem to be. But they also play very fast on a modern computer. And the nostalgia is strong for me.

2 responses to “Curse of the Azure Bonds”

  1. Zeno Avatar

    I remember when 1e Unearthed Arcana came out and gave us Cavalier as a separate class, and – of course – paladin-cavalier. That was truly the Knightliest Knight that ever Knighted. Too bad it was rather on the overpowered side… And of course the various Knightly Orders in Krynn were a fun take on the theme. I’ve always preferred a more “generic” paladin class – so that it could encompass a wider variety of archetypes. Lancelot and Galahad, sure! But Vampire hunter paladins. Renaissance Swashbuckler paladins. A questing holy gunslinger. There’s so much room for fun variants of “holy warrior” that keep the basic “piety, honesty, valor” template without being wedded to the “mounted, heavy armor Knight Errant” prototype. Without having to wander off into “anti-paladins” and “paladins of tyranny” and the like which to me just dilute the whole thing into “Cleric with a Sword”.

    Not going to take a run at Hillsfar? 😉

    I do remember feeling like Curse went a bit to far in the direction of “book-based theme park”. The Krynn games did a bit better I thought – letting you play in the world of the books without feeling quite so much like you were copying somebody else’s story beats.

    Like

    1. atcDave Avatar
      atcDave

      As I mentioned in PoR, the Garaint character was one of those non-Paladin Cavaliers in his PnP outing! I actually kept that idea in my own PnP campaign, but Cavaliers had to belong to a select number of knightly orders. Their alignment had a lot to do what the knightly order served, so even Evil aligned Cavaliers were possible in some cases. For the players, the only order available served a Lawful-Good church (I used Greek inspired deities, so this was Athena) in a Good-aligned Empire. So PC Cavaliers would be Paladins or Fighters of LG or NG Alignment.
      No other kit boosted a characters power in quite the same way.
      And I used three different types of Holy Warriors, apart from fighter-clerics. Paladins were LG followers of Athena. I had a Champion as NG followers of Prometheus (more clerical, less warrior than a Paladin). And Anti-Paladins as CE servents of Ares.
      I always required Holy Warriors to follow their deities’ clerical weapon restrictions, although since all three had warrior sects those restrictions were pretty lenient (Paladins could use any melee weapon, but no missiles except javelin or spear).
      I think these three types tie in pretty closely with the mythology I was using.

      I think Forgotten Realms might have more warrior type deities to build from. At least Torm, Tyr and Lathander for Paladins. If I were running it I would make some distinction between those orders.
      Maybe more? I know IWD suggests Ilmater, but I dislike that option. I’d also want to do something different for Helm, being LN it should have a different vibe.

      As far as the IE take on Paladin kits I’m mostly okay with what they did. Obviously with no mounted combat in the game the Cavalier as a horseman is pointless. So they went with epic monster hunter instead. Less Galahad, more Beowulf. That works for me. The biggest problem being the way those games handle character creation. A Cavalier needed a 15 in Strength, Dexterity and Consitution. Which should make them pretty uncommon! But when you get to choose class/kit first then roll, it makes the requirments a bonus! So if they’d implimented those Cavalier requirements there would be way too many such powerful characters.
      By having to roll first, then choose kit, it makes a lot of those less obvious kits more interesting. Like Peasent Warrior. Why didn’t they impliment that? I think its only in-game ability might be “+3 to Reputation in Candlekeep”! Hah.
      But funny thing, I’m kicking around another idea for a BG run. Husband and wife unkitted Paladins! I have the right couple! I think they only had dex bonuses (he had a 17 she had a 16. Maybe one of them had a 15 const?). WE’ll see…

      And no, I won’t do Hillsfar! I might do a few other oldies. Maybe the first Ravenloft? Maybe Dungeon Hack? Maybe the Dark Sun games? But my patience on some of these may be limited. I’m already thinking I will do something else for a bit after Curse.

      Like

Leave a reply to Zeno Cancel reply