|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 17, 2020 16:12:19 GMT -6
I promised this review quite a while back. I recorded a review video months ago, ended up in editing hell and just decided to rerecord it last night. I drone on a bit, but hopefully make some interesting points.
I didn't intend to be negative, I have positive feelings for the book, but the more I reviewed and researched it the worse it got.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2020 12:39:27 GMT -6
An interesting review. If I have any specific disagreement, it's with the idea that it'd be a better book if TSR had consulted subject-matter experts for each pantheon. That would make it a different book, but not necessarily a better one. Overall, D&D cribs from many sources to make a kind of fantasy pastiche. Historical accuracy isn't really the goal of the game as presented. (Though there's no reason one couldn't revise it in that direction, if desired.)
As a kid, I loved Deities & Demigods. On reflection, I don't think it's a terribly good or useful addition to the game. How often did anyone battle gods or need statistics for them? Shoehorning the gods into standard AD&D categories (like classes) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. In my opinion, it would have been better to present a made-up pantheon or pantheons with information readily usable in the standard AD&D game: for example, symbols, goals, any additional abilities granted to or limitations imposed on clerics. It was a missed opportunity to differentiate the cults of various gods in ways that are flavorful and interesting and could have served as a guide to DMs in building their own pantheons.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 18, 2020 13:40:04 GMT -6
It was a missed opportunity to differentiate the cults of various gods in ways that are flavorful and interesting and could have served as a guide to DMs in building their own pantheons. Good point. In the spirit of D&D at the time the point of the book should have been as a toolkit and useful campaign supplement. Not just as a survey of world mythologies. I still think it had potential as an educational tool and being more authentic would have made for a better book. Universities are full of professors very knowledgeable on these topics who would love to be paid (even peanuts) to write about them. To summarize some major missed opportunities, and these aren't just hindsight is 20/20, or backseat driving, these were obvious at the time the book was written: Toolkit for creating pantheons for your own campaign. Maps of temples and important locales in each pantheon Cosmology maps for those pantheons that had unique cosmologies (Yggdrasil, Egyptian Afterlife, Mt. Olympus, etc.) Unique abilities/disabilities conferred to clerics for each God or pantheon served Ability scores beyond 25 (does anyone know why they capped at 25? So arbitrary) Enough information on the outer planes to actually adventure in them |
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Aug 18, 2020 15:27:51 GMT -6
Ability scores beyond 25 (does anyone know why they capped at 25? So arbitrary) DM Tufnel: The ability scores all go to 26. Look, right across the board, 26, 26, 26 and... DM DiBergi : Oh, I see. And most go up to 25? DM Tufnel : Exactly. DM DiBergi : Does that mean it's more powerful? Is it any more powerful? DM Tufnel : Well, it's one more powerful, isn't it? It's not 25. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 25. You're on 25 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on 25 on your characters. Where can you go from there? Where? DM DiBergi : I don't know. DM Tufnel : Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do? DM DiBergi : Put it up to 26. DM Tufnel : 26. Exactly. One higher. DM DiBergi : Why don't you just make 25 more powerful and make 25 be the top number and make that a little more powerful? DM Tufnel : [pause] These go to 26. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 18, 2020 23:28:59 GMT -6
Ability scores beyond 25 (does anyone know why they capped at 25? So arbitrary) DM Tufnel: The ability scores all go to 26. Look, right across the board, 26, 26, 26 and... DM DiBergi : Oh, I see. And most go up to 25? DM Tufnel : Exactly. DM DiBergi : Does that mean it's more powerful? Is it any more powerful? DM Tufnel : Well, it's one more powerful, isn't it? It's not 25. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 25. You're on 25 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on 25 on your characters. Where can you go from there? Where? DM DiBergi : I don't know. DM Tufnel : Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do? DM DiBergi : Put it up to 26. DM Tufnel : 26. Exactly. One higher. DM DiBergi : Why don't you just make 25 more powerful and make 25 be the top number and make that a little more powerful? DM Tufnel : [pause] These go to 26. I don't get it. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 18, 2020 23:59:38 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2020 13:18:49 GMT -6
If I had to guess why ability scores cap out at 25, it's probably because the system begins to break down past that point. Take Odin, for example. Odin, among other things, is an 18th level ranger. So he needs a 14 to hit an armor class of negative 10. Odin's strength bonus gives him a +7 to melee attack rolls, and he has a +5 spear. So the DM needs to roll a 2 or above on a d20 for Odin to hit the lowest armor class in the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Aug 19, 2020 15:52:09 GMT -6
In Supplement IV: GODS, DEMIGODS & HEROES, every deity has a score of 20 in all six of his ability scores.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 19, 2020 16:15:41 GMT -6
In Supplement IV: GODS, DEMIGODS & HEROES, every deity has a score of 20 in all six of his ability scores. This is mostly true - but what it actually says is that every deity has a score of 20 in any attribute which is not otherwise specified, so there are a few exceptions. For example, Thor has hill giant strength if he is ever without his magical belt and gauntlets, or storm giant strength when he is wearing them. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 19, 2020 16:28:06 GMT -6
If I had to guess why ability scores cap out at 25, it's probably because the system begins to break down past that point. Take Odin, for example. Odin, among other things, is an 18th level ranger. So he needs a 14 to hit an armor class of negative 10. Odin's strength bonus gives him a +7 to melee attack rolls, and he has a +5 spear. So the DM needs to roll a 2 or above on a d20 for Odin to hit the lowest armor class in the game. That sounds right. Another flaw with the descending AC system reverberating through the overall design. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 19, 2020 16:32:26 GMT -6
oh, I see. The paraphrasing threw me off. So I'm the idiot who doesn't get why the amplifier can't go to 11? Ha, ha. So funny. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 19, 2020 16:34:18 GMT -6
If I had to guess why ability scores cap out at 25, it's probably because the system begins to break down past that point. Take Odin, for example. Odin, among other things, is an 18th level ranger. So he needs a 14 to hit an armor class of negative 10. Odin's strength bonus gives him a +7 to melee attack rolls, and he has a +5 spear. So the DM needs to roll a 2 or above on a d20 for Odin to hit the lowest armor class in the game. That sounds right. Another flaw with the descending AC system reverberating through the overall design. Eh, in 2nd Edition AD&D they just allowed for AC to go below -10 and it continued to function. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 19, 2020 21:12:59 GMT -6
That sounds right. Another flaw with the descending AC system reverberating through the overall design. Eh, in 2nd Edition AD&D they just allowed for AC to go below -10 and it continued to function. So there was no reason to cap it at 25. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 19, 2020 21:35:46 GMT -6
Eh, in 2nd Edition AD&D they just allowed for AC to go below -10 and it continued to function. So there was no reason to cap it at 25. I never said there was |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 20, 2020 14:08:06 GMT -6
So there was no reason to cap it at 25. I never said there was oh, I was quoting you, but it was actually in response to @dungeonmonkey |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2020 15:30:12 GMT -6
oh, I was quoting you, but it was actually in response to @dungeonmonkey Sure, 1st Edition could have been 2d Edition instead.* But Deities & Demigods was written as a supplement to an existing game; it makes sense that a supplement would be written with the rules and limitations of the core volumes of the existing game in mind. To add in additional armor classes (negative 11 and beyond), Deities & Demigods also would have needed to introduce expanded or revised attack matrices (expanded or revised from the ones in the DMG; although there was a hint of THAC0 in one of the appendices of the DMG, it did not formally debut until 2d Edition to my knowledge). I suppose that Deities & Demigods could have been reimagined as a kind of immortals rules supplement for AD&D or something. That would have been more interesting than the actual book released, but it would have been a lot of trouble to go to for play at levels that most players seldom or never saw. (Most of the games I played in were in the low to mid-levels. My experience may have been idiosyncratic, but most of the gamers I've talked to over the years have echoed that observation.) * I'm not sure where the idea that 2d Edition AD&D had still lower armor classes comes from. From page 51 of the 2nd Edition DMG (or page 73 if you are using the later printing with different cover): "Armor Class is measured on a scale from 10, the worst (no armor), to -10, the best (very powerful magic armors)." Maybe the idea of still lower armor classes crept in some of the late-2d Edition optional rules supplements? But I don't recall it ever being a part of standard 2d Edition AD&D. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 20, 2020 15:56:59 GMT -6
* I'm not sure where the idea that 2d Edition AD&D had still lower armor classes comes from. From page 51 of the 2nd Edition DMG (or page 73 if you are using the later printing with different cover): "Armor Class is measured on a scale from 10, the worst (no armor), to -10, the best (very powerful magic armors)." Maybe the idea of still lower armor classes crept in some of the late-2d edition optional rules supplements? But I don't recall it ever being a part of standard 2d Edition AD&D. Nope, not from the later books at all. Great wyrm red and silver dragons both has -11, and great wyrm gold dragons have -12, and all of them are in Monstrous Compendium Volume One - published July 1989. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2020 16:23:28 GMT -6
Interesting.
As near as I can tell, neither the PHB or DMG note the possibility of anything beyond negative 10, and the Compendium(s) and later Manual don't seem to address the discrepancy.
It seems to be rare exceptions confined to particularly ancient dragons. Any other creatures?
|
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 20, 2020 16:52:51 GMT -6
Interesting. As near as I can tell, neither the PHB or DMG note the possibility of anything beyond negative 10, and the Compendium(s) and later Manual don't seem to address the discrepancy. It seems to be rare exceptions confined to particularly ancient dragons. Any other creatures? Not off the top of my head. There might be a handy spreadsheet of creature stats out there somewhere on the internet, but I don't have a copy if so, so I can't really investigate easily. Though the best bets would be to look at either creatures that were enhanced or expanded in 2E (dragons, giants, demons and devils once Planescape came out), or try to find creatures that were entirely new in 2E - because the great majority of creatures were simply ported in unchanged from 1E, other than giving them longer habitat/ecology descriptions. |
|
