Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Despite bringing in some interesting ideas (specifically I liked the Lovecraft stuff), I was never a fan of this book. 1. it made what should have been DM only material easily readable to the players and took alot of mystery out of the game (actually creating limits to the game "this is the god of the orcs" as if the DMs own ideas were less important. 2. I never liked the idea of defining these gods and demigods in terms of PC classes, we never saw that kind of thing before (which of course became staple with 3E). Anyhow, its not how I would have done it. If an author can take the time to deck out a powerful demon in the MM do the same for a deity for Gods sake. 3. This book really intruded on the territory of the DM who, before this point, had more leeway into determining what any particular god's powers were and encouraged him designing his own home pantheon. Like your typical splat book it provided all the options for you. Sure, you can say "it was supposed to be just ideas to base your own stuff on" but in reality it limited rather then expanded. Plus, I never liked the idea of showing what these gods looked like. That should be up to the imagination of the player. Its not like a generic picture of "orcs" its one particular individual (which is fine if its a monster looking thing, but if human looking it better be good).

There is a reason we didn't see the gods and demigods worked out in the MM. Despite the fact that they are monsters, they are ones that PCs will rarely fight, and are elements that should be left up to the DMs imagination (no different then the local politics, terrain, lay of cities and what have you). Prior to the Dieties and Demigods, this was DM turf...no longer.

AxeMental wrote: 2. I never liked the idea of defining these gods and demigods in terms of PC classes, we never saw that kind of thing before (which of course became staple with 3E). Anyhow, its not how I would have done it. If an author can take the time to deck out a powerful demon in the MM do the same for a deity for Gods sake.

3. This book really intruded on the territory of the DM who, before this point, had more leeway into determining what any particular god's powers were and encouraged him designing his own home pantheon. Like your typical splat book it provided all the options for you.

I'm with you on these two points particularly.

I definitely had/have a hard time with this book. I've only ever considered some of the normal monsters as something I'd actually use in the game (Nehwon ghouls, cyclopses...)

Good observation on gods with class levels --> 3e characters! What hubris!

Demons and devils from monster manual are WAY cooler!

I think it’s worth having. It definitely should be off-limits to players. The whole point of offering gods from Greek Mythology and such is that players know enough to go by off the top of their heads, and can easily research themselves if they want more info.

Arguably it does stifle DM creativity, but isn’t that true of every single RPG product since the original D&D set? The whole point of a book is to do your work for you. For what it’s worth, there continued to be other gods books and homebrew pantheons since DDG, just as there were other monster books and homebrew monsters since the MM1.

I think Sup IV is more useful, since it has more of a focus on monsters and artifacts from mythology. Still, as you mentioned, the Cthulhu section of DDG is legendary, and I still get a kick out of various odd little bits in there.

From the Foreword to Supplement IV: Gods, Demi-gods and Heroes, written by Tim Kask:

This volume is something else, also: our last attempt to reach the "Monty Hall"
DM's. Perhaps now some of the 'giveaway' campaigns will look as foolish as they
truly are. This is our last attempt to delineate the absurdity of 407 level characters.
When Odin the All-Father has only 300 hit noints who can take a 44th level Lord seriously?

Maybe there was such a goal in stating the Gods originally? To provide a sort of reference frame by which to compare PCs, and realize when the game would reach a level of power that just wouldn't make sense to the Fantasy anymore?

If so, then this failed spectacularly. Fact of the matter is, when people play "Monty Haul", they don't care if their games are ridiculous. They strive on the power trip and the ridiculousness of it all, if anything. So this goal was destined to fail in any case, because it was completely inappropriate for the target audience.

I love Gods, Demi-gods and Heroes, and through it, Deities and Demigods. I think the basic idea of providing divine/mythic/legendary fodder from the real world, as well as notorious worlds of fiction, for a GM to get inspired, either using the materials provided or searching for other sources on his own, is an excellent one. It's such a good idea that to me, it must be part of D&D's core offering, as far as game materials go.

The treatment, or implementation of this idea, left a lot to be desired, however. I guess that the original page count and the issue of retrofitting this material into the D&D game frame was a concern that affected what the contents ended up looking like, as opposed to what they could have been: even more of a mine of ideas, not with stats, but with summaries of different takes on the deities, including contradictory sources, bibliography to search for more, basic ideas/treaties on how these mythoi matter to Fantasy, and how they can be used for one's own Campaign, etc.

The basic concept, idea, still remains absolutely great, and necessary, for D&D to become more at a game table than it ever was between the covers of its supplements.

Yeah, after the DDGs I pretty much gave up on this concept. I'll have to check those out.

O: The treatment, or implementation of this idea, left a lot to be desired, however. I guess that the original page count and the issue of retrofitting this material into the D&D game frame was a concern that affected what the contents ended up looking like, as opposed to what they could have been: even more of a mine of ideas, not with stats, but with summaries of different takes on the deities, including contradictory sources, bibliography to search for more,

This is how I feel. The idea of offering a new "divine" supernatural aspect to the 1E game was great. It makes for a richer experience (before this alot of DMs had very little knowledge of gods, or the sorts of things they might send). However, the way that it was implemented failed. Listing references would have also been great (particularly in those pre-internet days).

I'd like to have seen a big section on creating your own gods. Hell, maybe even some blank pages where you could create your own, and fill it in. Also a good template in how to give powers and figure reasonable AC, HD, Damage etc. would have been nice. Also, there should have been a giant section on denziens, things between demigod and weak undead, things that can travel between planes that might take PCs with them. Really, this work could have melded well with the Manual of Planes (which was a total botch job) perhaps having combined the two works into one.

Gods, Demi-gods & Heroes was published in mid-1976, and Empire of the Petal Throne (which has descriptions but not stats of the gods) was published at Gen Con in 1975. Thus, publishing gods goes back pretty close to the beginning of D&D.

GD&H for OD&D is cool because it's basically a collection of monsters, characters, and magic items from RW mythology that you can insert into or use as inspiration for your D&D games. The gods as presented in the book are essentially really powerful monsters or characters -- there's no particular impression given that PC clerics should worship Odin, Zeus, Crom, Osiris, etc. (OD&D clerics are crypto-Christian (or crypto-Satanist) after all), but they might show up in an adventure, and the characters might even end up in conflict with them, so they get stats (plus, as mentioned in the intro, the idea was also to use them as a way of establishing the de facto "upper boundary" of the game -- if "the gods themselves" are 20-30th level with 300 hp, then it's (at least theoretically) understood that mortal adventurers should by definition be somewhere below that).

D&Dg, unfortunately, isn't so clear about what it wants to be and ends up being both a collection of stats like GD&H and a sort of tentative treatment of AD&D metaphysics and cosmology, and the latter purpose is inconsistent with (or even directly contradictory to) the former -- so on the one hand you have the gods as all-powerful beings who grant spells to clerics and shepherd dead souls to the afterlife and all that, while simultaneously on the other you have them statted out as powerful NPCs and monsters. The whole thing is a mess. IMO the gods should be either all-powerful beings in the sky or monsters you can meet and fight and kill (and FWIW I prefer the latter), but not both at the same time.

T. Foster wrote:GD&H for OD&D is cool because it's basically a collection of monsters, characters, and magic items from RW mythology that you can insert into or use as inspiration for your D&D games. The gods as presented in the book are essentially really powerful monsters or characters -- there's no particular impression given that PC clerics should worship Odin, Zeus, Crom, Osiris, etc. (OD&D clerics are crypto-Christian (or crypto-Satanist) after all)...

Good point.

Another old, official D&D god book is Judges Guild's Unknown Gods. DDG's Cthulhu Mythos excepted, I think the old Unknown Gods are cooler than TSR's two god books. The Unknown Gods are less powerful than the gods in DDG or in GDG&H: hit points range from a high of 200 all the way down to 40!

God books have a lot of potential, but I haven't seen one that screamed "AWESOME" to me. I haven't read the Petal Throne one, and I bet it's more along the lines of what I'd like to see. Don't care about stats, but I'm ALL ready to read about cool rituals, magic items associated with worshippers, etc. Give me stuff to use as ideas.

In that sense, the non-human deities actually fitted the bill somewhat better than the historical materials, although they didn't ultimately capture my imagination very much. They felt too "official," and although I can overcome a lot of that, there's a point where it starts to intrude on my own creativity, somehow.

The Cthulhu, Melnibonean, and Leiber stuff was godawesome. If it had just been that material, I would have said it was one of the best books ever. Which goes to show you that I'm as totally unfair as the next guy...

I rather like the Hackmaster "Dieties and Demigawds"

at least for the background material. don't really give a flip about the stats.

I like GD&H as a colourful monster manual for high-level characters, and I also like the Runequest-style "these are the rituals, special spells, customs and attitudes of specific religious organisations" treatment (and I think you can also kill gods with super-powerful RQ characters - sort of, at least). Both are functional and fun. Deities and Demigods is in between; good art but it never knew what it really wanted to be. It is not so bad as the "don't really use this book" approach of Manual of the Planes, but it could have been better.

IIRC, the stats for the gods is only for their appearance on the prime material plane. If you "kill" a god, then you've only momentarily banished his avatar.

Elric must be able to face, and defeat, the lords of chaos, and Elric is not a god.

TheRedPriest wrote:IIRC, the stats for the gods is only for their appearance on the prime material plane. If you "kill" a god, then you've only momentarily banished his avatar.

It's not stated as clearly as in the MM entries for Demons and Devils, but...

D&Dg, pg 3 wrote:HIT POINTS: This indicates the amount of damage a creature can withstand before being killed (or, in the case of deities, temporarily banished back to their plane of origin).

I'm not sure how long the banishment is, and don't think it's ever stated in the book, but my preference would be to make it a long, long time to reward the pc's for doing the act... "And thus Loki will not be able to befoul the Prime Plane for another 1,000 years!"

EDIT: On the other hand, demons are specifically only banished for 100 years, so maybe that's the time frame that should be used with gods.

EDITx2: Also, I believe those stats ARE the stats on whatever plane the being is encountered. The issue is that to ultimately kill the being, it must be killed on its home plane. The "avatar" concept in D&D started with Greyhawk Adventures and was then carried over to 2e.

rogatny wrote:EDIT: On the other hand, demons are specifically only banished for 100 years, so maybe that's the time frame that should be used with gods.

If it ever came up, I hope I roll with it that way!

Curious, while on the subject - any experience with cross-pantheon mash-ups? I have not, but I've never really 'featured' gods in my games anyway. Lovecraft 'gods' get overlaid on many campaign cosmologies, I'm sure... (like the original campaigns for example!)

I like something like Narnia.

The Emperor-Over-the-Sea is mentioned rarely, who is obviously God with a capital G. Never a direct actor in the stories.

The Calormenes worship idols (such as Tash) who are worshipped at great temples. I imagine it like the ancient near east, where each city had its own god. Since it is a fantasy world, the statue that is enthroned at the temple actually has power, and whether you encounter it in the temple or in a procession through the city or for some reason in the wilderness (or an older god in a ruin, I imagine), you are actually encountering a god which may or may not be animate at a given time.

Roman gods like Bacchus, Silenus, and Pomona may be encountered about Narnia. They are called gods but not considered objects of worship. They are encountered in nature rather than in cities (Narnia has no cities) and therefore have no shrines or temples. (They probably have lairs!)

The White Witch is an immortal of some sort, but it’s not necessary to call her a deity. When she’s killed in LWW she is really killed (not “banished from the prime material plane”). But dark magic can theoretically call her up again (in PC this almost happens). There are also other miscellaneous supernatural friends and foes. Stars are also somewhat godlike (Ramandu and Coriakin in VDT)...

Aslan is somewhat problematic in a campaign. But you could do like Tolkien does, or Culhwch and Olwen, or lots of mythology, where you have a Greatest of Eagles and Greatest of Wolves and Greatest of Dogs and Greatest of Whales and Greatest of Boars and so on. Continue that theme with Greatest of Griffons and other mythological creatures. These are all immortal, godlike creatures, but definitely more than half of them are meant to end up killed.

In other words, I think the worst thing you can do to a campaign is really nail down the number and nature of “the gods” that are active and how they are all active and worshipped.