Deities & Demigods

[GRWelsh]

I was thinking about what D&D and AD&D rules came out that were much less useful than others, and when that started. The D&D Supplement IV: GODS, DEMI-GODS AND HEROES (1976) may be the first time things went in that direction, later superseded and expanded upon in DEITIES & DEMIGODS (1980). Why do I say that? They make for interesting reading, but very little is applicable to actual play. Writing up deities as if they are characters or monsters seemed to be a natural evolution, but how often do deities actually get used in campaigns as 'monsters'? Either fighting against or for the player characters? It has to be one of the rarest instances. I'm not saying it is useless to write up details about deities, in general, but just the way it was done -- to treat them like monsters out of the MONSTER MANUAL -- may not have been the best way to go. EGG course corrected this somewhat in his 1983 boxed set for the WORLD OF GREYHAWK with more of a focus on the followers, their practices and powers, and where and how the deities were worshipped. That to me is much more useful information than knowing the strength scores, hit points and armor classes of the deities. Also, it seems a bit off to treat deities has having character classes in the same way the player characters do. Does that imply they improve by earning experience? Giving deities character classes implies they have the same abilities but also same limitations as those classes. That they need spell books and must memorize and learn spells? Do those with cleric spells and abilities have to pray to some even higher entity to get them? That seems unlikely, so why wouldn't they be unlimited if the deity is giving power to itself? If a god of magic is defined as a 24th level magic-user, does it make sense that a human mortal magic-user can match or exceed that level?

P. S. This isn't meant to be a dig against James Ward or Rob Kuntz. We all learn by trial and error what is useful and what isn't. There was, I think, a need to expand on the cleric concept by providing details about the deities they worshipped.

[geneweigel]

That is a good question. Especially anything involving Jim Ward... Just kidding!

Seeing it at the 11th level of post-modern D&D incarnations, it puts it in perspective like that but perhaps it was to say this is how far your limits go as a character is in the foreground of these beings.

[geneweigel]

I've got a good quote from DRAGON #28 (AUG 1979) a Q&A with Gary on the release of the DMG Highlighted relevant part in bold):

Q. Back to your earlier comments, that inevitably players will find areas that don’t suit them, areas that may be “wrong”, areas that are treated in a
way that the consensus feels to be wrong, whether or not it is, and if the game is expanded upon, or when it is expanded upon, it will be expanded upon in modules. Are the majority of D&D players going to have to pick up every one of these modules, like you used to have to do with all the supplements? You really had to keep up with the supplements to keep up with the ongoing, ongrowing D&D when it first came out. Is this going to happen again, or are you going to be able to take the DMG, lock yourself on a desert island, and have a good time with it?

A. This question will take about ten years to answer; it’s highly extensive. First of all, D&D came out in the form it did because it was still a baby when
it was done. It was done in a hurry to answer the demands of many hard-core gamers, and it was written for a whole different audience. But even though the audience was different, their basic abilities were not all that different from the anticipated audience. And most of these good people have great minds and imaginations, and nearly everyone of them is going to be able to say, “Boy, that would be a perfect game if only this rule or those rules were changed, and I know how to make it a perfect game.” This is rather typical of gamers, and so they’re going to want to immediately change things and amend things to make it “the perfect game.” To some extent, this can be done with AD&D, because there is still enough flexibility within the rules to allow it, without really changing the scope of the game. As the game matures, and we want to add on, without coming to what would be called perhaps “the third generation of fantasy role-playing,” we will add to it through modules, or perhaps through articles. These additions or clarifications or whatever won’t really be necessary to be obtained for any player, because, hopefully, they won’t be earthshaking revisions of the rules. If that comes up, what we’ll have to do, really, is publish an article saying, “this is a horrible revision, please take note, and free copies are available for all you good people who bought it.” But I really don’t envision that. Yet, the people who are active in this—perhaps not all the vocal ones or the ones you read about, but who generate the volume of mail—have enough questions or enough comments on certain areas, we might then look at a second edition, let’s say, of AD&D to cover these points. Again, if it becomes necessary, it will be well publicized prior to that. We don’t envision AD&D as being an ever-changing thing except as follows: Gods, Demi-Gods, and Heroes is really a necessary part of AD&D, because the deities are necessary to the game. So, eventually, those with viable campaigns move on to add deities to their games. And this will be possible within the next six-months, or a year, or whatever—whenever a much revised and expanded GDH is available. We also contemplate adding monsters to the game because monsters get burned up. It’s always nice to be able to throw a new monster at the players, so. . . . The people in the U.K. are going to have their chance to add some monsters to the game, and who knows? There might be two volumes to the Monster Manual, or three, over the years, but that’s about the size of it: a slowly growing work, as the players want it, not as the players must buy it.

[GRWelsh]

Jan 8, 2024 14:57:19 GMT -5 geneweigel said:

Seeing it at the 11th level of post-modern D&D incarnations, it puts it in perspective like that but perhaps it was to say this is how far your limits go as a character is in the foreground of these beings.

Yes, I think that's right. Tim Kask wrote in the Foreward to GODS, DEMI-GODS AND HEROES:

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 40+ level characters.
When Odin, the All-Father has only(?) 300 hit points, who can take a 44th level Lord
seriously?

So, it can be seen as setting the bar for comparative purposes. I get that, but part of the rules are the humans are unlimited in potential for some classes, and most demi-humans are for the thief class. Also, there are no limits within the game system for how much a DM can give out in treasure and thus XP. There is nothing in the rules that says "player characters above level X are absurd." Magic-user spell progression charts go all the way up to 29th level... B/X D&D allowed character progression up to 36th level. So, it's not unreasonable for D&D groups to have the goal of getting really high level characters, if the game mechanics allows that, and it does.

[geneweigel]

I found another relevant quote from Gary in DRAGON #97 (MAY 1985) article "Deities and Their Faithful - How gods and worshipers fit into the AD&D® game
By Gary Gygax" introduction:

The ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS® game is a role-playing game. This must be stressed, for too often the play of the game tends toward combat and questing. To allow this sort of activity to predominate is to lose sight of the greatest pleasures of the ongoing game — character interaction, meetings with intelligent monsters, and dealing with deities. When one considers it, this role-playing purpose is why deities are included in the game system to begin with. Of course, deities are part and parcel of the heroic epics written by Homer and those who followed him, well as the myth and legends and fairy tales which have come down to us — although in some of the latter works, other sorts of ultra-powerful beings take the place of Zeus et al. A major element of any campaign is the deities and their demands, machinations, rivalries, and confrontations. Let us, then, consider their power base before we deal with those who
serve them in the campaign play. Understanding what motivates these greater beings will certainly assist in development of proper role-playing of any type of character. Various and sundry statistics are given for deities, but let us make a basic assumption. Their power comes from those who believe in them; without followers, any deity is consigned to operations on some other plane of existence, without the means to touch upon the Prime Material. Such deities have no immediate interest to us, since they do not fall within the current scope of the game. Thus, we are interested only in deities with followers dwelling on the Prime Material Plane of the campaign. These faithful give the various deities power. Of course, this idea is not new. It has been put forth often by others, whether seriously or as a device of literature. It serves as an excellent game device as well.

[geneweigel]

I never really considered the "giveaway games" of D&D as part of the phenomena of "letting somebody win for a lift" because easy play was usually in the context of one on one. Cutting through the miasma of the "munchkin" games that I witnessed, to me "Monty Haul" always seemed to be "like me for my extra treasure because I have no social confidence".

The snowball of the "anti-baby" sentiment towards D&D games in the wake of the 1983 Mentzer edits, which was geared ultimately for the Toys R Us crowd, really makes Kask's feelings about Monty Haul hard to judge though. Were people that bad at that time (pre-Mentzer)?

[GRWelsh]

From what I've read, there were stories in circulation about super high level characters, even in the 1970's. I don't think they were really common. Mainly there was concern around people having characters that weren't "legitimate." So, a Monty Haul DM could have his player characters go up to 10th level in 10 game sessions, a monster guarding a gem worth 1,000,000 gp, that sort of thing. By the rules, you could do this... Also, there was the concern about characters having so many magic items that they were overpowered: a golf bag full of magic swords or wands...

[geneweigel]

I recall my brother DMing the high level characters of all my friends for a dust off the unplayable characters game and I recall some of them being ashamed of their multi-classed 30 plus compiled levels.

[GRWelsh]

They were, essentially, godlike heroes, at that point, considering the bar set with the gods of Greyhawk like Heironeous defined as 'only' a 17th level paladin/12th level ranger. That's fine, if that's the kind of campaign one wants to run, and if the conception is that there are certain mortals who can attain such greatness or even be on the road to deity hero status or quasi-deityhood. That certainly seems to be the level Gord achieved in the novels becoming a Champion of Balance or equivalent to something like the Eternal Champion as Michael Moorcock wrote about. Mordenkainen, Murlynd, Heward and the like are described as attaining levels to be able to rub shoulders with and becoming peers of the gods, at least the lesser sort.

[geneweigel]

My brother fashioned himself along Elric, rather than Conan, lines with a multiclass cluster on 3 or 4 of his characters which he slogged through the Immortals campaign with his middle school friends but seeing some of my peers have that same "bard cluster" of classes (EX: MU23/F8/TH14/CL6) when they broke out their "high levels" was shocking to me. Two of them were clearly labeled "demigod of..." on the top. After that I had retired my character the half-dwarf and that was it. I would muse that he was "at work somewhere" then returned him later as a sometimes resource for powerful players.

[Scott]

I think it was François Marcela-Froideval that Gary said ran a super high level campaign that he would play in some times and Mordenkainen was considered low level with the group.

[geneweigel]

I just reviewed the heavy hitters of AD&D in total. I mean its a different ball game when you're using the low key elements of the various "Mythos".


Heres my jumbled thoughts after pouring through high level concepts of AD&D especially considering implementing "lesser" content of DEI & DEM and Greyhawk's World's gods in today's post-modern gaming scene:

That all too familiar accumulated user-end style of D&D gameplay where the DM teaches neophytes priorly as what to expect in a statistic (i.e. chess) does not exist in the high level style. Its like high level play perpetuates that "first time play into the unknown" infinitely.

This is definitely at odds with the "now old school". The culprit is psionics loss it seems.

Maybe the perfect storm of:

(1)"User end habits of D&D play" 

paired with

(2)"Lacking content of post-Gygax angle of products"

(As well as those two feeding off each other creating lack of players and a need for quick play streamlining.)

 caused our current, although somewhat weakened, minimalization movement that first did away with psionics as a wild card threat (People claim "psi" was "optional" but so were subclasses optional by the book. PHB 1978 pg6 par. 4). 

Gary, in post-modern reaction, distanced himself from the nominals of "psionics" but as a necessity he continued using in DJ and LA relabeling it as "psychogenic".

It seems to me that applying official psionics to AD&D helps prepare your mind for the odd variables of a long play campaign. Why? Aside from psionics, if you audit "King Arthur" (PAL 14/BRD 5) or Fafhrd (RANG 15/THF 13/BRD 5) they clearly aren't technically bards but they use bard abilities. This heavy hitter NPC difference is stated in DEITIES AND DEMIGODS (1980):

CLERIC/DRUID: This refers to the being's ability to function as a cleric and/or druid. Wisdom spell bonuses apply to the number of spells that being can have. Note that a divine being need not be of neutral alignment to have levels of druidical ability. Furthermore, nothing prevents deities from functioning in several different apparently-inconsistent classes at once.
FIGHTER: This refers to the being's ability to function as a fighter, paladin or ranger. Note that alignment does not necessarily preclude inconsistent classing here, either.
MAGIC-USER/IllUSIONIST: This describes the level of the being's general magical spell ability, if any. Simultaneous classification in both areas is possible.
THIEF/ASSASSIN: This refers to the being's level of ability in regard to the thief and/or assassin classes. Once again, alignment does not preclude inconsistent
classing.
MONK/BARD: This refers to the being's abilities as a monk or bard, if any. Note that alignment is not necessarily a consideration here for either of these classes, and that bardic ability indicates only that a being has the corresponding bardic powers, and does not necessarily imply abilities in the fighter and thief classes.

Gygax continued this, for Froideval, in DRAGON #51 (MAR 1983) hinting at a high caliber gameplay being postponed until the campaign "develops sufficiently" highlighted in BOLD:

When our editors were going over the manuscript for The Land Beyond The Magic Mirror (module GC S8/X2), the question arose: Just who were Murlynd, Keoghtom, and Heward? I replied that they were “personages” — above the status of important characters, by and large, but not quite demi-gods and certainly not heroes. They are, in fact, quasideities, and I have named them such forevermore! In Greyhawk’s World there are quite a number of such, but only Heward, Keoghtom, and Murlynd are
currently placed so as to interact with player characters. The inactive list includes Daern, Johydee, Nolzur, Quaal,and Tuerny. Characters of personage status such as Bucknard (NPC), Mordenkainen (my own), Otiluke (NPC), and Tenser (PC), to name but a few, are not as powerful and broadly endowed as are the quasi-deities. Because “retired” characters will occasionally come into play, and the action can lead to more experience and power, I am presenting the three active quasideities of Greyhawk’s World for DM and player alike to inspect and assess. At least one was once actually a player character, by the way. Using these three as guidelines, it should not prove too difficult for the DM to act to bring very special “retired” player characters, and possibly some of your most successful NPCs too, into the realm of the quasideity. By means of dual-class work, special situations, successful questests, and the completion of defined tasks, the former PCs can be elevated to the new status. It is very important that quasi-deities be kept in tight control by the DM. Even though they might have once been the characters of game participants, their exalted status now moves them to different realms. Until such time as the campaign has developed sufficiently to allow the free interaction of characters of such power, the DM must control quasi-deities, just as other deities and their ilk are the province of the DM. All that said, here are Heward, Keoghtom, and Murlynd. Because the personages of Mordenkainen, Bucknard, et al, are actively used or played in my campaign, I cannot give details of their power
and possessions. Suffice it to say that their status is something less than that of the quasi-deities. As usual, if you have pertinent comments, please pass them on to me. I probably will not be able to reply, but all such information is noted and might well affect the course of the further development of the AD&D™ game system!

SNIP (After listed quasi-deities of Heward, Keoghtom,
and Murlynd then Gygax presents a preface towards Froideval's "hero-deity" character is considered an almost demigod)

The next example is that of a quasideity taken one step further along the road to greater power — demi-deityhood. This example, Kelanen, happens to be one which I devised (with assistance from Francois Marcela-Froideval). It demonstrates, however, the principle of advancement of power. The devotion and single-purpose nature of Kelanen is likewise a good model for player characters who desire to develop a “cause” and direct their power along a single path.

This "principle" of advancement of power is seen in the seaming gifted "special powers" that Kelanen has accumulated through high level play:

The special powers of Kelanen are these: 
Charm sword: If the opponent bears a sword with an ego, the sword will recognize the Sword Lord and refuse to harm him.
Immunity to special powers: Although Kelanen can be harmed by swords, he is not affected by anything other than the normal damage of the blade; cold, flame, magical plusses, or magical powers of swords have no effect on Kelanen. A vorpal blade, for example, will not severe Kelanen’s head under any conditions. 
Multiplication: When Kelanen bears a non-intelligent, non-magic sword, he is able to cause it to duplicate itself. After 1 round of combat, a second sword, exactly like the one Kelanen wields, will materialize in the air and combat his enemies as if Kelanen himself were using the weapon. This duplication continues each round until as many as 9 such swords fight against Kelanen’s foes. On the 11th round, and each round thereafter, one disappears until none remain. This power can be used but once per d a y . 
Sword blessing: Kelanen can “bless” any sword so that it gains a magical +1 (“to hit” and damage) for 10 rounds. He can do so for as many as 20 blades per day. The effect adds to weapons which are already enchanted. 
Sword control: Unless the wielder of a sword is successful in a saving throw versus spell, Kelanen  an cause that individual’s sword to turn against its wielder and strike that individual rather than Kelanen or his allies. This power is employable in addition to normal  attacks by Kelanen. It can be used but once per turn, twice per day. 
Sword summoning: In addition to the  command of his two personal swords, Kelanen is able to summon any sword in sight if it is not in the possession of some individual, i.e. in hand or being worn. This he can do but once per day.

[GRWelsh]

As far as psionics being a wild card threat, I think it certainly is, since most characters don't have any defenses against it. So, for high end play, the players may be familiar with and have ways to counter magic, but none of that works when you throw psionics at them, so now all of the sudden they are vulnerable again and have to be on their toes. I think that is the point you are making, and I agree that is an important factor when considering how to keep challenging players as they get more experienced and powerful -- and perhaps, jaded, or too knowledgeable about all of the threats in the game.

With the deities having a variety of classes and powers not available to player characters it was like EGG and the other designers were trying to "break the system open" to experiment with it and create things that are unexpected and new (and I think the sub-classes, multi-classes, dual classes, and especially the monk and bard fit into this concept) so I think your point applies there as well.

The quasideities, in addition to providing a conceptual outline of the spectrum from mortal to immortal in AD&D, also act as memorials by EGG... Tom Keogh (Keoghtom) and Don Kaye (Murlynd) were childhood friends, and Hugh Burdick (Heward) was a cousin. One can also memorialize favorite/retired PC's (Mordenkainen) and NPC's (Bucknard) in this way... Albert Bucknall (Bucknard) was a neighbor when EGG was young. So for the spectrum of mortal to immortal, it seems we have:

Greater gods
Intermediate gods
Lesser gods
Demigods
Hero deities
Quasideities
Personages
Important (powerful) mortals
Ordinary mortals

Coming up with ways or paths to deityhood seems to be more of the "breaking the system open" conceptually by EGG to come up with something new.