Deities & Demigods + ELH = ?

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Upper Krust....

Hi jasamcarl!

You are again demonstrating your bias, for in truth your presumption that 90% of those who purchase the ELH will also purchase D&D is baseless.

I was thinking of conducting a poll on the subject - perhaps that will give us a clearer indication!?

What do you think!?

I'll start the poll a little later today.

The ELH will obvioulsy have a much wider audience because it is a cross Player/DM product as well as a cross Core/FR one.

I think you are underselling Deities & Demigods - which as far as I remember* was the best selling non-core rulebook for both 1st and 2nd Editions!

*Based on information in previous Dragon Magazine issues.

And i don't trust your judgment of Wotc's production schedual or cost estimates...

I never considered myself a great economist, or econ major that matter, but you suggestion that they bundle the ELH and DaD is also flawed.

Not to bundle both works together; merely the rules for Divinity and Epic Levels. The actual mechanics of divinity perhaps encompass (as much as) 40 pages in D&Dg* something that could certainly be fitted into the allocated 320 pages of the ELH without much difficulty.

*Can anyone confirm?

For that to work, both the size of the audience of either product would have to be similiar (and as i stated above, they are not)

There is a lot more cross pollenation between Epic rules and Divinity than you are accrediting.

Not to mention actually placing both in one book would not present us with a constant cost model; from what Sean K. has stated before, i gather that after a certain page limit, the marginal cost of increasing such probably rises considerably..Wotc appears to be appealing to two audiences in an efficient manner...

I already stated that they could present both sets of mechanics in 320 pages - which is what the ELH is currently allocated.

Then they wouldn't have to present extensive Divine mechanics in both Deities & Demigods or Faiths & Pantheons since they would be core rules.

I'll ignore your math because the term 'your estimation' leaves a lot to be desired,

I appreciate the ignorance!

but i will say this about the relative power of the gods...there are two types of abilities, those that complement other abilities and 'Stack' and those that remain independent... In the case of Salient Divine Abilities its debatable how these and standard feats or class abilities complement each other...its probably the case that many don't though we know some do, so the IN GAME ability of the Gods in the EYES OF THE PLAYERS will not be effected to a great degree...the Gods are perfectly usable as is....

...and how does this affect my intentions to equate divine power with Challenge Ratings!?

Surely you would agree that power is relative!?

Developing a framework to equate Divine Rank to levels will remove the vagueness offered in the web enhancement.

 

[jasamcarl]

Ok

Now that i have a clear understanding of what you meant by 'bundling', my retort is simply this; it is obvious that if one was to fixe the ELH at 320 pages (a standard count) Wotc believes that 40 of those pages would be better spent on something that has wider appeal...i trust them on that point

Not to mention the fact that by publishing two books they can tap two different markets to their full potential at an efficient content/cost ratio..why should Wizards not take those fans of DaD for all they are worth by providing them with the full extent of rules+examples which they believe they want?

Again, what you are stating is a PERSONAL preference, it is not a viable argument as to what Wizards SHOULD have done...

God, I hate being the pragmatist..

 

[Upper_Krust]

Here is the poll.

Hi all!

Okay just set the poll up here:

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9585

 

[Moon_Goddess]

I really don't think WOTC will alter the CR system, Too confusing, not enough need for it. I could be wrong, (happens alot) But I'm resonably sure they will leave it as is. It's easier to adjust the monsters and classes to allow let a CR 71 monster and a level 71 character be equal than it is to tell everyone that level 71 characters should be fighting CR39s and explain why.

Again, I could be wrong, any playtesters wanna break the NDA long enough to confirm.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Ok

Hello again mate!

Now that i have a clear understanding of what you meant by 'bundling', my retort is simply this; it is obvious that if one was to fixe the ELH at 320 pages (a standard count) Wotc believes that 40 of those pages would be better spent on something that has wider appeal...i trust them on that point

I bet they could change font size to core rulebook size, restructure format, remove some material (for use in web enhancement); etc. to easily accomodate any changes.

Not to mention the fact that by publishing two books they can tap two different markets to their full potential at an efficient content/cost ratio..why should Wizards not take those fans of DaD for all they are worth by providing them with the full extent of rules+examples which they believe they want?

I already stated they would still be publishing two books. If anything the Epic + Divinity mechanic book would outsell something for merely Epic Levels anyway - added to that fact I suggested it be a Core Rulebook. Therefore they could subsequently either add more substance to both Deities & Demigods and Faiths & Pantheons or reduce the page count to both - since they would be unfettered by having to print the rules for divinity in both books!

Again, what you are stating is a PERSONAL preference, it is not a viable argument as to what Wizards SHOULD have done...

I never pretended it wasn't personal preference - I did start the sentance with 'personally'.

However, WotC should be receptive to consumer opinion...

Personally I think they should have combined the rules for both deities and epic characters into one rulebook and made that a core rulebook.

...most of the people I know are disappointed that D&Dg does not utilise Epic Level rules/material!

God, I hate being the pragmatist..

But thats why we love you so much!

 

[jasamcarl]

Actually....

The divine rules probably make up the most valuable aspect of DaD. By placing them in the ELH, the demand for DaD would probably be much reduced...and it is clear they believed that 40 pages could be put to better use....the font is already suppossed to be below average for d20....I simply believe you are overestimating the complementary nature of these products and it is obvious WotC agrees...and they have the resources to actually determine that to a greater assurity than an electronic poll on enword...

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again!

I really don't think WOTC will alter the CR system, Too confusing, not enough need for it. I could be wrong, (happens alot) But I'm resonably sure they will leave it as is.

As far as I know (from reliable sources) they already have a method for modifying CRs but I haven't been able to learn what they are yet!?

Again, I could be wrong, any playtesters wanna break the NDA long enough to confirm.

I am interested myself - in the spirit of OGL if WotC want to use my CR rules - feel free to do so!

It's easier to adjust the monsters and classes to allow let a CR 71 monster and a level 71 character be equal than it is to tell everyone that level 71 characters should be fighting CR39s and explain why.

I thought my above system was about as simple as you can get!?

As for an explanation, its simply a case that the difference between levels 44 and 48 is not as great as the difference between levels 4 and 8 - in terms of power. Yet extrapolating the +1CR/Level mantra suggests (incorrectly) that it is.

 

[jasamcarl]

Actually...

The Level=CR rule only breaks down after 20 if we assume that epic progression is anything like 1-20, that remains to be seen...multiclass characters, though weaker in combat than their single class counterparts, still follow the above rule. That rule could still stand and the results we have spied in the DaD could simply be 'weak' on a class basic, but still technically epic..just one of the foibles in a system which was always meant to be a ROUGH approximation..

Conclusion: we will see when the ELH makes its appearance....

 

[reiella]

One note at least...
ELH is already violating one of the rules of CAPs in general.

The FR epic level rewrites.
The Psionics content update.

At least of those that I know.

That said though, think it's probably a better mechanic to have cross-polonization in the more optional portion.

Also bit mixed though on stated deities not using the epic format. Who else is going to really 'need' stated deities?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Actually....

Hello mate!

The divine rules probably make up the most valuable aspect of DaD. By placing them in the ELH, the demand for DaD would probably be much reduced...

Unsubstantiated I'm afraid!

Also the majority of D&Dg is Pantheon write-ups, so presumably WotC thought that had the better draw!

Obviously most of the ELH is optional material and therefore not strictly necessary.

and it is clear they believed that 40 pages could be put to better use...

Unsubstantiated again. The only thing that is clear is that the ELH doesn't have rules for divinity and that people are unhappy that D&Dg doesn't draw upon the Epic rules. We don't know they were given the option of combining both sets of rules!?

Presumably if they had been presented with the option of a combined Epic/Divinity rules they would have structured things differently.

WotC are not omniscient, and the designers also have the added aspect of big brother looking over their shoulder - if you have read over some of the recent transcripts on ENWorld (with Ryan Dancey, Monte Cook and Chris Pramas) you would know that sometimes they have business men influencing content instead of designers.

the font is already suppossed to be below average for d20...

That in itself is good news. But only a trivial factor in dismissing a combined set-up.

I simply believe you are overestimating the complementary nature of these products and it is obvious WotC agrees...

If so, then I submit that I know more than WotC on such matters!

Its plainly obvious the products are complementary - otherwise why would WotC even go to the trouble of trying to make them so compatible.

In fact in a conversation with Ed Stark (WotC - in charge of D&Dg and the ELH) on the WOtC boards he went out of his way to stress the complimentary nature of the two books!

and they have the resources to actually determine that to a greater assurity than an electronic poll on enword...

True, they have the resources, but exactly how often/to what extent such resources are used is unknown.

I was surprised (in the D&Dg commentary) that Rich Redman mentioned they just determined between themselves what Pantheons to have in D&Dg.*

*As it happens the top 3 they selected were identical to a poll I undertook about 6 weeks ago on these very boards (Favourite Pantheons) with Celtic a close 4th!

But then of course you don't see the validity of ENWorld polls do you mate!?