Encyclopedia of Demons & Devils

[JustaPlayer]

trancejeremy,

Nowhere in my review did I mention Legions of Hell. And while I do think the concept behind Encyclopedia of Demons & Devils is great, that won't get me anywhere. I need to go through the book and check everything and spend hours fixing enties if I'm gonna use any of it. The price of $30 would be great if the work was even remotely playable, but it's not.

I would glad to pay higher prices for higher quality. Legions of Hell was worth evey penny to me.

 

[JustaPlayer]

oops, you are responding to Vecnajr2's better concept comment

 

[jdanovich]

Sorry, going through old reviews and I came upon this one. That you didn't like the book is fine, everyone has their own opinion on things. My comment actually has to do with the structure of the review. Having been a paid reviewer for many years, I am constantly appalled by people who use the old spaghetti western movie title for their review content. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly while it rolls off the tongue and has a rather obscure cultural reference to entertainment media always means that 2/3 of every review you write is bad. It's a crutch and a poor one at that.

Please do everyone a favor by reviewing each product as you see it, rather than trying to fit it into the cumbersome and unrealistic structure of 2/3 bad. Not every product has 2/3 bad; some are totally bad, some are totally good, and most range in between.

 

[Messageboard Golem]

Just a note on Fast Forward Games prez Jim Ward's response to your criticism on the CRs:

I pointed out the problem with Dungeon World's River o'Gold and Magic (there has got to be over 20,000,000 gps in that book, along with several artifacts). He also implied that I was somewhat ignorant and should open my eyes to a new style of play.

It seems like this is par for the course at that company. I guess when they tell you they want feedback, they really mean, "Tell us how great our stuff is."

 

[Messageboard Golem]

Of course they thought the stats were okay. Just be thankful that Jim Ward didn't call you stupid or insult you for daring to ask.

 

[Andorax]

I'm sad to say that this book has had no practical use or purpose in my campaigns. It wound up being a gift, so I can't complain of having spent money on it, but I'm still unable to get much purpose out of it.

I don't know if it's a personal feeling, or if it's part of the book itself, but I don't see the "historic" Demons and Devils presented as being either interesting or useful in a D&D context. They just don't fit properly.

The archaic use of 2nd edition fiendish terms (Tanar'ri and Baatzu) is grating and distracting, and the sections about interactions with Demons and Devils in the back also seem to be artifacts of 2nd edition. Things aren't expressed in straightforward levels, spells and costs, but instead long lists of specific components and rituals that makes for good descriptive terminology, but bad mechanics. The random tables are equally frustrating and hard to use. All in all, most of the "supporting" mechanics come across as a distraction, and leave you feeling it's better off to come up with something yourself.

As with many FFG products, there's also a feel of over-specialization of the items they're offering. There's plenty of background, but unless you want to center a storyline around one of these Demons or Devils (as the vast majority are unique), there's not a lot of utility. As with other reviewers, the quality of the stats for the various demons and devils presented varies widely. I get the feeling that this book wants to be occupying "center stage" in your campaign, and if you don't want to put it there, then it's not going to be useful as a sideline.


I have considered the possability of using some of this material in an alternate setting. The "real-world" nature of the fiends presented within might make it suitable for a Call of Cthulu or D20 Modern campaign, and this potential still manages to earn it a 2, but all in all, I think a gamer's funds are better spent elsewhere. I don't tend to think as much in terms of cost to page or cost to content ratios as much as cost to utility...and this book has had zero use.

 

[Psion]

"The archaic use of 2nd edition fiendish terms (Tanar'ri and Baatzu) is grating and distracting"

Arcahaic? Flip open your 3e MM under Demon and Devil, and you will find that the terms are current and have a meaning distinct from "demon" and "devil."

That said, there is no reason they had to throw these creatures into those categories. But archaic, they aren't.

 

[Andorax]

I stand corrected. However, with that in mind, they may well be doing an even worse disservice by misusing a term that is already cause for some confusion. As I recall, everything in the book is classified thus, further muddying the idea that the one is a generic term for the other.