Mr James Jacobs, might I suggest the e20 idea I had earlier. Where all progression stops at 20th level and you gain a feat every so many experience points.
This is arguably even weaker than what the Core rulebook supports for post-20 play; I doubt anyone would be satisfied by it.
Mr James Jacobs, might I suggest the e20 idea I had earlier. Where all progression stops at 20th level and you gain a feat every so many experience points. For me twentieth level is supposed to be the pinnacle of your characters power. I want a set of rules that let me play at that power level as long as I can.
Sounds to me like you're all set now, with no changes to anything.
I don't want to play in or run games where gods are our opponents.
Me neither. And I don't run games like that ... and yet my players have levels ranging from 51-64. Why? Primarily because I never intend to actually stat the gods. In my campaign (and I'll stress that again ... In my campaign ... I'm not implying it's the way to run an above-20 campaign) the gods are not something that mortals fight. Ever. Sure, there may be something out there that has Divine Rank up to maybe 5, but they're not the true gods. They're just really powerful mortal creatures.
Also the e20 mechanic is easy to adjust after the rules are printed, unlike a level system. If you need to bump up mythic play power level just add some more powerful mythic feats for people to select in a splatbook. That way you can start low powered and slowly adjust it upward over the course of a few books to the point where most people are happy with the rules.
That's really no different than having above-20 only feats like the ELH does. I'm not against it; in fact I like having post-20 play level out a bit, but it's not much different than the ELH.
Frankly, we've found in our game that even using the ELH (I'll note again that we pretty much have discarded the ELH magic system), it all becomes about the feats once you get high enough; though for certain classes (3.5e druid, I'm looking at you), HD is crucially important too. Sure, people will dip into prestige classes here and there, but it's really painful if any of your abilities is level-based; you lose ground quickly as you thin yourself out.
|
To me either fighting and or slaying gods just cries EPIC for me. Im not saying the rules should just support that type of play yet imo the should include options for the slaying if gods and other high level CR creatures. Maybr it just me yet some on this board just do not get what being Epic level means.
To me either fighting and or slaying gods just cries EPIC for me. Im not saying the rules should just support that type of play yet imo the should include options for the slaying if gods and other high level CR creatures. Maybr it just me yet some on this board just do not get what being Epic level means.
Personally, I'm all for the rules supporting that sort of thing. Not something I'd be likely to every use, but I think it does fit the mold of what post-20 play could be like. Just so long as post-20 play with not fighting the gods is also a feasible option.
But I suspect that will not be a concern, given what I expect to come out of Paizo for post-20 support.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me either fighting and or slaying gods just cries EPIC for me. Im not saying the rules should just support that type of play yet imo the should include options for the slaying if gods and other high level CR creatures. Maybr it just me yet some on this board just do not get what being Epic level means.
+1 Agree, 20+ levels rules must support all the kind 20+ levels types
Except for those of us that don't care for the whole "e[insert number here] system. I can speak for myself and my table; we abhor that system and would PREFER the 3.0 ELH to the "e[insert number here] system. Yes....you read that right.
As much as I despised 3.0 ELH, none of us at my table care for the "e[insert number here] system.
+1 Agree, that E[insert number here] sucks for me
We have posts clamoring for the ability to slay gods and take their place.Cite? Seems to me this was YOUR position, mis-characterizing other people. Saying it a lot didn't make it real, except maybe in your head.
Cite such a post, you say? Hmmm, let's see. There are several pages worth of posts, it might take some time...
Aha! Post #8 of this thread:
"Perhaps people want to rival the power of the deities of Pathfinder? Perhaps they want to take the Test of the Starstone? Perhaps they want to hunt down and kill Achaekek, who is explicitly statted out so that he can be killed..."
Let's see,
Wanting god-like power -- check.
Becoming a god (Test of the Starstone) -- check.
Killing a god -- check.
There. Post cited. No mischaracterizations, thank you. Oh, and that post was written by... well, that's ... odd.
It says it was written by Fozbek. But... that's you!
......
You're really not very good at this, are you?
To me either fighting and or slaying gods just cries EPIC for me. Im not saying the rules should just support that type of play yet imo the should include options for the slaying if gods and other high level CR creatures. Maybr it just me yet some on this board just do not get what being Epic level means.
Oh, hey Fozbek!! Just so you don't think I was cherry-picking the one guy in this thread whose posts supported my comments (y'know, that Fozbek guy...), here's another person who's down with some divine fightin' and slayin'!
So, it would seem it wasn't just my supposition!
Whew! I mean, I could write off one guy as an anomaly even when he's makiing my case, but TWO?!? I feel like an Internet Sherlock Holmes (Downey version, natch. Just without the fame. And fortune. Balls.)
Wait! What's that gbonehead's saying? Hot damn, I'm on a roll and I only had to look at the first and last pages.
Kidding aside - Memorax, thank you for telling Paizo what you'd like. Thanks also, for genuinely trying to answer the question I posed.
I am hanging myself out in the minority again. I wish Paizo would spend their limited time and resources on things other than their pathfinder rules.
I think pathfinder only feeds players who refuse to give up their favorite character. As someone who's been in the hobby over thirty years I am telling you now that sometimes you have to live in the real world. Younger nerds and geeks take up the mantle. You finally get the clue that hygiene matters and those who do not are left behind as an embarrassment. There's plenty of high fantasy and adventure the bars and night clubs to handle what you'll need.
The only people who have more fun playing a role playing game than going out are the fools that play role playing games. People who live to destroy everyone else's fun by having to talk about their level 12 paladin that is totally unstoppable.
</sarcasm>
Who are you? The frikking High Priest of Hygieia? Is that why you wear a bar of soap on a necklace and wield a mop as weapon?
I must tell you, that "I'll wipe the floor with you" battle cry is kinda neat, though.
:P
Thank you for my next monk character.
Vow of cleanliness and vow of chains (actually a bucket with soapy water for his mop, and chains of soap on a rope) monk of the empty hand with the devout trait.
***************
And just so I'm not just being a swarmy.
What I would really like to see is alternate rewards and how to use them in a game.
Something like a list of titles and what benefits those titles can confer. Buildings, their costs and how to apply them in a game. More 'rules' and guidelines for branching out into a more sandbox campaign where the players drive the action more than the 'plot' does (in fact where the players create the plot in many ways) and how to encourage and lead players to do this.
We have plenty of stuff for creating characters, NPCs, and how to run a railroad. What is lacking is ideas and guidelines for how to expand the campaign into a world.
We've gotten advice to "speak in character" before -- but how about some examples (acting advice really) on how to do it and not look campy or plain silly. How to guide character creation for a campaign, or to connect characters for a campaign, instead of simply saying, "you got this trait that makes you connected." I understand how that is easier -- but we should be past the easy.
What we need isn't more advance player options -- we need an advanced Gamemaster Guide.
That will help more games be truly epic.
Wait! What's that gbonehead's saying? Hot damn, I'm on a roll and I only had to look at the first and last pages.
heheheh
Just a little overenthusiastic there.
Personally, I don't like godslaying rules. However, I have nothing against such rules being included, since I'm fully aware that I'm not the final arbiter of How To Run An Epic Game.
Just wanted to point out that I'd lose zero sleep if the final published rules set included neither rules for fighting gods nor rules for becoming one :)
I seriously hope that the Test of the Starstone is never statted or described ever, in any publication epic or not. It would take away the mystique of the test if it were reduced to:
'make this series of DC 50+ skill checks of assorted nature; now you're a god!'
From Cayden Cailean's description I doubt it was epic levels that won him godhood. He did it by accident, probably before 10th level. If anything, the Starstone is the epitome of GM fiat. You get to be a god because the story requires it, not because of some minmaxed combo that lets you blitz the test.
From Cayden Cailean's description I doubt it was epic levels that won him godhood. He did it by accident, probably before 10th level. If anything, the Starstone is the epitome of GM fiat. You get to be a god because the story requires it, not because of some minmaxed combo that lets you blitz the test.
So Red Mage was right and wrong at the same time.
I think one of the basic problems with "EPIC!" levels is due to how modular the 3e engine tries to be while retaining a class-based system. In other editions, be it BECMI, 2e, or 4e, you have the high level or epic or Immortal powers, but because the engines are more traditionally class based, the stuff can easily be pushed into the classes themselves, such as 2e's class-based High-Level Powers or 4e's Epic Destinies.
With 3e, however, things are a lot murkier. In 2e it's easy to come up with FIGHTER POWERS and WIZARD POWERS. But how do you do powers for fighter 2/rogue 3/wizard 5/arcane trickster 10? Do they get powers from all of those classes? What about different archtypes that dramatically change the class?
So, 3e's epic stuff tried to stay very modular, and became very boring. Not going into the hot mess that was stuff like epic spellcasting, you had all the might of EPIC FEATS! Which were NORMAL FEATS but with BIGGER NUMBERS!! And if you were a single class you got MORE OF THEM!!! And because it was all modular there were no caps whatsoever on anything, which is something of a shame because endcaps are good because they can be cool. Instead there was no penultimate reward for being a cool fighter guy. Your penultimate reward was EPIC +1 NATURAL ARMOR!!!!!
...Yawn.
Because it's an incredibly complicated topic that we want to do right rather than rush into production and rue that for the rest of the game's life. And because more people play (and thus pay for) products set in the 1st to 20th level range.
Well that's a great reason to start playtesting NOW! :)
Talking seriously, I am eager to see "mythic levels" rules. I know Paizo won't overload the world with epic-level monsters and wizards. I am ready to bet we will see very, very few epic characters around, and those who are going to be epic will be just that, EPIC, not the nth 25th level wizard that's at the head of a big city academy. They will have epic stories and backgrounds and epic placement in the world.
Mechanics-wise, I prefer to play up to 6th level like some on this boards. Realism just goes to (9) hell(s) after 6th level anyway, so why not pushing our limites even more. 12th level characters are already super-heroes, so let's see how cosmic-level works.
All this said, I am curious to see how such powerful characters are handled "realistically" in the setting. When a country-levelling wizard wakes, entire nations should assist in fear...
I am also interested in seeing how this built-in-the-mechanics thing is handled: we have a system whose main dice is a d20... once the variables on the d20 roll surpass the +/-20 range, how would they keep the system intact?
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
What I would really like to see is alternate rewards and how to use them in a game.
Something like a list of titles and what benefits those titles can confer. Buildings, their costs and how to apply them in a game. More 'rules' and guidelines for branching out into a more sandbox campaign where the players drive the action more than the 'plot' does (in fact where the players create the plot in many ways) and how to encourage and lead players to do this.
One of the things I miss about high level play is how no one ever builds a castle any more. Back in 2e (and before) getting land and building a keep was part of the high level experience. One of my groups even made a flying castle. But back then you could give a party 100000 gp and they had nothing better to spend it on.
Nowadays, PC money = PC magic items. Heck, even if you granted the PCs a keep, they would probably try to sell it to get better magical stuff unless there was a plot contrivance to prevent it. Rarely will a d20 party choose to take 10000s of gp and say, hey, we could design a cool castle/tower/hideout. And that's sad to me.
Even if there is no magic-mart, if they have months to build a castle, they have months to make magic items.
The weird thing is when 3e came out, everybody in my group of play was excited because they could finally write up two fighters and through use of feats and skills, make them mechanically different. Looking hindsight, it looks like we abandoned a problem for another.
|
|
Wanting god-like power is not wanting to kill deities and take their place.
Wanting to become a god is not wanting to kill deities and take their place.
Wanting to be able to kill a demigod is not wanting to kill deities and take their place.0 for 3. Care to troll again? Also, your post said there were "people" "clamoring" for it.
Maybe not at your table. It maybe be just the thing at some other gaming tables. I wish gamers woudl stop and think that what happens at your table is not necessarily representaive of what happens at others. Maybe someone wants to have god-like power and kill gods at the same time. Another group may want to kill off a deities or deities. A whole campaign could be created around it. Everyone experiece for the most part is different. While people have not been clamoring for epic rules some like myself and others have been asking Paixo on a fairly regular basis to publish epic rules.
Well yeah at my table, we loved to build castles and strongholds. Spread out among the group was the following properties by the time we hit 20th level. (it was a 3.5e Forgotten Realms game)
- a Silver Mine
- a Haunted Manor
- 3 fortified Keeps (one with magical wards)
- a Flying Temple
- a Wilderness Encampment
- a chain of enchanted jewelry shops
- a small fleet of merchant ships
- 2 villages (one human, one lizardfolk)
- an estate in the wealthy part of Waterdeep
- and a portal site
The mine and two of the keeps were story rewards.
The haunted manor, the portal site, and the wilderness encampment were captured from bad guys.
The shops and ships were various PC business ventures.
The magical keep and flying temple were high level strongholds the party spent a ton of gold building.
The estate and the villages we had to earn the hard way... questing.
One of the things I miss about high level play is how no one ever builds a castle any more.
Not any worse than "everyone builds castles".
Back in 2e (and before) getting land and building a keep was part of the high level experience.
The problem with this is that it simply doesn't work in many campaigns. Telling the BBEG to put his fast-moving plan on hold for a few months while you build your overly phallic caster's tower? Oh please!
:P
It's not bad every once in a while, but it's not for everyone, and neither should it be.
Nowadays, PC money = PC magic items. Heck, even if you granted the PCs a keep, they would probably try to sell it to get better magical stuff unless there was a plot contrivance to prevent it.
Well, not everyone wants to be a lord.
Rarely will a d20 party choose to take 10000s of gp and say, hey, we could design a cool castle/tower/hideout. And that's sad to me.
How will the silly castle help you defeat the guy who wants to crack open the world just to feast on the gooey stuff within?
I bet the verse is full of destroyed planets that would be around if some vain heroes got items that made them better at defeating doomsday cults instead of building a large penis. :P
If gold = magic items... that's the game master's fault, not the game system's. Under a game master who has good control over magic you may have tons of money but your characters are too busy to sit around for years crafting epic magic toys. And high level magical items shouldn't be available in shops.
If gold = magic items... that's the game master's fault, not the game system's. Under a game master who has good control over magic you may have tons of money but your characters are too busy to sit around for years crafting epic magic toys. And high level magical items shouldn't be available in shops.
"Not in shops" isn't the same as "unavailable for commerical purchase right now". The 'rules' currently support some expensive stuff being available for purchase as it stands now.
"Not in shops" isn't the same as "unavailable for commerical purchase right now". The 'rules' currently support some expensive stuff being available for purchase as it stands now.
The rules do? Where does it say you can go to sword mart and pick up the latest +10 blade (now available in hot pink and lavender)? Just because it has a price doesn't mean it is sitting on a shelf somewhere waiting for you.
Objects which take vast amounts of skill and time to make should only be available on commission. And if there are only two mages who can make the sword of amazing deli slicing, then you have to wait in line behind a world full of other commissions from other adventures, nobles, or planar beings.
"Not in shops" isn't the same as "unavailable for commerical purchase right now". The 'rules' currently support some expensive stuff being available for purchase as it stands now.The rules do? Where does it say you can go to sword mart and pick up the latest +10 blade (now available in hot pink and lavender)? Just because it has a price doesn't mean it is sitting on a shelf somewhere waiting for you.
Objects which take vast amounts of skill and time to make should only be available on commission. And if there are only two mages who can make the sword of amazing deli slicing, then you have to wait in line behind a world full of other commissions from other adventures, nobles, or planar beings.
Right there. Try harder next time.
Since we are talking major items here then all that you have available are a few randomly generated ones... hardly the Lavender Sword of Amazing Deli Slicing the player probably wanted. You are right... they made rules for buying major items off shelves, something I disagree with... but that's life. Fortunately the player has NO control over what is available from month to year or however long it takes before the occasional changing of items off the available list generates one the player actually wants.
Since we are talking major items here then all that you have available are a few randomly generated ones... hardly the Lavender Sword of Amazing Deli Slicing the player probably wanted. You are right... they made rules for buying major items off shelves, something I disagree with... but that's life. Fortunately the player has NO control over what is available from month to year or however long it takes before the occasional changing of items off the available list generates one the player actually wants.
I'm not really certain what your point is. Even if the player can't ever get the exact sword they want, they'll still buy whatever expensive sword is available before they buy a keep.
At least, until the keep is so insignificant compared to their wealth that it doesn't effect their magic sword buying abilities. Or they get high enough level that they can just create a crystal palace through magic.
Since we are talking major items here then all that you have available are a few randomly generated ones... hardly the Lavender Sword of Amazing Deli Slicing the player probably wanted. You are right... they made rules for buying major items off shelves, something I disagree with... but that's life. Fortunately the player has NO control over what is available from month to year or however long it takes before the occasional changing of items off the available list generates one the player actually wants.
Agreed -- if the player wants actual control over what he gets magic item wise he needs to craft the item -- or go out looking for the specific item in other communities. In the Golarion setting I would suggest looking in Katapesh, since it has just about everything for sale (and in its settlement description is listed as such).
|
|
Make your post clearer to understand. That is what I got from that part of the post. If I made a mistake my bad.
... That entire post has virtually nothing to do with my post.My post is perfectly clear. You cut out the part that made it clear.
I was responding to an accusation that I, personally, was clamoring for players to be able to kill deities and take over their position; that accusation was made by taking one of my posts in this thread and reading way more into it than was written.
What I said was this:
Just because some players want god-like power doesn't mean that I'm clamoring to be able to kill deities and take their stuff.
Just because some players want to take the Test of the Starstone doesn't mean that I'm clamoring to be able to kill deities and take their stuff.
Just because some players want to be able to kill demigods (which are very distinct from deities) doesn't mean that I'm clamoring to be able to kill deities and take their stuff.
Nothing in what I said stated or implied that YOU should be prohibited from wanting to kill deities and take their stuff (although, in fact, I think that's of necessity outside the scope of any possible rules; how do you define omnipotence through rules?). Further, you seem to be under the impression that I don't want epic rules. Even a cursory glance at this thread (nay, even the post you responded to) would educate you otherwise.
I made a mistake get over it. I apologized once Im not going to do it twice. What more do you need?
Since we are talking major items here then all that you have available are a few randomly generated ones... hardly the Lavender Sword of Amazing Deli Slicing the player probably wanted. You are right... they made rules for buying major items off shelves, something I disagree with... but that's life. Fortunately the player has NO control over what is available from month to year or however long it takes before the occasional changing of items off the available list generates one the player actually wants.
The nice thing about the game is you don't have to run it that way. I don't use APs. I've kept magic harder to craft and buy. I've scaled the opponents / encounters to reflect the lower level of magic the PCs have. Guess what... they're busily building a castle and getting infuedated with a frontier noble (an independent Duke). The Fighter (Cavalier now) is planning on being a baroness. The Cleric is planning on his chapel (and is married to the Cavalier). The Wizard is planning the classic tower. A couple of others are laying plans to make it their home base. And they're having a blast while dealing with a potential frontier war. They're 10-12th level. They can save the world later. When that Mythic rules set comes out for example :)
Not as familiar with the APs as I could be, but one of the problems, imo, with many adventures is the save the world syndrome. Many seem to need to go all the way to there... that can be fun, but what happens then? You start over and do it again with new characters? There's other stuff to do. Like build castles, get into politics, religion or military matters. Heck, just be the incredibly good cat burglar. Run a caravan, a mercenary company, a thieves guild. Explore. Have fun. *sigh* Old geezer rant over.
|
I've scaled the opponents / encounters to reflect the lower level of magic the PCs have.
I know this is a little unrelated, but can I just say this: Thank You!
I see so many DMs who eliminate magic items from their games (or reduce the amount of them) and then still throw the characters at encounters thinking that they are equal in power level to when they would have had said magic items. Listen, you don't like magic items? Hey, whatever. But, don't think that the players can still fight a CR normally appropriate to their level afterwards. Anyways, thank you for being one of the few people who understands this change in power level.
Personally, I wish my players gave a cuss about building alliances and castles and...whatever! But even if I make the castle building something they don't even have to pay for out of pocket, they could care less. *Sigh* While I enjoy the new editions for their idiot proof rules (at least for my group) I do miss the ritualization that AD&D had. Magic was more...magical, and players cared a lot more about what there character's goals were, instead of: I don't know what to do, when does the plot train come to pick me up next?
Will I purchase Mythic rules? Sure, I like the option of using them. Will I? Who knows. Personally, I think the game which revolves around defeating the local evil baron, and the game in which you are trying to defeat the guy who wants to crack open the world just to feast on the gooey stuff within (BTW, that is the funniest term I have heard all day!) could both use Mythic rules, it just depends on how you view them. I think you could run a 1st level game in which the players are all gods, it just depends on perspective really. DC: 15 = Whatever you (DM) want it to be, whether that be to climb a ladder, or climb the forbidden ice cliffs of eternity.
Ack, I'm rambling now. Is what I'm saying making any sense? (<---trying to have civil conversation without the hate. Can't we all just have fun?)
I am hanging myself out in the minority again. I wish Paizo would spend their limited time and resources on things other than epic level rules.
<Inflammatory remarks deleted.>
I say, no sir. I need no epic.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Thank you R_Chance, that is exactly the type of game I like.
Will I purchase Mythic rules? Sure, I like the option of using them. Will I? Who knows. Personally, I think the game which revolves around defeating the local evil baron, and the game in which you are trying to defeat the guy who wants to crack open the world just to feast on the gooey stuff within (BTW, that is the funniest term I have heard all day!) could both use Mythic rules, it just depends on how you view them. I think you could run a 1st level game in which the players are all gods, it just depends on perspective really. DC: 15 = Whatever you (DM) want it to be, whether that be to climb a ladder, or climb the forbidden ice cliffs of eternity.
Ack, I'm rambling now. Is what I'm saying making any sense? (<---trying to have civil conversation without the hate. Can't we all just have fun?)
What you're saying makes sense in a global "hey, I've got an idea for a game" sense. But in terms of two people being able to talk about Pathfinder games and having any chance of understanding what the other person is talking about, "level 1" has to mean something specific, just like magic missile, the Improved Initiative feat, and "you have 10 hit points" all mean something specific.
So, if you're thinking of a game in which "level 1" characters are charging into Nessus and confronting Asmodeus, that's not Pathfinder; that's something else. Nothing wrong with that kind of a game - it'd probably be a blast, but if you call it Pathfinder you're going to spend half your time debating terminology with someone who is talking about standard Pathfinder rules.
Now, it's entirely possible that the Paizo design team might decide that at high level things start all over again at a "level 1" which is different than what is typically meant by level 1, but I certainly hope not just for sanity's sake.
|
|
Wow, did I do that?
I checked back on this post the morning after I put it up and found no responses. I assumed it died.
Let me rephrase something. For the most part, people who enjoy 20th level more than first level are people who enjoy the game as a tactical simulation more than a roleplaying opportunity. You may disagree with this, it has been my experience.
I did write the original post with tongue in cheek. I thought the double-negative gave that away.
I still stand by my request. I would enjoy more material for 1-20th level characters than I would epic level content. I do not enjoy epic level play. My perspective is as a GM, who finds it difficult to prepare for high level play.
I would say my math skills are adequate. I have never enjoyed card games or any game where coming up with combinations of certain abilities gives a player an edge. I am more focused on story. I know there is a large segment of the gaming population that does enjoy making builds. I say more power to them and good gaming.
As a side note, I think Paizo has done an excellent job so far of appeasing all types of gamers. I don't know if that is possible with epic.
Let me rephrase something. For the most part, people who enjoy 20th level more than first level are people who enjoy the game as a tactical simulation more than a roleplaying opportunity. You may disagree with this, it has been my experience.
This may be true for players who skip straight to high level, I don't know. But the other set of people who like high level play are those of us who have run long campaigns. My game will be 4 years old this month. The PCs are 18th level. Getting to the point where the PCs are prime movers in the world creates a huge amount of role-playing opportunity. Instead of having to deal with the local baron, they are the local baron (or guildmaster, or general, or king, etc.) And now they have to deal with rivals and politics and all sorts of things.
So while I understand that a lot of groups don't stay together that long, that doesn't make any of us that stuck it out any less role-play oriented than those who keep starting over at 1st level. (Not that I'm saying that's bad, I am also a big fan of E6. It just depends on what kind of story you wish to tell.)
This may be true for players who skip straight to high level, I don't know. But the other set of people who like high level play are those of us who have run long campaigns. My game will be 4 years old this month. The PCs are 18th level. Getting to the point where the PCs are prime movers in the world creates a huge amount of role-playing opportunity. Instead of having to deal with the local baron, they are the local baron (or guildmaster, or general, or king, etc.) And now they have to deal with rivals and politics and all sorts of things.Let me rephrase something. For the most part, people who enjoy 20th level more than first level are people who enjoy the game as a tactical simulation more than a roleplaying opportunity. You may disagree with this, it has been my experience.
+1
'cept we're five years in this very month, and the levels are a wee bit highter. But that's because we intentionally used a very fast XP track at the beginning so we could get by the lower levels in months instead of years. Never more than a level per game, but at the very beginning pretty close to that, and we played weekly at the outset.
Just want to say that I can't wait for official epic/mythic rules, Paizo will have in me a dedicated buyer for such rulebooks!