Mythic Adventures

Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

I am very much looking forward to this. I think this is a very good idea;

but I just can't help but feel this is sort of giving us what we want with out giving us what we want, level 21+ game play, which maybe a good thing.

Just wish we had something other than the 3.0 DnD rules to go with a little as I do have a 100% legit level 20 character I was hoping to get to at least level 30.

Lets see what happens. This sounds really cool.

Perhaps some questions might help.

Why do you want levels above 20? What is it that having more than 20 levels makes you feel?

I see what your getting at.

Other than being "mythic" I feel it is allowing me to be a mythic X.
X being the class I am in.

These rules seem more like mythic Y.
Y being the same mythic type as another mythic of the same time, more generic, less unique.

I was looking for breaking new grounds in a class, and getting that extra smite per day, with additional damage, and developing new paladin abilities no one had ever seen or heard of before, if I were playing a paladin.

P.S.
I hate to put this in as a video-game comparison, but I have seen City of Heroes do the same thing with their level 50 game play. Instead of giving people another 5 or 10 levels, they made a generic system of general abilities that will work with any class across the board. While it works, is very fun, and is cool, wasn't exactly what people wanted, but might have been for the better.

This system for PF? Not sure. Again, I was sorely looking for continuance of my already level 20 character, not being prompted to start another from scratch with new rules additions.

I think the point Tim made earlier in the thread about mythic play not only being optional, but also potentially being temporary opens up all kinds of unique storytelling opportunities. It's entirely possible for a divine entity to bestow "mythic" power upon a select group of PCs in order to accomplish a specific task to save the world. That's some epic storytelling potential. But, once that task is done, the divine entity withdraws that mythic power to return those heroes to a well-deserved "normal" life again. I think GMs who normally don't favor high-level or epic play will find something useful in that.

Additionally, as others have cited, the proposed mythic rules give you a chance to inject some of it earlier on in a hero's career...kind of the way Hercules was born with a divine blessing from Zeus right from the very beginning. But, along the way, he completed his twelve labors, which basically amount to the "deeds" which allowed him to advance in mythic power. Paizo's new rules system will let you simulate that kind of arc in your PC character development, too.

And, lest you think that's all the mythic rules might entail, there's going to be room for applying a mythic layer of challenge onto monsters, too. So, a GM could essentially hoard the mythic ruleset to himself, if he wants, and only use it as a means for creating tougher monsters without having to resort to advances in Hit Dice or layering on a bunch of templates. It might require mythic heroes to battle these mythic monsters. Or, it might just be that your regular heroes have to face a mythic monster that would have been a pushover in its normal incarnation, but can now slug it out with them at a CR-scaled encounter that's still APL-appropriate. As a freelancer and a GM, I find this aspect of the mythic system to be a real winner.

And, lastly, that's not all. Paizo has said they'll explore what it means to come across a mythic magic items and artifacts that can grow in power as you do. Again, that kind of design opens up a whole extra layer of storytelling and design potential. And again, the GM gets to deploy this toolbox when and where he wants to...and for as long as he wants to. It enables the "epic" level play that many have asked for. And yet, it also widens the game play for even those who weren't necessarily looking for a better high-level ruleset. That's because mythic adventuring isn't just about high-level play.

But that's just my two cents,
--Neil

Wha, not gonna be rolling my +95 to hit against a Turbodragon's AC of 110? Bummer! ;-)

Seriously, so damn happy it's not Pathfinderized Epic Level Handbook. That was quite a silly system.

Set wrote:

DM Doom wrote:

One thing that has kept me out of the Paizo public play-tests are that they're pretty much done on the forums.

The downside of public playtests is that they are indeed public, and the hoi-polloi can speak their minds.

The downside of private playtests is that I don't get invited to them.

Eh. Whatareyagonnado? /shrug

I hope the irony in this post was intentional.

Alas, it was more a miss-spoken statement by Yours Truly. It should have read:

One thing that has kept me out of the Paizo open play-tests are that they're pretty much done on the forums.

In the end I love that the play-tests are open to the fans of the game to nit pick, get that free sneak peak at what is to come, I dislike that they are public. I think it would be better if groups play-tested, discussed, filled out a report, then sent it in. Then the designers could sift through them, pick what sounds good, all without having to go through a 15 page play-test forum thread of two people arguing over whether or not this feat is overpowered or that spell too weak for it's level. Let the masses argue and gnash their teeth in some 'play test discussion thread' while Jason and company look over the reports and make decisions based on those rather than who can whine the loudest.

But then, this is like, just my opinion... man.

I think it is interesting that Mythic magic items (or artifacts) will grow with you. From how I understand it, your numbers (saves, HPs, BAB, spells, etc) do not go up during Mythic tiers. But when you have a Will save DC 35 for a CR 30 creature, what is that 20th level Fighter or Barbarian supposed to do to have any chance? And please don’t say “you just fail”, there should be options at higher levels to combat that save disparity, because it just becomes unfun for said class.

Now, in what ways those magic items/artifacts advance will be key.

Wha, not gonna be rolling my +95 to hit against a Turbodragon's AC of 110? Bummer! ;-)

Seriously, so damn happy it's not Pathfinderized Epic Level Handbook. That was quite a silly system.

I see what your saying, but would another 10 levels hurt that bad really? I think it could be done with out breaking the system.

Gorbacz wrote:

Wha, not gonna be rolling my +95 to hit against a Turbodragon's AC of 110? Bummer! ;-)

Seriously, so damn happy it's not Pathfinderized Epic Level Handbook. That was quite a silly system.

I see what your saying, but would another 10 levels hurt that bad really? I think it could be done with out breaking the system.

Interestingly the Mythic Level "classes" each comprise of 10 tiers.

So potentially a GM could just start handing out Mythic Levels only after PCs reach level 20, and thus gain 10 Mythic Levels so PCs can fight a challenging CR 35 Demonlord or Demigod.

20 normal levels + 10 mythic tiers should be what you are after.

I believe a "10 more levels" would quickly lead to a war between proponents of different caps (30? 36? 40? 50? 100?)

I hope 20 character levels + 10 Mythic tiers are not equivalent power-wise as a CR 30. I am actually hoping it is designed you can take on higher CRs (than 30).

I know in the Tome of Horrors there are several creatures that are CR 30+, Asmoedus is the one that sticks out my mind right away at CR 39. I do hope the Mythic levels are designed to take on creatures of that scale.

Take all of this, and ask yourself, do you really, honestly, deep down in the darkest corners of your heart and soul, think that Paizo is going to create a new Adventure Path that actually forces its costumers to do something they may not want to?? Such as buy a new rulebook, and use rules they actively oppose???

Here's a quote from James Jacob's "ask me a question thread":

At this point, I'm thinking that yes, you'll need Mythic rules to run that adventure path. You can run it without them, but only if you're comfortable reworking encounters and adding in a lot of NEW encounters to boost your party's XP total higher. Or perhaps run it for a group of 8 instead of a group of 4. But still... many NPCs and monsters in the adventure path will use mythic rules.

So yes, I do think that's exactly what's going to happen, which is why I'm arguing that as an 'optional' rule system, Mythic Adventures is different from what's been done before. Now as others have said, people like me who aren't particularly interested in Mythic rules (assuming my opinion doesn't actually change from the playtest and the eventual final publication of said rules) can simply skip the AP.

Now personally, I don't have a problem with that. In fact, I'm likely to keep my AP subscription anyway, just to see how Paizo incorporates the rules into the adventure whether I like them or not. I'm open minded about that.

Taking all that into account you might see why some people who aren't fond of higher level or even mythic roleplay may have some particular concerns about how the introduction of these so-called 'optional' rules might effect the game overall. You don't have to agree with them, but I think it should be acknowledged that this has the potential for a significant impact on the future of the game and concerns in that direction shouldn't be quite so quickly dismissed as ridiculous.

From some things they've said, it might be more, They're writing these rules so they can do this AP.

Think of it as a giant, separately published subsystem for the AP. It may get pulled into later modules/APs as appropriate. I doubt it'll be in everything.

I'm really hoping that it doesn't become SOP for the higher-level installments of APs and any BBEG in the final chapters to have Mythic stuff tacked onto them...

I think the point Tim made earlier in the thread about mythic play not only being optional, but also potentially being temporary opens up all kinds of unique storytelling opportunities. It's entirely possible for a divine entity to bestow "mythic" power upon a select group of PCs in order to accomplish a specific task to save the world. That's some epic storytelling potential. But, once that task is done, the divine entity withdraws that mythic power to return those heroes to a well-deserved "normal" life again. I think GMs who normally don't favor high-level or epic play will find something useful in that.

Additionally, as others have cited, the proposed mythic rules give you a chance to inject some of it earlier on in a hero's career...kind of the way Hercules was born with a divine blessing from Zeus right from the very beginning. But, along the way, he completed his twelve labors, which basically amount to the "deeds" which allowed him to advance in mythic power. Paizo's new rules system will let you simulate that kind of arc in your PC character development, too.

And, lest you think that's all the mythic rules might entail, there's going to be room for applying a mythic layer of challenge onto monsters, too. So, a GM could essentially hoard the mythic ruleset to himself, if he wants, and only use it as a means for creating tougher monsters without having to resort to advances in Hit Dice or layering on a bunch of templates. It might require mythic heroes to battle these mythic monsters. Or, it might just be that your regular heroes have to face a mythic monster that would have been a pushover in its normal incarnation, but can now slug it out with them at a CR-scaled encounter that's still APL-appropriate. As a freelancer and a GM, I find this aspect of the mythic system to be a real winner.

And, lastly, that's not all. Paizo has said they'll explore what it means to come across a mythic magic items and artifacts that can grow in power as you do. Again, that kind of design opens up a...

All excellent and valid points. As someone who doesn't want Epic-level play, this approach has me at least taking a wait-and-see vs. a will-not-buy approach.

However, we often see alchemists, cavaliers, witches, ninjas, etc. showing up in AP installments. I REALLY don't want to see APs that regularly include Mythic stuff. If it's integral to the story, as we're being told it will be in the upcoming Worldwound AP, that's one thing. But if Mythic starts becoming anything more than rare, it's going to push all the wrong buttons, at least for me and my group.

thejeff wrote:

From some things they've said, it might be more, They're writing these rules so they can do this AP.

Think of it as a giant, separately published subsystem for the AP. It may get pulled into later modules/APs as appropriate. I doubt it'll be in everything.

I'm really hoping that it doesn't become SOP for the higher-level installments of APs and any BBEG in the final chapters to have Mythic stuff tacked onto them...

It's a response to requests (and their own desire) to do APs that deal with some of the big threats they've established. Things they couldn't approach with the power levels reached in normal AP.

There are plenty of AP ideas that don't involve taking on Demon Lords or the like, so I doubt it'll be SOP. OTOH, if it goes over well, I'd expect to see it again.

Given the nature of the rules, I don't think it's likely they'll just be tacked onto the final installments of APs, at least for PCs. A couple Mythic tiers wouldn't make that much difference. OTOH, I wouldn't be too surprised if it was used as a framework for giving a few special abilities to BBEGs. That seems like a pretty good usage of it to me.

So, the part where he said "at this point" means its totally set in stone, right?

My point is based on a VERY SMALL amount of information we've gotten, people have done everything from proclaim the death of Paizo and Pathfinder, to saying they're not buying any products from Paizo to cancelling their AP subscriptions....

Also,
He said you could run it sans Mythic Rules, but it would require tweaking on a GMs part.

That said, why don't we wait till there's a playtest and some more definite info on the AP before we start to declare this as the end of Pathfinder and the hearlding of 2.0, shall we??

But then what would we talk about?

Actually, I believe Jason Bulmahn and Erik Mona both said that the Demonblight Crusade AP WILL be played with Mythic Rules. They'll be heavily included in the AP. Sure, you could play without them, but I'm guessing that would involve a lot of conversions.

Monkeygod: That's a very unmeasured response to my very measured posts. Very few people are saying that it's the end of Paizo and Pathfinder and those few who have usually admit to going overboard. I've never suggested that it's the end of anything. This conversation is not about the end of the world.

What it IS about is a concern that the Mythical Adventure rules will play a more significant role in future Paizo publications than other optional rules have. And if that's the case, then the Mythical rules won't be quite so optional. Using the rules in a AP that will take a considerable amount of rework to circumvent is one of the signs that this may be the case.

Some people just want it to be known that we'd prefer the rules to remain truly optional. Personally, I don't mind one AP using the rules. I just hope that it doesn't become the established rule. Even then, I'm willing to withhold my ultimate judgement until next year when it's actually published.

Actually, I believe Jason Bulmahn and Erik Mona both said that the Demonblight Crusade AP WILL be played with Mythic Rules. They'll be heavily included in the AP. Sure, you could play without them, but I'm guessing that would involve a lot of conversions.

I asked James in the Ask James Thread, whether it would be possible for a higher-level party to tackle a mythic campaign in whole or in part, as the reverse of a single mythic PC tackling a non-mythic campaign.

He said: "Maybe."

There's a lot we don't know yet.

Monkeygod: That's a very unmeasured response to my very measured posts. Very few people are saying that it's the end of Paizo and Pathfinder and those few who have usually admit to going overboard. I've never suggested that it's the end of anything. This conversation is not about the end of the world.

What it IS about is a concern that the Mythical Adventure rules will play a more significant role in future Paizo publications than other optional rules have. And if that's the case, then the Mythical rules won't be quite so optional. Using the rules in a AP that will take a considerable amount of rework to circumvent is one of the signs that this may be the case.

Some people just want it to be known that we'd prefer the rules to remain truly optional. Personally, I don't mind one AP using the rules. I just hope that it doesn't become the established rule. Even then, I'm willing to withhold my ultimate judgement until next year when it's actually published.

They've been walking this line for years now, since the APG.

They haven't screwed it up yet.

I think that the adventure content developers have a very solid grasp on how to include content that doesn't throw up entry barriers. They had to do it even in 3.5, when they included 3rd party stuff — it was never the case that you needed those books to play Rise of the Runelords or Legacy of Fire, even thought they heavily utilized books few people would have (Testament?)

They've taken the same approach with the APG and later books. It's a good approach, where they include the data you need to run the game, and not much more.

It's fine to be concerned about it, but look at the track record. They're pretty good at this stuff.

It's a balancing act.
One problem is that new material assumes you have all the old material and thus you're forced to buy/use it if you want to use other new stuff. Particularly APs and modules.

The other problem is when new material is always based strictly on the Core Rules. Then any other new rules don't get any support and wither away.

Having all the actual rule material available in the SRD does help with the first problem, since you don't need to buy the sourcebooks to use that one encounter in the AP. Less so if the whole thing is focused around rules you don't like.

I'll reiterate that I doubt it'll become the standard. It looks to me like the Mythic rules are being written to let them do this AP. This will be the Mythic AP, much like S&S was the pirate AP or JR was the Asian AP.

Of course if the Mythic rules turn out to be wildly popular and this AP outsells the others, then we'll see more, but I'd bet they won't make that decision until sales figures are in, which would mean probably at least 2 more APs before they could act on it.
And if it is wildly popular and boosts their sales, what else should they do?

Wander Weir wrote:

Monkeygod: That's a very unmeasured response to my very measured posts. Very few people are saying that it's the end of Paizo and Pathfinder and those few who have usually admit to going overboard. I've never suggested that it's the end of anything. This conversation is not about the end of the world.

What it IS about is a concern that the Mythical Adventure rules will play a more significant role in future Paizo publications than other optional rules have. And if that's the case, then the Mythical rules won't be quite so optional. Using the rules in a AP that will take a considerable amount of rework to circumvent is one of the signs that this may be the case.

Some people just want it to be known that we'd prefer the rules to remain truly optional. Personally, I don't mind one AP using the rules. I just hope that it doesn't become the established rule. Even then, I'm willing to withhold my ultimate judgement until next year when it's actually published.

They've been walking this line for years now, since the APG.

They haven't screwed it up yet.

I think that the adventure content developers have a very solid grasp on how to include content that doesn't throw up entry barriers. They had to do it even in 3.5, when they included 3rd party stuff — it was never the case that you needed those books to play Rise of the Runelords or Legacy of Fire, even thought they heavily utilized books few people would have (Testament?)

They've taken the same approach with the APG and later books. It's a good approach, where they include the data you need to run the game, and not much more.

It's fine to be concerned about it, but look at the track record. They're pretty good at this stuff.

One might almost think they've made a highly successful RPG or something crazy like that...

It's the thetawaves man. They get inside your head, make you think things, make you do things! CAN'T TRUST THE DEVELOPERS, MAN!

And, lest you think that's all the mythic rules might entail, there's going to be room for applying a mythic layer of challenge onto monsters, too. So, a GM could essentially hoard the mythic ruleset to himself, if he wants, and only use it as a means for creating tougher monsters without having to resort to advances in Hit Dice or layering on a bunch of templates. It might require mythic heroes to battle these mythic monsters. Or, it might just be that your regular heroes have to face a mythic monster that would have been a pushover in its normal incarnation, but can now slug it out with them at a CR-scaled encounter that's still APL-appropriate. As a freelancer and a GM, I find this aspect of the mythic system to be a real winner.

That's an excellent point.

As a Designer one can create a tough "boss" encounter and potentially not have it be challenging simply from economy of action. That being, 4 PCs are going to bring down a single enemy simply because they can focus on them alone.

The knee-jerk reaction is to make the monster even tougher, but if you cross a fine line, you design a TPK.

(We've seen it before, miscalculated CRs due to equipment, or layered defenses like incorporeal on top of DR when the party has had no equipment to deal with either..)

The current preferred thinking is that you lower the Boss's CR and give him some minions. but dang it all—what if that is simply not what you want to do for the purposes of story and impact? After all, Darth Vader was Darth Vader.. Not the merely leader of the Four Muskastormtroopers. Sometimes the story calls for a BBEG, not a "BBEG and their support staff."

Mythic rules opens up the possibility of putting "Boss" back into the Boss Fights. Which is a pretty cool idea if you ask me.

After all, Darth Vader was Darth Vader.. Not the merely leader of the Four Muskastormtroopers.

Snort... Thankfully I managed to turn my head so the laptop didn't get splattered, but you owe me a cup of coffee that is now all over the floor!

-- david
Papa.DRB

Tels wrote:

Actually, I believe Jason Bulmahn and Erik Mona both said that the Demonblight Crusade AP WILL be played with Mythic Rules. They'll be heavily included in the AP. Sure, you could play without them, but I'm guessing that would involve a lot of conversions.

I asked James in the Ask James Thread, whether it would be possible for a higher-level party to tackle a mythic campaign in whole or in part, as the reverse of a single mythic PC tackling a non-mythic campaign.

He said: "Maybe."

This would easily be the most appealing aspect of the product for me. I've been running more and more solo one-shots thanks to the group's occasional scheduling problems, so if there's anything that makes that task a bit easier, I'm game. Now, I'm not saying that I can't run solo games without doubling or trippling a PC's power, but the other players can't GM this way. I've got more free-time at my disposal than most, but the others don't have that luxury and have their hands quite full with the basic preparations.

I think a lot of the concerns voiced come from tables where the players:
- see every die the GM rolls
- are allowed to argue their way into playing whatever they want
- feel that the GM is bound by a set of absolute rules

If you let the players into the kitchen, they will b+#@& about how much salt should be used.

I honestly doubt it will be a magic bullet for solo play. I don't think that can be done.

But I like the idea of templates that flex the game mechanics a little more, and advancement being something more than levels.

I honestly doubt it will be a magic bullet for solo play. I don't think that can be done.

It may or may not get to the point where a mythic PC could solo a particular adventure or AP campaign. I believe the Paizo folks are examining whether that would be possible or not. Regardless, I think it's very likely 2 or 3 mythic PCs could take on a regular AP by themselves. And that could make the storylines of those campaigns accessible to smaller play groups who have trouble recruiting enough reliable players to make it all the way through every chapter. For instance, say a gaming group breaks down because one player gets deployed overseas or moves away or something. Instead of the rest of the gaming group having to put everything on hold, recruit someone else, disband, or otherwise start over, the GM could elect to empower the remaining PCs with a tier of mythic abilities and carry on.

Thus, I think the mythic rules are going to open up a lot more options on how the game is run, as well as how it plays. It's still optional, though. Plus, even when deployed, I think there are optional ways on how you can use the extra rules. And, personally, I think it's fantastic that the mythic ruleset has the potential achieve that kind of effect across all level bands, not just the high-level, epic play stuff we've seen in the past. In essence, it's looking like there'll be something there for everyone. And, perhaps more importantly, that you can deploy elements of mythic play in different ways. It's not the all or nothing power-up some might fear.

--Neil

This looks suspiciously like Paizo's attempt to make Pathfinder look and feel more like 4th Edition.

Actually I was thinking more like "5th edition" or at least the "5th edition" press that I've heard. The idea of layering a new game on top of the existing instead of replacing one with the other.

Kvantum wrote:

So right now it basically looks like we have one Mythic Path for each ability score. What about for the hybrid classes? Which path would a Magus look for? What about a Nature-focused path? I assume the intent is to have more like three dozen paths for the finished book rather than just the six, correct?

I was wondering when someone would catch on to that little correlation. You even beat the folks here in the office. As for the hybrid classes, there will be an option that allows you to get into more than one path.

As for their being a large number of paths, currently I am trying to settle on six just to prevent too much bloat. That said, each path has a very large number of options built into it, allowing you to explore each one a little differently.

I thought everytime there is a "six something" in the game, the association to ability scores, unless intrinsically unrelated, is quite automatic.

Already thinking about how to build Xena. (Again.)

Already thinking about how to build Xena. (Again.)

Don't forget Gabrielle. What about her magic quill, think that could be a Mythic Artifact?

Plants use carbon dioxide which, last time I checked, was two thirds oxygen ;)

Now Horta and giant space slugs... :D

Horta are sexy!

I see what your saying, but would another 10 levels hurt that bad really? I think it could be done with out breaking the system.

The system is already pretty bent at levels 16-20. Expanding the math beyond level 20 isn't going to make it unbent...

The system is already pretty bent at levels 16-20...

"The Villain Levels", as they are known at my table.

assorted fantaublous-sounding stuff

Why is it that every time Neil puts his fingers to his keyboard I end up wanting to spend money?

SPICERRRRRRRR!
</William Shatner yell>

If anybody can unbend the bendy parts, its the benderific folk at Paizo....

If anybody can unbend the bendy parts, its the benderific folk at Paizo....

Yeah, but they twist it serpentine trail that will be hard to follow without decent pathfinder.

Berselius wrote:

This looks suspiciously like Paizo's attempt to make Pathfinder look and feel more like 4th Edition.

Actually I was thinking more like "5th edition" or at least the "5th edition" press that I've heard. The idea of layering a new game on top of the existing instead of replacing one with the other.

Yeah, the proposed modularity does sound a bit 5e-ish (at least, a bit '5e-press-release-ish').

Being able to take or leave different tiers of Mythic-ness sounds excellent, in theory, allowing you to dip a toe in, or dive headfirst into it, depending on how crazy you want to go.

Neil Spicer wrote:

assorted fantaublous-sounding stuff

Why is it that every time Neil puts his fingers to his keyboard I end up wanting to spend money?

SPICERRRRRRRR!
</William Shatner yell>

Oddly enough, that ability isn't even dependent on me putting my fingers to the keyboard. I think I've been doing pretty well selling people on Pathfinder at the Paizo booth in-person the past couple of GenCon's...and I really enjoy it. Of course, the creative game mechanics and amazing production values pretty much sell Paizo products all by themselves. But I enjoy calling attention to those things, because I believe it helps the entire hobby. From there, it's a no-brainer for most people. They recognize good stuff when they see it. And therein lies the difference. :-)

I hope 20 character levels + 10 Mythic tiers are not equivalent power-wise as a CR 30. I am actually hoping it is designed you can take on higher CRs (than 30).

I know in the Tome of Horrors there are several creatures that are CR 30+, Asmoedus is the one that sticks out my mind right away at CR 39. I do hope the Mythic levels are designed to take on creatures of that scale.

Why wouldn't it be equivalent power-wise to CR 30? At 30, you can take on higher CR's than 30. Just like at 20 you can take on CR 25, I imagine at 30 you can take on CR 35.

Creatures of that "scale" will be scaled appropriately to the Mythic cap. They're not going to cap players at 30 and then design creatures that are CR 40. That would be foolish. Instead, the biggest and baddest Demon Lords and Archdevils will probably cap out somewhere around CR 35 to 36.

As for Asmodeus (and his ilk) in the ToH, that's not the version that Pathfinder and its setting uses. Asmodeus is a god in Pathfinder and they don't plan on doing rules for deities. Never say never, I suppose, but it's highly unlikely. These rules will be designed to be compatible for the Golarion setting first and all other PFRPG-compatible 3PPP second. That means the focus is going to be on the Golarion cap only. It'll be up to GMs to modify these rules into their homegame if they want to include things like CR37+ creatures from the ToH or Colosseum Morpheon.

Evil Lincoln wrote:

I honestly doubt it will be a magic bullet for solo play. I don't think that can be done.

It may or may not get to the point where a mythic PC could solo a particular adventure or AP campaign. I believe the Paizo folks are examining whether that would be possible or not. Regardless, I think it's very likely 2 or 3 mythic PCs could take on a regular AP by themselves.

I have zero interest in epic rules, but this alone has made me very excited about the mythic rules. If I can run a regular AP for 2 PCs it will suit our group down to the ground.

The Block Knight: I don't think this could be broken down to 20 standard levels + 10 mythic. That would suggest that lvl 3 PC is equal to lvl 2 hero with 1 mythic tier, but what was said so far and with the abilities shown the abilities of PC characters will be broadened, not increased as standard levels do it now. It could mean that lvl X characters could take on more lvl appropriate foes, but they would be just as dead if the triffle with something way above their level as normal PCs would be. CR may have to be a bit rerefined when it comes to mythic rules.

Why wouldn't it be equivalent power-wise to CR 30? At 30, you can take on higher CR's than 30. Just like at 20 you can take on CR 25, I imagine at 30 you can take on CR 35.

Creatures of that "scale" will be scaled appropriately to the Mythic cap. They're not going to cap players at 30 and then design creatures that are CR 40. That would be foolish. Instead, the biggest and baddest Demon Lords and Archdevils will probably cap out somewhere around CR 35 to 36.

As for Asmodeus (and his ilk) in the ToH, that's not the version that Pathfinder and its setting uses. Asmodeus is a god in Pathfinder and they don't plan on doing rules for deities. Never say never, I suppose, but it's highly unlikely. These rules will be designed to be compatible for the Golarion setting first and all other PFRPG-compatible 3PPP second. That means the focus is going to be on the Golarion cap only. It'll be up to GMs to modify these rules into their homegame if they want to include things like CR37+ creatures from the ToH or Colosseum Morpheon.

Yes, I realize Asmodeus is not Pathfinder specific and they (Paizo) are not necessarily going to design the Mythic ruleset to cater to creatures outside of official Pathfinder. However, I was just using Asmodeus as an example of CRs that I wish we have the capability to take on. Maybe a better way to put it is I wished we would have a little more than 10 Mythic tiers added.

However, if a 20 character level + 10 Mythic tier is able to take on a mid 30s CR, then that is fine. However, I don't know about you, but when we've tried to take on a CR 5-6 levels higher than us, we usually have to run or we die. So if you are able to do so here, most likely 20 character levels + 10 Mythic tiers are probably not equivalent to CR 30.

However, if a 20 character level + 10 Mythic tier is able to take on a mid 30s CR, then that is fine. However, I don't know about you, but when we've tried to take on a CR 5-6 levels higher than us, we usually have to run or we die. So if you are able to do so here, most likely 20 character levels + 10 Mythic tiers are probably not equivalent to CR 30.

I'd expect that they're thinking, more than likely, that they'll still need to have an extra "boost" or two to make it possible, sort of like happened with both Kyuss and Demogorgon in the Paizo Dungeon APs.

I love making magic item. The idea that this item could be around for a lot longer then my character is what bring me to it. I hope this book will finely let me put my maker's mark on at lest one artifact, something that the ELH didn't even let me do (not very epic).

EDIT:sorry reposted in the right thread

There are several reasons why I dislike this:

1) From a design elegance standpoint, it doesn't seem like a good idea to subvert the level = power paradigm without a very good reason.

2) Pathfinder PC's really don't need more abilities. By 10th level, most PCs already have more than most players can comfortably keep in mind and handle in play.

3) Conceptually, I positively hate the idea that "If Elric, Fafhrd, Gray Mouser, Hercules, or King Arthur were created in Pathfinder, they would be mythic characters." What do the default game and the default characters model then?

Personally I'm excited at the prospect and very much looking forward to what they come out with. The bit they have shown so far looks like it could be very fun.

I think if you don't like it, don't use it. It's not like it is a mandatory set of rules to use or that they are forcing it on you. Obviously this won't appeal to everyone (like gunslingers, summoners, etc) nor should it have to. I'm already implementing something like this so if Paizo wants to do rules for it and save me the trouble, I'll happily buy in!

My only complaint is we have to wait till next year to buy it.

20 normal levels + 10 mythic tiers should be what you are after.

I believe a "10 more levels" would quickly lead to a war between proponents of different caps (30? 36? 40? 50? 100?)

Sigh, I hate slippery slop arguments.

10 more levels would be nice because it would give people a 20 level Class and a full typical PrC. However I personally would like to see a lot of PrC expansions to allow for 10 Class levels and 20 PrC levels so you are more the PrC than the class. That is why I said level 30 cap. If the devs felt they could do higher then that is another book they could sell.

As I stated before in other posts. I don't like the idea of being stuck at 10 levels in a PrC when that PrC is what I felt I wanted to play from the beginning and to be stuck being only half that class out 20 levels, but now I am looking at the levels and I am getting 33.3% normal class/ 33.3% a PrC/33.3% Demi-God. This is assuming I am playing a PrC centric character.

If I am playing a class centric character, it will still be that my character is becoming less a class and more a demi-god, just not as much an impact with a PrC, 66.6% class/33.3% Demi-God.

Now if they make most these mythic powers Class specific, and not exclude PrCs. That is another matter entirely.

This is why I believe it's important not to think of your character as a member of a class. Use the mechanics to express a concept. Don't define yourself by the labels on those mechanics. That's entirely metagaming.

This is why I believe it's important not to think of your character as a member of a class. Use the mechanics to express a concept. Don't define yourself by the labels on those mechanics. That's entirely metagaming.

That may work for some, but you shouldn't lump the way you feel it should be played onto everyone else. The classes are not there just for abilities, there are there for identity of the character as well. It isn't metagaming....

I have to chime in and say I'm a little disappointed. I really would have liked to have epic level rules, and this sounds like a source book to add 4e elements to a pathfinder game. Likely to attract the now disenfranchised 4e players. Don't get me wrong it's a great idea on paizo's part why not get the 4e crowd who wont switch to 5e. But, I honestly wanted epic.

I don't know, Paizo is a great company and they managed to sell me on products I though I wouldn't like before so maybe I'm wrong.

I have to chime in and say I'm a little disappointed. I really would have liked to have epic level rules, and this sounds like a source book to add 4e elements to a pathfinder game.

How do you figure? Nothing mentioned strikes me as 4E-like.