So, we basically found out on the other thread "Epic Level Handbook NOW please" that Paizo has no intent to publish its Mythic rules set until there is material out there to support High Level (13 or 15-20) play and make that a more popular part of the game to play.
Fine. I can wait to see what that book holds before getting back on the "More levels, please" bandwagon. After all, if they can work the glitches (perceived or real) out of High Level play and game mastery, they'll have a better chance to provide us with FLIPPIN' AWESOME Mythic rules, when the time comes.
And now, I say to you, what SHOULD that book contain? (For the intent of this thread, let's really place a hard limit at up to 20, since that's as far as the game we're playing goes, for now).
I'll start things off:
1. Stronghold building rules.
2. Kingdom building rules.
3. Suggestions for how to run a rulership based campaign (how to get 'political' when your players can solve problems with wish and meteor swarm, how to keep them on their toes with the minutia when what they really want is to kick butt, etc.)
4. Suggestions for making them realize the scope of their incredible powers.
5. Options to exchange lower-level feat choices that were good at the time, but don't do much for the characters in their current BA incarnations.
6. Character based (NOT class based) capstones.
7. High level suited archetypes/prestige classes.
8. Warfare/Siege Warfare rules, including but not limited to: army building, special units, the role of arcane/divine magic in the armies, naval warfare guidelines, aerial warfare guidelines, planar armies and warfare, and most importantly, ways for the PCs to really affect the outcome of battles/wars.
9. High level NPC guidelines, for creating, running, distracting, etc.
10. Planar environments for high level adventures.
There are other aspects, I'm sure, and so I open the floor to the assembly!
Thanks in advance for constructive contributions and criticisms.
Happy gaming (at whatever level you like.)
Seriously, nobody? You guys are keeping the "Epic" thread going even after Erik said that there will be no exploration of "mythic" until there is more support for "high-level" play out there. Support that, from what I understand, Paizo knows they need to offer.
So let's get the suggestions up for what we want to see in that product, the one that isn't "2 years out, at the very least," the one that paves the way for the "mythic" book we all are chomping at the bit for. (Directed only at the people who are chomping at the bit for it, not the people who say that because they would never buy mythic rules, Paizo should not publish them.)
Help a brother out, here!
Good topic!
Erik's post was disappointing, but not a big surprise. I believe he wrote essentially the same a couple of years ago in a similar thread. I've looked up my posts on said threads, and here is my new condensed wishlist for high level content:
We need more tools to make the game easier to run on high levels. Simple mooks, sample hoards, npc galleries and most important interesting story hooks.
1) Stories. High level stories must be something folks actually want to play, then we can worry about systems. We are on a right track once we have stories that require powerful characters.
The adventure idea table in the old ELH (page 117) could have been better - high level stories must be more than just cosmic-crisis-of-the-week.
The epilogues of Kingmaker and Serpent's Skull was far more interesting, as they made me want to play those stories.
I think a "realistic" high level Pathfinder setting could play out like Steven Eriksson or Michael Moorcock's books, and any new high level material should be designed with that in mind.
2) Tools. I want high-level rules to be backwards compatible. Sam's list cover alot of the new subsystems I'd like to see, especially an expanded treatment of the new rules in Kingmaker.
The new character rules in a high level book can be limited to a chapter of powerful feats and archetypes/prestige classes, and it would be fine by me.
The idea of character based capstones is interesting.
The magic system is fine as it is, and the Wish spell is a good capstone. I really don't see the need for a new magic system, and if we do, use the established Words of Power system.
3) Npcs. An extensive and easy to reference NPC Gallery would be very useful. The GMG was disappointing in this respect, as it did not cover nearly enough ground.
We may need a condensed npc statblock for high level npcs. Something that allows designers to take shortcuts and save pagecount, without compromising the game.
Or perhaps "high level npc" templates, to keep things simple. NPC and monster design is the one thing I really love about 4e.
4) Monsters. Monsters must be adaptable, easy to use and re-usable. The Eternal and Mighty templates from the geniuses are a good start. Again, "high level npc" templates could be a way to do this.
5) Loot. We need lots of new treasures, and not just higher numbers. We need item sets and items for the rarely used slots.
Pathfinder lacks interesting powerful items in general - this could be a great way to draw in people who normally would not consider this type of book.
I can echo the above sentiments, or restate things that I've seen elsewhere on the forums, but the thing that has me most excited about a Pathfinder High-Level Guide is the stuff I don't expect.
In Ultimate Magic, there was a lot of stuff I saw coming, but it was the little touches and systems they didn't advertise that won me over. Same for the APG! Who saw archetypes coming? They weren't nearly as discussed before the release as were the new classes, and yet, if I had to pick new classes or archetypes, the latter would win every time.
This is why I started that other thread about "How Much change are you willing to see" or whatever I called it. I don't want to dictate to Paizo what needs to be done to high-level play, I trust them to figure it out better than I possibly could. What I want is for them to have a degree of flexibility when they do sit down to iron this out. They shouldn't feel shackled to the expectations of the players, as long as they pay due diligence to the spirit of the game.
So... what do I want to see? Something great that I didn't anticipate. A book that will make me want to wrap up my Runelords campaign so that I can get to the awesome play experience of high levels. Right now, I feel like I could stay at 11th forever. I'm a little scared by the outlook of mid-high levels.
Thanks for the feedback, guys.
Evil Lincoln, that is an EXCELLENT point. Paizo does an awesome job of giving us tools we didn't even know we needed.
On the other hand, they do a great job of listening to the players, playtesting, and revising according to the needs of the game. So while they have great ideas, maybe we (as players, and as a LARGE number of players, to boot) will brainstorm ideas that they haven't considered, too.
So, although you make a good point, I say "On with the thread!" Let's see how many options we can give them to consider, and let them do the editing and refining that they are so well known for.
Snotty, I realize now that I've always had Melnibone in mind when I've run/play high-level stuff! Also, I agree that monsters/NPCs that can do their job in a pinch without requiring gobs of work by the GM would be nice.
With regard to treasure, well, I'm honestly not sure. I have a tendency to rely not so wholly on equipment. (Matter of fact, most of my high level characters are too busy, and would look like impoverished 3rd world children next to the standard guidelines for PC wealth by level.)
And I can't overemphasize my desire to see a Mass Combat system that lets the PCs shine.
Thanks all.
The additional options mentioned by you all sound very interesting.
But in my opinion, half of the book should be GM advice of how to run/write high-level adventures, covering common pitfalls, for example:
- how to deal with scry & fry (without just denying it the PCs)
- how to deal with divinations vs. mystery plots
- how to design combat encounters to keep them challenging
- how to keep combat moving (make your players know the rules, use quick reference cards, etc.)
- etc.
|
The additional options mentioned by you all sound very interesting.
But in my opinion, half of the book should be GM advice of how to run/write high-level adventures, covering common pitfalls, for example:
- how to deal with scry & fry (without just denying it the PCs)
- how to deal with divinations vs. mystery plots
- how to design combat encounters to keep them challenging
- how to keep combat moving (make your players know the rules, use quick reference cards, etc.)
- etc.
I like how 4e simplified the combat powers of monsters, but dislike their "scrap all noncombat abilities" philosophy. I'd say monster's spell-like abilities should be divided into combat (in the normal place) and noncombat (sequestered at the bottom).
For example, how many times has a pit fiend used create undead in your encounters?
The magic system is fine as it is, and the Wish spell is a good capstone. I really don't see the need for a new magic system, and if we do, use the established Words of Power system.
Wish just doesn't sit well in my gut as the capstone of magic, with every single amazing thing you cast at mythic levels, from levitating mountains to splicing planes together, technically being the same spell every time. I'd remove it (perhaps split out the spell duplication and inherent bonuses into two other ninth-level spells), and continue an appropriate ramping of power through 10th, 11th, etc. No new spell system like with the ELH.
I'd like to see a system of conjoined casting (which would also be usable at lower levels) to allow multiple magic users to cast spells normally beyond their abilities. It's a fairly common aspect in many stories. These would just be standard spells (I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to apply to the Words of Power system). Say individual casting ability capped out at Nth level (if they went with a cap like 36th level), but three (standard coven size) could cast an (N + 1)th level spell (a few examples of which could be given in the mythic level handbook).
---------------------
Expansion of size categories would be useful, too, since something the size of the Empire State Building shouldn't fall into the same category as a measly Tarrasque. We'd have rules for "creatures as terrain" with things like "Scaling/Acrobatics DCs vs. creature speed/Dex" for the truly colossal beings. On the other end, sufficiently small creatures could wreak havoc on your body equivalent to disease or poisons, or your party of characters may be the germs inside a being 15 size categories larger than medium.
(And on that note, the removal of absolutes for things like the vorpal blade are a necessity... give it a x10+ crit multiplier or whatever, but no way in hell should a medium-sized vorpal blade be able to take off Unicron's head. [That's for the Autobot matrix to do.])
Seriously, nobody? You guys are keeping the "Epic" thread going even after Erik said that there will be no exploration of "mythic" until there is more support for "high-level" play out there. Support that, from what I understand, Paizo knows they need to offer.
Well, frankly, it's a topic I know and enjoy.
In terms of "High-but-not-really-high game mastery," I don't necessarily have a lot to say.
I'll certainly read and enjoy a book of suggestions about how to run games at levels 11-20, but it's not something that gets my blood racing :)
|
|
Why not write up "Mythic" (ie. levels 21+) versions of each of the classes as something like prestige classes? Something that continues with the theme of the class, but amps their existing powers, replaces old ones for "new and improved" versions, or something something something..
There's more to my idea than what I can seem to write. But it's WAY past my bedtime, and I'm not thinking straight at the moment.. Don't mind me.. I'll get back to this at some point..
Why not write up "Mythic" (ie. levels 21+) versions of each of the classes as something like prestige classes? Something that continues with the theme of the class, but amps their existing powers, replaces old ones for "new and improved" versions, or something something something..
There's more to my idea than what I can seem to write. But it's WAY past my bedtime, and I'm not thinking straight at the moment.. Don't mind me.. I'll get back to this at some point..
+1.
I think this should form the base of a mythic system.
Then again, I am still a vocal proponent of "fix upper levels first."
|
|
I was thinking, as an example let's use the abjuration wizard. We could give him a second energy type to eventually become immune to by 30, for his resistance ability. His protective ward would continue as normal, even if it is a whole +2 extra by 30. And finally, his energy absorption could increase the amount it absorbs. He's still getting a wizard feat at 25 and 30, d6 hit points (and modifier), 2 skill points (and modifier), and 2 spells to his spellbook. The only thing left to "fix" is BAB and Saves. As far as I see it, there are only 3 options: 1) drop them entirely. you top out at level 20. 2) continue them as normal. 3) modify them. you could slow the good ones, speed up the bad ones, or both.
Heheheh
It's amusing (but unhelpful) that this thread has drifted into above-20th play topics when it was created by Sam for the express purpose of talking about below-20 topics.
In that spirit, may I suggest the following as useful topics for, shall we say, the Advanced GameMastery Guide:
- High-level plots.
- Common pitfalls encountered when running high-level games.
- Tips and tricks for designing high-level encounters.
-
Reward strategies. I'm not just how to pick treasure, I'm talking things like using flat XP advancement, running low/high magic games, etc.
- How to design adventures that play to or against the strengths of a party.
- Tips on running a game where power levels significantly differ in the party (for example, when you have a table that has both an uber-optimizer and an under- or counter-optimizer).
- Running one-shot versus campaign adventures at high levels.
Stuff like that applies to all levels, including above-21, but it becomes really important once the power level starts ramping up (i.e. probably above 8th-9th level).
Heheheh
It's amusing (but unhelpful) that this thread has drifted into above-20th play topics when it was created by Sam for the express purpose of talking about below-20 topics.
Whoops, my bad.
Well, on that note, we still have iterative attacks to deal with at the higher pre-mythic levels. I sorta like the idea (for simplification purposes only... the sugar-snorting dice freak in me wants more rolling!) of simplifying iterative attacks that I came across in the Immortal's Handbook.
Instead of the attack range being +20/+15/+10/+5 and tracking separate numbers, the fighter would just have a +20 flat attack. Additional attacks (up to a maximum) can be purchased in increments of "+5," and all attacks will use the single bonus for simplification. (Could go even further and use a single roll, but that's way, way too swingy.)
So, by spending 10, they get three attacks in a +10/+10/+10 spread. Quick roll of three dice. I'd probably tweak the costs and/or crit interaction if I really felt the need to use the simplification.
|
Honestly I've yet to have a smooth high level experience. Combat slows to a crawl as players get more and more actions and options. I'm constantly on the back foot as a GM as I deal with scry and fry, or other high level spells play havoc with plot. High level play tends to disable story seeds rather than enable them.
So I'd like too see High Level play simplified and streamlined so more can be done in a 4 hour time slot. When your life is hectic getting through a single High Level combat a session is just unacceptable.
I don't know if this changes expectations too much for others though.
Heheheh
It's amusing (but unhelpful) that this thread has drifted into above-20th play topics when it was created by Sam for the express purpose of talking about below-20 topics.
Thanks, gbone. Things could've got derailed there.
To Zen79 and Jason, good ideas guys. Looking at things from the GM's perspective is crucial. I'd say that if the players understand what the GM goes through for a high-level adventure (or campaign), they will be more prepared, more thoughtful, and (hopefully, unless they are hopeless munchkins) more forgiving when things do get a little weird or out of control.
Shim, I like the multiple attacks at the same base, but think that it's a little steep. If I sacrifice +5 for each extra attack, that's more like "instead of taking iterative attacks, take all of them at your lowest attack bonus." Something more along the lines of the flurry penalty (-2, maybe -3) for each extra attack would stick it to your groups warriors a little less.
Dudemeister, SO TRUE! Way back in 2 ed. revised I tried to run "A Paladin in Hell," (there is an UNBELIEVABLE conversion out on the threads, btw), but everyone was so tired of loooooooong combats that it slogged to a halt after the first 2 sessions.
Granted, Monte's adventure was supposed to be a string of improbable combats, but it was, as you said, disabling to the story.
And finally, back to gbone. Try to remember waaaaay back when your 49-64th level PCs were 13-20...(go ahead, I'll let you search through the notes). What got under your skin then? What made you think "man, this would be so much easier if..." Maybe some of the stuff you're doing currently is derivative of your experience back then with house-ruling, hybrid systems, etc.
What changes did you initiate back in those days that helped you get where you are now as a GM, and helped your players get where they are now, as PCs?
(I think you said you started these guys at low levels back in 2008. Were you still pure 3.5 then, or had you incorporated some of the PF stuff?)
Honestly I've yet to have a smooth high level experience. Combat slows to a crawl as players get more and more actions and options. I'm constantly on the back foot as a GM as I deal with scry and fry, or other high level spells play havoc with plot. High level play tends to disable story seeds rather than enable them.
So I'd like too see High Level play simplified and streamlined so more can be done in a 4 hour time slot. When your life is hectic getting through a single High Level combat a session is just unacceptable.
I don't know if this changes expectations too much for others though.
Well, it's been a long time since I've had to force high-level play into a four hour slot.
Not that I don't go to my share of conventions, but the play is always at a lower level (typically 10 or less), and I think that's fitting - I'd rather have the time available for roleplaying, and combats at that level are lengthy unless the players (all of them, including the GM) are well-prepared.
I *do* run high level games at conventions, but I always have a fast and loose plot, and I warn everyone ahead of time that it is *not* a single slot event. That way nobody feels like they're being railroaded.
And finally, back to gbone. Try to remember waaaaay back when your 49-64th level PCs were 13-20...(go ahead, I'll let you search through the notes). What got under your skin then? What made you think "man, this would be so much easier if..." Maybe some of the stuff you're doing currently is derivative of your experience back then with house-ruling, hybrid systems, etc.
Heheheh. That would be in 2006. I'll have to think about it.
From what I can recall, though, that was a sweet spot for us. We're all long-time players, so the levels from 8-16 felt like home. It was only once we got to 15-16th level that the cracks started to appear around the edges, and that was largely due to the powerful new abilities that so few players had encountered before.
Frankly, the biggest issue at that time was the player who'd decided that he wanted to be a Vow of Poverty/Vow of Nonviolence monk, which just made the game excruciating. Everything else pales in comparison.
One thing that's always been a nightmare for me, however, are druids. What Paizo's done with limiting the shapes they can take is a godsend; the druid in my campaign is a nightmare to deal with - not as a player, but as a PC because he's virtually impossible to stop. Ever.
One of the things I'd really like to see for high level play are some systems codifying "influence" in various ways.
I'd really like to be able to run a game similar to kingmaker with various high level quests to run off and do but with some abstract systems for the PC Cleric to ascend to leadership of their church and spread the word winning converts, silencing heretics and negotiating with other churches. I'd love some rules around building spy networks, mercantile empires, mercenary companies, political factions, etcetera
To me high level characters suffer at the moment from just being 'like the low level guys but better'. I think some abstract systems (relatively simple at heart but able to be expanded based on interest) which modelled the PCs accruing some intangible benefits would make high level play attractive to me in a way that more feats, more items and more abilities just doesnt.
One of the things I'd really like to see for high level play are some systems codifying "influence" in various ways.
You might want to check out Green Ronin's "Noble's Handbook". The Noble Houses (which could actually be any organization type from a Thieves' Guild to a religious order) had abstract Resources and Influence that the Noble leader could use in-game.
The class was revised in the Pathfinder Freeport Companion, without the Noble House material.
Reading the first post we can say that Paizo listen and are doing it, Ultimate Equipment, NPC Gallery and Ultimate Campaign I hope the next book for 2013 be Epic rules I'm becoming impatient
I do not like the old 3.5 epic rules for at least one reason:
(never played though)
the 1/2 advancement rule for saves and BAB
A 20wizard/20fighter is different from a 20fighter/20wizard.
My suggestion for that is too have a maximum save and bab for each level after 20.
As someone who has played using the 3.5e BAB/save advancement, I can say that the designers' concerns (which they elaborated on in a sidebar) are entirely accurate.
Even WITH the normalized advancement, there's still situations where part of the party needs a 1 to fail and others need high numbers to succeed due to the differences in important stats (e.g. Will saves made by divine types, etc.).
Any non-normalized advancement would be self defeating except at low levels (low in this case meaning close to 20). Once the PCs advanced far enough, the disparity within a party would result in PPKs (partial party kills) with every encounter that was capable of threatening the characters with the high saves.
Some type of normalization is needed, it would be cool to have it from base maybe for Pathfinder 2, one of the things I like from 4e you add half you level to everything
Nods. which is why the maximum would by 22-max 21,24-max 22 etc
Please explain what you mean?