Do You Want High Level Content?


Product Discussion

51 to 100 of 330 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

I really like the term "Mythic" for it, as an earlier poster stated, because it gives that vibe of demigods duking it out, Hercules, etc.
I do feel like everything should have its cap though. 3.5's epic levels were hilariously all over the place. Skills & BAB most obviously. You can only get so good at tieing your shoes, or cutting with a knife, or dancing. In epic play there was no limit to anything. (Not necessarily bad when stood next to the fact that people are summoning meteor storms, but still!)
If it was done a bit differently, rather than just "your character keeps getting the same increase to attack every level & if a caster, a few spells here & there, etc etc" then I would absolutely be pulled in to play that higher level style.
In short, I'll never play "epic", but would enjoy playing "MYTHIC".


Short answer, yes, I want high level content.

Long answer, only if it has a good theme(s). Theme? What in the world do I mean by that?

Other attempts in the past to publish high level content and epic rules have been "flavor neutral". You epic characters are pretty much just more powerful versions of your already powerful heroes. Nobody ever really attempts to give epic rules flavor and weight.

Why are your characters becoming so powerful? Are they simply fated to become more than everyone else is capable? Are they blessed by the gods? Are they becoming demi-gods? Perhaps they have different types of souls... or even a new type of soul.

And epic rules would not have to be limited to only one of these options. There's certainly room for all of the above.

But there really needs to be drive behind the characters' evolution from the most powerful people on the face of Golarion (or whatever setting suits you) to being more great than great.

This is especially true when you consider "normal" heroes. Wizards, sorcerers and clerics I can see becoming epic with little problem. But how does a Fighter or a Rogue evolve to such a higher state?

Some people tend to like the term "mythic", and I like that too, but how about "legendary"?

As for practical matters, I hereby vow to purchase such a product if Paizo takes the risk and publishes it. They should be rewarded for catering to fan requests, to be sure.

But for the love of God, Paizo, please support it! An adventure path once every year or two would be good. A sequel to Rise of the Runelords or a new path facing down Tar-Baphon would be awesome.

Dark Archive

Gururamalamaswami wrote:

I hate labels like "mythic", "epic", and "legendary." Do you want more content for levels 15-20? How about levels 21-30? If you want 20+ what would be a reasonable level cap?

James says that popular interest is what best guarantees the genesis of a product. Weigh in with your thoughts folks.

If it can be done without added complexity of say, hmmm, a 9th level single-class PC, I'd consider it.


I would love to see some high-level content.

I feel that it's a completely different game at that point, though, and like joela points out, the complexity of the character and NPC/monster write-ups would be tremendously unwieldy.

I hope that the development team can create a simple and elegant system to approach demigod+ levels of power.


I would love a 20+ rules set, as long as it is open and supported. Open so 3rd party publishers can add to it and make adventures for it. Take the PC's to a high enough level that they make the notice of the Dark Eight, a Demon prince or two, a Lord of the Nine, or even a god.


oooh, just had a thought. No level caps but bonus caps? i.e. no one can have more than a +50 bonus to hit on their first hit +45 on the second (str, magic, feats, etc can raise it, but raw nakes bonus to hit based on class/level can not be more than 50) So a fighter maxes out at level 50, a mage maxes out at level 100 (4 attacks, just like the fighter). Put caps on the other things like saves, hitpoints etc. At some point mortals just reach their limit. They can continue to gain levels which allows them to gain more feats to do different things, multiclass to pick up new abilities and so forth but numbers stuff don't grow.

At some point something become too big for a mortal, I don't care how many levels he has, to do anything to. I always chuckle at the epic level handbook's xixcal (The amazingly tall creature that has great wyrm white dragons perched on its shoulders). How can a 6 ft tall human damage that thing with a 3 foot long sword? This thing can rend for 4d8+48, it's bigger than some mountains and that is all it can do?

Having rules to enter demigod status would be the only way to increase stats beyond mortal abilities. This would probably also require a different rules set, but once characters make it past some point in these higher levels, this becomes a new possibility.


Of course I want more high-level content. Both for "Mythic" and Core.

Just as archetypes are a brilliant new concept, I am confident that there are other ways of evoking Mythic play, without adding levels. In a system where levels were chosen to facilitate Mythic, I'm most comfortable with 50 being the cap.

I certainly agree with those who say that sane rules for divine/supernal entities are also wanted.

While I'd love for players to dip into such might, I would be completely comfortable with gods, or a certain tier thereof, functioning in a stat-block form more akin to Kingdoms or Caravans than PCs.

While Inner Sea region is the heart of Pathfinder, other continents, the Great Betond and the Dark Tapestry all present Golarion-specific opportunities for Mythic play.

As a note, I While I personally prefer Legendary to Mythic, I think the former is too evocative of 11+, especially to players of 3.5 D&D.


Absolutely, yes I (and my gaming group) would love high-level and/or mythic content.

We have PCs in the 33 to 39 range. I know, sounds ridiculous to many, but we've been playing in the same (convoluted) FR campaign for 24 (actual) years! Covering about 26 years of game time (we got there several years ago).

We ground a broad team of heroes up through 1st Ed., and then 2nd Ed. By the time 3.0 came out, we had several PCs around 20th and a couple a little higher. Remember, that (other than Mage spells) there was not much reason to be 20th level in those days. We just loved playing our characters. We still do.

However, I think it is very important to address "high-level" rules before making the leap to "mythic". My friends and I broke them epic rules real good, and our epic PCs have been on forced early retirement for years now. When we play, we bog down at the 13th to 15th range, just like everyone else. We need strong support for the top levels already in the game.

A lot of people are very vehement about not liking or wanting "mythic" rules; that they 'never go above 13' or some such. But the underlying cause of much of that is that high level is already troubled. When people say we shouldn't even support level 15-20, I say those levels are in the Core Rulebook! If you don't like 'em, don't play 'em, but we should have support for the full level spread provided in the core rules.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have nothing against a 20+ book coming out some time in the future. I would never use it myself because I find that like DnD the game starts sucking from about 15 onwards.

Not sure what a 20+ book is needed for, by then its a case of 'your char walks onto the battlefield, gives the army an Angry Monkey stare, they all die'

but if its what enough people want then it should be produced..but not yet, valuable resources shouldn't be used on stuff that very few will use, but in time it will be a good addition, as long as they don't focus too much on producing a load of AP content and stuff for it when they could be making the mainstream APs

Sovereign Court

A thousand times this. It's not that I'd discourage people from going to these lengths, I'd just like to improve and expand what we have available now before making the leap to the next big thing. Sort of like Foundation.

Liberty's Edge

Imo poster who do not want the high level content also need to look at it from another angle. Indivdually they may not need it. Yet imo Pathfinder does. Right now the only thing making Pathfinder fairly self contained is a psionic and high level set of rules. Those that are woriied that PF does not cover all the wide range of topics that 3.5 will not need to worry. Second it makes it easier to sell to those who like 3.5 yet want new material.


Level 13 through 20 support material would be a fantastic start. Perhaps some more high level modules and an AP starting at 10 running through 20 alongside a hardback. I am running a high level game and my primary issue is access to pre-gen balanced monsters and traps to use as a baseline. Merely scaling a CR5 trap up lacks some flavor. Challenges at this level should be beyond mere deeper pits and sharper spears.

I have thought about the issue of how high level play should fit into a campaign world, and my primary solution is separating the party from the rest of the humanoids. Throwing wilderness encounters with CR15+ creatures just seems cheesy. Having a party of high level adventurers as foils in each village is not in keeping with Golarions feel (IMHO). Most of my scenarios then feature less combat scenarios in and around civilization, and has the party traveling into previously uncharted areas not normally accessed. I intentionally keep combats ridiculously easy if the story requires it, for example the players starting a tavern brawl.

Shadow Lodge

Kain Darkwind wrote:
Demonlords are considered demigods. And they begin at CR 26.

Which means that if they put out a "Mythic" levels supplement, they would need to retcon that to higher, or simply accept the fact that characters will be invading the Abyss or Hell and b+&+&-slapping the ruler of an entire planar layer around like nobody's business. Personally, I think that while demigod level powers such as demon lords and the like should be defeatable, it should involve a full party and getting some equally powerful allies to go up against them. Their power level should be out of reach by conventional means (ie, the average 4-person party of the highest possible level going up against Orcus should get slaughtered).


I would like to throw in my support for the "Mythic" label.

"Legendary" also has a nice ring to it, but I realize this might have Gygaxian overtones due to his "Lejendary" product line.

I don't have a problem with levels beyond 20, per se. But I think it would be a kewl nod to the past if Level 36 was the limit for player characters... :-D

Besides which -- what level d'you suppose Tar-Baphon the Whispering Tyrant was, anyway??

Cheers, JohnH / Wanda


Kthulhu wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
Demonlords are considered demigods. And they begin at CR 26.

Which means that if they put out a "Mythic" levels supplement, they would need to retcon that to higher, or simply accept the fact that characters will be invading the Abyss or Hell and b@*#!-slapping the ruler of an entire planar layer around like nobody's business. Personally, I think that while demigod level powers such as demon lords and the like should be defeatable, it should involve a full party and getting some equally powerful allies to go up against them. Their power level should be out of reach by conventional means (ie, the average 4-person party of the highest possible level going up against Orcus should get slaughtered).

If I recall the old "immortal" box set rules correctly you could not kill an immortal unless you were, yourself, an immortal. As a way of keeping things sane you could introduce a mechanic whereby certain categories of creatures (gods, demi-gods, certain outsiders) can only be killed or perhaps even damaged by a group once a certain task has been performed. There is much mythology requiring the hero to get object X or perform rite Y before they can slay the BBEG. I can think of some great story lines that can be introduced just with this requirement.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Another big problem is that, the same with psionics, everybody has her/his vision of what "epic" rules should be.

Some want a Pathfinderized ELH, some want a different way of expanding the existing ruleset, some want an entirely new set of rules.

I fear the flamewars that will arise once these groups come to blows over what direction should Paizo take.

Owner - House of Books and Games LLC

Gorbacz wrote:

No level 20+ content please, unless there will be a very good integration of it in Golarion.

Which I don't think is quite possible, but maybe Paizo will surprise me.

Well, first off, I agree that it needs to be integrated with Golarion to be useful, but I disagree 100% that it should only support Golarion and thus be restricted to what is useful in Golarion.

Golarion is clearly a world aimed at all levels of characters. As such, it becomes hard to justify the existence of super-high level PCs. That is not necessarily a restriction that will apply to an arbitrary campaign.

Thus, a Golarion 21+ sourcebook will be a very different animal than a core 21+ sourcebook. Which is as it should be - but the two should not be confused.

And I still think Paizo should look to Primal Order for inspiration.

Azazyll wrote:
Yes. Level 20+ please. Call it whatever you want. And give it to us in an AP. In fact, just start the AP at level 10.

That was my thought. If the Adventure Path started at level 10 and ran to, say level 25-27, it would follow existing models and could have a background like "this follows particularly well after modules X, Y and Z." Alternately, it could start around level 15-17 and start after one of the existing Adventure Paths.

Either way, it's going to be an issue for a lot of subscribers - I can hear the complaints already - just look at the ruckus over the Beginner Box.

On the other hand, you don't hear me whining about having to purchase an Oriental Adventures Adventure Path, even though I have long stated zero intereste in such stuff. But some people just can't get over the idea that they may not find every single Adventure Path up their alley. Just look at the people who hate Kingmaker because it's too sandboxey, or the people who don't like Carrion Crown because of the Lovecraftian overtones.

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Major__Tom wrote:
I agree. Number one problem with APs, they end just when the characters are getting interesting. Need some that go to at least 20, more would be better.
Why not just make your characters more interesting from level 1?

Because people don't want to play that game. They want to play a game where their characters get a chance to use all those wonderful powers and capstone abilities, and for more than a short while.

They want to play games where they bang on the gates of the Nine Hells and those inside quiver in fear just a little bit.

They want to play games where they can face down the tarrasque as opposed to being turned to paste in round 1.

Some people even want to play in games where they depose gods and take their places.

Nothing wrong with such a game. I've played Village of Hommlet, and it was awesome, but not every game is Village of Hommlet. Some aim for a different target.

Kain Darkwind wrote:

I'm always interested in higher level support, both for the Core high levels and beyond 20th.

Our game has been going for three years and my players at at 14th level. I'd like to think that by the time they hit 20th level, I'll have an officially supported ruleset to take them beyond.

+1

My current game is likely to end, I'm guessing, in about 2 years, and I'll want to start up another one like it - which means what Kain says goes for me as well - I want to have the infrastructure in place so I can run this campaign to level 21+ as well.

Asteldian Caliskan wrote:
I have nothing against a 20+ book coming out some time in the future. I would never use it myself because I find that like DnD the game starts sucking from about 15 onwards.

I've played in games that have sucked - and it was never because the rules sucked. Perhaps the GM was unprepared, or inexperienced, or perhaps there was one of Those Players at the table (you know, the ones that ruin it for everyone). In some cases I blamed the module, but in my opinion a good GM can make a mediocre module into a good module. In one case, I even vowed never to sit at that GM's table again.

All of those games were in the level 1-10 range, and would have sucked just as much at a higher level.

I will agree that it is harder to run a higher level game. But then again, it's harder to play a 10th-level character than a 1st-level character. Does that mean we should get rid of 10th-level characters?

Wanda V'orcus wrote:

I would like to throw in my support for the "Mythic" label.

"Legendary" also has a nice ring to it, but I realize this might have Gygaxian overtones due to his "Lejendary" product line.

I don't have a problem with levels beyond 20, per se. But I think it would be a kewl nod to the past if Level 36 was the limit for player characters... :-D

I'll again comment that while this makes sense for Golarion, there's nothing inherent in high-level play that dictates any level as one that should be a cap.

There's a big difference between campaign design and rule design. A campaign needs a power limit in order to make any sort of sense unless it's going to be complete chaos. There's nothing inherent in a rules system that requires mandating a level cap.

Now, the rules as published may only support levels up to a certain level, kind of like the current rules largely only support levels 1-20 (but there is that section of the Core Rulebook that talks about post-20th-level) ... but I'm 100% dead against any attempt to dictate that no campaign ever should ever have PCs with a level above some arbitrary cap.

But I don't think Paizo will do that - I think they'll make rules that support levels 21-36, they'll stat out a bunch of demon princes and the like, make some cool Golarion-specific material, and it'll be awesome.

Then, maybe someday they'll set their sights higher - but my guess is that they'll leave that for third party - for example a version of Primal Order that supports Pathfinder, or an updated version of Immortals Handbook: Ascension, etc.

Gorbacz wrote:

Another big problem is that, the same with psionics, everybody has her/his vision of what "epic" rules should be.

Some want a Pathfinderized ELH, some want a different way of expanding the existing ruleset, some want an entirely new set of rules.

I fear the flamewars that will arise once these groups come to blows over what direction should Paizo take.

I don't see that happening at all. They'll have a take on the above-20th rules that works for Golarion. That might not be what certain groups of people want to see - but it will be one valid interpretation of high level play.

Since I suspect it'll be along the lines of what I want with high level play, I suppose it's easier for me to be nonchalant about it, but either way, I can't see them shutting the door on other options.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
gbonehead wrote:

I don't see that happening at all. They'll have a take on the above-20th rules that works for Golarion. That might not be what certain groups of people want to see - but it will be one valid interpretation of high level play.

Since I suspect it'll be along the lines of what I want with high level play, I suppose it's easier for me to be nonchalant about it, but either way, I can't see them shutting the door on other options.

Incoming "You got your Golarion in my setttingless rulebook line" issue.

Remember the uproar when Golarion-specific campaign traits appeared in APG? The non-Golarion crowd will throw tantrums over how a setting they don't care for influences the epic rules which they are after. Paizo already has enough of a problem with that (compare to the "Won't buy ARG because it's about Golarion races" argument that appeared in few places already.)

Shadow Lodge

gbonehead wrote:
They want to play a game where their characters get a chance to use all those wonderful powers and capstone abilities, and for more than a short while.

A level cap doesn't mean You must stop playing this character when you reach level X. It means that once you reach level X, you simply stop advancing in power...you won't reach level X+1, because that level doesn't exist. You can still keep playing the character.

Contributor

Yes, with the following caveat: I don't want high level material that ends up being a munched out kill-fest going A to Z through a book of deific stat blocks.

It's a play style issue for me, and every campaign I've run has ultimately gone up past level 25 (and involved a whole lot of MacGuffins, and things that don't have clearly defined stats, and lots of 'the avatar of it has stats but not necessarily the true thing itself').

I prefer having the out of 'this statblock is only for an avatar and the true form will have stats however much higher or as utterly undefined as you like, up to the DM'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not interested in 20+ material.


Definitely would like to see a book on (20+)mythic levels.

Silver Crusade

Todd Stewart wrote:

Yes, with the following caveat: I don't want high level material that ends up being a munched out kill-fest going A to Z through a book of deific stat blocks.

It's a play style issue for me, and every campaign I've run has ultimately gone up past level 25 (and involved a whole lot of MacGuffins, and things that don't have clearly defined stats, and lots of 'the avatar of it has stats but not necessarily the true thing itself').

I prefer having the out of 'this statblock is only for an avatar and the true form will have stats however much higher or as utterly undefined as you like, up to the DM'.

+1!

I feel the game fundamentally alters after level 20. A dungeon crawl through great wyrm mobs, culminating in a Cthulhu boss-fight is just silly point inflation. Mythic rules should be... more. Players that reach that level should open up a whole new kind of game, otherwise it's just Dragon Ball Z, where the class levels go up to 9000.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

I want a 20+ book very much. I never cared for the arbitrary 20 limitation introduced in 2e.

Sometimes you just want a campaign to go from "farmboy" to "god assassins."

The book definitely needs advice on how to effectively run/play at high levels though. There are enough GMs that seem to think that high level combat has to take forever, (or that it's over with the first action, alternatively), or that level 7+ spells have to ruin plots, or other problems that can be corrected with some good advice.


This isn't the first thread asking this question. :)

However: Yes, please. I would love to see a well-balanced (presumably because of an absolute level cap so that you don't have to try to scale up to CL66) set of mythic-play rules -- and I wonder how much disapproval here is because of how terrible the 3.0 rules were (and then the fact they were completely unsupported).

Personally, I like the idea that a character who's become powerful can attempt to attain true immortality, or perhaps even godhood (which I would imagine would be allowable in Golarion, considering that several existing deities were once mortal)

Now, realistically, I would think that such a book might support the highest levels of non-mythic play as well -- if only by providing good threats and angles for high level characters that aren't just gating yourself to the outer planes and beating up on Demon/Devil Lords and the like... For example, it might be very interesting to start showing the more subtle machinations of various Powers and how they exert their influence on the Prime Material plane -- to show how, for instance, it may have been the case that the Orcish Invasion that you dealt with at levels 5-8 was part of the long-term plan of something immortal that you just get to see now that you're level 18.

Further, I think that a section on powerful characters using those powers to deal issues on their home planes (instead of planehopping or fighting Tarrasques) would be extremely useful.

To be fair, it's tricky to design a game that allows for this to happen - and there are huge issues with the idea of magic that ends up being more powerful than Wish or Miracle -- or, for that matter, the idea that a character who just gained 1 more level (to 21) suddenly can do way more super-powered stuff than a guy who was only level 20 -- especially when you think about the effects on characters who multiclassed... but at the same time, based on the quality of the Core and APG, I have faith in Paizo's ability to design something that makes sense.

In terms of support, I think a good way to introduce such a thing would be to have an AP that starts around level 15 (where a normal AP stops, more or less) and then takes characters up to 20-something.

Just my opinion, anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gururamalamaswami wrote:
Do you want more content for levels 15-20? How about levels 21-30? If you want 20+ what would be a reasonable level cap?

NO. Resounding NO.


Just weighing in with my opinion. I'd welcome high level (12+, 15+) and Mythic (20+ etc) additions to Pathfinder. I've always felt a strong connection to my characters as a player and my ca,paigns as a DM, and the thought of just setting that down and starting over when you don't have to never made a lot of sense to me. I liked the BECMI approach, even the (admittedly broken) Epic book, but given I've been consistently impressed with the quality of Paizo's products, I'd welcome their take on it and I'm pretty sure it would find a place on my gaming shelf.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ryric wrote:
I want a 20+ book very much. I never cared for the arbitrary 20 limitation introduced in 2e.

The only arbitrary limitations in 2e were... 30, introduced by the DM Option: High Level Campaigns book.

The arbitrary limitations based on race choice (usually ranging from 7 to 14 with a few outliers) were a holdover from 1e - and pre-option series 2e had unlimited advancement built into it: noted on the class level limits by race table with "U" and facilitated by experience charts that all ended with "+X thousands of experience each additional level."

History lessons aside... I think a book covering some suggestions as to how to handle advancing beyond 20th level could end up being good - I don't think I would ever use it though.

I still view anything past 12th level as "epic level," so I tend to not see a need for more than 20 levels... not to mention that the creation of monsters meant to be a threat to characters of higher than 20th level tends to become a bit cumbersome at best, and a silly game of "rocket tag" at worst given the amount of pieces needed to be put together in order to actually push the capabilities of a party that high of level.

I almost believe that the best thing to do would be to go the 2nd edition (pre option series) route - show how XP gains increase, and classes only keep gaining abilities that are tied to an "every X levels" rate - like feats, skills, ability increases, bonus feats, and so on.


Gururamalamaswami wrote:

I hate labels like "mythic", "epic", and "legendary." Do you want more content for levels 15-20? How about levels 21-30? If you want 20+ what would be a reasonable level cap?

James says that popular interest is what best guarantees the genesis of a product. Weigh in with your thoughts folks.

I'm not so much interested in what it would be called but I definitely want high level content / options otherwise I feel as if the rules are forcing me to stop playing my character once I reach 20th level. I think there should always be something to press toward regardless of the level of the character, not everyone has to use it but for those of us who want it, I think it would be cool if it could be built seamlessly into the core rule system.


Well said, gbonehead.

zwyt wrote:


I'm not so much interested in what it would be called but I definitely want high level content / options otherwise I feel as if the rules are forcing me to stop playing my character once I reach 20th level. I think there should always be something to press toward regardless of the level of the character, not everyone has to use it but for those of us who want it, I think it would be cool if it could be built seamlessly into the core rule system.

And this +1. This is pretty much how we all feel at my table. Right now, RAW, my players feel that they're being forced to stop at level 20. I don't know how they (Paizo/Pathfinder) would do a [insert 20+ book name here] book, but it needs to be done.

We want to go down to the Nine Hells and knock on the doors of Dis; we want to go have a final throwdown with Orcus (they may not survive, but they want to!). We want to challenge Avatars (not gods themselves) because those make for memorable end games. Not many do, and I understand that. But....clearly there are those here that do want this as well.

If you don't want it, does it mean you need to use it? Like gbonehead said, he doesn't necessarily use any of the Oriental Adventures stuff, but he's not against it. I'm not particularly fond of all the "race books" and I see no need or desire for them, but I'm not against them being printed. It just means that I don't use them or purchase them.


Yes I want high level content. Not only do I want level 15-20 content, I want level 20 plus content as well. Despite what I see on these boards I have never had a player tell me that he doesn't want to play past level 15. In fact I've had groups beg me to keep the games going long enough so that they can finally get to play those levels. I want the level 20+ content to be relatively open ended so that there is no absolute "you shall not pass" point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I want to see a 21st+ release IF and ONLY IF they manage to tighten up levels 13th-20th first. Those levels are the foundation of 21st+ play, and right now it is a pretty weak foundation.

As noted in the survey post I did a while back, I think Paizo has a lot of leeway to introduce new methods and optional rules that expand on the CRB in order to get this done; but still stopping short of re-writing the rules.

What I would like to see most is a "High Level Play Guide" that covers 13th-20th for GMs and Players, makes those levels highly playable, and includes a sizable chapter on play beyond 20th. Then — if that chapter works well — a book of all 21st+ rules makes a logical followup.

Most importantly, I want a curve, not a plateau. The game should not change fundamentally all at one level. And if it must change, it should be richer and more thematic than merely affixing a buzz-word to each ability.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16

Has anyone on this thread ever played Exalted?

Sorry to pimp another publisher's game (there's 4thED forums on this website, so it's gotta be okay), but this really seems like what people are looking for.

You start off as demigods at the game's equivilant of "level 1", and go up from there. The game is designed with that in mind, so you can take feats to "jump over mountains" and "walk on clouds." And spells that sound Biblical in proportion, like "Plague of Locusts", which isn't just an attack spell, but also starves an entire region to death.

The rules are bulkier than low-level Pathfinder, but simplier than high-level Pathfinder. (The scaling curve is less harsh.) And if it's "advancement past 20 and doing mythic stuff" that interests you, then, well, this game really seems the better option.

I've played it. It's a good game. No reason you couldn't put in a little effort to run in set in Golarion or the Nine Hells of Baator, if that's what you're really into.

Shadow Lodge

Evil Lincoln wrote:

What I would like to see most is a "High Level Play Guide" that covers 13th-20th for GMs and Players, makes those levels highly playable, and includes a sizable chapter on play beyond 20th. Then — if that chapter works well — a book of all 21st+ rules makes a logical followup.

Most importantly, I want a curve, not a plateau. The game should not change fundamentally all at one level. And if it must change, it should be richer and more thematic than merely affixing a buzz-word to each ability.

Short answer - I barely like anything past level 12 as-is.

Long answer - Evil Lincoln did a good job describing why.

Dark Archive

Erik Freund wrote:


You start off as demigods at the game's equivilant of "level 1", and go up from there.

I can't speak for anyone else but myself, but this is exactly what I'm not looking for. I don't want to begin the game being a demigod. I want to start the game being Timmy the Apprentice Wizard, who, over the course of adventure, mishaps, tragedy, and glory, eventually becomes known as Archmagus Tim, Master of His Own Plane. (Terrible example, but it gets the point across)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Major__Tom wrote:
I agree. Number one problem with APs, they end just when the characters are getting interesting. Need some that go to at least 20, more would be better.

If a character isn't interesting at level 1, then perhaps you have problems that high levels won't solve.

Dark Archive

I've started a new thread here about addressing specific issues of high level play.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Erik Freund wrote:

Has anyone on this thread ever played Exalted?

Sorry to pimp another publisher's game (there's 4thED forums on this website, so it's gotta be okay), but this really seems like what people are looking for.

You start off as demigods at the game's equivilant of "level 1", and go up from there. The game is designed with that in mind, so you can take feats to "jump over mountains" and "walk on clouds." And spells that sound Biblical in proportion, like "Plague of Locusts", which isn't just an attack spell, but also starves an entire region to death.

The rules are bulkier than low-level Pathfinder, but simplier than high-level Pathfinder. (The scaling curve is less harsh.) And if it's "advancement past 20 and doing mythic stuff" that interests you, then, well, this game really seems the better option.

I've played it. It's a good game. No reason you couldn't put in a little effort to run in set in Golarion or the Nine Hells of Baator, if that's what you're really into.

Hmm. My (admittedly short) experience with Exalted involved newbie characters rolling 20d10 for things, and an initiative system that was quite borked if only one person in the group had a Join Battle charm(that one person was routinely getting 10+ successes more on initiative, making everyone else act on the same tick). Combat was very swingy - either the opponents are utterly trivial (can't ever hurt you) or every attack risked one-shotting your character. Again, we were newbs at Exalted (but not at roleplaying) so maybe we were making some mistakes. Our GM has converted the world over to M&M so we can try it with a different system.

Exalted also doesn't support the peon -> godkicker scale that I'd want. I don't want to start awesome, I want to earn it and enjoy it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Before I want high level 20+ player material (which I do), I'd like adventureS (capital S for plural) that take you all the way up to level 20, not just 15~18. Right now it's slim pick'ns.

Basically this:

Evil Lincoln wrote:

I want to see a 21st+ release IF and ONLY IF they manage to tighten up levels 13th-20th first. Those levels are the foundation of 21st+ play, and right now it is a pretty weak foundation.

...
What I would like to see most is a "High Level Play Guide" that covers 13th-20th for GMs and Players, makes those levels highly playable, and includes a sizable chapter on play beyond 20th. Then — if that chapter works well — a book of all 21st+ rules makes a logical followup. ...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
zwyt wrote:


I'm not so much interested in what it would be called but I definitely want high level content / options otherwise I feel as if the rules are forcing me to stop playing my character once I reach 20th level. I

And if Paizo makes a 20-30 we'll have someone who complains about being forced to stop at 30, 40, etc.

D20 based systems have some major breakdowns that get progressively worse as you advance... differences in saving throws make the concept of will saves for 40th level Fighters, Fort for 40th level Wizards, something I don't want to contemplate.

You're NOT forced to stop playing your character at 20th level, you're just giving up level advancement. Elminster and Manshoon don't advance between novels. they're complete. What you're saying is that the only motivation for playing your characters is the promise of new level shinies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll never have a need for 20+ level material. The game's math seems to break down between 15-20th level anyway. Some material to assist the game system's flaw 15-20 might be of some use, however.

I'll never buy a 20+ level epic book for pathfinder.


Asteldian Caliskan wrote:
Not sure what a 20+ book is needed for, by then its a case of 'your char walks onto the battlefield, gives the army an Angry Monkey stare, they all die'

Characters of that level wouldn't be anywhere near that battle. Their concerns would be on a more planar level... like facing the hordes of the Abyss in the form of an army of Balors or some such thing for a climactic battle.

And just to point it out (and not because I assume you don't know) but it isn't all about combat.

As an aside - Quite a few of the classes have the characters become immortal at 20th level. My assumption was that anything above 20th level in Pathfinder would have to move on to demigod-like powers and transition out of the "mortal" realms.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that such a book should have more than one path. Not more than one set of mechanics but more than one story telling path for progress at high levels.

The super hero like deeds of legend with men that can punch through steel and wizards that can dry up oceans is perfectly valid.

So is a vision where heroes take the fight to the realms of gods and take up divine mantle for themselves.

So is a world where heroes become more skilled and wise but essentially remain simply men and women who have survived a dangerous world longer than most.

An epic book should help guide both players and game masters to tell the kinds of stories they are interested in, not to give only a single possibility.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played Shackled City up to level 15ish. It worked great, and the characters were impressive. Then I played Age of Worms to the end, at level 22ish. It was horribly broken by that point, with massive power disparities, combat slowed to a crawl and people died often to one-shot-kills. No. I don't like epic level play.

If anyone has done that rules space decently, it's Dragon Kings for Dark Sun. I think. I haven't seen it in play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
Demonlords are considered demigods. And they begin at CR 26.

Which means that if they put out a "Mythic" levels supplement, they would need to retcon that to higher, or simply accept the fact that characters will be invading the Abyss or Hell and b+*&%-slapping the ruler of an entire planar layer around like nobody's business. Personally, I think that while demigod level powers such as demon lords and the like should be defeatable, it should involve a full party and getting some equally powerful allies to go up against them. Their power level should be out of reach by conventional means (ie, the average 4-person party of the highest possible level going up against Orcus should get slaughtered).

This is an often touted fallacy. Simply put, most of these creatures live in dangerous places, have massive amounts of minions, etc.

Also, 'begin at CR 26' is not the same as 'the most powerful are CR 26.' I believe James said that he would likely have demon lords range from CR 30-40 in one thread. (I think that would be a good idea, and allow nascent demon lords to take the CR 25-29 spot)

A DM is under no obligation to allow characters to even meet Orcus unless he is prepared for Orcus to die.

I don't have an issue with letting 30th level PCs fight and possibly kill demon lords. But if I did have an issue and they insisted on it, they might stop after the hundredth skeletal warrior showed up, or the tenth time their negative energy protection was dispelled.

I mean, what are the odds that a DM who allows her PCs to do whatever they want, totally open sandbox, actually has an issue with kings or gods dying?

And what are the odds that a DM who puts her PCs on a strict story based campaign is going to even have a road to travel to kill demon lords she doesn't want killed?

Unless someone has an odd attachment to planar lords and gods that they don't have to the kings and other important NPCs in the campaign setting, I don't see what makes this a sudden change. Can the PCs just waltz in and kill the 10th level king at 15th level in your campaign? And if so, why do you then have an issue with the 40th level PCs doing that to your 35th level demon lord?

Dark Archive

I will buy every single Paizo Published book targeting level 13 and up, no matter the setting, location, or subject. Every example of a challenging trap, encounter or monster is extremely useful to me, and a whole book about high level encounters - oh boy....yes.

From level 12 up, PC's are getting pretty powerful and it's getting hard for a GM to put a reasonably-tough-but-not-instantly-lethal challenge against them. Sure, you turn the Bestiaries upside down and put the the appropriate CR monsters against them in a dungeon - but that's not what makes an encounter a high level encounter.

The high CR monsters have been alive for so long that they have specialised in their nasty tricks - that specialty is what kept them alive for so long (survival of the fittest and so on) so, at higher levels a GM needs very clever tactics to reflect that monster's level of cunning or battle experience.
I loved the tactics block in the Arkhryst encounter (PF#5) because it made us think what a clever monster would do, when given enough time and power. gief moar!

I guess I'm voting for a Pathfinder Monster Tactics book more than anything else - that would be insanely fun at any level, but especially relevant to the higher levels because of the inherent complexity.
if I had a great set of different monster tactics to pick from, that would cut down my preparation time by half and that means more time for props, side quests, miniatures, etcetera, giving everyone a more fun campaign.

/rant sorry :)

Scarab Sages

Gururamalamaswami wrote:
Do you want more content for levels 15-20? How about levels 21-30?

Yes and yes.


I want rules for ascending to the divine, that's about it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
roguerouge wrote:
I want rules for ascending to the divine, that's about it.

That's easy.

GM: The Gods themselves marvel at your accomplishments and invite you to join the Pantheon.

Player: Cool! Sign me up!

GM: *Makes sounds of thunder, with 23 part choral accompaniment* Your character is now one of the AlLMighty! Congratulations. Here have this *hands player a sheet of paper, pencil, and some dice.

Player:What's this for?

GM: Rolling up your new character.

Consider the above material free for use. OGL, FSN, BBA. :)


To the OP, yes I want a tightened up rules set for 13-20, and yes I want 20+ play to be supported.

To some of the subsequent posters, who seem to be nervous that Mythic rules will mess up Golarion, I say this:

Did the the 3E Game Designers take OUR Epic games and change Living Greyhawk because of the outcomes from OUR groups' sessions? Nope. So why would Paizo?

And the more I think about it, the less I care if my characters are high-powered high-level mortals or demi-deities or Great Old Ones or Omnific. I just want rules that allow me to make the game what I want. Does that rules set need to be tailored only to my play style? No. Should it consider that there are people out there like me who want that style of play? Yes. And thus far, Paizo has done great with this.

So bring on the Mythic Level stuff, but make sure it's tight, doesn't mess up levels 1-20 (or more specifically 13-20), and make sure the OPTIONS are there for the different play styles.

Seems like JJ and Erik are keen on getting the bumps out of 13-20 first. Which I am in full support of.

Fre'zerker.

51 to 100 of 330 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Do You Want High Level Content? All Messageboards