| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, you want to scrap the 1-20 advancement tables, come up with new tables for 1-15, then make new nebulous epic rules for play past 15th level?
Why not have 3 tiers of play 1-10, 11-20, 21-30? They could each be tailored to their specific classes, rather than just broad epic advancement rules that all classes use.
We could call them... just throwing out names here off the top of my head: Heroic, Paragon, and Epic.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not have 3 tiers of play 1-10, 11-20, 21-30? They could each be tailored to their specific classes, rather than just broad epic advancement rules that all classes use.
Those categories already exist. Among common gamer jargon they are as follows-
1-5: Gritty
6-10: Pulp Heroic
10-15: Wuxia
16-20: Superheroic
In more plain terms, it should read Gritty, Heroic, Mythic and Epic.
Gritty is, well, gritty. Conan is a good example of this powerlevel if you think of him as a 5th level character in a setting where nobody tends to get beyond 2nd. He's extremely powerful but still completely, believably human. H.P. Lovecraft and George R.R. Martin write at this scale.
Heroic meaning Action Hero scale. Powerful, but rarely beyond human potential. Batman is a good example of a character at this scale, as are most Hollywood heroes. This scale is still grounded in humanity. The villains still tend to be people (thought hey are often very powerful people)
Mythic meaning beyond human. This is the scale of powerful enhancement objects, like Stormbringer or Excalibur. Think like the heroes from greek mythology. Perseus exists here (winged boots, magic sword, gorgon's head. Here we start to get into beyond-mortal enemies and world-shaking conflicts.
Superheroic is exactly that. Characters are no longer grounded by any kind of rules of reality. They nearly exist in a class of their own. This is where Superman, Merlin, He-Man, and other characters who are power-level benchmarks tend to go.
Beyond that is usually classified as Godlike. At that scale the d20 system begins to break under the weight of the numbers. There's a lot of research, discussion and articles written about this. I know a lot of people are going to argue this, but really, this is the consensus.
The fact is, at 20th level you are flirting with Godlike power. If you want to play past that, fine, but you might be better off with a different RPG system. If your game has you taking on the gods, I'd recommend going the God of War approach and designing the most powerful gods as 20th level characters and scaling the rest of the world back from that benchmark. I'd bet real money that it would make your game both more playable and easier to grasp thematically.
Anything past 12th is "epic" anyhow. Past 5th your outside the range of mortal, by 10th you walk as living legends, 12th your mythic figures who command powers out of the scope of most of the world, by 15th you have demi-god like power and can take on hoards of normal people naked.
There really is no need for "epic" when you already are demi-god like in power.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Although E6's concept of "nothing but feats" is rather weak tea
I disagree. Feats are actually the interesting part about "leveling up". The boring static increases to BAB, Saving Throws, Spells, etc are what's "weak tea". Feats are how you're able to customize your character as they grow more powerful.
Interesting point, and - I think - a pretty good one. But I'm pretty sure feats alone would not satisfy those who crave EPIC, y'know?
Epic is just a matter of scale. It has nothing to do with numbers. If you are in a setting where the most powerful NPCs in the game are 5th level, being 6th makes you epic.
Epic is just a matter of scale. It has nothing to do with numbers. If you are in a setting where the most powerful NPCs in the game are 5th level, being 6th makes you epic.
I disagree. Epic is being able to chop the top off of a mountain with a swing of a sword.
Or, more mythologically, epic is being able to change the course of rivers with your bare hands.
I've played in several epic campaigns in 3.5, and one of the really big frustrations I had was all the immunities and negations that occured at that level of play. You could conjure a river of lava, but everything was immune to fire--and drowning--and pretty much most magic (high SR or golem-like magic immunity).
You could do really cool things, but then they were often negated by all the weird defenses opponents have at that level.
Granted, all these epic campaigns were with a group I had joined about 10 years after all those campaigns had started, so I was kind of overwhelmed by that power level and had to create characters at 21st+ level without the slow growth and evolution that most epic characters go through.
I like the idea of spending XP after 20th level for feats, special abilities, higher spell slots, etc.
Also, some classes seem designed to advance pretty much as is into epic levels, like the barbarian, fighter, ranger, rogue, etc. Others lack a lot of regular, numerical, progression of powers.
Anything past 12th is "epic" anyhow. Past 5th your outside the range of mortal, by 10th you walk as living legends, 12th your mythic figures who command powers out of the scope of most of the world, by 15th you have demi-god like power and can take on hoards of normal people naked.
There really is no need for "epic" when you already are demi-god like in power.
That really depends on the scope of the setting and how the GM wants to place the Player Characters into perspective. I have played in games where what you have said holds true, and I have played in games where your typical guard unit patrolling the streets of a small town consists of 5th-9th level NPCs.
As with almost everything in RPGs, the definition of what is epic is completely subjective and can be redefined from game to game, or even session to session. The original Forgotten Realms is a good example of this - throughout the majority of the Realms Greenwood's mary-sue Elminster is undoubtedly epic. When it comes to the region of Halruaa, however, the old boxed set specifically described the power-level of the region in terms that would have placed Elminster amongst the typical rank and file in the area.
As far as I am concerned, more rules for extending the scope of the game would surely be a good thing. Those who wish to use them can do so, and those who do not can ignore them. My biggest concern with any type of Epic Level Handbook would be that they would repeat the mistakes of the past. In my opinion, such a set of rules should simply extend the game at the same pace as the Core Rules. In the past it has always seemed to me that the attempts at Epic rulesets have always cranked the knob a bit too hard, causing the difference in power between a 20th level PC and a 22nd level PC to end up more like the difference between a 12th level and a 20th level, rather than the difference between an 18th level and 20th.
Interesting point, and - I think - a pretty good one. But I'm pretty sure feats alone would not satisfy those who crave EPIC, y'know?
In 3.X that's exactly what EPIC was, more feats. Sure, they were EPIC feats, but still just feats.
What exactly did you have in mind thats more than just feats, but isn't better served by a unique level progression for each class. To put it another way, why not just call level 15-20, as is, EPIC and be done with it? What exactly are you looking for?
I am still using the original definitions of what each level means... that is to say that "super hero" is 8th level, and "epic" is anything 10th or beyond.
The only reason those definitions ever appeared to change was because 2nd edition didn't include that chart (the one that labelled each level), and then 3rd went and included the Epic Level Handbook and made everyone think that meant that only 21+ were epic levels when it was really just expanding the already existing epic levels by officially removing the ceiling.
This is a good point.
I'm sure the designers are punting around ideas. 3E took a step away from these older systems, but didn't quite adjust as well. We've a few more years of testing now than the original designers did, though.
Part of what happens may come down to the style the audience wants. For instance--do we want fighters to own or run keeps?
Perhaps PF 2.0 (may it not come until I've defrauded some widows or something and can afford it) should only run to, say, Level 15 and introduce its "epic rules" for those who want to achieve 16+ levels.
I don't use epic rules, but many other folks enjoy them. And from what I hear, it seems a lot of folks think that the PF engine starts to 'overheat' a lot earlier than 20th level. Seems like redefining where "Epic" begins might solve problems on both parts of the divide. I mean, it isn't like 'the range of levels starts at 1 and ends at 20' is an immutable fact.
The decision of which high-level class features to strip out and which to reassign to lower levels would require tons of playtesting, of course.
I think dropping 8th- and 9th-level spells from the basic rules (and using them as sample spells for 'epic magic') might remove some of the spells that GMs hate having to design adventures around. Similarly, the full-BAB types would 'cap out' just before gaining their final iterative attack at 16th level.
Well, go on, tell me this is a crazy idea and that I'm a bad person. (Don't forget to tell me that I didn't use the scientific method! I love hearing that!) ;)
I have to disagree with you that this would be a good solution to either problem. Your crazy and a bad person let me show you the math. Kidding.
The problem with this is people who want epic level play already play to level twenty....don't find the system 'overheats' at high level...have no problem as a GM with full BABs or those 'poroblem spells...etc.
Redefining where 'Epic' starts would just be moving the goalposts....we would just After Epic rules. Also it would be kinda of annoying to have to buy another book just to get the same play experience that we have now.
Also a small correction....D&D has never stopped at 10th level play...there was no cap for levels back than(you just did not gain anything really back than)...and plent of 20th + NPCs running around.
Anything past 12th is "epic" anyhow. Past 5th your outside the range of mortal, by 10th you walk as living legends, 12th your mythic figures who command powers out of the scope of most of the world, by 15th you have demi-god like power and can take on hoards of normal people naked.
There really is no need for "epic" when you already are demi-god like in power.
That an in 2E you couldn't even go past certain level if you weren't Human. Some races capped around 7th level for some classes. I think the highest was level 15 for elven wizards.
I remember playing games of humans where they would level up in Fighter then dual class into another. Basically we had almost level 30 characters that way. Like fighter 9, Wizard 18. You had to have good stats to do it though. If I remember right is was 15 in Str and 17 in Intelligence to do it.
That really depends on the scope of the setting and how the GM wants to place the Player Characters into perspective.
I am gonna disagree. While a setting or a GM can switch things, the game is built upon the assumption that high level NPC's are rare. You may have some in large cities but you won't have more then a score or so within a nation for the most part. Even if it is 60 or better, out of the few hundred thousand that make up a nation, that is less then a percent.
The way I see things parallels Doomed Hero at the top of this post:
Those categories already exist. Among common gamer jargon they are as follows-
1-5: Gritty
6-10: Pulp Heroic
10-15: Wuxia
16-20: SuperheroicIn more plain terms, it should read Gritty, Heroic, Mythic and Epic.
Though I prefer the "plain terms." That said, at 20th lvl a character is essentially a demigod and can take on lesser deities without further advancement. Anything else is godly, though if you wanted to allow a "demigod" level of play, I would say that BAB, HD and saves (& DCs) no longer advance (though characters may trade out HD for better ones, as long as they already have a "non demigod" lvl in that class), but additional lvls still grant class abilites and feats (no additional "demigod" abilities would become available). This would allow characters to continue customization without being able to take over the gods without first becoming one, not that it couldn't be done, just not easily.
Of course, you could do the same thing, just capping the max lvl of any given class lower if it really suited your game better, just beware the repercussions in both game terms and player satisfaction (or dissatisfaction when they can't get that next shiny ability on the advancement table). If your group is cool with this, great, otherwise keep clear.
And please note, these are my opinions, and are not meant to offend or replace the rules for your game, just how I'd play mine.
Oh, and if you need lower lvl NPC's to challenge your PC's, try using teamwork feats and allowing some unusual uses of assist another actions.
I'm an epic-level enthusiast. I say that and I mean, "man, I love me some games that get past the ever-mythical level 20 mark" (and even that dreadful, awful, wonderful 3.0-spawned ELH). I enjoy the high level play, the host of options, the "overly-powerful" characters (fun fact: monsters are just as powerful!), and the lot of it.
I also enjoy completely redefining those expectations, sometimes.
I think redefining expectations can work, it just won't with the majority of PF fans as they currently stand (or with one step away from PF as the system currently stands), as too many people are too invested in the "level 20" concept. Plus, the number "20" is becoming slowly more mystical and important in Golarion.
Edit to clarify