Is Paizo planning to publish a book that would provide for character advancement and supporting material above level 20? I remember that we have discussed this several times in the past on this forum, but I have been out of the loop for a while, so I am wondering if there are any new indications either way.
Personally, I would be interested in seeing such a book, but only if it were well-executed indeed. Should it turn into something like the Epic Level Handbook in 3e, I would probably pass.
Is Paizo planning to publish a book that would provide for character advancement and supporting material above level 20? I remember that we have discussed this several times in the past on this forum, but I have been out of the loop for a while, so I am wondering if there are any new indications either way.
Personally, I would be interested in seeing such a book, but only if it were well-executed indeed. Should it turn into something like the Epic Level Handbook in 3e, I would probably pass.
To my knowledge this is no official plan. That being said, you can continue to have epic level games by merely using the core rules and extending their natural expectations. Just like you have monsters with tons of HD, so too can you have classes with tons of HD, no problem.
The core rulebook has a small section in the gamemastering chapter which discusses how to continue advancing spells per day and such. Higher level spell slots can be used with metamagic feats and such to produce more impressive versions of lower level spells.
Most classes can simply continue to function as they have before. Fighters eventually get so much +hit that they have two options. Either have a 95% chance to hit more or less indefinitely, or power attack to add lots of damage. Both are valid options.
The formulas used to determine the cost of magic items can continue to function even past high levels. The fact they rely on the bonus squared means that they become significantly more expensive as the bonus rises. So you could continue the price formulas to generate items that gave bonuses higher than +6 easily enough (I would recommend setting a required caster level of 3 * bonus, which generates a smooth progression).
Essentially, the only thing that really might create a problem with a super-high level game is saving throw progression. A 40th level Fighter would have a +40 BAB, 40d10 HD, a +22 base Fort, and +13 base Reflex. So his Reflex would be an Achilles heel, as a strong save DC at this level would probably be around DC 45-50 or so.
But you'd probably also have a nice +10 Dex, +13 Resistance, and +2 from a feat, resulting a +38 Reflex, which means that you'd still have a solid chance.
All in all, it would be pretty hard to mess up the game as much as the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook did if you just continue playing the game as it is written. Post 20th is an excellent time to multiclass as well.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.
A conversation we've had many times and a standpoint I agree with, if for nothing other than the magic side. Truly expanding the scope of magic spells in power beyond what is represented for Level 9 starts to border on ridiculous.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.A conversation we've had many times and a standpoint I agree with, if for nothing other than the magic side. Truly expanding the scope of magic spells in power beyond what is represented for Level 9 starts to border on ridiculous.
Which is why you don't. By 9th level spells you can play god, including creating new planes of existence. The only reason you need higher level spell slots is for saving throw DCs and metamagic. Truthfully, the biggest hurdle I find with going beyond 20th level is dealing with caster level limits. For example, a lot of spells say "Up to xd6" or something like that. The easiest fix for that would be a feat that increases all level-based effects by 5 for each spell level slot higher than it would normally take. So if you prepped fireball as a 4th level spell, it would go up to 15d6, and prepping it as a 7th level spell could get up to 20d6, and 8th up to 25d6, etc. Capping at your actual caster level, of course.
Maybe call it Improved Heighten Spell or something. Make it increase the level of the spell and what-not. You could also make a feat such as Improved Spell Deflection, which made globes of invulnerability increase the level of spells blocked by 1/8th your caster level (so a globe of invulnerability which normally blocks up to 4th level spells would block up to 7th level spells at 24th level, etc).
From what I remember reading, in any one of the many threads on this topic, certain members of the development staff want to do epic/mythic rules. Though as far as I remember, there has been nothing said about actually doing it. I think there are just other things that they feel are more important to produce than epic/mythic rules.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.
Can you give an example?
Personally, I think the spells are just fine. Simply increase the spells per day limit. There are plenty of CR 20+ monsters and they're created with the same rules. They may have certain special abilities not found elsewhere, but that doesn't mean they're invulnerable in any way.
You can probably pick and choose the things that worked alright out of the 3.0 Epic Level Handbook, but having played some crazy epic stuff before, I treat level 20 as an "end point," and aim to complete everything by then.
A major crunch point of +20 level play is that up until then combat is the key way you advance. Once you reach 20, you're a powerhouse and combat is more of "how" to kill rather than if you've got the raw power "to" kill. Thus, while still important, I think more story points should be introduced to make up for that. At that point you've most likely essentially become the scion of a god, befriended one or two, are the bane of several others, etc so essentially you've got their attention in some way. So, instead of leading up to fighting a pit fiend, epic level play would probably entail things like settling disputes between that pit fiend's master and another god that could threaten to wreak havoc in the mortal plane. Things like that are likely to include a healthy amount of combat but there's also a fair amount of discovery and problem solving along the way that doesn't entail combat.
Another thing that makes epic play difficult is that there isn't a whole lot of official epic level APs so there is no unifying source of what that looks like. What is epic to one person can be lame to another.
On another thread, a poster mentioned the idea of >20, you just pick another class and, instead of advancing normally in it, you pseudo-gestalt it up.
Like if you get Cleric20, at level 21+ your effective caster level continues to progress, as do hitdice and skill ranks, but not your BAB or base saves.
Further, you also get to progress in another class... sort of.
If, for example, you pick Ranger, you get
Well it's not from paizo, but there is this.
3.5's Epic Level Handbook was quite good for this. A few of the basics I remember somewhat well...
- BAB continues to increase by +1 at every odd level (you never gain additional attacks after this point).
- All saves increase by +1 at even levels.
- Classes which have abilities that are based on level (such as the DC on certain powers, the amount of times a Paladin can Smite Evil) continue to increase at the same rate.
- Classes gain bonus feats at a certain rate based on how many abilities continue to improve. For example, a fighter receives a bonus feat every 2 levels, while a Paladin receives a bonus feat every 4 levels (I think).
The ELH had rules for discovering new spells, a host of epic feats, and managed to, in theory, let the game stretch into perpetuity. If you can find it, I recommend it.
3.5's Epic Level Handbook was quite good for this. A few of the basics I remember somewhat well...
- BAB continues to increase by +1 at every odd level (you never gain additional attacks after this point).
- All saves increase by +1 at even levels.
- Classes which have abilities that are based on level (such as the DC on certain powers, the amount of times a Paladin can Smite Evil) continue to increase at the same rate.
- Classes gain bonus feats at a certain rate based on how many abilities continue to improve. For example, a fighter receives a bonus feat every 2 levels, while a Paladin receives a bonus feat every 4 levels (I think).
The ELH had rules for discovering new spells, a host of epic feats, and managed to, in theory, let the game stretch into perpetuity. If you can find it, I recommend it.
The biggest problem with the ELH is that it's terrible, and few of the rules inside of it are actually playable. It breaks the game worse than it helps, and I don't mean merely from a balance perspective but from a mechanically functioning perspective. The majority of the epic feats are just kind of dumb, epic spellcasting is horrible, the monsters are generally lame and wildly off kilter with their CRs, and the book takes anything that resembles working mechanics for magic items and such and flushes it down the toilet. What you are left with is scraping up the mess.
To give an idea of just how bad the ELH makes things right off the bat, PCs begin advancing at a constant rate of +1/2 level. So being a Fighter basically means diddly, 'cause once you hit 20th level, everyone's BAB effectively becomes poor (+1/2 level), and everyone's saves become best (+1/2 level). Meanwhile, monsters continue to advance perfectly normal within the rules. So a level 30 Fighter only has a +25 BAB, but a 30 HD outsider has a +30 BAB, while a level 40 Fighter has only ha +30 BAB, and a level 40 outsider has a +40 BAB.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.Can you give an example?
Personally, I think the spells are just fine. Simply increase the spells per day limit. There are plenty of CR 20+ monsters and they're created with the same rules. They may have certain special abilities not found elsewhere, but that doesn't mean they're invulnerable in any way.
The CR encounter system specifically imo is the system that breaks down. I suppose that as long as you keep the spells at 9th level it helps, but the whole issue is that casters get more spells. They pretty much run the game from levels 15-20 already and it just gets more and more apparent. Everybody is able to take all of the feats to ensure they have little to no weaknesses and the game just looses a lot of its charm for me.
By 20th level, casters are limited by time more so than money. Their spell slots already aren't a real factor in how limited they are, because their bonus spells are many.
If you continue to rise past 20th using the standard progressions, you will likely find that spellcasters need some new options to keep their saving throw DCs relevant, as the resistance bonuses and such will begin to exceed their capabilities, assuming the suggested guideline of requiring a CL of mod*3 to craft most static magic items.
Imo, just keep progressing classes on the same curve as in the book. Use research to gain new spells that fit what you want to do. Wish sets the standard pretty high in terms of what's possible. For issues like being invulnerable, keep in mind you're up there with demon lords around level 30 and demigods around 45/50. I don't see just anyone going around telling stories or how they felled "yet another" demon lord like its nothing special. That stuff makes the history books. Lol. That's why I really like the idea of relying more on story hooks than just combat to keep things interesting. I can see some extra material being absolutely necessary around level 60. At that point you're pretty much a defacto deity yourself and I can't see how any mortal limits can/should constrain you at that point.
I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.A conversation we've had many times and a standpoint I agree with, if for nothing other than the magic side. Truly expanding the scope of magic spells in power beyond what is represented for Level 9 starts to border on ridiculous.Which is why you don't. By 9th level spells you can play god, including creating new planes of existence. The only reason you need higher level spell slots is for saving throw DCs and metamagic. Truthfully, the biggest hurdle I find with going beyond 20th level is dealing with caster level limits. For example, a lot of spells say "Up to xd6" or something like that. The easiest fix for that would be a feat that increases all level-based effects by 5 for each spell level slot higher than it would normally take. So if you prepped fireball as a 4th level spell, it would go up to 15d6, and prepping it as a 7th level spell could get up to 20d6, and 8th up to 25d6, etc. Capping at your actual caster level, of course.
Maybe call it Improved Heighten Spell or something. Make it increase the level of the spell and what-not. You could also make a feat such as Improved Spell Deflection, which made globes of invulnerability increase the level of spells blocked by 1/8th your caster level (so a globe of invulnerability which normally blocks up to 4th level spells would block up to 7th level spells at 24th level, etc).
I think that if you just spent your money on quadratically increasing items with the max bonus = 1/3 level, then you will actually have a pile of money because the WBL grows faster than quadratic I think. I haven't done the math.
To give an idea of just how bad the ELH makes things right off the bat, PCs begin advancing at a constant rate of +1/2 level. So being a Fighter basically means diddly, 'cause once you hit 20th level, everyone's BAB effectively becomes poor (+1/2 level), and everyone's saves become best (+1/2 level).
heheheheh
Oh, I might beg to differ.
When the PCs at the table I GM want to kill something, they stand back and let the fighter do it. He has, by far, the highest damage output of any character at the table.
Sure, some magic can keep up for a round or so, but in general the fighter can completely crush multiple opponents every single round.
Being a high-level fighter is certainly not irrelevant ... there's a heck of a lot more to combat than BAB.
I think that if you just spent your money on quadratically increasing items with the max bonus = 1/3 level, then you will actually have a pile of money because the WBL grows faster than quadratic I think. I haven't done the math.
It will, but not in non-epic play. A +5 enhancement is 25,000 gp. A +6 would be 72,000 gp. The WBL of level 15 is 240k gp whereas the WBL of a level 18 is 530k gp. So, the enhancement cost tripled but WBL only doubled. Now, past 20th level, WBL would seem to really shoot up since the different from 16 to 17 is only 100k but the difference from 19 to 20 is 200k. That seems to be a more exponential curve. However, the cost of a +13 enhancement would be 338k. :P
You would also need to modify the max enhancement on an item. Currently, the global cap is 10 regardless of level. The 1/3 level thing you mentioned is for enhancement bonuses with a global maximum being +5. Epic items change these rules but how we don't know. xD
I think that if you just spent your money on quadratically increasing items with the max bonus = 1/3 level, then you will actually have a pile of money because the WBL grows faster than quadratic I think. I haven't done the math.I find that the system starts to break down once you go past level 20.A conversation we've had many times and a standpoint I agree with, if for nothing other than the magic side. Truly expanding the scope of magic spells in power beyond what is represented for Level 9 starts to border on ridiculous.Which is why you don't. By 9th level spells you can play god, including creating new planes of existence. The only reason you need higher level spell slots is for saving throw DCs and metamagic. Truthfully, the biggest hurdle I find with going beyond 20th level is dealing with caster level limits. For example, a lot of spells say "Up to xd6" or something like that. The easiest fix for that would be a feat that increases all level-based effects by 5 for each spell level slot higher than it would normally take. So if you prepped fireball as a 4th level spell, it would go up to 15d6, and prepping it as a 7th level spell could get up to 20d6, and 8th up to 25d6, etc. Capping at your actual caster level, of course.
Maybe call it Improved Heighten Spell or something. Make it increase the level of the spell and what-not. You could also make a feat such as Improved Spell Deflection, which made globes of invulnerability increase the level of spells blocked by 1/8th your caster level (so a globe of invulnerability which normally blocks up to 4th level spells would block up to 7th level spells at 24th level, etc).
Well generally the wealth is spread around, which really helps. For example, at higher levels, focusing on a single ability score is far more detrimental than at low levels, if only for saving throws. So at the very least, you're probably looking at 3 ability scores you're trying to keep maxed out. Then your main static bonuses like natural armor and deflections, then your armor, etc, etc.
For example, if you have a 25th level character (who could support up to +8 mods on equipment) you might have the following basic gear:
That's 1,147,000 gp for staples. That's before counting backup weapons, special powers on your armor, intelligent items, consumables, and convenience items like Pearls of Power, Boots of Greater Teleportation, etc, etc, etc.
Also, for anyone interested in pearls of power.
To give an idea of just how bad the ELH makes things right off the bat, PCs begin advancing at a constant rate of +1/2 level. So being a Fighter basically means diddly, 'cause once you hit 20th level, everyone's BAB effectively becomes poor (+1/2 level), and everyone's saves become best (+1/2 level).heheheheh
Oh, I might beg to differ.
When the PCs at the table I GM want to kill something, they stand back and let the fighter do it. He has, by far, the highest damage output of any character at the table.
Sure, some magic can keep up for a round or so, but in general the fighter can completely crush multiple opponents every single round.
Being a high-level fighter is certainly not irrelevant ... there's a heck of a lot more to combat than BAB.
I would hope so. That's what Fighters are supposed to be for. The problem is, the reverse is true for monsters too. See, monsters could take all that excess BAB and turn it into damage via Power Attack, even in 3E when Power Attack was kind of a crappy feat, and it means more now with PF revisions since PA is nicer.
Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.
Essentially the 3E ELH rules instantly downgrade a Fighter's BAB to that of a wizard from 21+, while keeping monsters advancing normally. It's kind of a bum deal for Fighters. It's significantly worse when you consider that Fighter options don't stack like they did in 3E (when the ELH was printed, Keen + Improved Critical stacked, so most epic level Fighters could swing 50% threat ranges) since they were nerfed so fiercely in 3.5.
Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.
Not counting, of course, 40 levels of feats and bonus feats the Fighter has used to raise both BAB and damage (and at levels above 20, Strength too).
All I can say is, from experience, the fighter is really, really badass. Granted, he's not a straight fighter, but he's the one the party depends on to take everything out.
Now I'm sure high level Pathfinder will be a completely different animal than high level 3.5e, but nobody in this group thinks either the fighter or the monk is weak; the weakest character in the entire party is the ranger/scout, and that's primarily because he's a very new player who's still figuring out how to play at this level; he rarely uses his +13d6 skirmish damage to his advantage, and virtually never casts spells.
Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.Not counting, of course, 40 levels of feats and bonus feats the Fighter has used to raise both BAB and damage (and at levels above 20, Strength too).
Last I checked, there was no feat that raised your base attack bonus. Also, those feats you mention are still completely available to the very same Balor (barring epic weapon focus and epic specialization, which is only +2/+4), will probably have a higher Strength than you due to racial modifiers plus buffs (magic items or otherwise), etc.
But I digress.
I'd strongly suggest going with, as others have suggested, some form of pseudo-gestalt system for post-20 play. Expand breadth of ability, not raw power.
Or, another way to look at it: Consider E6 rules. Now just use E20 instead.
Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.Not counting, of course, 40 levels of feats and bonus feats the Fighter has used to raise both BAB and damage (and at levels above 20, Strength too).Last I checked, there was no feat that raised your base attack bonus. Also, those feats you mention are still completely available to the very same Balor (barring epic weapon focus and epic specialization, which is only +2/+4), will probably have a higher Strength than you due to racial modifiers plus buffs (magic items or otherwise), etc.
But I digress.
*shrug*
Frankly, as long as my players are enjoying the game I'm running, commentary by non-participants about how above-20th play is broken is pretty darn irrelevant :)
Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.Not counting, of course, 40 levels of feats and bonus feats the Fighter has used to raise both BAB and damage (and at levels above 20, Strength too).Last I checked, there was no feat that raised your base attack bonus. Also, those feats you mention are still completely available to the very same Balor (barring epic weapon focus and epic specialization, which is only +2/+4), will probably have a higher Strength than you due to racial modifiers plus buffs (magic items or otherwise), etc.
But I digress.
*shrug*
Frankly, as long as my players are enjoying the game I'm running, commentary by non-participants about how above-20th play is broken is pretty darn irrelevant :)
But not in a discussion about the balance issues of high level play. Otherwise, I agree. :)
I want the level 10 spell "rocks fall and everyone dies." :D
But not in a discussion about the balance issues of high level play. Otherwise, I agree. :)Let's pretend for a moment we have a 30 HD outsider. Maybe a tougher than average Balor. The Fighter using Power Attack would have a +19 to hit and a +21 to damage. The Balor would have a +22 to hit and a +24 to damage. Now if you continue to raise their levels to 40 and 40, the Fighter has a +30 BAB and the Balor a +40, and so when Power Attacking the Fighter has a -8 to hit and a +24 damage, and the Balor has a -11 to hit and a +30 to damage, which leaves the fighter at +22 to hit, and the Balor at +29 to hit.Not counting, of course, 40 levels of feats and bonus feats the Fighter has used to raise both BAB and damage (and at levels above 20, Strength too).Last I checked, there was no feat that raised your base attack bonus. Also, those feats you mention are still completely available to the very same Balor (barring epic weapon focus and epic specialization, which is only +2/+4), will probably have a higher Strength than you due to racial modifiers plus buffs (magic items or otherwise), etc.
But I digress.
*shrug*
Frankly, as long as my players are enjoying the game I'm running, commentary by non-participants about how above-20th play is broken is pretty darn irrelevant :)
But the point stands.
Statement made: High level play is borked.
Evidence to be considered: Multiple tables exist that enjoy high level play.
So either people are enjoying "broken play" (and I won't disagree that there are people who do - one man's bork is another man's feature), or the statement that high level play is broken is not as factual as those who are stating it as fact would like it to be.
Now, whether or not a player can break a table is an entirely different discussion. I'm sure that anyone who's claiming that high-level play is broken could sit at my table and break the game. But that's not unique to high-level play - that's a personal issue.
My contention is that if you have a group of players who want to play the game rather than prove some point about play being broken, then you can play the game.
This is not conjecture. We've been doing this since 2006. I'm sure if someone at the table wanted to 'game' the rules and 'prove' the game was broken, I'm sure they could break the game. But, in my opinion, that would more prove that they were a jerk than that the rules were broken.
Now, that's not to say that it's easy running a high level game. It's a tremendous amount of work. But it's doable, fun, and can continue for a long time so long as your goal is to play the game and not to prove some kind of a point.
But the point stands.
Statement made: High level play is borked.
Evidence to be considered: Multiple tables exist that enjoy high level play.
A game can be enjoyable for reasons beyond the game y'know. I mean, even if a game has mechanical troubles, people still play and enjoy the game, and improve it steadily as it grows. I mean, if this wasn't the case, there would be no edition changes.
I would like to see something to help "guide" epic level play.
When our group played using the 3.0 Epic Handbook I know the DMs had a hard time coming up with Monsters to throw at us.
Maybe a supplement could work that detailed perhaps an "EPIC" template to apply to Bestiary monsters. Like in the old 8 Bit video games... a blue slime is a walk in the park but the RED slime...uh oh Run Away!!!
I've thought about this for awhile, and I think the way I'll handle this is a modification based on the book's suggestion.
Above 20, the following rules take effect :
You can only have 20 levels in a class, but you can continue to multiclass.
BAB continues to accrue, but maxes at +20.
Saves continue to accrue, but max out at +12.
HP continue to accrue normally by class.
Skill points continue to accrue, but max ranks in any given skill is 20.
Attribute Bonuses continue to accrue, but no stat can be higher than 18 + Racial Mods + 5 (maximum normally achievable from 1 to 20). So, for example, a human might have 18 + 2 + 5 = 25 in a single stat.
This would basically allow the characters to continue to gain abilities, and hp, but the issue of scaling armor and bonuses goes away. Saves top out, etc. No need for worrying about 30th level casters. Nobody is higher than 20 level caster. Basically, everyone converts over into a slowly developing 'gestalt' type character.
I've thought about this for awhile, and I think the way I'll handle this is a modification based on the book's suggestion.
Above 20, the following rules take effect :
You can only have 20 levels in a class, but you can continue to multiclass.
BAB continues to accrue, but maxes at +20.
Saves continue to accrue, but max out at +12.
HP continue to accrue normally by class.
Skill points continue to accrue, but max ranks in any given skill is 20.
Attribute Bonuses continue to accrue, but no stat can be higher than 18 + Racial Mods + 5 (maximum normally achievable from 1 to 20). So, for example, a human might have 18 + 2 + 5 = 25 in a single stat.
This would basically allow the characters to continue to gain abilities, and hp, but the issue of scaling armor and bonuses goes away. Saves top out, etc. No need for worrying about 30th level casters. Nobody is higher than 20 level caster. Basically, everyone converts over into a slowly developing 'gestalt' type character.
A glaring problem with that is that your HP would continue to rise but offense wouldn't. If your BAB, stats, CL, and so forth cannot go higher, you still have the problem with monsters and such already going over 20 HD and still scaling, but now everyone has more and more Hp.
So what if the 40th level Fighter/Ranger can deal 300 damage with his full attack. The wizard/fighter has 700 Hp.
I actually don't see that as an issue Ashiel. The only thing you get is people are harder to kill in 2 rounds. Hmm, so the guy has to take 3 rounds to do it. Big deal.
It actually favors melee people, because their saves keep increasing, but the magic casters 'top out' on their damage and save DCs, which actually brings them closer back toward the same power level.
Basically, everyone get's harder to kill and has more options, but they plateau on the uber god scale.
I really have no problem with the existing ELH flattening of the BAB and save advancement; their logic for doing it that way was sound, and I think it works the way they expected it to.
It's other subtle things that cause issues. Save or die effects (blasphemy for example), and other absolutes such as no-save effects (Stunning Critical, for example) or auto-win/auto-fail effects (like freedom of movement).
The way I see it, a high level game has to somehow deal with absolutes. Does freedom of movement really mean that Thor can't grapple you? Does an antimagic field really stop the magic of a 30th-level wizard? Stuff like that is what needs alteration.
I think Paizo cleared up some of the trouble by doing things like specifying the stats of a wall of force, for example, and limiting the wild shape abilities of druids, but a lot of the capstone abilities of classes were clearly written thinking they'd be used little if at all, and some will need some tempering if they're going to be in use longer term.
As for the God Scale, I think that can be relative based on the campaign. James Jacobs has already stated where he sees the demon princes and demigods in Golarion. I know what the CRs are of many of the Lords of the Nine and certain other nasties. Like him, I'll probably never stat out the gods; it's not relevant for my campaign.
I really have no problem with the existing ELH flattening of the BAB and save advancement; their logic for doing it that way was sound, and I think it works the way they expected it to.
It's other subtle things that cause issues. Save or die effects (blasphemy for example), and other absolutes such as no-save effects (Stunning Critical, for example) or auto-win/auto-fail effects (like freedom of movement).
The way I see it, a high level game has to somehow deal with absolutes. Does freedom of movement really mean that Thor can't grapple you? Does an antimagic field really stop the magic of a 30th-level wizard? Stuff like that is what needs alteration.
A: Yes, freedom of movement prevents a god from grappling you unless the god has some ability negating it (probably a quickened disjunction or something).
A: Yes and No. While it technically can stop most magical effects of a 30th level wizard, a 30th level wizard can simply conjur-bomb someone inside an AMF, or use a mage's disjunction with a 30% or higher chance to negate the AMF completely. Since by this level you will probably have a few CL buffs (like ioun stones), you should actually have a bit higher than 30% to disjoin it, and can quicken disjunction as well, allowing you to attempt to break the field beforehand. However, AMF basically kills you in a high level game because it turns off all of your buffs, magic items, etc, but it doesn't stop a lot of attack forms. So relying on AMF in a high level game is essentially suicide vs any competent opponent (ESPECIALLY a wizard).
As to the save / BAB progression, I think just using the regular system works well in this sort of theater. The game is already set up so you can use a feat (which every warrior takes) to convert +Hit into +Dmg, so the issue of getting lots of +Hit isn't a big one. In short, excess can be converted into more balanced stuff. So while a 3/4 BAB class should hit regularly at high levels as well, a 1/1 BAB class should either always hit, or hit less often but for heavier damage (which is basically how PF Power Attack functions). Combat Expertise is good too.
I'm a big fan of things generally working about the same way on both sides of the screen. That's one of the things that bugged me about the ELH, is that suddenly the PCs were limited by rules that didn't affect the monsters one itty bitty bit.
A: Yes, freedom of movement prevents a god from grappling you unless the god has some ability negating it (probably a quickened disjunction or something).
Exactly. Under existing rules, a god needs a special exception to grapple a character running freedom of movement. Which is exactly my point; why should it need a special exception?
While [antimagic field] technically can stop most magical effects of a 30th level wizard, a 30th level wizard can simply conjur-bomb someone inside an AMF, or use a mage's disjunction with a 30% or higher chance to negate the AMF completely. Since by this level you will probably have a few CL buffs (like ioun stones), you should actually have a bit higher than 30% to disjoin it, and can quicken disjunction as well, allowing you to attempt to break the field beforehand. However, AMF basically kills you in a high level game because it turns off all of your buffs, magic items, etc, but it doesn't stop a lot of attack forms. So relying on AMF in a high level game is essentially suicide vs any competent opponent (ESPECIALLY a wizard).
(unless they're in the field)
Not sure what your overall point is unless you're looking to disprove every single thing I say. And since what I said is that in my opinion the current rules don't well support high level wizards vs. antimagic fields, I definitely put this one in the "arguing just to argue" category.
As to the save / BAB progression, I think just using the regular system works well in this sort of theater. The game is already set up so you can use a feat (which every warrior takes) to convert +Hit into +Dmg, so the issue of getting lots of +Hit isn't a big one. In short, excess can be converted into more balanced stuff. So while a 3/4 BAB class should hit regularly at high levels as well, a 1/1 BAB class should either always hit, or hit less often but for heavier damage (which is basically how PF Power Attack functions). Combat Expertise is good too.
For "low" high levels, yes, it works fine. When you reach the point where half the party needs a 1 to fail and the other half a 20 to save, not so much.
BAB on the other hand, sure, I could accept an argument to leave it as is, since it is a reflection of martial ability.
I'm a big fan of things generally working about the same way on both sides of the screen. That's one of the things that bugged me about the ELH, is that suddenly the PCs were limited by rules that didn't affect the monsters one itty bitty bit.
Good golly. Monsters != characters. I'm the king of "if the monsters can do it, the PCs can do it," but even I don't insist that monsters BAB from HD has to max out at +20.
It's perfectly acceptable for there to be monsters that can do things characters can't. That doesn't mean I want a 4e-style "every single ability every monster has is a unique capability," I'm just saying that not every power has to be accessible to PCs.
A: Yes, freedom of movement prevents a god from grappling you unless the god has some ability negating it (probably a quickened disjunction or something).Exactly. Under existing rules, a god needs a special exception to grapple a character running freedom of movement. Which is exactly my point; why should it need a special exception?
The entire game is built around exception-based rules. All special abilities are exceptions. For example, having Improved Grapple means you are an exception when it comes to grappling provoking attacks. Wearing an amulet of proof vs poison means you are an exception to being affected by poison, etc. Having the Grab special ability fills a similar role to Improved Grapple and provides certain exceptions.
There can also exist exceptions to exceptions. For example, undead are immune to mind-affecting effects, but there exist feats or class features which ignore this exception, essentially making an exception for your ability. This is how the game is built. Exception based design is actually brilliant because you can build a core and then proceed to expand through these exceptions which allow you to legally break the rules of the game. For example, Evasion and Improved Evasion are both mechanics that allow you to act outside of the core expectations.
Asking why a powerful being needs something to allow him to overcome your freedom of movement is like asking why can't a powerful being's poison affect a monk with poison immunity. Because currently he is immune. Now if that powerful being had an ability that made an exception to this immunity...well, here we are again! :D
That's how the game was designed. It's been noted by a few of the designers over the years. It's also how Magic the Gathering works on a rule level. Cards create exceptions to the expected rules. For example, some cards might say "You have no maximum handsize". This is an exception to the normal rule, and it is self-contained.
In many ways, it is like a computer program.
While [antimagic field] technically can stop most magical effects of a 30th level wizard, a 30th level wizard can simply conjur-bomb someone inside an AMF, or use a mage's disjunction with a 30% or higher chance to negate the AMF completely. Since by this level you will probably have a few CL buffs (like ioun stones), you should actually have a bit higher than 30% to disjoin it, and can quicken disjunction as well, allowing you to attempt to break the field beforehand. However, AMF basically kills you in a high level game because it turns off all of your buffs, magic items, etc, but it doesn't stop a lot of attack forms. So relying on AMF in a high level game is essentially suicide vs any competent opponent (ESPECIALLY a wizard).(unless they're in the field)
Not sure what your overall point is unless you're looking to disprove every single thing I say. And since what I said is that in my opinion the current rules don't well support high level wizards vs. antimagic fields, I definitely put this one in the "arguing just to argue" category.
I don't see why. You commented on these things like they were somehow a problem or like there weren't valid counters to it. I already discussed in another thread as to why antimagic field has trouble affecting any wizard in a pointy hat, but long story short, it is a very, very specific and narrow-use spell that usually has more drawbacks that pros, so allowing it to have its intended use (blocking most magic) is fine. Epic level characters, as I noted, are already capable of either ignoring it completely or removing it. The 9th level spell that a wizard would need to drop to negate an AMF would be rather trivial to a 30th level wizard (who is up to 14th level spells, I believe), assuming they didn't ignore them or just conjure-bomb them.
I've run quite a few epic level games as well, I might add. One of my favorite campaigns went into epic levels just because we just weren't finished with their adventures yet. You talk about these things like they are major problems, and when I discuss them honestly with you, you accuse me of arguing for the sake of arguing.
That's very much like someone going "X is broken", and someone saying "Well actually it is easily countered at this level by A, B, and C", and then the first commenter saying "Well you're just arguing to be arguing". It's fairly dismissive, and rather insolent.
For "low" high levels, yes, it works fine. When you reach the point where half the party needs a 1 to fail and the other half a 20 to save, not so much.
BAB on the other hand, sure, I could accept an argument to leave it as is, since it is a reflection of martial ability.
Which doesn't actually happen unless you are using the rules from the ELH. See, the epic level handbook handles spell level progression in some wonky ways, and also makes it far easier to pump your save DCs higher and higher. On average, spell save DCs in the game progress at a rate of about .75 per level, plus spell focus and other modifiers. Saving throw DCs actually slow down at higher levels (assuming the notations I've made are used) unless you specifically make new feats to re-pump saving throw DCs and such.
Meanwhile, as levels rise, you have feat that you can afford to put into your weak saves (Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Great Fortitude, Improved versions, etc). Likewise, Resistance bonuses continue to climb. Plus ability modifiers from +X magic items. Epic levels discourage glass cannons, because it makes you consider your weaknesses more.
A 40th level wizard might have an Intelligence of 20 + 10 + 5 + 13 = 48 (+19) and 18th level spells. That sets the save DC at 47 (49 with greater spell focus).
A Rogue would have a base Reflex save of +22, and a base Fortitude save of +13 (a difference of 8). Assuming he began the game at 1st with a 14 Con, he now has 14 + 5 (inherent) + 13 (magic item) = 32 (+11). So that's a +24. He then has a +13 Resistance bonus from his cloak, giving him a +37. The rogue can make the save with his poor save on a 10 (45% chance). So even at 40, which is literally 100% more levels to the game, he doesn't have a 95% chance to fail on his weak save. The rogue does indeed have a 95% chance to make his Reflex save vs the same DC, but it's a 40th level Rogue. Reflex is kind of its thing.
To put this in perspective, a 20th level wizard has a about a DC 19 + 13 (20 + 5 + 5 + 6 = 36) = 32 9th level spell. A rogue has a +6 weak save, +7 ability, +5 resistance, which means he can save on a 14 (only a 20% difference). His strong save he saves on an 8. 12 and 6 respectively if he has feats.
It balances out pretty good, I think.
My players are just now level 20. The Age or Worms campaign is designed to bring them up to 21-23rd level. Most of the players have been thinking about what they want to do.
The paladin 20 is looking at taking a level of fighter.
The ranger 5/sorcerer 4/shadow scout 5 (From Wayfinder #1)/arcane archer 6 is just going to take more arcane archer
The barbarian 20 is probably taking a level of fighter or rogue (he loves the idea of sneak attack while raging)
The inquisitor is probably going with fighter
The wizard is completely stumped
The fighter is thinking of rogue or cleric
The problem with the idea of just taking more classes is that the spell casting classes are at a bit of a loss unless you plan on continuing on. My players know they only have a few more levels and so the casters really don't know what they should do. As you can see, most are considering the fighter simply because it gives them some quick and easy benefits. There isn't any real need for them to take a casting class because the spells will be too weak.
If anyone has any ideas, I can post their builds and you can make some suggestions. I will not be bringing in the Epic Level Handbook at this point. If I do, it will just be for +6 weapons but I'm thinking of going with an artifact or two instead.
TL;DR
At this point I'm just seeing "I'm not going to agree with you no matter what you say" repeated over and over :)
*shrug*
I've run an ELH-based game for years. We've been running over level 40 for years. It can be done with 3.5e. Therefore, in my opinion, it can be done with Pathfinder too.
If the Wizard has the feats necessary or can retrain one or two, I'd suggest the Loremaster. or possibly the Pathfinder Chronicler.My players are just now level 20. The Age or Worms campaign is designed to bring them up to 21-23rd level. Most of the players have been thinking about what they want to do.
The paladin 20 is looking at taking a level of fighter.
The ranger 5/sorcerer 4/shadow scout 5 (From Wayfinder #1)/arcane archer 6 is just going to take more arcane archer
The barbarian 20 is probably taking a level of fighter or rogue (he loves the idea of sneak attack while raging)
The inquisitor is probably going with fighter
The wizard is completely stumped
The fighter is thinking of rogue or clericThe problem with the idea of just taking more classes is that the spell casting classes are at a bit of a loss unless you plan on continuing on. My players know they only have a few more levels and so the casters really don't know what they should do. As you can see, most are considering the fighter simply because it gives them some quick and easy benefits. There isn't any real need for them to take a casting class because the spells will be too weak.
If anyone has any ideas, I can post their builds and you can make some suggestions. I will not be bringing in the Epic Level Handbook at this point. If I do, it will just be for +6 weapons but I'm thinking of going with an artifact or two instead.
The problem is that his spell progression stops and he won't get the full benefit from those classes. I don't have the Pathfinder Chronicler but I'm assuming that it would increase spell casting like other prestige classes for wizards.
My players are just now level 20. The Age or Worms campaign is designed to bring them up to 21-23rd level. Most of the players have been thinking about what they want to do.
The wizard is completely stumped
Assuming you're using pseudo-gestalt rules for epic advancement, there are a number of good options.
1: take a level of sorcerer with the crossblooded archetype, picking out whichever bloodline arcanas you like the best. (I'm rather partial to the umbral bloodline (wildblooded shadow), as +1 caster level is nice, and dim lighting is easy enough to come by.)
2a: If there's a third level bloodline power you want from one of your bloodlines, progress as sorcerer until level three. (Otherwise, skip this step.)
2b: Or just start adding levels of dragon disciple; it's not going to be hugely useful, but it's fun, progresses bloodline powers, and at a minimum the natural armor won't go to waste.
3: Consider one or more of the following options:
Two levels of ranger (guide archetype, archery combat style) - this gives you some good bonuses to ranged touch attacks (Free precise shot feat plus Ranger's Focus for more hit & damage)
Depending on what epic level advancement rules you're using, it may also help shore up your weak saves. (I firmly believe that the core numbers - base attack & saves - of a wizard 20 ranger 2 should be the same as if they'd taken the ranger levels first, but not all pseudo-gestalt methods actually support this.)
One level of cleric - opens up using spell-completion items such as staves for all cleric spells. Or you could use druid instead if you prefer; its spell list isn't quite as good, but it gives you more special abilities that might come in handy.
One level of monk - wisdom bonus to AC, plus, say, deflect arrows as a bonus feat. There may be good archetype options, especially if you look at two or three levels, but I'm not actually very familiar with the available options for monks.
Two or more levels of paladin - charisma bonus to saves, plus the occasional immunity. Again, look through archetypes; there may be something shiny that I'm not aware of.
Magus has some good abilities, and should synergize fairly well with wizard. Similarly, summoner (especially, if allowed, synthesist summoner), could be useful with even just a few levels of it.
Oracle. Keep in mind that the powers you get from the oracle curse scale (at a reduced rate) with total character level.
Two or more levels of rogue; go for one of the tricks that lets you roll twice on some useful skill (diplomacy or sense motive, perhaps?); if you're usually invisible in combat, the sneak attack will also apply to ray attacks (like quickened scorching ray).
TL;DR
At this point I'm just seeing "I'm not going to agree with you no matter what you say" repeated over and over :)
*shrug*
I've run an ELH-based game for years. We've been running over level 40 for years. It can be done with 3.5e. Therefore, in my opinion, it can be done with Pathfinder too.
wow tldr that is a boneheaded response. makes one seem childish
The problem is that his spell progression stops and he won't get the full benefit from those classes. I don't have the Pathfinder Chronicler but I'm assuming that it would increase spell casting like other prestige classes for wizards.If the Wizard has the feats necessary or can retrain one or two, I'd suggest the Loremaster. or possibly the Pathfinder Chronicler.My players are just now level 20. The Age or Worms campaign is designed to bring them up to 21-23rd level. Most of the players have been thinking about what they want to do.
The wizard is completely stumped
The problem with the idea of just taking more classes is that the spell casting classes are at a bit of a loss unless you plan on continuing on. My players know they only have a few more levels and so the casters really don't know what they should do. As you can see, most are considering the fighter simply because it gives them some quick and easy benefits. There isn't any real need for them to take a casting class because the spells will be too weak.
If anyone has any ideas, I can post their builds and you can make some suggestions. I will not be bringing in the Epic Level Handbook at this point. If I do, it will just be for +6 weapons but I'm thinking of going with an artifact or two instead.
Another possibility is the Pathfinder Savant. The problem is that the first level gains no spellcasting benefits, but every level after that you get to choose a spell, any spell, and add it to your spell list.
There's a few spells out there that would be really, really nice additions to the wizard spell list.
wow tldr that is a boneheaded response. makes one seem childishTL;DR
At this point I'm just seeing "I'm not going to agree with you no matter what you say" repeated over and over :)
*shrug*
Yep, I suppose so. However, I didn't just say "TL;DR" and take my toys and go home, there was a bit more to it than that. Frankly, one gets tired of what seems to be arguing simply for the sake of arguing.
Another possibility is the Pathfinder Savant. The problem is that the first level gains no spellcasting benefits, but every level after that you get to choose a spell, any spell, and add it to your spell list.
There's a few spells out there that would be really, really nice additions to the wizard spell list.
With the exception of advancing his wizard spells/day, this is probably a perfect class for him. He already has Staff-like Wand. The scroll master would fit him very well as would adding some clerical spells to his repertoire. He has used Limited Wish and Wish to replicate several clerical spells already. Not having to use those costly spell components would make him (and the party) very happy!
Note that people who went Mystic Theurge can continue to advance their base Wizard/Cleric classes even past 20. They'll not get more spell slots (when using the modified gestalt rules) but they will up their CL (since MT adds one to the CL) which means they'd top out at CL 30 on both classes (at level 40). They'd also get all the benefits of both classes (the higher level class benefits). That's nothing to sneeze at.
Note this applies to anyone who went into a prestige class. Alternately, you can start a prestige class. For example, a wizard at 20 could take one level of Fighter and then go into Eldritch Knight. He'd then continue to gain CL's up to CL 29.
In place of Wizard spells per day for Savant you could work out a spell or two he spends the level researching and then gains that spell once he levels.