| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hear me out.
I'll be the first to tell you, Mythic is broken, no one uses it, and it piles more complication onto a game that is already overly complicated at high level. But there are two very good reasons to incorporate something resembling Mythic into the mid-to-high-level progression (say, level 7 and above) of the base game. The first is it'll help close the gap between casters and non-casters, by letting non-casters be unabashedly superhuman in a genre famous for enforcing realism selectively.
The second is that, as I see it, the quality of high-level play is what will make or break PF2. 3rd edition D&D, including PF1, already works mostly well at the low levels. If high-level gameplay doesn't meaningfully improve, there's little reason for fans of older editions to switch. High levels are where things go pear-shaped, as casters start to run away with the game, and crunch overload makes the game increasingly cumbersome to play (let alone run). This is why PFS ends at level 12, most APs end at level 15-17, E6 is a very popular set of houserules, and—most importantly to this argument—5e's solution was to stretch the low-level experience across all 20 levels. PF2 can differentiate itself from its predecessor, from 5e, and from the large number of other fantasy RPGs out there, by making the high levels both playable (streamlined and well-balanced) and by making them feel like high levels whether you're playing a spellcaster or not—in other words to keep the power ceiling high for everyone, not just casters. A tall order, but well worth it.
A major obstacle will be, as I mentioned, the additional complication that Mythic adds to the system. But I think this can be partially alleviated by making a slimmed-down version of Mythic part of the universal progression rather than being a parallel system bolted on to the core. For example, the abilities could run on existing class resources (Stamina, Ki Points, etc) rather than an additional pool of Mythic Power. Character levels are an easy substitute for Mythic Tiers. Many fiddly little abilities of marginal usefulness that exist only to fill in dead levels (see Monk), could be outright replaced by Mythic progression—though I do believe it should remain part of universal progression rather than having (for example) Champion path abilities parcelled out among Fighter, Barbarian, etc. Combined with an overall streamlining of the base game's rules for 2e, adding pared-down and more thoroughly edited/tested Mythic mechanics to the game at high levels need not make the game overly complex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mythic was always the replacement for Epic to me, in that it did basically the same thing but wasn't forced upon >20th level characters.
We may potentially see something akin to this in the core book, but definitely not as robust.
In fact, the classes themselves all seem to be based on the mythic system in that you get a base chassis but all your class features seem to be modular in class feat selection.
I couldn't disagree with you more about high level needing to be important to the success of PF2. I think Mythic should remain an optional bolt on produced after launch. /not signed
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like "doing a 2nd edition set of the Mythic rules" is fine. But it feels like this is a tricky thing to balance so I'd prefer it wait until later so that they can devote their full attention to it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mythic is no longer Mythic if it's part of standard progression. The whole concept is about being something beyond just even high-level adventurers.
I really like the idea of the mythic rules, I'd love to see a better-balanced 2e version, I'd even very much like just an update to 1e Mythic. But it should be a subsystem, not just "you're mythic at level 10" or whatever. Same way I don't want every other campaign to be mythic. To quote Syndrome of The Incredibles, if everyone's special, no one will be. And that's not what I want done with 2e Mythic.
Mythic is no longer Mythic if it's part of standard progression. The whole concept is about being something beyond just even high-level adventurers.
I really like the idea of the mythic rules, I'd love to see a better-balanced 2e version, I'd even very much like just an update to 1e Mythic. But it should be a subsystem, not just "you're mythic at level 10" or whatever. Same way I don't want every other campaign to be mythic. To quote Syndrome of The Incredibles, if everyone's special, no one will be. And that's not what I want done with 2e Mythic.
High level characters are special by dint of being high level characters, and they remain special because not everything is a high level character/creature. And currently some are more special than others.
Yeah, they're amping up skills and martial character's abilities to the extent that they would need a complete redo of mythic.
Hero points are also part of our core play test, seems akin to mythic.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds great, let's take away 7th through 9th level spells.Mythic is no longer Mythic if it's part of standard progression. The whole concept is about being something beyond just even high-level adventurers.
I really like the idea of the mythic rules, I'd love to see a better-balanced 2e version, I'd even very much like just an update to 1e Mythic. But it should be a subsystem, not just "you're mythic at level 10" or whatever. Same way I don't want every other campaign to be mythic. To quote Syndrome of The Incredibles, if everyone's special, no one will be. And that's not what I want done with 2e Mythic.
I'm fine with that too, there's a reason I prefer 6-level casters. Nice attempt to twist my point, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hear me out.
Sure thing
I'll be the first to tell you, Mythic is broken, no one uses it ...
Danger, Will Robinson.
... and it piles more complication onto a game that is already overly complicated at high level.
Yep. The game gets complicated at high levels. Turns out that happened with epic, or even pre-epic, and with Pathfinder high-level (say 10+) even without mythic. Not quite sure how that's avoidable or if it's even desirable to avoid it.
But there are two very good reasons to incorporate something resembling Mythic into the mid-to-high-level progression (say, level 7 and above) of the base game. The first is it'll help close the gap between casters and non-casters, by letting non-casters be unabashedly superhuman in a genre famous for enforcing realism selectively.
Ah, everyone's favorite whipping boy, caster/martial disparity. Having run very high level games for very many years, let me say while it does have relevance, it's also not really that big of a deal, especially in Pathfinder. In our epic game, we had a wizard who could drop repeating split twinned maximized disintegrates and it was still the fighter who tended to take many opponents out. In the current game, the fighter tends to one-shot many opponents and the others basically keep him standing and aim him. And keep the cleric alive.
The second is that, as I see it, the quality of high-level play is what will make or break PF2. 3rd edition D&D, including PF1, already works mostly well at the low levels. If high-level gameplay doesn't meaningfully improve, there's little reason for fans of older editions to switch.
A reasonable argument but a strawman. With Paizo retiring 1E, people effectively have three choices: stay with 1E (and no new material other than what 3PP may put out), switch systems (likely to 5E) or switch systems to 2E. People will not be making this decision based on the effectiveness of high-level play.
High levels are where things go pear-shaped, as casters start to run away with the game, and crunch overload makes the game increasingly cumbersome to play (let alone run). This is why PFS ends at level 12, most APs end at level 15-17, E6 is a very popular set of houserules, and—most importantly to this argument—5e's solution was to stretch the low-level experience across all 20 levels.
Nope, can't let this one slide. Sure there's more work involved in playing and running a level 20/mythic 10 game than running a level 5 game. How could it not be so? If it were the same, why bother? However, the richness of the options and the utter madness of the possibilities both for the GM and characters makes it more than worthwhile. Believe me, I know what kind of work it takes to run these things. That's what I do. But you're misinformed if you think that Mythic was any easier than Epic, and if you think there's some magic bullet that will have Pathfinder 2E make 25th-level play "easy" you're living in a pipe dream. High level play will never be easy, and it shouldn't be. High level play is the reward for learning enough of the game through low-level play to actually participate.
In my opinion (and it's just that), 4E came the closest to making high-level play simple, and you know what? It was dull. Boring. There was nothing to distinguish high-level play from low-level play other than scale. Sure, it was easier to run, but there was nothing that made me want to. For all it was touted to be, Mythic has made high-power play even more complicated than epic becuase it's an all new bag of rules on the side, but so what? It's high-power, high-level play so my table is okay with that.
PF2 can differentiate itself from its predecessor, from 5e, and from the large number of other fantasy RPGs out there, by making the high levels both playable (streamlined and well-balanced) and by making them feel like high levels whether you're playing a spellcaster or not—in other words to keep the power ceiling high for everyone, not just casters. A tall order, but well worth it.
I don't recall the 45th level fighter feeling like he was running into a ceiling, and I suspect the figher 30/mythic 15 that will be the equivalent will be in the same boat once we get there (probably in 2019). I'll check back in. Remember, the fighter and wizard and everyone else are part of a team and they're working together ... they're not (usually) fighting each other and having complementary strengths and weaknesses is useful.
A major obstacle will be, as I mentioned, the additional complication that Mythic adds to the system. But I think this can be partially alleviated by making a slimmed-down version of Mythic part of the universal progression rather than being a parallel system bolted on to the core. For example, the abilities could run on existing class resources (Stamina, Ki Points, etc) rather than an additional pool of Mythic Power. Character levels are an easy substitute for Mythic Tiers. Many fiddly little abilities of marginal usefulness that exist only to fill in dead levels (see Monk), could be outright replaced by Mythic progression—though I do believe it should remain part of universal progression rather than having (for example) Champion path abilities parcelled out among Fighter, Barbarian, etc. Combined with an overall streamlining of the base game's rules for 2e, adding pared-down and more thoroughly edited/tested Mythic mechanics to the game at high levels need not make the game overly complex.
Hey! I've seen that! It's called the Epic Level Handbook and we loved it!
Now, one of the goals of mythic was to allow low-level characters to have mythic power, but in practice I think that just complicated things and having a single progression as opposed to an orthagonal progression is actually simpler.
Anyways, just some observations from having done this stuff for years. Like, literally - we started running an epic campaing in 2006 and that's pretty much what I've run every since. Going a little slower with the current campaigns - one is level 15/mythic 9 while the other is level 16/mythic 1, so we're still low on the power curve (from my point of view), but we'll get there. And if anyone thinks I'm stopping at level 20 or mythic 10 they're deluded :)
I love Mythic, and I hope it gets included.
As an Orthogonal advancement system it helped to stop Quadratic Wizards.
It did suffer from certain options being way too dangerous in concert with other options.
I loved the way it "broke the rules" in its powers on occasion, when it did so in a fair way. Giving an extra action, for example, was enormous. This was part of the "in concert with" issue though.
Yes it should be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stuff.
Thank you for posting that so I don't have to.
I wouldn't mind mythic being in PF2nd, but not as part of the CRB. I've found Mythic really useful to round out my BBEGs and give them a little more punch. So in my games, mythic is in the game, but not accessible to players (anymore, we had a mythic campaign and that was so busted).
After reading through the blog post on skills, Legendary proficiency seems to have a little bit of the mythic feel already baked in (a person who's got a Legendary proficiency in Athletics jumping 20ft straight into the air to smash a chimera was one of the examples), it'll be interesting to see more.
After reading through the blog post on skills, Legendary proficiency seems to have a little bit of the mythic feel already baked in (a person who's got a Legendary proficiency in Athletics jumping 20ft straight into the air to smash a chimera was one of the examples), it'll be interesting to see more.
Not quite. That's probably under Master, not Legendary, meaning it's available as soon as 7th.