Epic Levels; D&D's Other Beast

[Oversquid]

Once a party reaches 21st level and beyond, the whole game becomes a different feeling game altogether- as it should be, I mean, you've officially become the stuff of myth and legend, rather than simply a hero of sorts.

But when it comes down to it, a lot of times at Epic level, the game is more prone to falling apart mechanically, especially when you treat it like the game it was when the party was between levels 1 through 20.

So my question to you guys is, what sorts of problems do you see happening a lot at Epic Levels, be they conceptual, mechanical, or otherwise. As a bonus, feel free to give a pointer or an idea on how to remedy that problem. It doesn't have to be good, but it could start something somewhere somehow.

To get the ball rolling, I can see that once the modifiers get staggeringly high, the 1d20 dice that the whole game is centered around becomes dwarfed by the sheer size of the modifiers that come up. A possible remedy is that in the old school of thought, a +1 modifier equates to a +1 in effective level, and with 1d20 having 20 sides, so too is there a normal maximum of 20 levels. What I'm getting at is whether or not I could add an extra 1d20 die and make it 2d20, and then tone down a few modifiers to make the core dice mechanic have more of a say in the outcome rather than simply the sheer size of the modifiers?

I'm sure I'm missing lots, so feel free to say stuff. If I'm wrong, or if you have a better idea about what I said, then like always, feel free to say what you think needs saying.

 

[Raith5]

Good question.

I have to say that I am a fan of epic level play but I am not a fan of the idea that epic level play should be a completely and dramatically different 'game'. I think the design idea should be to make the transition from high level play to epic as smooth as possible, it should follow the same rules as lower level play and ramp up slowly rather than suddenly. I think the transition from paragon to epic in 4th ed is fine, but even here the adjustment in terms of some feats and at will damage increases could be seen to be dramatic.

I like the idea of making the transition to epic being as campaign dependent as possible: it should be able to support fighting /becoming a god, becoming a leader/owning a castle, on continuing on adventuring in dungeons.

The most important design thing for epic style play is to leave 'space' in terms of spells, magic items and monsters to be able to operate at epic levels. I think wish should be available at 27th level rather than 17th.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I've played in one epic campaign, and it was fun specifically because it became about big and broken things.

I do think that epic levels need to be unlocked in some form. Mere mortals simply can't become that powerful. They have to ascend to partial godhood, or consume the still beating heart of a celestial, or find a powerful artifact that awakens something within them.

Beyond that, I think a tremendous amount of thought would have to be put into the game to make epic play really work well. I would be glad to see it, but so far, nothing has quite fit the bill.

 

[pemerton]

I can see that once the modifiers get staggeringly high, the 1d20 dice that the whole game is centered around becomes dwarfed by the sheer size of the modifiers that come up.

The issue here isn't the size of the modifiers, but the difference between the modifiers and the target numbers. For instance, in 4e the d20 doesn't become irrelevent (at least, not typically) because of the way defences, skill DCs etc scale.

I don't have enough familiarity with 3E to know how it compares in this respect.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I do think that epic levels need to be unlocked in some form. Mere mortals simply can't become that powerful. They have to ascend to partial godhood, or consume the still beating heart of a celestial, or find a powerful artifact that awakens something within them.

I did this in my 3.5 campaign. Each god sponsored a mortal, and there was a tournament (half martial contestants in their own tournament, half magical contestants in their own tournament, and one god sitting out). There were 16 contestants (4 players, 12 NPCs), and thus 3 rounds of matches in each tournament.

Each match was done through an Astral Projection artifact (after the match, you weren't missing any spell slots, either). If you won your second match, you got a Wish for free before entering the third round. If you won the third round, you broke that mortal barrier (epic level), and the god who sponsored you gained more influence for the next year.

None of my players won in their division, and thus none advanced. However, they got the alternate route: go and kill one Great Wyrm Dragon of each color of either Good or Evil (their gods got to choose). So, they went out and killed one Great Wyrm evil dragon of each color (didn't get to keep most of their stuff due to the rules), and this let them advance past the mortal tier. Even then, they found that they could only transcend being a mortal off of the Material Plane, or only in a smallish space on the Material Plane (the king PC chose his castle, as did his archmage [another PC], while the Cleric of Pelor chose his church).

I found this to engage the players very well, and I'm certainly glad I did this over "you hit level 21" with little explanation as to why they experienced such a big jump. So, yes, I agree with you on this, even if it's different from campaign to campaign. In general, I think having to bypass the bump in some way might help most campaigns (obviously not all of them). As always, play what you like

 

[Oversquid]

The issue here isn't the size of the modifiers, but the difference between the modifiers and the target numbers. For instance, in 4e the d20 doesn't become irrelevent (at least, not typically) because of the way defences, skill DCs etc scale.

I don't have enough familiarity with 3E to know how it compares in this respect.

At the first few levels, one d20 did just fine, but in time, you get some hefty DCs, like an Escape Artist check at a DC of 80 allows you to fit your head into a space thats way smaller than it for example, and one 1d20 will have to mave a modifier of at least 50 for it to be reasonable to do.

Of course I can change some of the math, but as written, 50 dwarfs 1d20 by a longshot in my humble opinion.

I don't know much about 4th Edition, but I think they scaled the Epic parts pretty well from what I hear.

 

[Raith5]

I don't know much about 4th Edition, but I think they scaled the Epic parts pretty well from what I hear.

I am playing a 21st level character in a 4th ed campaign and I have to say that while it is early days it seems to work well.

One thing I find really interesting in 4th ed high paragon and epic level play is that the magic using PCs in my party are not ridiculously powerful (not to say that in some situations they couldnt be!). I cant make a direct or clear contrast with previous editions but in my previous 3rd ed campaign the wizard and druid in that party were powerful in encounter wrecking ways at about 12th or so. So I guess one thing about epic play is thinking about the power and impact of magic

 

[delericho]

The issue here isn't the size of the modifiers, but the difference between the modifiers and the target numbers.

That, and the difference between the modifiers of a character who is 'good' at something vs one who is 'poor' at that thing. The "Epic Level Handbook" spends quite a lot of time discussing it, but the big takeaway is that it's quite easy to have one character who can save on a '2' and another who needs a '20'.

That said, there is a 'sweet spot' where it feels like the die and the modifiers are in balance. At very low levels, because modifiers are so small, the d20 is a much bigger contributor to your final score; at very high levels, the d20 is a relatively small component of the whole, with the modifier being the thing. Either way, the chance for success is ideally about 70%, but it feels better if the die and the modifier are contributing about equally to the result.

 

[PureGoldx58]

I am playing a 21st level character in a 4th ed campaign and I have to say that while it is early days it seems to work well.

One thing I find really interesting in 4th ed high paragon and epic level play is that the magic using PCs in my party are not ridiculously powerful (not to say that in some situations they couldnt be!). I cant make a direct or clear contrast with previous editions but in my previous 3rd ed campaign the wizard and druid in that party were powerful in encounter wrecking ways at about 12th or so. So I guess one thing about epic play is thinking about the power and impact of magic

That really has more to say about 4th edition than Epic Level transition.


The power of Epic Level play is supposed to be insanely high, you are basically living legends times a thousand. Hercules post-godhood. It depends on your setting the most and the only thing I know for certain is martial characters will generally be disappointed in an Epic Level campaign. Some of the ACs and DCs are insane.

 

[delericho]

In addition to the above, the biggest issue I would expect with Epic play is simply the sheer weight of the system. Indeed, that's one reason why I simply don't play 3e above the mid-teens any more - as the game goes on, the number of options available to characters increases exponentially, the game slows down, and it becomes more trouble than it's worth.

But YMMV, of course.