Heroic/Paragon/Epic

[Grimstaff]

How do you feel about these deliniations? It seems like 4E will keep these three game "levels" pretty strictly in their place. To me it seems a pretty handy tool. If I'm in a low-fantasy, gritty mood, I can base my campaign strictly off "heroic"-level concepts and limits, basically "capping" my game at 10th level (I'm assuming this would be roughly equivalent to the power level reached in the much-lauded E6 variant of 3.5E). Or maybe I want to start a campaign at Epic level, having each of the players write up a detailed background sketch of how their characters got to be so Uber-powerful before I go and throw them in the Abyss for a devil-hunting crawl.

Giving D&D these three clear phases seems like it will be a great campaign-design tool for DMs (I hope it works out that way...)

Thoughts/Opinions/Vitriol?

 

[RandomCitizenX]

I definately think that the three groupings of levels has great potential to help define the style of game the DM is interested in. One thing that I am wondering about is how much high Heroic is going to differ from low Paragon. Will it feel like you have crossed over some magic speed bump of power, or will it feel more organic? No way to know for sure until the books are in hand.

 

[Emirikol]

I definately think that the three groupings of levels has great potential to help define the style of game the DM is interested in. One thing that I am wondering about is how much high Heroic is going to differ from low Paragon. Will it feel like you have crossed over some magic speed bump of power, or will it feel more organic? No way to know for sure until the books are in hand.

I dont' think it's going to be much different from those famous terms: BASIC, EXPERT, COMPANION, MASTER. Ah, the good old days..when levels were detailed up to 36th and you didn't have to deal with halflings past 8th..sigh..memories... Wait, I forgot the IMMORTAL LEVEL RULES!: http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/highdd.html

Along those same lines, I think those names mean very little. Players are still going to refer to levels..and most DM's are still going to quit at about 15the level..about the time even this edition will break back down into a series of number crunching nightmares... There will be the usual terminology then: Heroic, Number Crunching levels, and Number Crunching Nightmare Levels. (humor emphasized)

jh

 

[RandomCitizenX]

Sadly those rules predate me, since I started around the time of players option (although I think I was a little earlier). The only reason I am concerned by the possible jump in power between catagories is the feats which were previewed had the tier has a prereq. As long as they avoid what would basically ammount to Plateaus of power I think it will work beautifully.

 

[Wanderer20]

In my most humble opinion, they can name the levels how they want, if the system works.

Seeing how 3.x had troubles managing beyond 5th-6th (they even mentioned "D&D was created for levels 1-5 in a dungeon"), and the announced changes only destroy the fluff and worsen the crunch, names and titles should not the first priority.

 

[Emirikol]

In my most humble opinion, they can name the levels how they want, if the system works. Seeing how 3.x had troubles managing beyond 5th-6th (they even mentioned "D&D was created for levels 1-5 in a dungeon"), and the announced changes only destroy the fluff and worsen the crunch, names and titles should not the first priority.

Naming them at all seems kind of like the level names of 1EAD&D. I think they should have MORE names than just the three..and perhaps there will be..but only as a 4th party supplement.

jh

 

[Remathilis]

Good point, but I think WotC is acknowledging more DMs knew for years: D&D changes tone, feel and setting when you reach high (10+) and epic (20+) levels. At high level, adventures become more about saving the world, plane hopping, and huge epic combats more so than long dungeons. At epic, it becomes the Justice League.

By breaking the games into those tiers, they can better prepare for and signal those gameplay changes.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Naming them at all seems kind of like the level names of 1EAD&D. I think they should have MORE names than just the three..and perhaps there will be..but only as a 4th party supplement.

jh

I think for the purpose it exists in the game, the 3 names are the right number.

Their purpose seems to be to make clear what kind of game you should expect. There are certain types of adventures that will fit best in a specific tier.
Such tiers didn't exist in name in 3rd edition, but they existed in spirit, even if not clear-cut and certainly not in the "10 levels each"-division.

There basically was a "Prestige" tier at 6th level upwards, where you were finally able to qualify for prestige classes or really managed to fulfill your character concept (if it required a lot of multiclassing, at least). If the PrCs were associated with an organization (which in practice didn't seem to be enforced much, though) the characters became a part of something greater - having chosen sides and their purpose in the world. Leadership became available at the same level, meaning you also carved out your place in the world (at least if you actually took it. )

Another tier was implied by the kinds of spells that were available. At 9th level, Wizards got Teleport - the game was no longer about long travels, and it began to span the whole world, not just the local area.
Once Discern Lies, Divinations and Zone of Truth appears, certain adventures (mysteries) became a bit more difficult to manage (though they might also get enriched by some of them, if taking into account)
Plane Shift indicates another tier, the point where characters leave the mortal world and might change (or have to fight to preserve) the world, interacting with demons, devils and possibly deities.

Epic Levels were a tier that was consciously added into the game (it was a very "mechanical" break, because it changed how classes advanced, mostly probably because the system broke down in several areas. It might actually have broken down earlier...)

 

[Particle_Man]

The tier system reminds me of Savage Worlds. In SW there are certain edges you cannot take until you have reached a certain "Rank" like Heroic, Legendary, etc. Here the requirement of a tier to get access to certain goodies like feats seems similar.

I think it could work, though in both cases it does add a bit of complexity (but it would be easy to get a sort of index of "these are the feats available for beginning characters, these are the feats available for heroic characters, etc." so not too bad.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Good point, but I think WotC is acknowledging more DMs knew for years: D&D changes tone, feel and setting when you reach high (10+) and epic (20+) levels. At high level, adventures become more about saving the world, plane hopping, and huge epic combats more so than long dungeons. At epic, it becomes the Justice League.

By breaking the games into those tiers, they can better prepare for and signal those gameplay changes.

This is what I think too. If there's a formal break, not only can they prep DMs with better-targeted advice, but they also have a hard break for when to insert certain problematic rules. It would not surprise me if all the truly crazy game-breaking effects (time stop, gate, etc.) get shoved into the epic tier with a clear warning label on how/whether to use in your game.

In addition, it is *possible* (though IMO, unlikely, since they don't appear to have segmented the core books this way) that complexity will be dependent on tier in the same manner as it was in the B/E/C/M/I rules. One could simply keep certain rules options (followers, domain building, etc.) reserved for the paragon tier, and others (creating demiplanes, meeting gods, etc.) for the epic tier. Probably not going to happen, though.