Pros and Cons of Epic Level Play?

[malovec]

Epic Level play has become some what of a forgotten aspect of many games which is a shame.


What are the reasons?


Almost everything that previously was 3.5 D&D seems to have translated well enough, but Epic Level play is still left behind well into pathfinder.


Is there anything good that can be salvaged from it?


Would it be best to have a brand new system to build from?

So, what say you pathfinder/d&d folks .

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Epic Level play has become some what of a forgotten aspect of many games which is a shame.


What are the reasons?


Almost everything that previously was 3.5 D&D seems to have translated well enough, but Epic Level play is still left behind well into pathfinder.


Is there anything good that can be salvaged from it?


Would it be best to have a brand new system to build from?

So, what say you pathfinder/d&d folks .

It's less playtested.

Game balance tends to fall apart as you gain levels.

It's just harder to write adventures. Epic adventures tend to go planar, but frankly most of the planes aren't that interesting. Many only have one serious threat or complication. Epic PCs can cast spells such as Planar Adaptation and just wander the Elemental Plane of Fire.

 

[innerdude]

It's pretty simple:

Too much work for GMs, for little real payoff in terms of player enjoyment and overall "impact."

When your 14th-level fighter of legendary proportions has already saved entire empires, possibly the world, is it really that much more "epic" to travel to some distant "plane of existence" to square off against some ridiculously-statted "god" NPC? To what purpose? To get in a cosmic pissing contest to prove that your character is truly more "godlike" than an actual god?

Epic play is ridiculously taxing to prep for as a GM, at least for D&D. It adds very little real dramatic tension as a player--most of the time, it's players poring over epic spells and feats, trying to eke out another 100 damage on that "epic sword attack."

I'm a #1, Type-A-Positive example of someone who thinks "epic" play is an absolute, utter waste of time. It has never, ever, ever, in 30 years of playing RPGs, held any interest for me, as either a GM or player.

In my opinion, D&D throughout its entire existence would be a better system if Gygax had just stopped levels at 15, permanently, forever, no exceptions.

 

[the Jester]

Epic Level play has become some what of a forgotten aspect of many games which is a shame.


What are the reasons?


Almost everything that previously was 3.5 D&D seems to have translated well enough, but Epic Level play is still left behind well into pathfinder.

4e has epic play as a core part of the game, although the epic tier was somewhat neglected compared to the other two. Nonetheless, a couple of pcs imc just hit 25th level last night after laying an ambush for and killing the Grandmother of Assassins (THE head assassin in my campaign).

They called in a god and a prospective arch-devil to do so.

So epic play's still around, depending on the system you're playing. However, by its very nature, it's much easier for epic play to get all whack out of balance, and when the game is about being one of the world's top dogs (instead of an up-and-comer) the very nature of play changes. I suspect not everyone is into it.

 

[Ahnehnois]

3e epic does some things right and others wrong. At its best, epic play creates a sense of larger-than-life superheroes. At its worst, it becomes bogged down in bookkeeping.

Mechanically, 3e epic looks a lot like 4e, and they both go wrong at the same places (namely, the endless lists of relatively insignificant limited-use powers and the +1/2 level bonus to saves and attacks for everyone).

A few really good things that 3e epic rules have:
*Epic spellcasting: a rough system, but one that encourages creativity.
*Some of the other wacky things you can do with epic skills.
*Advancement primarily by bonus feats.
*Most of the epic feats are good.
*Really cool monsters.
*A fair amount of the magic item rules.

 

[Raith5]

It's pretty simple:

Too much work for GMs, for little real payoff in terms of player enjoyment and overall "impact." ...

In my opinion, D&D throughout its entire existence would be a better system if Gygax had just stopped levels at 15, permanently, forever, no exceptions.

I like epic gaming and high fantasy. I think some editions were no designed with epic play in mind at all. I think 4th ed made a very good fist of it and I had fun epic play in AD&D - even though the math of saves did not seem to work from memory.

I think the central problem has been getting 1) the maths right and 2) the storytelling right putting too much onus on the GM. I think 4th ed "shows the way" on both these fronts. The maths works OK (and bounded accuracy of DDN may be even better) and the mechanics of powers, rituals give a lot of tools (and responsibility) for players to advance the play rather than resting wholly upon the DM. The only real problem here was a overload of powers and feats that create an overload of options that can slow down play even more than normal 3rd and 4th ed play.

So I am glad that some editions (especially BECMI and 4th ed) have pushed the game in high fantasy directions but I do understand why some would not like to see it in the game.

 

[MarkB]

I'm playing in an Epic-tier campaign in 4e and enjoying it. That said, the trouble with 4e Epic play is that it just doesn't tend to feel very, well, epic. Since the opposition's numbers scale with those of the PCs, and since there aren't much in the way of fundamental game-changing elements introduced at Epic tier, you're basically just doing exactly what you were doing at Paragon tier, except adding larger numbers to your dice rolls and changing the names of the opposition.

It's a way of making it accessible, but it doesn't really give Epic-tier play any real identity.

 

[N'raac]

MarkB's comment is very accurate - do characters really feel epic (in other genres, SuperPowerful) when their opposition's power increases in lockstep with their own?

 

[Raith5]

MarkB's comment is very accurate - do characters really feel epic (in other genres, SuperPowerful) when their opposition's power increases in lockstep with their own?

I dont think the higher numbers are what make epic play. The epic...ness has to be within the story - most significantly the scale and stakes/consequences of the story.

That said one of the defining aspects of epic play in 4th ed is also the PCs ability to avoid conditions (including death!) and more readily imposing conditions on the enemy.

 

[Ahnehnois]

MarkB's comment is very accurate - do characters really feel epic (in other genres, SuperPowerful) when their opposition's power increases in lockstep with their own?

I think the answer is yes, to a significant extent. When characters are trading back and forth in powerful spells and ludicrous combat numbers, it feels rather impressive to an experienced gamer. It also makes it seem more consequential if the loser of the battle is powerful. Killing a bunch of kobolds is meaningless, but if your vanquished foe is a dracolich with a thousand-year history, it matters more. It's also possible that bystanders could get caught up in your business, which could be very lethal for them with all those higher numbers.

If your foes are now easily defeated, it doesn't feel very epic at all. If anything, I think epic gaming is a license for the DM to throw the kitchen sink at the PCs.

Now, if your foes are just as generic as they were at level 1, then no, the higher numbers don't matter (the endless waves of epic drow warriors in NWN: Hordes of the Underdark come to mind).