What's wrong with Epic Tier and how do we fix it?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I guess the problem I have with this issue is...

A disparity of 5 points in attack bonus versus AC should be instantly noticeable. INSTANTLY. That's the difference between hitting the typical enemy on a 7 to a 10 as my character does now, and hitting the typical enemy on a 12 to a 15.

One playtest session should indicate that this problem exists. Just one.

So I guess that leaves two possibilities.

1. The armchair math is correct, and nothing else is factoring in to mitigate or negate it. Epic tier is broken, and WOTC never noticed it, even though noticing it would be really, really easy. Apparently the epic tier was never playtested at all.

2. D&D is a complex system, and something else is being factored in. Or, a player who is skilled with his character hits more often at epic tier than the armchair math suggests. We lack testimony from such players because everyone in the conversation either hasn't played epic tier, or, created characters who started at epic level and which they either didn't create well, or didn't play well due to lack of experience with the system.

I know someone will chime in now and tell me that WOTC always screws up this stuff and I shouldn't be surprised, but seriously, I have trouble believing that something so obvious as a five point disparity could be missed. Five points on a 20 point distribution is enormous.

I think it's the powers and paragon path or epic destiny features that change a lot, and which aren't factored in.

Demigod can increase your stat. Epic Trickers grants you rerolls (you'll use them when it counts,not on your vanilla basic attack). There is a Warlord Path that grants you a +2 bonus on your attack if your previous attack mised, and another path that grants adjacent allies a straight +2 bonus to attacks (never leave the side of your Warlord!).
Damage for PCs might go up considerably, and status effect become more common. More powers have Effect or Miss clauses, your action points get you more.

I think the -5 penalty is compensated by the overall effect on all this. Maybe you sometimes hit less often, but you hit a lot harder, and have more ways to boost those attacks that count. I think that's the counter-effect. Arm-Chair math so far only focused on the "obvious" stuff - Level Bonus, Ability Increases, item enhancements, not the subtle effects.

(also not that the original assumption of this thread was that monsters are too weak!)

 

[Kraydak]

I guess the problem I have with this issue is...

A disparity of 5 points in attack bonus versus AC should be instantly noticeable. INSTANTLY. That's the difference between hitting the typical enemy on a 7 to a 10 as my character does now, and hitting the typical enemy on a 12 to a 15.

One playtest session should indicate that this problem exists. Just one.

So I guess that leaves two possibilities.

1. The armchair math is correct, and nothing else is factoring in to mitigate or negate it. Epic tier is broken, and WOTC never noticed it, even though noticing it would be really, really easy. Apparently the epic tier was never playtested at all.

2. D&D is a complex system, and something else is being factored in. Or, a player who is skilled with his character hits more often at epic tier than the armchair math suggests. We lack testimony from such players because everyone in the conversation either hasn't played epic tier, or, created characters who started at epic level and which they either didn't create well, or didn't play well due to lack of experience with the system.

I know someone will chime in now and tell me that WOTC always screws up this stuff and I shouldn't be surprised, but seriously, I have trouble believing that something so obvious as a five point disparity could be missed. Five points on a 20 point distribution is enormous.

a) The problem is real (and WotC appears to have, as per tradition, never play-tested Epic tier, witness minions/grindfest/math breakdown),

BUT

b) monster level ranges go from 1-30. This means that at lvl 1, you are fighting a lot of lvl 3 monsters. At lvl 30, you are fighting a lot of lvl 28 monsters. The NPC/PC difference *can* be made up by having the NPC/PC level spread change, and I think that this frequently happens.

 

[Fenes]

1. The armchair math is correct, and nothing else is factoring in to mitigate or negate it. Epic tier is broken, and WOTC never noticed it, even though noticing it would be really, really easy. Apparently the epic tier was never playtested at all.

I'd not say WotC always screws up, but I think the whole skill challenge debacle demonstrates that they are not very good at math and playtesting in at least one case.

 

[Mournblade94]

Okay.
Crits are not that important.
Considering your self admitted lack of knowledge about 4e, can you see how comments like these seem biased and based on nothing more than a dislike of 4e?
Since you obviously don't know alot about 4e (by own admission), why is that?

It is quite obvious the poster was not bashing the 4th edition game at all. In fact he was bashing 1st edition more. Gamers are gamers. This particular person offered a suggestion from experience.

4th edition is not your baby, there is no need to be so sensitive.

Epic Play seems to be where the problem lies for most games. Perhaps even the vaunted 4th edition cannot handle this level of play efficiently.

 

[Stalker0]

Guys, you cannot just look at the base numbers, notice that attacks are 5 worse at level 30, and conclude the math is wrong.

Epic level has far more powers, abilities, and magic items getting tossed in the mixed than at low levels. For example, encounter powers go from a small portion of the fight to the vast majority (players don't need at wills very often at higher levels).

Now i'm not saying it can't be wrong, but epic levels isn't something you can theorycraft right out of the box, it does take a playtest look at things to determine what is going on.

We should take the concerns of people who have played at the epic tier seriously, but we can't just check a few numbers and conclude it doesn't work.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Very interesting comments, you two.

I wonder what monsters would look like if they were given damage levels in keeping with the DMG guidelines for their type and level?

Vecna
Paralyzing Touch: 3d10+12...instead of 3d6+14, net +4 avg dmg
Banish to the Dread Realm: 5d10+12...instead of 2d10+9, net +19 avg dmg
Ray of Death: 2d10+12...instead of 2d8+15, net -1 avg dmg
Necrotic Web: 5d10+12...instead of 2d6+12, net +20 avg dmg

Orcus
Wand of Orcus: 4d8+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +4 avg dmg
Tail Lash: 4d8+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +4 avg dmg
Necrotic Burst: 8d10+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +30 avg dmg

Storm Titan
Roaring Greatsword: 3d8+9...instead of 2d6+11, net +4 avg dmg
Hurl Thunderbolt: 2d8+9...instead of 3d6+6, net +1 avg dmg
Howling Winds: 4d10+9...instead of 2d12+6, net +12 avg dmg

Tarrasque
Bite: 4d8+10...instead of 1d12+16, net +6 avg dmg
Fury of the Tarrasque: 5d10+9...instead of 3d12+16, net +1 avg dmg
Trample: 3d8+10...instead of 1d12+16, net +1 avg dmg

Note that while quite a few are simply +1 damage on average, they would often be far greater on a crit.

 

[Vayden]

I will say that the to-hit issue doesn't seem to be the major problem to me. I know the +5 difference really jumps out at you, but that's not what I'm seeing in play - epic characters have a lot of options that do automatic damage, and the various item/situational feats roll into it. Epic characters land their hits maybe a bit less often than paragon/heroic, but they do seem to connect most of the time (although if you use soloes higher level than the PCs, forget about it).

Where I'm really seeing the problem is with the monsters - the fights are TOO epic in length because Epic monsters are too tough, and I'm not finding them epic enough in danger because the monsters attacks aren't doing enough damage (especially with the amount of time monsters spend dazed/blind/stunned etc from getting hit with Epic level PC powers).

Upper Krust, thanks for doing that monster math - that looks fantastic, and I think that and HP reduction will go a long way towards what I'm looking for. Can't wait to test it out.

 

[Starsunder]

Vecna
Paralyzing Touch: 3d10+12...instead of 3d6+14, net +4 avg dmg
Banish to the Dread Realm: 5d10+12...instead of 2d10+9, net +19 avg dmg
Ray of Death: 2d10+12...instead of 2d8+15, net -1 avg dmg
Necrotic Web: 5d10+12...instead of 2d6+12, net +20 avg dmg

Orcus
Wand of Orcus: 4d8+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +4 avg dmg
Tail Lash: 4d8+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +4 avg dmg
Necrotic Burst: 8d10+11...instead of 2d12+12, net +30 avg dmg

Storm Titan
Roaring Greatsword: 3d8+9...instead of 2d6+11, net +4 avg dmg
Hurl Thunderbolt: 2d8+9...instead of 3d6+6, net +1 avg dmg
Howling Winds: 4d10+9...instead of 2d12+6, net +12 avg dmg

Tarrasque
Bite: 4d8+10...instead of 1d12+16, net +6 avg dmg
Fury of the Tarrasque: 5d10+9...instead of 3d12+16, net +1 avg dmg
Trample: 3d8+10...instead of 1d12+16, net +1 avg dmg

Note that while quite a few are simply +1 damage on average, they would often be far greater on a crit.

Now THIS looks much more in line with what the monsters should be doing damage wise. Orcus and Vecna in particular look positively beastly.

I wonder if perhaps someone from WotC would explain the method and/or reasoning behind gimping monster damage (not to mention clearly not following the rules set down by the DMG).

 

[Celebrim]

(also not that the original assumption of this thread was that monsters are too weak!)

Technically, that is true, but phrased as you phrase it, it obfuscates rather than clarifies.

The original assumption of the thread was that epic monsters took too long to die, and didn't do much damage while doing it. 'Didn't do much damage' was the attribute that made them 'too weak'. Having too high of an AC isn't incompatible necessarily with the idea 'taking too long to die'.

 

[Upper_Krust]

A few more epic monsters:

Yuanti Anathema
Slam: 3d6+8...instead of 2d6+7, net +4 avg dmg
Bite: 3d6+8...instead of 2d8+7, net +2 avg dmg
Trample: 3d6+8 (probably)...instead of 2d6+7, net +4 avg dmg
Horde of Snakes: 2d6+7...instead of 2d4+6, net +3 avg dmg

Fell Wyvern
Bite: 3d6+8...instead of 2d10+9, net -2 avg dmg
Claws: 3d6+8...instead of 2d6+10, net +1 avg dmg
Necrovenom Sting: 3d6+8...instead of 2d6+9, net +2 avg dmg
Pestilent Breath: 4d12+8...instead of 2d10+9, net +12 avg dmg

Dread Wraith
Dread Blade: 4d6+9...instead of 2d10+9, net +3 avg dmg
Death Shriek: 7d10+9...instead of 4d6+9, net +21 avg dmg

Swordwing
Armblade: 3d8+9...instead of 2d6+9, net +6 avg dmg

Crownwing
Armblade: 3d8+9...instead of 2d6+10, net +5 avg dmg

Voidsoul Spectre
Spectral Touch: 4d6+8...instead of 2d12+6, net +3 avg dmg
Life Siphon: 5d10+8...instead of 2d12+6, net +16 avg dmg

I may put all the proper damage figures for every epic monster on my website. I'll post a link when I have some uploaded.