Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
An Idea For Epic Level
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5944025" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>There are many different arrangements of the tiers that could be made. The one you suggest wouldn't be my preferred arrangement, but there's nothing particularly wrong with it.</p><p></p><p>However, I don't think the problem with Epic play in 3e and 4e was to do with them not having the right arrangement of the tiers. IMO there were two issues, one with game design, and one with support.</p><p></p><p>In both 3e and 4e, the complexity of the game increased with level, and never really stopped. (In 3e, this manifested as the game becoming extremely mathematically complex. In 4e, it was more an issue of juggling huge numbers of options. IMO, 4e had the edge here, though I wasn't a fan of either.) As far as I can tell, this was largely a matter of the designers making sure they got the game 'right' at the early levels for release (since that's what people would play), but deferring the later stuff... only to find there were insurmountable problems tucked away in the design. (Needless to say, I was more than a little disconcerted when WotC said they were doing the same again with 5e - that will almost certainly lead to the same problems.)</p><p></p><p>Because of the complexity of the systems at these levels, there was a greater need for support. However, there were also fewer people playing, meaning that WotC couldn't justify providing that support. This, in turn, turned people off playing at those levels, further reducing the incentive to support those levels...</p><p></p><p>That leads me to one of two conclusions:</p><p></p><p>1) WotC should design the game only to cover those initial 10-15 levels that people actually play in numbers, and that they themselves can reasonably support.</p><p></p><p><strong>Or...</strong></p><p></p><p>2) WotC should work really hard to make sure that the game does not become inherently more complex as it goes up in level (or, at least, no more than it <em>absolutely</em> has to). This will mitigate the need for support, that they cannot guarantee to provide. If this then leads to more people playing high levels, this will justify them providing support, and at that time they can consider introducing more complex Epic modules. But they should work from an initial assumption that they're <em>not</em> going to be able to support it, and so build the game to work without.</p><p></p><p>IMO, of course.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5944025, member: 22424"] There are many different arrangements of the tiers that could be made. The one you suggest wouldn't be my preferred arrangement, but there's nothing particularly wrong with it. However, I don't think the problem with Epic play in 3e and 4e was to do with them not having the right arrangement of the tiers. IMO there were two issues, one with game design, and one with support. In both 3e and 4e, the complexity of the game increased with level, and never really stopped. (In 3e, this manifested as the game becoming extremely mathematically complex. In 4e, it was more an issue of juggling huge numbers of options. IMO, 4e had the edge here, though I wasn't a fan of either.) As far as I can tell, this was largely a matter of the designers making sure they got the game 'right' at the early levels for release (since that's what people would play), but deferring the later stuff... only to find there were insurmountable problems tucked away in the design. (Needless to say, I was more than a little disconcerted when WotC said they were doing the same again with 5e - that will almost certainly lead to the same problems.) Because of the complexity of the systems at these levels, there was a greater need for support. However, there were also fewer people playing, meaning that WotC couldn't justify providing that support. This, in turn, turned people off playing at those levels, further reducing the incentive to support those levels... That leads me to one of two conclusions: 1) WotC should design the game only to cover those initial 10-15 levels that people actually play in numbers, and that they themselves can reasonably support. [b]Or...[/b] 2) WotC should work really hard to make sure that the game does not become inherently more complex as it goes up in level (or, at least, no more than it [i]absolutely[/i] has to). This will mitigate the need for support, that they cannot guarantee to provide. If this then leads to more people playing high levels, this will justify them providing support, and at that time they can consider introducing more complex Epic modules. But they should work from an initial assumption that they're [i]not[/i] going to be able to support it, and so build the game to work without. IMO, of course. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
An Idea For Epic Level
Top