D&D General BECMI - okay how do you Immortal?

[Lyxen]

In 5e, the "mid-levels", tier 9-12, play so differently from both 5-8 and 13-16.

My impression of BECMI is, as @cbwjm notes, there are virtually two tiers of Immortal: the game of manipulating the world and the tier where they interact with each other.

There is a gradation of Immortals, but the game was mostly intended to play the lower ranks anyway (although the rules are for all ranks), and it's about interacting with other immortals, directly or through manipulating the world, which changes from Master, where you are being the influenced one.

 

[Yaarel]

There is a gradation of Immortals, but the game was mostly intended to play the lower ranks anyway.

The more playable lower rank of Immortal makes tier 17-20 a good fit.

For the upper rank 5e epic boons are great, for nonclass tier 21-20.

The boons are all over the place balancewise, so the DM needs to doublecheck each one before granting it to a player character.

 

[Parmandur]

The more playable lower rank of Immortal makes tier 17-20 a good fit.

For the upper rank 5e epic boons are great, for nonclass tier 21-20.

The boons are all over the place balancewise, so the DM needs to doublecheck each one before granting it to a player character.

No, not really: the capabilities of Level 17-20 PCs in 5E more resemble Master characters: although the official "conversion from previous Editions" document for 5E would set any character over 20 in BECMI as a Level 20 5E PC, so that would mean the event horizon of power level is in Companion, not even Master.

 

[Lyxen]

The more playable lower rank of Immortal makes tier 17-20 a good fit.

The problem is that the powers that you get at these levels have nothing to do with the powers of an immortal or demi-god.

For the upper rank 5e epic boons are great, for nonclass tier 21-20.

Again, it's not a question of power, epic boons are fine but fairly mundane.

The boons are all over the place balancewise, so the DM needs to doublecheck each one before granting it to a player character.

Of course, but for me it's a really different topic. Playing an immortal is not about D&D combat power...

 

[Parmandur]

Honestly, thinking about it, one may as well get the I rules from the DMsGuild and run them as-is for PCs who feel done after 20: the rules are as compatible with 5E as they are with BECM, that is, it's a different game.

 

[dave2008]

I'm working on a 5e conversion of the Immortals Rules from BECMI. Though I am straying pretty far from base 5e (similar to how Immortals strayed pretty far from BECM). It is a work in progress:

ASCENSION, The Codex of Exalted, Book 1: Player's Guide
ASCENSION, The Codex of Exalted, Book 2: GM's Guide
ASCENSION, The Codex of Exalted, Book 3: Friends and Foes

 

[jgsugden]

Basic rules really only covered a short span, levels 1 to 3, but actually more like levels 1 to 2 if 5E is used as a benchmark as 5E characters have a lot more abilities. The feel of a 3rd level basic PC ismore like the feel of a 2nd level 5E PC. They were very easy to kill with a couple 'good' DM rolls or one big mistake by the PCs. And given the lack of strategydiscussion in that era - PCs made a lot of things we'd call mistakes today.

Expert took spellcasters through 6th level wizard spells, which is more like level 12 in 5E. One could argue the lack of special abilities may equate to a lower level of PC, but wizards, specifically, had a lot more spell slots, longer durations and no concentration mechanic, so they were a lot more powerful. Most players with fond memories of these days are speaking primarily of their experience with expert rules.

Companion (not Champion) Rules took PCs up to the equivalent of 20th level PCs in 5E, but the magic users, specifically, peaked with a lot more power than a 5E wizard due to the amazing number of spell slots and ability to stack spells. My high level PCs from my Companion days used magic to scout before battle, walked in with a dozen spells up on the party, and were my first examples of effective and powerful PCs.

Master and Immortal do not equate to 5E, at all, as they took PCs to power levels that exceed what we see in 5E. 9 spells of each level between level 1 and 9 in Master? However, in practice, there were a lot of TPKs if a DM followed the rules. It was not a well balanced game, and there were too many opportunities for a single bad roll to end a PC. If you had two of those early in a combat, there was no way to recover.

 

[Parmandur]

Basic rules really only covered a short span, levels 1 to 3, but actually more like levels 1 to 2 if 5E is used as a benchmark as 5E characters have a lot more abilities. The feel of a 3rd level basic PC ismore like the feel of a 2nd level 5E PC. They were very easy to kill with a couple 'good' DM rolls or one big mistake by the PCs. And given the lack of strategydiscussion in that era - PCs made a lot of things we'd call mistakes today.

Expert took spellcasters through 6th level wizard spells, which is more like level 12 in 5E. One could argue the lack of special abilities may equate to a lower level of PC, but wizards, specifically, had a lot more spell slots, longer durations and no concentration mechanic, so they were a lot more powerful. Most players with fond memories of these days are speaking primarily of their experience with expert rules.

Companion (not Champion) Rules took PCs up to the equivalent of 20th level PCs in 5E, but the magic users, specifically, peaked with a lot more power than a 5E wizard due to the amazing number of spell slots and ability to stack spells. My high level PCs from my Companion days used magic to scout before battle, walked in with a dozen spells up on the party, and were my first examples of effective and powerful PCs.

Master and Immortal do not equate to 5E, at all, as they took PCs to power levels that exceed what we see in 5E. 9 spells of each level between level 1 and 9 in Master? However, in practice, there were a lot of TPKs if a DM followed the rules. It was not a well balanced game, and there were too many opportunities for a single bad roll to end a PC. If you had two of those early in a combat, there was no way to recover.

Good run down. Beyond the mechanical questions, it does seem to me that the narrative space represented by the BECM stages and the 5E Tiers do line up, though. The M adventures would fit with adjustment for Level 20 5E PCs, and the CM would be appropriate for 11-16, and X for 5-10, and B for 1-4.

 

[Zardnaar]

I wouldn't bother. NPCs only. It's essentially a different game.

 

[Shiroiken]

Not much in the way of running an Immortals type game, but if I had to breakdown the BECMI into 5E, it's pretty simple to me:

• Basic: Lv 1-2, which are the training wheel levels
  • you don't even necessarily have your archetype/subclass yet, and death is just a failed save away
• Expert: Lv 3-10, where most of the game takes place
  • IME almost all games of BECMI ended somewhere in this tier, and even if not most of the campaign took place here
• Champion: Lv 11-16, where you're a real power player
  • This isn't that big of a coincidence, since Champion pretty much matched "name level" of AD&D
• Master: Lv 17-20, when you can really screw up the multi-verse
  • Most games never made it here, but power-wise it fits pretty well
• Immortal: 20+ several boons at least
  • Doesn't translate real well

• Immortal: I have yet to found epic rules for 5e that give you something even approaching what an Immortal game feels like, actually.

The closest is some of the description stuff in Theros, and that's not particularly helpful. Although to be honest, I don't know how much interest there really is in it. Epic tier is generally consider epic enough for most, and IMO D&D has never really done a great job with "Epic Levels" anyway. Probably best just to try and modify stuff from the Immortals set, since regular mechanics are kinda weird/pointless for it.