Epic Destinies and Earth Giants

I much prefer the Death giant from MMIII than the bog standard Frost and Fire ones. I'm sorry but while they have lots of history with D&D, they just plain ass suck for me. I've never been enamored with them and have never seen the big deal with giants.

These hill giants are the same way IMHO which is why I find them disappointing. Giants are basically upscale version of kobolds.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Voss said:
But the powers are what I'd expect to be getting anyway at those levels... But they don't really have anything to do with being an archmage...
The archmage casts draining, tiresome magic without becoming drained or tired. Nothing seems off about this to me. What was your expectation for the Archmage?

To be honest though, I do have to say that I don't think "Archmage" is useful as the name of anything in game, and I'm kind of disappointed that it's hung around this long. The title tends to be associated with power, and as you said, 30th level Wizards tend to have the power. I still feel that the reusability of the Archmage's powers gives him the feel of one who has truly mastered magic rather than one who can only barely grasp its power, but I consider the archetype fairly... not archetypal as soon as you introduce it to a classed, level based game.
Voss said:
Frost and Fire giants have a history, a theme and a point.
Absolutely disagree. Like I said, I don't have a 27 year old module to work with to give me history. I have a 3.5 Monster Manual that tells me that Fire Giants are grumpy, wear red and orange, and like volcanos and flaming swords. And that Frost Giants are also grumpy, wear pelts, and like glaciers. I accept that, somewhere, there may be a cool history, but I don't see it. The theme is apparently "these creatures are palette swaps," and their point appears to be being a big dumb meatsack with a club or axe.

You could make an individual frost/fire giant interesting if you really tried, but collectively, they aren't interesting as giants.
 

So, folks, do epic destinies really mean that the likes of Elminster and The Symbul have been forced into mandatory retirement?
 


Never did like the Frost/Fire giants either.

I thought the Death Giant was interesting, but too powerful; I don't like save or die, and that's what he had, so.
 


Merlin the Tuna said:
I'm not really concerned about the lack of oomph in the Archmage epic destiny; we pretty much already knew this from the Tiers article. One utility power from the destiny at 26th level, and that's it for powers. If you want universe-destroying powers, you look at the class powers you pick up at 22nd, 23rd, 25th, 27th, and 29th. And I imagine at-wills fill in the blanks at a few of the other levels.

It's not about the oomph - it's the wet cardboard flavour....
 

Merlin the Tuna said:
The archmage casts draining, tiresome magic without becoming drained or tired. Nothing seems off about this to me. What was your expectation for the Archmage?

Nothing at all. Its a title, nothing more. But they're trying to build it up into something amazing, and it looks kind of sad, because it remains just a title despite all the 'epicness' and 'destiny' that they're trying to imbue into it. The abilities wouldn't be out of place as just optional picks for wizard class abilities at levels 21, 24, and whatever. I like the abilities, there just doesn't seem to be any reason to separate it out and put on a pointy hat with 'archmage' stitched on it.


.Absolutely disagree. Like I said, I don't have a 27 year old module to work with to give me history. I have a 3.5 Monster Manual that tells me that Fire Giants are grumpy, wear red and orange, and like volcanos and flaming swords. And that Frost Giants are also grumpy, wear pelts, and like glaciers. I accept that, somewhere, there may be a cool history, but I don't see it. The theme is apparently "these creatures are palette swaps," and their point appears to be being a big dumb meatsack with a club or axe.

You could make an individual frost/fire giant interesting if you really tried, but collectively, they aren't interesting as giants.

It has nothing to do with Against the Giants (which frankly, as far as modules go, is pure trash) Giants go back into folklore, myth and literature. Drawing from that background is what makes them interesting, not being a beatstick or a random collection of spell-like abilities. Thats why the death giant fails- its *just* a collection of abilities. It has no depth at all. Classic giants are the aggressive and dangerous side of humans literally written large, with all the failings and flaws available to exploit by the cunning hero. If you delve into it, there are cultures and preferences and tactics and all sorts of things. A death giant is just a big guy who casts finger of death at you. (or whatever).
 

I'm actually surprised they didn't give the Archmage some of the abilities from 3.x. Ie, like

Arcane Fire at-will, Mastery of Elements - change energy type by spending an action point, some type of counterspell...
 

Felon said:
So, folks, do epic destinies really mean that the likes of Elminster and The Symbul have been forced into mandatory retirement?
Or they simply aren't fully level 30, and even if they are that doesn't mean they have "retired" they have simply reached the pinnacle of their power (thank god when it comes to Elminster in this regard).

I don't think too the abilities of the Archmage are underpower or "non-Epic" think about what the Archmage is, he is simply a extremely powerful Wizard. As such, it makes sense a Archmages powers would simply allow better use of one's Wizard powers, since guess what that is all a Archmage is, a powerful Wizard.

I suspect ordinary Epic-Tier Wizard powers will be plenty powerful and epic enough. Not to mention what Rituals you may have, hell! There may be Archmage-specific Rituals.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top