I'm fine with the epic destinies.
They're a good idea, but WOTC has to tread a fine line with them.
Remember how originally prestige classes represented organizations and in game groups, so you could only join a PRC if your DM explicitly set it up so that you could roleplay your entrance into it?
That rule, had it remained enforced, created problems. Players felt they had the right to create the character they wanted, but doing so required the DM to alter the campaign's storyline to fit in elements the player needed for their PRC.
Fortunately, this was never a problem for most campaigns because that rule was happily ignored.
Now, epic destinies seem at risk of creating the same problem. They represent mechanically things that are happening in game. If epic destinies are highly evocative, they'll also run the risk of being too specific to fit into most campaigns.
Imagine that you're a DM, and you have 4 players. One wants to transcend mortality and become a deity. One wants to die, party in valhalla, and rise again as a major player during the final battle of the apocalypse. Another wants to attain immortality of reputation by establishing an earthly dynasty capable of lasting thousands of years. And another wants to achieve lichdom.
Now suddenly you need to write all of those into your game at one time, and STILL have enough time to handle your main plotlines.
That's a bit challenging. And its also why I think the basic epic destinies are going to be a little bit generic. "Wizard who masters the arcane completely, then retreats from the world" isn't very hard to work into a campaign. Its certainly no tougher than "retires to raise grandchildren."
So... I expect we'll see some flashy epic destinies. I just expect the initial layout of epic destinies to be a little bit generic, or at least to contain a certain number of generic options.
All in all, I like them though. Just may be challenging as a DM when I have to juggle the needs of the ascendant deity with the dragonlord.
They're a good idea, but WOTC has to tread a fine line with them.
Remember how originally prestige classes represented organizations and in game groups, so you could only join a PRC if your DM explicitly set it up so that you could roleplay your entrance into it?
That rule, had it remained enforced, created problems. Players felt they had the right to create the character they wanted, but doing so required the DM to alter the campaign's storyline to fit in elements the player needed for their PRC.
Fortunately, this was never a problem for most campaigns because that rule was happily ignored.
Now, epic destinies seem at risk of creating the same problem. They represent mechanically things that are happening in game. If epic destinies are highly evocative, they'll also run the risk of being too specific to fit into most campaigns.
Imagine that you're a DM, and you have 4 players. One wants to transcend mortality and become a deity. One wants to die, party in valhalla, and rise again as a major player during the final battle of the apocalypse. Another wants to attain immortality of reputation by establishing an earthly dynasty capable of lasting thousands of years. And another wants to achieve lichdom.
Now suddenly you need to write all of those into your game at one time, and STILL have enough time to handle your main plotlines.
That's a bit challenging. And its also why I think the basic epic destinies are going to be a little bit generic. "Wizard who masters the arcane completely, then retreats from the world" isn't very hard to work into a campaign. Its certainly no tougher than "retires to raise grandchildren."
So... I expect we'll see some flashy epic destinies. I just expect the initial layout of epic destinies to be a little bit generic, or at least to contain a certain number of generic options.
All in all, I like them though. Just may be challenging as a DM when I have to juggle the needs of the ascendant deity with the dragonlord.
