Epic Players/DMs: Do you use epic spellcasting?

[Shade]

This is a question for folks playing or DMing epic games. It seems like every thread on epic play indicates that the epic spellcasting system has either been abandoned or bypassed. We're not really using it either, other than the few epic spells possessed as spell-like abilites by monsters.

So, is anyone actually using them? If so, are you using them "as is", or modified?

 

[lkj]

As a matter of fact, I am. I have a long-running campaign that has recently gone epic. I have evil Lich Lord foes who are 30+ levels. I sat down the other day to properly stat them out and read through the epic spellcasting rules. On my second readthrough, I actually quite like the system. It's flexible and gives you the raw tools you need to make any number of spells. I've crafted a few of my own using the seeds and am using some straight from the book. I know a lot of other people don't like the system, but I like it quite well for what I've done so far. But hey, to each their own, I'm not so enamoured such things to care to argue about them.

AD

 

[Darth K'Trava]

I, as a player, never bothered with epic spellcasting. I found it to be too much of a hassle to create my own spells; not that I'd have any clue where to start...

 

[Psion]

I used it once as a plot device, and the NPC lived on as a PC (who then tried to abuse it and I shot it down; he was doing his calculations in the wrong order).

I think R&R true rituals do the "plot device" spell better. Perhaps if it got reworked I'd consider it.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Using a (now heavily) modified / updated to 3.5 version. I think I've scaled the progression pretty well, made it viable vs. metamagicked nonepic spells, and closed dozens of loopholes. A lot of work, though.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Using a (now heavily) modified / updated to 3.5 version. I think I've scaled the progression pretty well, made it viable vs. metamagicked nonepic spells, and closed dozens of loopholes. A lot of work, though.

care to share

 

[ruleslawyer]

Out of the box? Not in a million years.

Conceptually, Epic Spellcasting is great. It's based on an entirely different mechanic than 1st-9th-level spells, which allows players to feel like their PCs are doing something *different* and thus makes ES feel different. It's immensely (nigh-infinitely) flexible. It allows for great plot hooks. Because it runs on a different "track" from spellcasting using Improved Metamagic/Improved Spell Capacity, it even allows epic spellcasters a greater degree of specialization: Either they can become mighty machine-gun engines of destruction, or true magical artisans.

The execution, however... leaves something to be desired. Basing it off a skill mechanic means that there will be a *vast* difference in spellcasting ability based on a few simple (effectively costless) skill boost items. Mitigating factors (especially the ones used) mean that casters will figure out umpteen ways to min-max the heck out of the system and cast world-shaking spells at overly low cost. Worst of all, the linear scaling of numerous factors, especially conferred bonuses and durations, coupled with the ability to mitigate by increasing casting time, mean that the most common epic spell will be a long-term buffing application, which, at a mere +100 DC for a +50 enhancement bonus, equates to untouchable ACs and unbeatable spell save DCs.

I've seen fixes that I would *consider* allowing IMC, although I have the feeling that I'd still be invoking the most important Epic Spellcasting rule of all:

Approval: This is the final step, and it’s critically important. The epic spell development work and reasoning must be shown to the GM and receive his or her approval. If the GM doesn’t approve, then the epic spell cannot be developed. However, the GM should explain why the epic spell wasn’t approved and possibly offer suggestions on how to create an epic spell that will be acceptable.

This may sound a little outrageous, but to be honest, I think I'd just prefer to use Feanaro's "epic spellcasting DCs convert to spell levels above 9th" system and create a list of spells of those levels, just as there are spell lists for 0th-9th-level spells. Otherwise, I feel like the approach to any really serious dilemma will be "create an epic spell that resolves this" and come down to a resource expenditure issue.

 

[lkj]

Originally Posted by SRD
Approval: This is the final step, and it’s critically important. The epic spell development work and reasoning must be shown to the GM and receive his or her approval. If the GM doesn’t approve, then the epic spell cannot be developed. However, the GM should explain why the epic spell wasn’t approved and possibly offer suggestions on how to create an epic spell that will be acceptable.

Well, this is really the crux of it. It's one instance where I think the 'subject to DM's approval' works just fine. I think the mechanic is cool and different. I like how it 'goes beyond' regular spellcasting. I like how it has raw 'seeds' from which a wide variety of spells can be crafted and developed. It's just a neat system.

And used in the spirit for which it was designed, I think it works just fine. Generally a very powerful spell will have a very high DC. Now is it possible to abuse through creative munchkining? I'm sure it is. The advantage of having a flexible, very open, system has its downsides. But to be blunt, it's not very hard as a DM to pick out when the system is being abused. It's nothing to me to say, "Eh, no. Despite your best research efforts, you discover that such a spell is impossible to develop."

I guess I hate to see what I think (just my opinion) is a pretty neat design get thrust aside because-- by assuming the DM is incompetent-- you can abuse it.

Anyway, that's my couple cents.

AD

 

[Victim]

Well, the problem with epic spellcasting is that its rather punishing for 'normal' spells. Take Animus Blast: 10d6 cold damage, and then up to 20 medium skeletons that count towards the character's control limit for 450k GP and a DC 50 check. I'd peg something like that between 5th and 7th level as a normal spell; the skeletons are a non-factor in most combats at even that level, much less epic ones.

If you don't cheese the system, then the more readily available spells are usually total junk since you have to pay significant sums just to reach the point where a caster's normal spells start (since caster level isn't referenced). And the system is pretty abuseable as well. If you want custom effects subject to DM approval, the normal 'rules' for spell research work fine.

Also, like many Epic rules systems, it was built with the 3.0 assumption of ultra cheap items adding to the characters' checks. But DCs weren't changed when the costs for skill boosters were corrected. Not to mention that the high DCs were part of the reason for the skill items in the first place.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Ehh. We generally rely on metamagicked "normal" spells. Increasing the die-cap does a good job as does the "empower/maximize" combo feat, plus some casters get the automatic-X feats.

The epic seed spells are typically plot devices (e.g raising Orcus from the dead would be an epic spell IMO) but I use it as a framework for a couple of uber-monsters real power. You don't need many HPs or attacks yourself if you can fire off "summon red dragons" by yourself. Or, at least, with a half-dozen thrall mages you keep in stasis until its time to cast the spell.