Epic Players/DMs: Do you use epic spellcasting?

[Vrecknidj]

My own experience is about the same as ruleslawyer's. I am running a campaign where there are several level 21 and level 22 characters, and the enemies go all the way up to CR 34 (got long-term ambitions).

I have an uber-enemy (63rd level) and have had all kinds of fun trying to figure out how to have a tiered system of something like this:

commoners / normal PCs / epic / deific

So far, there aren't any epic-level spellcasters among the PCs and it's not looking like it'll be a problem for several more levels. But, I really don't like the system as is.

I have started working on other things, such as actual 10th and 11th level spells. I can't really see a reason why a wizard couldn't research a 12th level spell. After all, a 9th level spell that's got a +3 metamagic feat added to it is supposed to be the equivalent of a 12th level spell. So asked myself, what would such a spell be able to do? I ratcheted up the tables in the DMG regarding dice and effects of spells and just pushed the "chain" spells up a few notches. I much prefer this to epic spells. But, I do like the idea of epic spells, and of them being of a different type than normal spells.

I also still try to use the very old WotC product: the Primal Order, and find that this system makes a tiered system rather simple.

Dave

 

[CRGreathouse]

At the moment, yes. We don't allow custom skill-boosting items, so that aspect hasn't been a problem; new spells are created with the DM's help and approval, so that hasn't given trouble. Eventually I'd like to write my own system, but for now this is good enough to go with. (Frankly, the standard 0-9th system has almost as many problems, but I'm more accustomed to them. Funny how that goes, yes?)

 

[Luthien Greyspear]

Sorta yes, sorta no...

In my long-running campaign, the entire plot is driven by the after-effects of an Epic spell the BBEG created called Gilded Cage, which polymorphs and mind-screws the victim into living a life he might have had, had he not made the choices he did in life. Basically, I used it as a plot device to convert my old high-level 2nd Edition campaign into a new, lower-level 3e campaign. It made a great plot device, and the party is still chasing down the clues to figure out who they really were (the players know, of course).

In game, however, I have not used the Epic Spellcasting rules, and I don't know yet if I will. There are plenty of high-level spells that are just as efficient, deadly, or creative in the multitude of splatbooks out there that will do the trick just fine. Combine those with a few well-chosen metamagic feats, and voila! "Epic" spells cast from 10th-12th level spell slots.

 

[jmucchiello]

I think I'd just prefer to use Feanaro's "epic spellcasting DCs convert to spell levels above 9th"

This sounds interesting. Where is it?

 

[Psion]

I'm sort of wondering to myself (well, to you all too, since I am posting it) if Elements of Magic could be tinkered into an epic casting system.

I really sort of think the epic casting in ELH doesn't get it done.

 

[ruleslawyer]

This sounds interesting. Where is it?

Try here:

http://community.dicefreaks.com/viewtopic.php?t=2153

That thread actually has a *lot* of interesting discussion on epic spellcasting.

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.

I think there's a vast gulf between "potentially abusable, but only if the DM really isn't paying attention" to "abuse-prone unless the DM constantly asserts control." ES falls under the latter category, IMHO.

The problem here is perhaps with the D&D spellcasting philosophy in general. Rather than using a flexible, Ars Magica (or Elements of Magic Revised) -style "design your own spell" system, D&D evaluates spells based on the power of the finished product. On the one hand, that's a bonus, since the finished product can be balanced rather straightforwardly against other finished products. On the other hand, the system is therefore a tad inflexible. However, D&D magic is also extremely potent, even compared with alternatives like Ars Magica. The problem with Epic Spellcasting is that it combines the potency of D&D baseline magic with the means of extending that potency tremendously via flexible design and modification.

I think the best revision approach would be something like an uncapped Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth system that incorporates everything from 0th-infinite level, with a suggested cap for non-epic games. But that's wishful thinking, unless the ENPubs people feel like writing it...

 

[lkj]

Try here:

http://community.dicefreaks.com/viewtopic.php?t=2153

That thread actually has a *lot* of interesting discussion on epic spellcasting.

I think there's a vast gulf between "potentially abusable, but only if the DM really isn't paying attention" to "abuse-prone unless the DM constantly asserts control." ES falls under the latter category, IMHO.

The problem here is perhaps with the D&D spellcasting philosophy in general. Rather than using a flexible, Ars Magica (or Elements of Magic Revised) -style "design your own spell" system, D&D evaluates spells based on the power of the finished product. On the one hand, that's a bonus, since the finished product can be balanced rather straightforwardly against other finished products. On the other hand, the system is therefore a tad inflexible. However, D&D magic is also extremely potent, even compared with alternatives like Ars Magica. The problem with Epic Spellcasting is that it combines the potency of D&D baseline magic with the means of extending that potency tremendously via flexible design and modification.

I think the best revision approach would be something like an uncapped Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth system that incorporates everything from 0th-infinite level, with a suggested cap for non-epic games. But that's wishful thinking, unless the ENPubs people feel like writing it...

Well, I don't suppose I'm really in a position to disagree with you at the moment. It doesn't really seem 'abuse-prone' to me. But there are probably two caveats I have to make about that-- 1) My experience so far is quite limited. I've used the system but not extensively enough to feel like I've really given it a good test drive. 2) The group I play with doesn't really try very hard to abuse the system. They like to create effective characters, but they aren't going out of their way to find loopholes or to try to max the system.

I guess what that means is that I don't really ever envision myself having to 'constantly assert control' with this system. As any epic spell development is run by me as a DM regardless, I just don't see it being very hard to adjudicate. My players will likely use the system in the spirit for which it's intended, so I don't really have to worry about draconian oversight. At worst, it'll be 'accidental breakage', which, so far, seems pretty unlikely.

Well, long ramble short-- So far, it works for me and my group just fine.

Cheers,
AD

 

[Psion]

It seems abuse prone to me.

But here's the deal: when it comes to a system that let's you implement world spanning epic magic, it's sort of hard to avoid that without sucking the flavor out of the system.

Though I am definitely of the mind that the epic spellcasting system does not get the job done, I'd still be prone to replace it with a system that also might well require a good deal of GM ajudication. And not necessarily because it's inherently abusable from any sort of a universal standpoint. But rather, because when you are working with magic on such a scale, even if the system perfectly supports what the player wants to do, it has the easy potential to totally alter the kilter of the GMs campaign world.

And the GM might not want that...

 

[kigmatzomat]

I tried to min-max the spell seed system and couldn't seem to make anything that was particularly game breaking. The DCs were dang high unless there was a lot of casting damage and/or XP loss. All in all, it seemed much more like the kind of one-shot-kills-anything-but-casting-it-might-kill-you spells you see in anime ("Dragon Slave" anyone?) than epic fireball.

I considered most of the stock spells to be as much examples why NOT to use epic spells as primers on using the system. Enhanced, intensified fireballs are much more effective.

 

[lkj]

I tried to min-max the spell seed system and couldn't seem to make anything that was particularly game breaking. The DCs were dang high unless there was a lot of casting damage and/or XP loss. All in all, it seemed much more like the kind of one-shot-kills-anything-but-casting-it-might-kill-you spells you see in anime ("Dragon Slave" anyone?) than epic fireball.

I considered most of the stock spells to be as much examples why NOT to use epic spells as primers on using the system. Enhanced, intensified fireballs are much more effective.

I've essentially found the same thing. Really powerful spell designs tend to have unattainable DC's. I realize there are probably ways around that problem, but it sure seems like they would involve some pretty creative contortions (that would be fairly obvious to spot).

That said, I don't really want to argue that this system is the best, end all way to do epic spells. I like it, and, from my position, doesn't seem inherently abuse prone. Again, that doesn't mean I think it's not abuseable at all. I just don't think it's worth the effort to try to close every loophole. I agree with Psion here that any flavorful system that allows 'world changing epic magic' is likely to have dangerous loopholes. And I think the work of adding '100 limitations to stop abuse' isn't really worth the page space.

But hey, to each his own. I'm not really familiar with the other options being thrown about, so, who knows, maybe there are lots of better ways to do it.

AD