"Epic" progression after 6th level

[Ry]

You're right, phindar, and good point about the saves. I'd rather not touch the crafting rules if I can avoid it (although treating as wondrous items was suggested before). But putting some kind of "alternate magic items rules" as an appendix to give advice on adjusting to taste would be a good idea too.

 

[wolfpunk]

I have been reading this thread and I have a couple of quesitons.

If a character could qualify for an epic feat, can they take it? I am leaning towards no because they are not 21st level characters. I just wasn't sure if you were treating the feats gained after 6th level as being epic level feats and so you could take one if you met the prerequisites other than the 21st level one of course?

For example, Chaotic Rage, requires Rage 5/day and chaotic alignment. You could easily get the five times per day by taking the Extra Rage feat.



Also, I have an idea, but I don't know if it twists from the path you are intending to travel, so if it is not of interest, don't worry. What if you moved characters attribute adjustment from every fourth level, to every third level and then an additional increase every 15,000 XP after 6th level. Or to slow it down, every 30,000 XP after 6th level.

 

[Ry]

Don't all those feats require 21st? I'd assume no.

For me, the existing epic level rules are like crack, in the sense of "what, cocaine wasn't good enough for you?" (Once a fighter can take on armies of 1st-level characters or a wizard can cast wish, that's even MORE epic than the fantasy I like to read or play).

 

[Ry]

What does Chaotic Rage do?

 

[Meeki]

Actually, I found the opposite in my games. Wizards really shine. The reason, I think, is the change in setting assumptions.

For example, if you want to have a village of 100 people, they're ALL 1st level commoners, maybe 2 first level warriors, maybe an expert.

The fact that if they all stood in a crowd, the wizard could kill them all with a few words (I'm talking fireball here) - that's scary. A fighter knows he could survive that, but who knows what else the wizard can do? Turn invisible? Protect himself from arrows?

Basically, if you cap at 6th, there's less of the arms race: "but my spell beats that" - "but my goggles counteract your invisibility" - "but I've got boots that do that anyway" - "WE'll just raise him from the dead"

Magic is powerful under these rules.

Thats great, for an evoker. What about those players that want to play abjurers, diviners, conjurers. These schools have some of their most powerful spells at higher levels. Do you allow them to take weaker versions of those spell or how do you deal with this?

 

[wolfpunk]

It allows you to treat your attack as chaotic so you deal +2d6 damage against lawful creatures.

It was more just an example. I can see people wanting to take epic toughness which gives you +30 hit points as being desirable.

I am not actually promoting the use of epic level feats after sixth level, just wondering since all you get are feats after sixth level. No to mention that most epic feats have skill and feat requirements that the players will never be able to meet, but there are a few that they could.

I suppose if you really wanted to, you could treat each 5,000 XP after sixth level as a virtual level, so the character would have to earn 81,000 XP before being able to take their first epic feat.

 

[Ry]

Thats great, for an evoker. What about those players that want to play abjurers, diviners, conjurers. These schools have some of their most powerful spells at higher levels. Do you allow them to take weaker versions of those spell or how do you deal with this?

Splatbooks and variants typically handle that. But IMC people typically just go for base wizard.

I'd allow spell research into weaker versions of appropriate spells, and of course there's just so many different spells out there in the world that you can usually find something that fits a lower-level niche.

 

[Ry]

If it has [Epic] after the name it's not allowed just like it's not allowed before 20th in the core rules.

 

[Animus]

Hello,

This system looks like it would be cool to play as a change of pace. I do have a question about skills, however, and I apologize if I missed information upthread. What do you do about really high DCs (30+)? Some Knowledge skills may require attaining a result at or above DC 30. A 6th level character with 9 ranks in a skill +3 from Skill Focus +2 from one of the misc. feats that gives +2 to two skills gives a total bonus of +14-18 depending on the relevant ability bonus. Taking 10 or an average roll gets you 24-28. Of course you can roll high to get better results, but do you view this as a problem?

 

[Meeki]

Splatbooks and variants typically handle that. But IMC people typically just go for base wizard.

I'd allow spell research into weaker versions of appropriate spells, and of course there's just so many different spells out there in the world that you can usually find something that fits a lower-level niche.

splat books are not an answer I was looking for, but research could be neat i suppose. Even with spell compendium and the like I feel many schools are lacking at low levels.

I really like the idea of capping the levels, however im really a lush for high magic .

 

[Ry]

Well, for knowledge checks, I think there's no problem with a limit. As-is, it's like the Wizard has a better and better version of Google installed in his brain.

I don't mind if some information just isn't available... unless you have a big circumstance bonus, like researching in a giant library.

 

[Ry]

splat books are not an answer I was looking for, but research could be neat i suppose. Even with spell compendium and the like I feel many schools are lacking at low levels.

I really like the idea of capping the levels, however im really a lush for high magic .

Fair enough; 20-level D&D can't be all things to all DMs, but then again, neither can 6-level

 

[phindar]

When it comes to Knowledge checks, "unbeatable" DC's are generally plot points. If a DC is too high for a pc to know, a lower DC may point them to where that information might be found. If the pcs can't make the DC 35 Knowledge check to figure out how a guy became a lich, a DC 25 might let them know which necromantic text he was researching, and a DC 15 might let them know what lich legends he was looking up prior to seeking out his lichdom. They don't need to make the DC 35 to figure out how he did it if they manage to get their hands on the "How I Did It" tome. A book doesn't necessarily have to be a "+2 to Knowledge checks", it can also effectively be an auto-success to a particular subset of questions.

I find it somewhat humorous if the pcs were trying to figure out how to kill a lich and they find out he took a century off to write an autobiography before getting sick of that and going back to the original plan of world domination. It could be filled with all sorts of stuff beyond how he became a lich or his nefarious plans; just mundane stuff from his childhood, his first love, as well as the choices he made that led him down the path of evil and undeath. There's no telling what a creative group of pcs could do with information like that.

 

[Ry]

Maybe I should put together a FAQ.

 

[Nifft]

Maybe you should start a Ry20 wiki.

-- N

 

[Ry]

I'm hoping to keep the rules so very short... but I'm considering it.

Actually, after the playtest I'm looking for some kind of "raise the stakes" mechanics, i.e., the player can say "If I'm successful with this hit, he gets -2 AC, but if I lose, I get -2 to attacks." and I can say "Done" and then they roll.

 

[green slime]

This idea is probably the best thing to happen to DnD since 3.0... seriously.

It also opens up a whole new can of possibilities/worms.

For instance, you could introduce new feat chains, similar to ELH, that would allow casters to gain access to 4th+ level spell slots, for use with metamagic spells.

Feats to improve effective creator/crafter level, for access to better items (+3 armours!)

Feats to gain access to otherwise unattainable feats (Imp Critical, for instance).

Personally, I'd feel happier with the cap at 10th, but that is just me.

 

[Khuxan]

Personally, I'd feel happier with the cap at 10th, but that is just me.

The thing that sold me on the 6th-level cap is the article that explained Aragon is a fifth-level character. Sixth-level makes more sense than 5th-level as a cap for a number of reasons (iterative attacks for combat classes, 3rd-level spells for sorcerers, the bonus feat, etc.).

 

[Ry]

The 1e Dragon magazine article "Gandalf was a 5th-level wizard" really inspired all this.

 

[Nifft]

The 1e Dragon magazine article "Gandalf was a 5th-level wizard" really inspired all this.

I can see that being a bit controversial these days... he was dual-class at least, right? For the whole sword thing?

Cheers, -- N