how Epic do you like it?

[Naoki00_]

something I've been meaning to find out here is this- How epic do you like your games to be?

it seems a pretty simple question really, but I find that it's sometimes hard to answer because of the different ideas of whats really 'epic' in a game, regardless of it's system or setting. most people I've talked to feel that any game above level 10, or ones where your given certain powers or abilities in order to make a character more personal and much less cookie cutter, find that it's breaking the game and not really 'epic', while others find the grind of going starting as the generic class at level 1 to boring or slow.

MY personal view on and epic game is a huge power scope game. maybe not nessisarily level 20's stuff, but characters that are larger then life, with abilities not limited by class or similar and are nearly impossible to recreate in the setting, sort of like a D20 justice league or avengers with numbers in the millions and billions. I find that not including things like character specific powers or traits makes the game feel very 'samey', but again this is MY opinon, and I'm wanting to see what the communities idea's of "Epic" are.

 

[S'mon]

My 1e AD&D games went from low level to very epic stuff, with deity PCs battling evil gods, saving worlds and even the spacetime continuum. They certainly had unique powers. Then 3e really burned me on very high level play, it only seemed to work in the 1-10 range. I haven't played 4e beyond Heroic yet, in principle I'm keen to try Paragon & Epic play, but maintaining enough long-term player continuity is hard these days; I don't get to run enough games, players move away and new ones come along, the tendency is to restart with new campaigns at low level.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I tend to prefer D&D in the 1-14 range (or thereabouts), where levels 9-11 are the start of "high level," and few people in the world are at those levels. My level scale is something like this:

• 0-level: Common men of all sorts. Even typical career mercenaries may be 0-level fighters.
• 1st level: Talented Veterans. Grizzled sergeants. Gifted youth with the potential for greatness.
• 4th level: Local Hero. Famous captains. People know your name.
• 8th level: Superhero. Fame is spread far and wide, and there are stories and maybe some songs about you. You're edging into Conan/Amra or John Carter territory.
• 9th level +: Lord among men. Your fame is such that you've attracted followers and could set up your own domain or holding.
• 15th level +: You're reaching heights that few men ever do. At this point, you're truly legendary, and might even be a candidate for some sort of demigod status. Mortals seldom reach these levels without some sort of magical or supernatural aid, and that often comes with a price. That's why so many archmages in the tales are insane, or demon-ridden, or turn to lichdom. And why so many legendary heroes seem doomed, or bear a artifact that gives them power at a terrible price, et cetera.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Good question. I like epic game very much. When I play D&D it means usually more plot-line, than just levels. Some epic stories involving godlike beings and their plots or dimensional rifts apparing alien beings invading world etc can start at lv 1. Or even lv 0 when characters were just some young "ordenary" folk not yet started adventuring.

Involtment and ability to actually affect epic are different things. Changing things requires power, and by D&D rules that comes in form of level and DM:s deux ex machina.
Or any other ruleset really, some are just better for it than others.

Then there is of course what I call "epic feel". That doesn't always require world-shaking and/or superpowered stuff, though it sure helps.

I personally like to start my characters at low lv (1-3), though that might involve some heritage of uber-powerful item, some really bad-ass spell-like power, or whatever story calls. My point is like like to start and dm to characters that are young on their careed or reincarnated somehow to be so.

That makes it easier to get into character, and IMO creates more of a bond of intrest than just creating 20 lv+ character strait up. NPC:s are of course different.

Our Conjunction War-game is still going on, it started 15 years ago, and various ex-characters that have become npc:s to newer pc:s. 3 different DM:s have been contributing to this even, me included. Its very epic in concept and very highpowered, at some places. And has left D&D universe mythos behind (or included it to bigger whole) long time ago.

Not all our games contribute to that however, many games have happened at alt universes that have nothing to do with that.

So as a player I've played characters that become gods, cosmic vampires, get eaten by big nasty things/consepts, and lot lot else.

Great fun.

But games like those require like-minded people. And ability to go beyond the rules, but still have rules. But those rules tend to form around those games, and depending on people I play with, they are either very light, or kinda D&Dish in comlexity.

Here at ENworld there used to be more people writing that liked so called high-lv gaming. Their numbers have grown thinner what comes to posting though. Some here don't like to do it for complexity and various other reasons, but are ok with it. And then there is people who think it's "badwrongfun".

 

[Jack7]

How epic do you like your games to be?

I find that not including things like character specific powers or traits makes the game feel very 'samey', but again this is MY opinion, and I'm wanting to see what the communities idea's of "Epic" are.

Totally epic (to not coin a phrase). But to me that's got nothing to do with either the level of the characters (though an epic campaign allows plenty of opportunities for character advancement, including level advancement) or what might nowadays be considered tiered-games.

That kind of stuff to me is a potential reflection of a game structure, not the substance. A symptom, not a cause.

Epic to me is when epic things happen in the World that the players can participate in, influence, and/or change the outcome of. World War II was epic (in this sense) a simple border skirmish is not, no matter who takes place in it or what their theoretical "level."

World events are Epic, or not, characters are not. Characters are Heroic or Legendary or perhaps sometimes even Mythical (in personal nature), but they are not Epic. Epic is what happens in the World. A Saga is what happens in the World. Not what happens to characters.

What I think happens to characters is that by living through an Epical, or Ephocal Event or sires of such events (and sometimes by dying in them) is that characters become Heroic or Saintly or Legendary or Famous (or inversely, infamous), and an Example for others, and are tested to the limits of their strength and powers of endurance. But at what theoretical level they begin and at what level they end is not nearly as important as what they become, how they change, and the resulting influence they will have on others. And how it effects their own nature and "character."

And to me every great epic (or myth, or story, or game built around such a story) has an exceptional mix of both superlative events and very mundane events that allow characters to exploit their own best talents in sometimes unexpected and almost unbelievable ways, while also allowing them to explore the small but very satisfying things of what it means to be a man or woman. And to be alive, and happy to be alive.

Epics are of the world, but ultimately men shape them, and remember and record them, and adventure through them, and survive them or are killed by them.

So the epic is not the characters, but without exceptional and extraordinary characters to adventure through the epic the world cannot change and the events cannot be as important as they should be. For men are men, and they want to hear stories of other great men. Great men are not epics, but without Great Men there would be no Epics.

 

[SnowleopardVK]

So... Is anyone already sick of the word epic after reading through this thread?

I tend to like any game. Low level, high level, mundane... Epic. I think what matters more to me is that I'm playing, not what I'm playing.

 

[Dykstrav]

First of all, let's keep in mind that everyone is going to have their own idea about what "epic" means. Some people think it means high-powered or high-level characters. Some believe that it must include legendary elements like artifacts, battles with the deities, and so forth.

For me personally... I believe that "epic" properly refers to scale and drama. Clashes between armies of hundreds of thousands, journeys across half the world, thwarting the machinations of a unique, powerful villain.

In that sense, I include "epic" in every single campaign to some degree. My very first campaign under the second edition rules involved a centuries-long war between two empires that each spanned a continent, yet the characters started at 1st level and had real opportunities to affect the outcome of the war by their actions and choices during adventures. The war tied up when they reached 5th level, but there was still plenty to do after the fighting. That campaign ended with the characters around 16th level or so once they tied up their individual destinies and founded kingdoms, dynasties, and the like.

My first third edition campaign was similarly "epic," it focused on the characters thwarting Baalzebul's efforts to obtain an artifact that could transform any spellcaster into a lich under his control. It started at 1st level and ended with a battle in the seventh level of Hell with the characters at 22nd level.

Although I don't think that character power has anything to do with how "epic" a game is, it can figure into the equation since higher-level threats are far more uncommon (and many are unique, such as demon princes, archdevils and the like). Generally speaking, my ideas about character power are roughly as follows:

1st-4th level: Low-level, local heroes. You are known in your hometown or are one of several others like yourself in a metropolis. People watch your career with interest.

5th-8th level: Mid-level, national heroes. People have heard of your deeds, the local king considers you an ally (or a threat), you're looked to in times of trouble.

9th-12th level: High-level, famous heroes. You're one of a select handful of powerful adventurers in your kingdom, people have heard of your deeds across the entire continent. You could rule a kingdom (or similar prestige and power, such as leading a religion or powerful trade guild).

13th level and up: Very high-level, legendary heroes. Characters rarely get as powerful (or more powerful) than this, in part because few creatures and threats seriously challenge them and partially because such challenges are exceedingly rare in the world. Characters interested in further adventuring can find it on the planes, where truly legendary challenges await.

 

[RainOfSteel]

How epic do you like your games to be?

I like the full range of standard levels in d20, 1-20. 21+ is epic. Most individuals never reach epic status. Heck, most never reach 20.

 

[anest1s]

Extra epic with extra sauce.

Its not about the level.
Its not about kicking ass.

Its about being epic-cool.

A ''chased by bad things'' campaign?
Ok, but the way I run should be worthy of many bards tales.

 

[Jack7]

"For me personally... I believe that "epic" properly refers to scale and drama. Clashes between armies of hundreds of thousands, journeys across half the world, thwarting the machinations of a unique, powerful villain."

I agree with that. Scale and drama are to me far more important considerations than other types of considerations, especially limited game design or construction ones.

I'm also not at all sure one can construct epic events or adventures. You can construct epic storylines, of course, write into the story or the game or the film what should be epic events, but if they play out that way or not, that's another matter.

Epic is more than just intention, it is also execution.