Pathfinder 1E Ideas for Epic Pathfinder

[GreyLord]

Probably one of many threads, but never a bad subject per se.

If Paizo ever created an Epic handbook, what are some things you'd like to see or like some ideas you think might be interesting.

To get it started and hoping it doesn't die quick...I'd like to see....

Epic Spellcasting - ala 3.X (3e and 3.5). Let the spellcasters be all powerful.

That said...make them think...

Let Fighters and maybe Warrior types have the option to become completely immune to magic...or even their choice of whether to let magic affect them or not depending on the situation. This means Spellcasters could still use their magic against them, but not directly...the only thing that could affect the Warrior would be the non-magical side effects (sort of like if all magic was an illusion...and only believers can truly be affected by it...a theme that you occasionally see in fantasy movies).

Have a way for Attack Bonuses and the number of attacks to keep going up with out limit.

Have it so that you actually can become deities and perhaps a game after that...sort of like the Immortals idea from BECMI D&D.

If you have immortals rules, then also additional rules for temples, religions, organizations, worlds, and other items that you'd be responsible for depending on Immortal Rank.

 

[joah_from_Alberta]

I have been working on a rule-set of Epic Combat for Pathfinder. It is designed to allow play at an Epic level while maintaining the existing mechanics of D&D 3.5

Epic is relative to the perspective as an ant being crushed under foot may go unnoticed but at a molecular level can present an incredible composition of forces. Rather than to rewrite a new set of rules, I've tried my best to calibrate the existing rules to function within an Epic environment. This allows for an attachment of perspective for the players as they can relate better while magnifying the environment to Epic proportions.

The one constant that will not change for the player in Epic play is time. And it is an unforgiving constant for to become laboured by minutiae details and values is taxing and takes away from the playability. It has been my goal to pare down the values while maintaining an integral system of equations, and yeah-- it's been as difficult as it sounds. I'm having fun with it tho, I'm using tables to layout the rules much like in D&D books.

As an entry play-test, I've had my players fight an Epic combat against a huge Demon Lord (CR 16) that has laid waste to a small hilltop village with his minions of orcs, giants and captured siege weapons set in a defensive position. The party consisted of a square of veterans (formations are relevant as per quasi-historical), a dragoon of musketeers and centaurs (??) led by a 15th level Bard no doubt, and some low level archers mixed with a treant led by a 12th level Wizard and a copper dragon. It took us a bit to write out the unit sheet (very similar to character sheet) and the encounter would have lasted about four hours with some roleplaying.

It is my goal to create Epic combat for Pathfinder so that it can be enjoyed within any ongoing campaign setting and can be played at any level.

 

[gamerprinter]

Up front, just to say, I hate epic play - had a campaign that went up to 40th level as our last 3.5 hurrah, and I am glad it is over. I never want to go back...

That said, Paizo has put two possible directions.

One in the Core, that suggests you complete 20 levels of whatever class you are in + dip levels + prestige class levels, so you might end up with a 27th + level character doing it that way. This would work fine for me.

The second Paizo suggestion was that Epic caps out at 36th level - as a nice round number to attach progressive abilities in sets to 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 levels. It works out well mathematically. Build epic class features that follow that progression and it should work. (If Paizo ever formally tackles epic levels, they suggested this was the way they would go.)

What I never want to see make a return from 3.0 Epic Handbook, most especially was Epic Spells. It was so loose, that over-powerful spells could be suggested, untested and utilized in game that breaks the game way too easily. Until a more reasonable method of Epic-fying spells comes about, I don't want to see that ever again. Some of the Epic feats in that book weren't bad, but feats are another slippery slope of mechanics to worry about in an Epic system.

If Paizo puts out Epic rules for Pathfinder, I'll be eager to look, but still I will probably avoid Epic like the plague that it is. Besides I almost always get bored with a given character about 19th to 20th level anyway.

 

[BriarMonkey]

...
One in the Core, that suggests you complete 20 levels of whatever class you are in + dip levels + prestige class levels, so you might end up with a 27th + level character doing it that way. This would work fine for me.
...

Were I to run a campaign that went into Epic levels, that's the approach I would take. Classes cap out at the levels given, so a Fighter could only ever get to Level 20 in Fighter; A Shadow Dancer could only get to Level 10. Thus, if you wanted to multi-class, or pursue a straight career plus prestige classes - you could as you would still be able to cap out.

In other words, once JimBob the Barbarian has hit 16th level, he could take 10 levels in Fighter, then go back and finish up Barbarian. By that time, he'd be a 30th level Character (20th Barbarian / 10th Figher), and could still work on Fighter, or opt to dabble in Druid.

There'd be no having to extend any features or abilities, and characters have the freedom to work around to fit what they want to do, and the only issues the DM has to work with are the really big numbers, and probably significant utility of some characters.

This mechanic works for me.

 

[Azgulor]

Honestly? A one-book-and-out approach.

I know that when they do it they likely won't take that approach. We'll likely see at least one module, perhaps a campaign setting supplement, and almost certainly a bestiary.

And it worries me a fair bit.

I'm not a fan of epic play but obviously there's a vocal group that is. However, my fear is that Paizo will embark on this path around the time of 5e or shortly after its launch, and I think Pathfinder will take a hit as a result.

I subscribe to multiple Pathfinder lines, including the RPG line. And while I have zero interest in 5e, I also have zero interest in epic play. If & when that book hits, my RPG subscription goes on hiatus. If it extends into other lines, I'll be skipping those as well until they return to the 1-20 core. I can't imagine that I'd be the only one to do so.

I'm a big Pathfinder and Paizo proponent. IMO, it's the best fantasy RPG I've ever played/run. I think it's phenomenal, bordering on amazing, at how Pathfinder has reached the level of popularity that it has in the time it's been available.

I seriously hope epic play doesn't prove to be a misstep on that climb...

 

[paradox42]

36 was the maximum mortal level in BECMI of course; after that you had to go Immortal or stay where you were.

My own 3.X setting had class tables extended, partly but not entirely based on the ELH rules, up to 40th level. For the PF version I decided that 40 was probably too high given how PF upped the power quotient of the core classes, and only extended them to 30. The hardest part of that is deciding how to handle the capstones granted at 20th, and what to grant for new capstones at 30th.

I wouldn't use the Epic spell system from the ELH again, definitely- though I have toyed with the idea of making a few 10th or higher level spells to give casters above 20th something extra to do.

Given the extension to 30th for all base classes, I would also use the hard-cap rule once characters hit those. No more than 30 levels in any one base class, and 10 in most Prestige Classes. It fits PF's paradigm better, I think- though I could also see extending the base classes to 36th for the reasons gamerprinter noted.

For Immortals rules under PF, I can say that Upper_Krust's Immortal's Handbook worked pretty well under 3.5, if you took care of some of the more egregious power problems like Power Attack (he has some Immortal abilities that increase the multipliers on damage when you use it), it's actually a pretty elegant system. I transitioned my Epic game to use the IH, modified slightly to fit the setting and existing house rules, and never looked back- ran that game for two years and had some of the most memorable stories and game events I've ever even heard of- let alone experienced personally.

IH would need some fairly heavy modification to work with PF, since several of the base assumptions under which the IH was made changed between editions (for example, the way skill points are allocated and used), but it'd be doable.

EDIT: And people who hate Epic play, or think it's a "plague" as gamerprinter helpfully said, have clearly never played in a decently-run and set-up Epic game. You want an example of a good one, look at Sepulchrave's Story Hour (Tales of Wyre, in the Story Hour forum) and see what one can really do with Epic rules. The key is always to think and do Big- and never shy away from changing the world in a significant (even major) way because of things PCs did. IME that's always what trips people up who try to go Epic when they're used to low-level games: they keep trying to stay small. You can't do that with Epic; it just doesn't work.

 

[gamerprinter]

EDIT: And people who hate Epic play, or think it's a "plague" as gamerprinter helpfully said, have clearly never played in a decently-run and set-up Epic game.

My mentioned previous Epic game is the only attempt at Epic we've ever done, and I did mention that in that game, I was getting bored with my character about 19th level, so I wasn't interested in going Epic, even before reaching epic levels. Needless to say, I played because the rest of the group wanted to try. I did so, to keep everyone else happy, but really I had no interests in Epic even before we did it.

Even if there were fantastic rules for Epic play, I would have no interest.

 

[gamerprinter]

I'm not a fan of epic play but obviously there's a vocal group that is.

Though vocal, that group is actually pretty small.

Epic is worthy for a 3pp to develop, since there really isn't that much money in it. Certainly is too small potatoes for Paizo, unless they convince themselves otherwise.

 

[Azgulor]

Though vocal, that group is actually pretty small.

Epic is worthy for a 3pp to develop, since there really isn't that much money in it. Certainly is too small potatoes for Paizo, unless they convince themselves otherwise.

That's my read as well and the primary reason I feel that, from a business perspective, their resources would be better put elsewhere.

From a fan perspective, epic-level play just doesn't appeal to me. Tales of Wyre is a great story hour, and IMO, a showcase for epic-level-done-right. Even then, however, while I enjoyed reading it, I have no desire to run that kind of game or play in one.

 

[GreyLord]

I like epic, if we get there, as long as I'm not the DM. I like it as a player...hate doing the math and prep as a DM.

Biggest complaints I've heard though were the runaway casters. That's why I'm thinking to give them a counter. As a caster I enjoy the epic spellcasting, but I DEFINATELY see some problems with it. I'd want to keep it, but there should be a way to keep it in tact.

We can see in many stories where the hero is immune to magic simply because they are from a different world and don't believe in it, or choose not to believe in it, or various other things dealing with how magic only affects you if you believe it affects you.

In that light was why I think a good counter could be a feat or ability some warriors get which makes them able to be immune to magic if they so choose...aka...choose not to believe something can affect them. Wizard casts a big hole underneath them to the center of the earth...for them it doesn't exist and so the warrior keeps walking towards the wizard.

On the otherhand, this forces the wizard to be more creative, maybe he casts a spell which dominates a nation which turns them against the Good character, leaving them with the recourse to flee the entire nation or slaughter everyone in it...Hard choices and epic situations!

Ultimately though, I like it when there's an endgoal to epic in sight, such as Immortality. I wouldn't mind having it where you simply go up in levels as the first choice someone listed above, or the second choice with hard level caps either. I just like the epic play ideas, so love to hear ideas about it!

Of course I'd rather have some more Oriental Options (ALA Dragon Empires) or devoted Oriental adventures book first, but I think that's pretty slim from what I've heard from Paizo...and I imagine we're more likely to get an Oriental Adventures book before we ever get an epic book....

So mostly this thread is just for fun. So, keep the ideas coming, don't take it so seriously...use it for fun ideas and interesting thoughts.

One thing Paizo mentioned in a conversation was the idea of epic not necessarily being 20th level and over...that perhaps some of the epic ideas start to take place at lower levels, such as 15th level or something.

I think that could be pretty cool...characters are starting to really be powerhouses in the world at that point so why not make them start dealing wtih epic issues?

Many of the adventure paths starting at the 5th or 6th installment many times are pretty epic in and of themselves already at that level, so I can definately seeing that they'd be prime for epic level rules affecting them as well.