Is the ELH a complete train wreck?

[iblis]

It seems I am in the fortunate position of having considered buying the ELH, then thinking better of it.

However, I would like to know if WotC are going to release a v3.5 'corrected' ELH. A la XPH? Possible at all?

If not, or even if so, is there a good alternative out there? I don't have many 3rd ed D&D/d20 books at the moment - and no 3rd party ones yet, but am in the market for more, from whichever publishers.

 

[Shade]

I am both a player and a DM in epic-level campaigns. We've played at 21st-23rd levels, and at 30th-32nd levels. The ELH provides the groundwork for running a campaign, but it will be necessary to make some modifications. However, most of the problems we've encountered can be attributed to the power-inflation of non-epic play in 3.5, which has rendered much of the epic stuff not very epic. Additionally, new supplements keep updating the epic feats, so a large number of them are not current. And the book as a whole is very 3E.

Honestly, you can probably find enough information to play at epic levels in the 3.5 DMG. However, I'd recommend getting the ELH for the monsters, the epic usages of skills, and some of the epic prestige classes.

I have found that the DM has to be very careful with the epic spell rules, as they can quickly throw the game out of balance. The higher-level spell slots for greater metamagic seems to work fine.

In summary, I have found epic level play to be very fun and worthwhile. However, if you plan on using the ELH, get ready to do some serious work bringing it up to 3.5. Even with the errata and SRD, much of it is still very much 3E.

Oh, and be ready to be treated like a red-headed stepchild if you expect much official support for epic level play. WOTC has been getting better about including a half-page to a page of epic material in some of the newer books, but outside of that, there is one issue of Dragon and one of Dungeon with epic material, and little else.

 

[hong]

Free Hint number 4: When you type "Free Hint number whatever" it sounds condescending.

Well, duh.

 

[kerakus]

No, my issue is that the ELH doesn't make any concession to reining in the potential for abuse. A game designer who relies primarily on people to be nice is a game designer who isn't worthy of the label. _I_ can always make up stuff that relies on people to be nice. I don't need to pay $70 for a hardcover book (with eminently mediocre flavour text) for that privilege.



Oh, please. Just because no ruleset is perfect doesn't mean there aren't degrees of brokenness. If you think otherwise, go back to playing RIFTS.

As an aside...I've DMed the first few levels of Epic...I've also played Rifts. I enjoyed both. Different styles and different strokes for different folks. Yes, play balance is an "issue" for the ELH and for Rifts, but if you and you're players are having fun, who cares?

Personally, I enjoy a grand slam munchkin fest...I also enjoy "normal" play and found that I could do both with the ELH. There's some things I won't allow from the book...just like the core rules. There's some things that need a little tweaking...just like the core rules. There some things that are just plain broken...just like the core rules.

Q

 

[KevinS]

We just ended a FR campaign that started at 1st level almost 3 years ago. It ended with an Epic adventure, saving the Realms from Orcus' machinations, & all the surviving characters retired to some peace & quiet after 25 levels of experience.
The Epic rules seemed fine with the exception of Spells. While the casters would use Imp Spell capacity, none developed Epic spells themselves. The Enemy Casters did though, giving them something special.
All things considered, there were no balance issues, but we did find Chapter 2 was not used by players. Almost everything else was though. The book was well worth the money spent.

 

[Shade]

Personally, I enjoy a grand slam munchkin fest...I also enjoy "normal" play and found that I could do both with the ELH. There's some things I won't allow from the book...just like the core rules. There's some things that need a little tweaking...just like the core rules. There some things that are just plain broken...just like the core rules.

Absolutely! I have found that the 1st-level spell enlarge person and the 2-for-1 Power Attack has broken my campaign far more than anything in the ELH.

 

[hong]

As an aside...I've DMed the first few levels of Epic...I've also played Rifts. I enjoyed both. Different styles and different strokes for different folks.

RIFTS also has an amazingly evocative setting, mixing ultratech and fantasy elements with remarkable style and panache; distinctive, mood-setting artwork; and continuing support from Palladium.

The ELH has Union City.

Yes, play balance is an "issue" for the ELH and for Rifts, but if you and you're players are having fun, who cares?

I can have fun with just the core rules too.

Personally, I enjoy a grand slam munchkin fest...I also enjoy "normal" play and found that I could do both with the ELH. There's some things I won't allow from the book...just like the core rules. There's some things that need a little tweaking...just like the core rules. There some things that are just plain broken...just like the core rules.

By blithely skipping over just how much of the book falls into each of those categories relative to the core rules, you miss the point. The entire chapter on spell seeds is broken. The epic BAB and save progressions play havoc with balance, since many classes (base and prestige) are designed under the assumption that BAB and saves are an implicit mechanism for balancing out special abilities. Many feats are either pointlessly underpowered or a no-brainer to take. The epic skill DCs show neither rhyme nor reason; they seem to be a matter of picking a number and adding 10.

Yes, a good DM with a cooperative group can still have a good game in spite of these flaws. A good DM with a cooperative group can make a good game out of stuff that's remarkably bad. That doesn't change the initial assessment of the ruleset as being flawed.

 

[Agamemnon]

Why is it, I wonder, that I get the distinct impression that for many posters this thread is not about Epic rules at all?

Having read the epic SRD, I came to the conclusion that level 20 will be a hard-wired cap in any and all games I will ever run. There is a distinct lack of anything "new" as far as character development is concerned. Besides, I'm not exactly a fan of open-ended progression. I quite like the idea that no matter how mighty you are, there are limits to what you can become.

 

[diaglo]

Yes, a good DM with a cooperative group can still have a good game in spite of these flaws. A good DM with a cooperative group can make a good game out of stuff that's remarkably bad. That doesn't change the initial assessment of the ruleset as being flawed.

i knew hong agreed with me about 2000ed and 3.11ed for Workgroups.

my hat and hong's too it seems for d02 knows no limits.

 

[hong]

i knew hong agreed with me about 2000ed and 3.11ed for Workgroups.

my hat and hong's too it seems for d02 knows no limits.

Nooo!!! It's not true! It's not true!!!!


*cry*


I seem to be doing that a lot lately.