Most ridiculous thing about Epic Rules

[Nightfall]

Easy now boys and girls. Rouncer and I have managed to be very civil here. I suggest we all do the same. After all we don't need to act like...well the people we don't like. *takes out his Jack Chick voodoo doll and sticks a few pins in it. *

 

[rounser]

Fair enough Nightfall. I'm trying to make dance music at the moment, though, so that's where my free-time productivity priorities lie (apart from occasional work on campaign) rather than game design...

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

The most ridiculous thing about the Epic Level Rules is that I do not have them yet.

Edena_of_Neith

 

[hong]

Dear Nightfall,

Shut up already.


Hong "equal opportunity grouch" Ooi

 

[Nightfall]

Well I guess that's where you and I differ then and that's fine. If it's not my music I'm changing stations.

Me I don't mind doing SOME game design. At present (with no current job or other activities) this is part of what I do. Mainly BECAUSE I want to help out others that might want some of this OR help in designing such events. My hope is to one day have some books I've authored/written for as well as edited. That said, it's easy said than done.

Anyway now that we've killed any interested, switching topics.

Epic Level Pr-classes folks: Good or bad?

I say good, cause that just shows us the difference we can do with say an ordinary True Necromacer and a Epic level one!

 

[Nightfall]

Dear Nightfall,

Shut up already.


Hong "equal opportunity grouch" Ooi

I would but I have "Zone of Talkativenes" surrounding me.

 

[rounser]

Me I don't mind doing SOME game design.

Me neither...but if I remember correctly the stated figure on how much full time work something on the scale of City of the Spider Queen takes, I think it qualifies as a tad more than "SOME".

 

[Celtavian]

Welcome to the boards! But boy, I couldn't disagree with you more. I inherently dislike someone telling me that the PCs in my game "shouldn't" be dungeon delving at their level. Why in the world not? If I as a DM can make it fun and challenging, I see no reason not to design adventures that the players enjoy.

To be honest, a campaign where the players sit around and guide lower level characters sounds boring. Maybe that's just me, though.

I agree about roleplaying and story, though. High level games need to depend upon things that can't be slain with a sword - politics, moral dilemmas, difficult choices.

All I am saying is they aren't going to find a dungeon suitable to challenge them everyday of the week or as easily as prior levels. If epic level characters go dungeon delving, they might be rescuing a group of lower level heroes from the clutches of death. Or maybe they have decided to venture into some legendary dungeon that no one has returned alive from, thus it is some kind of local event of some reknown for them to even enter the dungeon. Might have people placing bets on their survival, or the entire town their to watch them enter the dungeon.

Indiana Jones could well have been an epic level character, but the adventures his movies were based upon involved epic level artifacts and enemies as well. You started off watching one of his easy adventures, then the movie progressed into an adventure of biblical proportions, literally.

That is pretty much all I am saying. If they go dungeon delving, it better be one hell of a reknowned dungeon or perhaps some lost temple that has already led to the death of many an adventurer. Epic level characters are the greatest heroes of the world whether you play in Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, or a homebrew world.

The actions of epic characters are taken into account before a king would launch an attack on any particular area. For example, the Zhentarim have to plan tactics for Elminster and Storm before they even think about attacking Shadowdale. This is how a DM should think about epic level characters unless they run some kind of strange campaign where everyone is epic.

Epic level characters are epic. Their adventures should also be epic.

 

[James McMurray]

I like Epic level prestige classes, although I've only seen one so far (from the web enhancement).

 

[Henry]

It is true that if people would like to play like that, then they have every right to. It does, however, effect me if the books WotC chooses to publish caters to that style of play. Furthermore, if the books cater to that style of play then that is the way new people to the hobby will tend to play which, IMO, hurts the hobby. That style of play leads away from creativity and imagination which is what the game is all about.

I'm sorry, but for Celebrim, El Ravager, and other expressing this opinion - I don't get it. I also don't buy into it. The crunchy bits style of books such as the ELH do not hamper style of play any more than an automotive manual hampers you from getting in your car and going on vacation. It does not restrict creativity, any more than my creativity was restricted in adapting the Keep on the Borderlands, or the Against the Giants series to my home campaign. The point was that the stories are so light and flexible that they can be dropped into most campaigns with little alteration.

There is a reason that books that try to be so pretentious as to tell someone how to run a whole campaign fail: only a very small market feels that they need it. Whether they need it or not is the subject of a different conversation. But the fact is, WotC did a survey, and still continues to gather feedback, of what gamers want. The majority of gamers want crunchy bits, new rules, new prestige classes, new magic items to introduce into their campaign. The majority DOESN'T want suggestions on building their own economic tables and commerce routes, and they DON'T want storytelling that turns people into the gritty dogs we know from real history and not the heroes of fantasy stories and fairy tales from long ago.

Celebrim, I beleive it was you who said that you had a good handle on why TSR failed; you may think you know why TSR died in the 90's, but I am willing to wager that Ryan Dancey, with access to private ledgers, company minutes, and communications within the company, has a little better handle on those doings from 1989 to 1996 than you or I. I'm willing to take his word a little advisedly in this matter.

Does anyone remember the products released by TSR from 1990 to 1996? Products that were VERY story oriented, very oriented towards showing people how to create their own campaigns - and it failed. Every, single, miserable bit of it.

Enter 3E, with a de-emphasis on story, and more on solid and intriguing rules. TSR would have KILLED to have the success that 3E did - but by the early 90's, the executives had lost touch with what sells a gaming product. There are signs that this is beginning to occur again. Not on the same scale mind you, but given Chris Pramas' comments on the Chainmail strategy, I think we may see where some people whithout experience in a field are overriding those that HAVE experience in a field.

I learned long ago - If you want to succeed, ask the secrets from someone who succeeded. Don't go to a self-help book. The times in my life I've failed, hindsight showed me that I've failed to follow this strategy.

There's room for all of us in this hobby. I enjoy a good plot and ability for development in my games, but that doesn't mean there's no room for a little trouncing the evil guys for the combat-mongers in my group.

Epic Level handbook, here I come!