Most ridiculous thing about Epic Rules

[LostSoul]

One of the problems that we noted in 1st edition play was that if the world was sufficiently dangerous to challenge a party of high level characters, then it was sufficiently dangerous that regular society could not function.

The "realistic" way to do handle this is through wars of assasins. Your high-level characters are balanced against each other, topped off on defense, just waiting for the other side to make a false move.

Depending on your players, you may or may not have a problem with the typical D&D campaign progression: each helpless merchant or baron/king/lord who asks you for help seems to know the precise power your party has, and won't challenge you too far above or below that...

 

[Xarlen]

One could also say that all this stuff happens off-stage, just like you never see normal people eating, crapping, and doing other biological things. Smaug, for instance, never had a problem finding food even after he was the only living thing left alive in the Lonely Mountain. In fact, I think it was Tolkien who said something along the lines of fantasy being like a stage show; knowing all the secrets spoils the fun. I've probably mangled that in at least six places, but you get the drift: thinking too hard about fantasy is bad.

Well, Hong, his complaint is how can Epic creatures exist in a world with mundane or relatively weak ones. I'm simply pointing out that, technically, neither could a lot of Other creatures, unless you actually put thought into why and how they exist.

Sure, you can suspend your belief about the off stage stuff, but if you can, then suspend it about epic creatures. If you Can't suspend your belief, then look to how they Can exist.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think a lot of the problems with Epic Levels seem to be that people don't want a high-powered D&D. I see it as basically distinct styles of play.

Some DM's don't like to reach the point where their PC's can teleport, because then they can't use "Go from point A to point B and see what happens" quests...the PC's can circumvent them.

Some DM's don't like to reach the point where a PC can wade through a host of orcs, take stabs in the back, and simply grin about it.

In short, some people like their D&D a bit on the weak side, with the PC's being basically normal people challenged by normal things...where slaying a dragon is a once-in-a-lifetime accomplishment, and where you're never always more powerful than those who are supposed to be superior to you.

There's a value in this style of play, this low-powered, low-magic D&D. There's a certain flavor it has that most D&D doesn't, and it starts to loose it about LV10.

That's when the PC's start getting above and beyond, by far, Joe Average and Jane Nobody. They're action heroes and superstars. They're celebrities and proud of it. They can take on three dragons and still have time to avert the astreroid imact, all within the course of the week.

Some DM's don't like this style of play. Others have no problems with it. It has it's own flavor -- heroic, famous, prideful, the icons of a setting and the heroes of a world.

Then, the Level 20 Barrier comes...

And things start getting 'Epic.' This adjective is, I think, meant to describe a setting where your PC's aren't just heroes among mooks, they're heroes among heroes. They're the kinds of guys the celestials recruit when they get problems. They're the ones that slay Giant Creatures from Space on a daily basis. They don't need to worry about the orc tribe any more -- what they need to worry about is the enemies sent to kill them, the creatures still in the darkness, and the potent masters of disaster that would like to see them dead. They're the guys Superman, whereas D&D heroes are Spiderman. Epic heroes are nigh-invulnerable. 20th level heroes are just REALLY COOL.

There's a seperate feel to this kind of game too.

I don't think all three levels are for everyone, really. Some like the power, some like the massive power, and some like very little of the power. It's just different styles.

What's wrong with somebody having fun doing Mortal Kombat style finishing moves? Who are you to get up on some high horse and decree that as unworthy to be in the same game as you? Or maybe just to imply there's something wrong with that?

It's obviously fun. Don't crap in his cornflakes, yo.

I'm not sure if epic level rules are for me or not, but I'll check 'em out before I rule it out. And even if they're not for me, that doesn't mean they're wrong or silly or whatever. It just means that playing in a game where rogues can swipe people's clothes with a high enough Pick Pocket roll might not appeal to me. I'm nobody to say that they won't appeal to others, or to say that people are somehow inferior gamers because of it. There's value in all styles of play, from low-level mooks with extraordinary adventures to high-level champions for whom the extraordinary is every day to epic-level heroes who are the children of gods and who move rivers to clean out stables.

Anyhoo, that's me.

 

[Plane Sailing]

If they really took thier assumptions seriously, a real Epic Level handbook would deal in great depth with running realistic economies, handling the book keeping of nations, and running mass combat between mighty empires, because as someone who reached the 'epic levels' of 1st edition (say 15th) can attest - Epic Level characters have to deal with that sort of thing on a day to day basis. Instead, the emphasis seems to be on increasing ability to deal hp damage.

Clearly this is not what 'Epic Rules' are about as designed.

But I wish, I wish, I wish that WotC would produce something to cover this - in games that I've run in the past for high level characters the challenges are often ones that cannot be beaten just with swords and steel (in fact in my current campaign one of the Paladins is agonising over how he can help solve the refugee situation which is affecting thousands of his fellow worshippers).

This kind of campaign can be extremely challenging for the players, and even more challenging for the DM to set up and referee well. Assistance and guidance in these matters would be of far more value in my mind than options for doing 'the same thing but more powerfully', which it seems the Epic rules are largely about.

I wonder - do the epic rules contain stuff about apotheosis, or will that be in a future supplement? Or is it even in deities and demigods?

Cheers

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Re: Most ridiculous Epic thing

I vote for "the fact that people are complaining before they read the rules."

I voted "Other" under this catagory.

FD

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

I am one of the people looking forward to the Epic Level Handbook.

To address the initial question - I don't see any problems with the rules above and beyond those that are intrinsic to 3rd Ed. itself (hit points; strength; BAB and armour); but those discussions are for other threads.

Initially I didn't see why we even needed such rules (the core classes are easy enough to extrapolate). But the Epic Level Handbook is more than a mere set of rules for characters above 20th-level. Its actually a philosophical "Pandora's Box" that opens to infinite possibilities...

Personally I think Deity Level play has a lot more to offer high level (20+) gaming (particularly the worshipper "Achilles Heel" that adds a whole new dimension); but I see no reason why Epic and Deity Level play couldn't co-exist; in fact I would advocate just that!

I wonder - do the epic rules contain stuff about apotheosis, or will that be in a future supplement? Or is it even in deities and demigods?

Hi Plane Sailing!

Over on the WotC Boards in the Deities & Demigods Forum there is a thread about ascension with a few posts from Rich Redman (co-author of D&Dg) himself. Although it doesn't give much more than an overview.

http://boards.wizards.com/rpg/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=222;t=000115

 

[Berandor]

Well, that's the beauty of it. Those who don't like Epic Level Play - like me - can simply disregard it.

those who want it can shell out $30 (or whatever) and play this way.

Have fun!

I know I will, without the book (and its deific counterpart)

B

 

[Celebrim]

Kamikaze: Good post.

I agree that there are several styles of play. I'm biased in favor of gritty realism, I admit. I like a gritty feel no matter how high the level of play. Otherwise, I'd just as soon play Toon or Paranoia.

One of my DM friends has been for some time running a campaign at a truly Epic Level of play. Spell effects occassionally go off like atomic bombs and level cities, adventurers journey from planet to planet, stave off invasions of space creatures, do the work of the Gods on a daily basis, change the course of the history of the universe, occassionally hob-nob with the powers behind the Gods, and sail armadas of tall sailing ships from the sea of one world to another. It is a truly interesting and well run setting, albiet a very esoteric one that probably wouldn't appeal to everyone. Part of the reason I respect it might be due to the fact that the setting evolved through all the earlier stages of play. Part of the reason I respect it might be the fact that even emmensely powerful, the characters are living in well realized worlds full of well realized characters. Part of the reason, I respect it might be that the DM hasn't introduced anything without thinking about how it might alter the culture of his world(s) - even if it means that it won't continue to look anything like a standard D&D S&S setting. But, for whatever reason, I respect it.

To explain why I don't respect the sort of play the Epic Rules seem meant to encourage, I'd best tell a story.

One day I went over to my girl friend's house. Her younger brother (who'd eventually become my Brother-In-Law) was sitting at a table with his friends 'playing D&D'. I of course was courious and went over to have a look at what they were doing. The DM had his head bent over a 1st edition Deities & Demi-gods and was selecting which Deity the player's party of 30th level characters should slay next. Apparantly, 'campaign' play consisted of not much more than flipping a page and saying, 'You encounter a Troll... You encounter an Umber Hulk... You encounter Thor... Roll for initiative.... 'ALRIGHT, WE KILLED THOR!'.' I'm dead serious. As you might imagine, I was somewhat disgusted, and suggested (as politely as I could) that first of all, their characters should not be able to kill the Gods, and secondly, that it was not necessary to search the Deities & Demi-Gods for challenges for thier characters - that I could challenge them with only monsters from MM1 (which they vehemently denied, noting they'd already killed Orcus and Asmodeus.). I then proceeded to run them through a short imprompto dungeon and use a combination of setting (water, traps, falls) and Giant Octopi, Eye's of the Deep, and Ropers to kill off thier party of would be God Slayers. The lesson here being that there is more to D&D than dice rolling, and that its that extra stuff they'd left out that makes D&D challenging and interesting.

When someone announces that he wants his character to more resemble the characters of Mortal Kombat, I see this as being only one intellectual step removed from what my Brother-In-Law's junior high friends were doing. Is he having fun? Sure, and that's great, but it is to be hoped that he gets beyond that sometime soon after junior high. Given the rapid rate of level gain in 3rd. Edition and the new 'Epic Level' rules, I can foresee the sort of play of my Brother-In-Law's young friends as becoming the standard progression for most new players. Younger DM's simply won't have the time to mature before being asked to handle campaigning at levels of play with complexities that challenge DM's with 20 years experience. The rules seem to cultivate more Munchkins, not fewer. Once Munchkinized, few players out grow it. They either leave the Hobby or they remain min/maxing munchkins into thier 30's. They probably become the same people that use trainers, cheats, and PK in MMOLG's.

For the record, the kids had fun, but were clearly upset and disillusioned that I'd destroyed there all powerful characters so easily. (It was of course only a dream, so no one stayed dead.) I don't know if they ever out grew that. My Brother-In-Law quit that group and became a reasonable but occasional player afterwards.

 

[Conservative Cow]

Kamikaze: Good post.

I agree that there are several styles of play. I'm biased in favor of gritty realism, I admit. I like a gritty feel no matter how high the level of play. Otherwise, I'd just as soon play Toon or Paranoia.

One of my DM friends has been for some time running a campaign at a truly Epic Level of play. Spell effects occassionally go off like atomic bombs and level cities, adventurers journey from planet to planet, stave off invasions of space creatures, do the work of the Gods on a daily basis, change the course of the history of the universe, occassionally hob-nob with the powers behind the Gods, and sail armadas of tall sailing ships from the sea of one world to another. It is a truly interesting and well run setting, albiet a very esoteric one that probably wouldn't appeal to everyone. Part of the reason I respect it might be due to the fact that the setting evolved through all the earlier stages of play. Part of the reason I respect it might be the fact that even emmensely powerful, the characters are living in well realized worlds full of well realized characters. Part of the reason, I respect it might be that the DM hasn't introduced anything without thinking about how it might alter the culture of his world(s) - even if it means that it won't continue to look anything like a standard D&D S&S setting. But, for whatever reason, I respect it.

To explain why I don't respect the sort of play the Epic Rules seem meant to encourage, I'd best tell a story.

One day I went over to my girl friend's house. Her younger brother (who'd eventually become my Brother-In-Law) was sitting at a table with his friends 'playing D&D'. I of course was courious and went over to have a look at what they were doing. The DM had his head bent over a 1st edition Deities & Demi-gods and was selecting which Deity the player's party of 30th level characters should slay next. Apparantly, 'campaign' play consisted of not much more than flipping a page and saying, 'You encounter a Troll... You encounter an Umber Hulk... You encounter Thor... Roll for initiative.... 'ALRIGHT, WE KILLED THOR!'.' I'm dead serious. As you might imagine, I was somewhat disgusted, and suggested (as politely as I could) that first of all, their characters should not be able to kill the Gods, and secondly, that it was not necessary to search the Deities & Demi-Gods for challenges for thier characters - that I could challenge them with only monsters from MM1 (which they vehemently denied, noting they'd already killed Orcus and Asmodeus.). I then proceeded to run them through a short imprompto dungeon and use a combination of setting (water, traps, falls) and Giant Octopi, Eye's of the Deep, and Ropers to kill off thier party of would be God Slayers. The lesson here being that there is more to D&D than dice rolling, and that its that extra stuff they'd left out that makes D&D challenging and interesting.

When someone announces that he wants his character to more resemble the characters of Mortal Kombat, I see this as being only one intellectual step removed from what my Brother-In-Law's junior high friends were doing. Is he having fun? Sure, and that's great, but it is to be hoped that he gets beyond that sometime soon after junior high. Given the rapid rate of level gain in 3rd. Edition and the new 'Epic Level' rules, I can foresee the sort of play of my Brother-In-Law's young friends as becoming the standard progression for most new players. Younger DM's simply won't have the time to mature before being asked to handle campaigning at levels of play with complexities that challenge DM's with 20 years experience. The rules seem to cultivate more Munchkins, not fewer. Once Munchkinized, few players out grow it. They either leave the Hobby or they remain min/maxing munchkins into thier 30's. They probably become the same people that use trainers, cheats, and PK in MMOLG's.

For the record, the kids had fun, but were clearly upset and disillusioned that I'd destroyed there all powerful characters so easily. (It was of course only a dream, so no one stayed dead.) I don't know if they ever out grew that. My Brother-In-Law quit that group and became a reasonable but occasional player afterwards.

Lighten up Francis, not everyone can be as articulate as you.

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

To explain why I don't respect the sort of play the Epic Rules seem meant to encourage, I'd best tell a story.

One day I went over to my girl friend's house. Her younger brother (who'd eventually become my Brother-In-Law) was sitting at a table with his friends 'playing D&D'. I of course was courious and went over to have a look at what they were doing. The DM had his head bent over a 1st edition Deities & Demi-gods and was selecting which Deity the player's party of 30th level characters should slay next. Apparantly, 'campaign' play consisted of not much more than flipping a page and saying, 'You encounter a Troll... You encounter an Umber Hulk... You encounter Thor... Roll for initiative.... 'ALRIGHT, WE KILLED THOR!'.' I'm dead serious. As you might imagine, I was somewhat disgusted, and suggested (as politely as I could) that first of all, their characters should not be able to kill the Gods, and secondly, that it was not necessary to search the Deities & Demi-Gods for challenges for thier characters - that I could challenge them with only monsters from MM1 (which they vehemently denied, noting they'd already killed Orcus and Asmodeus.). I then proceeded to run them through a short imprompto dungeon and use a combination of setting (water, traps, falls) and Giant Octopi, Eye's of the Deep, and Ropers to kill off thier party of would be God Slayers. The lesson here being that there is more to D&D than dice rolling, and that its that extra stuff they'd left out that makes D&D challenging and interesting.

When someone announces that he wants his character to more resemble the characters of Mortal Kombat, I see this as being only one intellectual step removed from what my Brother-In-Law's junior high friends were doing. Is he having fun? Sure, and that's great, but it is to be hoped that he gets beyond that sometime soon after junior high. Given the rapid rate of level gain in 3rd. Edition and the new 'Epic Level' rules, I can foresee the sort of play of my Brother-In-Law's young friends as becoming the standard progression for most new players. Younger DM's simply won't have the time to mature before being asked to handle campaigning at levels of play with complexities that challenge DM's with 20 years experience. The rules seem to cultivate more Munchkins, not fewer. Once Munchkinized, few players out grow it. They either leave the Hobby or they remain min/maxing munchkins into thier 30's. They probably become the same people that use trainers, cheats, and PK in MMOLG's.

For the record, the kids had fun, but were clearly upset and disillusioned that I'd destroyed there all powerful characters so easily. (It was of course only a dream, so no one stayed dead.) I don't know if they ever out grew that. My Brother-In-Law quit that group and became a reasonable but occasional player afterwards. [/B]

So basically, you lorded your maturity - both as a person and as a player - over a bunch of young teens because they were playing like...a bunch of young teens. When I was thirteen, that style of play used to thrill me too. When I grew up, I put off childish things.

Snobbery of older gamers towards young gamers is really destructive, and while proving that god killing is more difficult than teens figure is not too bad, ruining the hobby for people just sucks.

Not every munchkin grows up to become a min/maxing rules rapist with a god-killing fetish. None of my group did. Maybe "Epic Level" will feed the munchkins, but if we adults are as mature as we think we are, then surely there's something in it for us. Or is this just a way to feel superior at someone else's expense?