Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of Epic Level Play?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6284774" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>As often happens in threads as of late (which is primarily why I'm less and less interested in posting), I can't get my head around what is being said. It seems like the signal of premise to be addressed is drowned by other, often unrelated/nonsupporting/at-odds-with, noisy statements.</p><p></p><p>There seems to be a premise that is something about "in order for Epic play to be functionally compelling, the system's PC build components and resolution schemes should change dynamically to support the end game, which should diverge dramatically from an adventurer warding off goblins from a frontier village." For example, transcending being a singular PC (with relevant point of view, build components, and choices related to those two interfacing) and becoming an overseer of a network who works as proxies; such as in a domain management system (stronghold, wizard tower, etc). <strong>Is that a position that is being put forth?</strong></p><p></p><p>Related to the above, there seems to be a premise that is something about "decision-making necessarily must move from the immediate and tactical to one best encapsulated by a strategic, wide/long-view (spatially and temporally) for Epic play to be functionally compelling." <strong>Is that a position that is being put forth?</strong></p><p></p><p>There also seems to be a premise that is something about "taking on more powerful/influential antagonists doesn't necessitate a visceral 'Epic' experience...being at odds with demon lords versus demon servitors, on its own, bears no difference in feel. It is not definitional for this evolution of antagonist power/influence to bear out a difference in scale/stakes. If a GM just makes the bad guys a collection of bigger numbers/more potent abilities, with no attendant observation of the two premises above, then Epic play fails to be functionally compelling." <strong> Is that a position that is being put forth?</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6284774, member: 6696971"] As often happens in threads as of late (which is primarily why I'm less and less interested in posting), I can't get my head around what is being said. It seems like the signal of premise to be addressed is drowned by other, often unrelated/nonsupporting/at-odds-with, noisy statements. There seems to be a premise that is something about "in order for Epic play to be functionally compelling, the system's PC build components and resolution schemes should change dynamically to support the end game, which should diverge dramatically from an adventurer warding off goblins from a frontier village." For example, transcending being a singular PC (with relevant point of view, build components, and choices related to those two interfacing) and becoming an overseer of a network who works as proxies; such as in a domain management system (stronghold, wizard tower, etc). [B]Is that a position that is being put forth?[/B] Related to the above, there seems to be a premise that is something about "decision-making necessarily must move from the immediate and tactical to one best encapsulated by a strategic, wide/long-view (spatially and temporally) for Epic play to be functionally compelling." [B]Is that a position that is being put forth?[/B] There also seems to be a premise that is something about "taking on more powerful/influential antagonists doesn't necessitate a visceral 'Epic' experience...being at odds with demon lords versus demon servitors, on its own, bears no difference in feel. It is not definitional for this evolution of antagonist power/influence to bear out a difference in scale/stakes. If a GM just makes the bad guys a collection of bigger numbers/more potent abilities, with no attendant observation of the two premises above, then Epic play fails to be functionally compelling." [B] Is that a position that is being put forth?[/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pros and Cons of Epic Level Play?
Top
