D&D 5E Should D&D 5e have Epic Levels?

[doctorbadwolf]

Check the CR 9-11 creatures. They all have well over 100 hp and can make 2-3 attacks. Mooks with several attacks and 100+ hp? A bookkeeping nightmare.

I’ve run a game at tier 4. It’s a mess. The saving throw issue is real, and it’s awful to have a player taken out for several rounds by a stun or incapacitate because they have a 0-10% chance of success. Massive hp pools everywhere, just bags of hp since that becomes the main defense as opposed to AC.

I can do epic boons, or not advancing numbers. But then how is that different from what we already have?

I have also run and played in games at those levels, and experienced no particular problems (or at least, no more than at other tiers, Bc CR is a crapshoot in 5e at literally every level).

You might note, before I continue, that I already said earlier that I voted “no”.

However, I do support a 10-level Epic Destiny set of features that can be chosen when “epic” is turned on, whether that is at level 1, 11, 3, 17, or 20, and that can also be spread out to every other level starting at level 1. An ED would be features similar to boons and such, but organized to fit an epic theme and concept without a DM having to figure out each ability by hand every time.

Post 20, it wouldn’t increase basic numbers, because then you have to adjust many many monsters CR and texts.

 

[Imaculata]

Having more options is always good.

 

[wingsandsword]

Okay, so this thread is based around one question: Should D&D 5e have Epic Levels?

So, have at it. Answer the poll, and please comment down below with your thoughts on this topic.

If you believe so, should they just be normal class progression, but at higher levels? If yes, too what level? 30? 40? If not, should it be like Prestige Classes, or just multiclassing?

If you answered no, please say why. Is it because of epic spellcasting? Is it because most campaigns don't reach high levels? Or, do you just not care about this enough to want it?

If you're undecided, please say why.

I have been homebrewing a class system up to level 30, and would like to get some information from the community of how you feel on this topic.

Epic levels are an intrinsic part of D&D.

1e had modules going up to 100th level (Throne of Bloodstone). A few classes only went into the teens (Monks, Assassins, Druids), but otherwise characters could go arbitrarily high.

2e eliminated the arbitrary limits, and let all classes go to at least 20th level. It had the first dedicated high-level books for D&D in Dragon Kings and High Level Campaigns, which posited the idea that mortal progression stops at 30th level, and between 20th and 30th level characters start to become very powerful if not outright transformational into quasi-divine entities.

3e had the same mentality as 2e, with this regard, that the core rules would go to 20, but you could go higher if you wanted, and they got rid of the arbirary cap at 30.

4e put rules for up to 30th level right in the core rules

5e introduces the idea that progression stops at 20. . .and that 21+ level characters are apparently badwrongfun. . .and of course people rush to defend it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Having more options is always good.

I agree.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Epic levels are an intrinsic part of D&D.

Survey says: nope. If D&D beyond is any kind of gauge (and why wouldn't it be) then only 10% of games are even extending above 10th. HALF of the classic 20 level progression is already UNUSED. It has ALWAYS been that way. Past surveys even back into 1E/2E era place the most popular levels of play BELOW 10th and in fact generally peak at about 7th. ALWAYS have. Unless there's some ENORMOUS and bizzarely silent majority who are doing/wanting a lot of high level and beyond kinds of gaming then it makes no sense. In fact, it makes more sense to me to all but abandon content and concern for gameplay above 10th level.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm going to go out on a limb, and say... honestly, it sounds to me like the level and style of play desired here really requires a different ruleset - the mechanics of 5e were not built for it, and are not well-suited to it... and if you tried to include it in the design from the beginning, the play experience of levels 1-20 would have suffered.

No ruleset does everything well - they all have their limits of power and genre in which they work well, outside of which they work less well (to downright poorly).

I don't quite agree that 1-20 inherently has to "suffer" for having epic play if designed in from the start, but it would probably be different, like with some monsters and enemies aimed at higher or epic levels, for example. I think 5E actually suffers slightly for trying to cram some epic stuff into 18-20.

Agree that not every system does everything well, but think its reasonable to hope for D&D to do post-20 well, as it has done in multiple editions, particularly BX/RC and 4E (4E had some problems post 11 or so but they didn't get any worse past 20 - arguably they got a little better).

Yeah. 5e can do a ranger just fine. It just can do one single class that encompasses everyone's preferred ranger.

I think it could have got a lot closer than it did (as shown by later takes). Certainly not every vision would have fit into the PHB though because there are more than three popular visions of the Ranger. That said, if you had a solid Hunter, Beastmaster and Monster Specialist/quasi-Witcher Ranger you'd have been pretty good.

 

[dave2008]

It works, but it's also a mess.

Not IME, but we are only lvl 15. We did do a couple 20th lvl one shot adventures and they went quite well, but it has been about 4+ years so my memory is a bit foggy.

CR? A huge gamble.

I never use CR. We didn't have it in 1e and I don't need it in 5e. I just design the encounter that makes sense. It is the players job to figure out how to deal with it.

How do you challenge players?

Not really something I have had to worry about. I've always been able to challenge my players. Not sure how to help you there, it seems easy to me (but my players are not power gamers / optimizers).

It's so swingy and hit-and-miss. Huge hp pools, low ACs. Everyone hitting all the time since hp are the main defensive attribute. Oh, and non-proficient saves against action-denial effects... 0%-5% chance of success.

OK, it that is your problem simply buff ACs and saves. I have a hard time believing you couldn't solve that one.

Go epic and save DCs go even higher, which means your non-proficient saves auto-fail. Attacks hit 95% of the time.

As noted above, it is pretty easy to buff saves and ACs. Heck, I feel this really should have been included in the DMG. Something like: "Increase monster ACs and saves by 1 per tier" (epic being tier 5 & 6 if it is 10 more levels). So all epic monsters would get a +5 or 6 to every save and AC. So now your ancient red dragon has an AC 28. That works well enough.

Are spellcasters going to be pulling off three 9th-level spells per day? How many 8th-level spells?

I don't know, but based on the trend in the PHB, I could see two 8th lvl spells at 22, two 9th lvl spells at 25, and one 10th lvl spell at 30. That seems fine to me. Still less spells than 3e I believe.

How do you use CR 10ish creatures as mooks when they have enormous hp pools for "minions" and may possess innate spellcasting or other complex mechanics.

There a lots of ways you can do it. Personally I use a version of the swarm rules to create hordes or regiments of monsters. However, it is worth noting that at lvl 20 PCs can already deal more than 100DPR, so even CR 10ish monsters are going to be pretty mooky without any changes.

It'd be a bookkeeping nightmare.

Could be, but it doesn't have to be. Also, just because you can't or don't want to handle the added complexity of epic level battles isn't a good reason to deny those you can or want to. Not every type of game is for everyone.

 

[GreyLord]

I've done epic play in 5e using the rules provided, and it worked pretty good...so I'm undecided.

If you had asked me when 5e came out, I'd have been absolutely onboard with epic levels.

Now, I don't know. It could be fun, but playing with the epic boons and an occasional supernatural gift is an absolute blast.

 

[Teemu]

Not IME, but we are only lvl 15. We did do a couple 20th lvl one shot adventures and they went quite well, but it has been about 4+ years so my memory is a bit foggy.
I never use CR. We didn't have it in 1e and I don't need it in 5e. I just design the encounter that makes sense. It is the players job to figure out how to deal with it.
Not really something I have had to worry about. I've always been able to challenge my players. Not sure how to help you there, it seems easy to me (but my players are not power gamers / optimizers).
OK, it that is your problem simply buff ACs and saves. I have a hard time believing you couldn't solve that one.

As noted above, it is pretty easy to buff saves and ACs. Heck, I feel this really should have been included in the DMG. Something like: "Increase monster ACs and saves by 1 per tier" (epic being tier 5 & 6 if it is 10 more levels). So all epic monsters would get a +5 or 6 to every save and AC. So now your ancient red dragon has an AC 28. That works well enough.
I don't know, but based on the trend in the PHB, I could see two 8th lvl spells at 22, two 9th lvl spells at 25, and one 10th lvl spell at 30. That seems fine to me. Still less spells than 3e I believe.
There a lots of ways you can do it. Personally I use a version of the swarm rules to create hordes or regiments of monsters. However, it is worth noting that at lvl 20 PCs can already deal more than 100DPR, so even CR 10ish monsters are going to be pretty mooky without any changes.

Could be, but it doesn't have to be. Also, just because you can't or don't want to handle the added complexity of epic level battles isn't a good reason to deny those you can or want to. Not every type of game is for everyone.

Level 15 is still tier 3 though. It's not quite as crazy as levels 17+. The issue with challenging players is that it's tough to create challenges that are "tough but fun". The CR rules work okay at lower levels but rapidly break down at higher levels. If you go even further beyond into levels 21+, things just get even more difficult.

I'm not just talking about monster ACs and saves. I'm talking about player saves. If you have to start changing the system so that it works, how do you imagine WotC publishing epic levels when they're already so reluctant to make changes to the published rules? It just sounds like a huge hassle.

Also, what's an "epic monster"? CR 30 tarrasque is a fine challenge for level 18 PCs. What's the CR 40 creature?

The problem with CR 10ish "mooks" is that you have to resolve more actions, since they do more attacks. They can also have spells that you have to keep track of. It's much more complex to run six stone golems or young red dragons than it is to run six goblins. But if you go epic, you're supposed to use these CR 10+ creatures as the supporting cast, in the way you use CR 1/2 creatures at level 10. Or is WotC going to publish swarm versions of stone golems and young red dragons? I don't see it happening.

 

[Parmandur]

I put in "no," but actually because 5E already has Epic levels: 17-20, and any boons or supernatural gifts the DM wants to grant past that.