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
Should Epic Be In PH1?
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="Keldryn" data-source="post: 5777471" data-attributes="member: 11999"><p><strong>Historical Context Is Important</strong></p><p></p><p>I think that another major reason why the 3.x epic levels (and the 2e "High Level Campaigns") didn't work very well comes down to how the spellcasting classes were presented in the Player's Handbook.</p><p></p><p>Epic levels had to be "more epic" than casting <em>Time Stop, Shapechange, Gate, True Resurrection, Miracle, </em>and <strong><em>Wish</em></strong>.</p><p></p><p>This ultimately comes down to planning for epic levels from the start. 8th and 9th level spells -- and possibly 7th level spells too -- should absolutely be reserved for epic-level characters. Trying to add more powerful abilities on top of such reality-altering magic is just asking for trouble.</p><p></p><p>In retrospect, there seem to be a number of areas where 3e inherited rules from prior editions but completely jettisoned the historical context of those rules. In OD&D, spells only went to 6th level; 7th to 9th level spells were introduced in the <em>Greyhawk</em> supplement, apparently intended for use primarily by the DM in creating high-level opponents. </p><p></p><p>B/X D&D (and the Mentzer Basic & Expert sets) topped out at 6th level spells as well.</p><p></p><p>AD&D incorporated the entire range of spell levels, but the general assumption was that adventurers would retire by around 10th to 12th level; Magic-Users received 9th level spells at 18th level, far beyond the expected range of play. The designers of 3e decided that the average group should be able to progress from 1st through 20th level within a year or two of regular play, so now it was expected that most groups would be using these spells.</p><p></p><p>The D&D <em>Master Set</em> even restricts the <em>Wish</em> spell to Magic-Users of 36th level with a Wisdom of at least 18. 9th level spells begin to be acquired at 21st level, but the <em>Companion Set</em> only contains four such spells (<em>Gate, Meteor Swarm, Maze, Power Work Kill</em>), the rest being left for the Master Set (levels 26-36).</p><p></p><p>I think that 4e got it right by defining the ultimate limits of PC power right from the start. How do you define spells more epic than <em>Wish</em>? And how do you make any other class competitive with a character that can do better than <em>Wish</em>?</p><p></p><p>BECMI did a great job of making each "tier" of play feel different by changing the goals and focus of the game, and that's something that should be maintained at least in spirit. </p><p></p><p>Design the framework of the epic "tier" right from the start -- and we already have a good baseline as to what the ultimate limits of power should be. Then put it aside and detail it in its own supplement where it can be given the treatment it deserves.</p><p></p><p>Those who prefer a little more down-to-earth fantasy game don't even have to know it's there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Keldryn, post: 5777471, member: 11999"] [b]Historical Context Is Important[/b] I think that another major reason why the 3.x epic levels (and the 2e "High Level Campaigns") didn't work very well comes down to how the spellcasting classes were presented in the Player's Handbook. Epic levels had to be "more epic" than casting [I]Time Stop, Shapechange, Gate, True Resurrection, Miracle, [/I]and [B][I]Wish[/I][/B]. This ultimately comes down to planning for epic levels from the start. 8th and 9th level spells -- and possibly 7th level spells too -- should absolutely be reserved for epic-level characters. Trying to add more powerful abilities on top of such reality-altering magic is just asking for trouble. In retrospect, there seem to be a number of areas where 3e inherited rules from prior editions but completely jettisoned the historical context of those rules. In OD&D, spells only went to 6th level; 7th to 9th level spells were introduced in the [I]Greyhawk[/I] supplement, apparently intended for use primarily by the DM in creating high-level opponents. B/X D&D (and the Mentzer Basic & Expert sets) topped out at 6th level spells as well. AD&D incorporated the entire range of spell levels, but the general assumption was that adventurers would retire by around 10th to 12th level; Magic-Users received 9th level spells at 18th level, far beyond the expected range of play. The designers of 3e decided that the average group should be able to progress from 1st through 20th level within a year or two of regular play, so now it was expected that most groups would be using these spells. The D&D [I]Master Set[/I] even restricts the [I]Wish[/I] spell to Magic-Users of 36th level with a Wisdom of at least 18. 9th level spells begin to be acquired at 21st level, but the [I]Companion Set[/I] only contains four such spells ([I]Gate, Meteor Swarm, Maze, Power Work Kill[/I]), the rest being left for the Master Set (levels 26-36). I think that 4e got it right by defining the ultimate limits of PC power right from the start. How do you define spells more epic than [I]Wish[/I]? And how do you make any other class competitive with a character that can do better than [I]Wish[/I]? BECMI did a great job of making each "tier" of play feel different by changing the goals and focus of the game, and that's something that should be maintained at least in spirit. Design the framework of the epic "tier" right from the start -- and we already have a good baseline as to what the ultimate limits of power should be. Then put it aside and detail it in its own supplement where it can be given the treatment it deserves. Those who prefer a little more down-to-earth fantasy game don't even have to know it's there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Should Epic Be In PH1?
Top