The ELH is a great book (if you know how to use it)!

[Aust Diamondew]

I have found that the epic rules work best when you simply ignore the word "epic" and all the baggage that goes with it, and just embrace the mechanics as a means of playing D&D on a larger scale.

I completely agree with that statement.

 

[buzzard]

I'm pretty ambivalent on the whole good or bad ELH thing myself. I've never played using it, so I can't really hold too founded an opinion.

However the notion of commons all being high level just doesn't work for me.
Let's be honest, how could anyone ever die? If Joe Commoner is 5th level, he'll have close to 20 hitpoints. Daggers have become a joke, and the headman's axe just doesn't cut it (I know, coup de grace is different). All of the DCs set in the game will break (DC for mastework armor? BFD for mr 10th level smith). Nope, I can't really see that adjustment as being a positive one.

buzzard

 

[mmadsen]

I personally love the ELH (Epic Level Handbook).

Could you be more specific about what the Epic-Level Handbook provides that you like?

For example, the notion that most NPCs are level 1 is a silly assumption that only works in a campaign setting where level 20 is the pinnacle of human achievement.

I don't think that making a typical person 1st-level is flawed because atypical people are 20th-level; I think the problem is that a 1st-level character isn't particularly competent at what he does (compared to a character with no ranks in the same skills).

Then there's the entirely separate issue that any 1st-level character who becomes more competent at anything (one more level) becomes vastly more competent in combat (one more hit die).

Once levels go beyond 20, NPCs have to scale upwards as well. With the average NPC level shifting upward from level 1 to anywhere from levels 5 to 15 or even higher. And most major NPCs should have epic levels on par with the PC's.

What does this get us? Why not go in the exact opposite direction and declare 10th-level superhuman?

If you normalize the entire system to a new scale, what changes? Not relative power, obviously, just absolute power. In D&D, that means absolute skill ranks, number of feats, and overall magic level.

You can easily argue that a competent adult should be 5th- to 10th-level, so that he is, in fact, more competent than an untrained adult -- at whatever skill we're discussing -- given the nature of the d20 roll. So absolute skill ranks do matter.

With the dramatically increased number of feats available, we've enumerated so many things that a character can do -- things that used to be abstract, before the additional rules were printed. If you want to design a quasi-Mongolian steppe nomad, he needs the appropriate mounted archery feats; he won't be convincing as a 1st-level Barbarian (or Fighter, or Ranger, or Expert). If you want to design an Arthurian Knight, he needs the appropriate mounted combat feats; he won't be convincing as a 1st-level Fighter (or Paladin). So that absolute number of feats matters.

The biggest thing that changes with level though is magic. If a competent blacksmith is a 5th-level Expert, and a competent sell-sword is a 5th-level Fighter, then a competent wizard is 5th-level too -- and having lots of 5th-level spellcasters cruising around certainly changes the feel of the game (and of the game world in general). The overall magic level scales dramatically with the character level of typical, competent characters.

 

[Aaron2]

I think the problem is that a 1st-level character isn't particularly competent at what he does (compared to a character with no ranks in the same skills).

I skilled character is at a minimum +7 better than an unskilled one. How is that not competent? With a high ability score (i.e. natural talent), he's hitting DC 20 skill checks all the time (by taking 10). That's the difference between a "typical" item and a "superior" one.

If you want to design a quasi-Mongolian steppe nomad, he needs the appropriate mounted archery feats; he won't be convincing as a 1st-level Barbarian (or Fighter, or Ranger, or Expert).

A first level barbarian can have Mounted Combat and Mounted Archery. How is that not convincing?

A first level knight (fighter) can have Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, and Spririted Charge. Again, what else does he -need-?


Aaron

 

[Desdichado]

What is the 'fundamental flaw' in the concept of Epic Prestige Classes?

The fundamental flaw is that prestige classes are supposed to be of limited duration. Stretching them into epic levels doesn't make much sense unless you rejig the concept, and do as you suggest; all epic levels operate as a prestige class of sorts. I could have gotten behind that idea.

As for the city of Union and its much-maligned Sentinels... 25th-level beat cops are only absurd if you assume that the average NPC is 1st through 5th level.

In which case nothing else makes any sense, unless your average teenager is coming out of the blocks already at 10th level. Otherwise it makes no sense that anybody survives into even high standard levels, much less epic levels.

 

[Desdichado]

The diceless Amber roleplaying game, based on Zelazny's "epic" series, actually takes this a step further -- the character with the higher score simply wins any contest involving that trait. Don't get in a sword fight with the best swordfighter in the multiverse; he's immortal, and he's been training for centuries.

At which point it effectively ceases to be a game, and is instead a (poor) storytelling mechanism. The use of probability is important in creating tension, creating the feeling that no matter the odds the little guy might pull through.

 

[mmadsen]

Epic play also requires a completely different mind-set than normal play. In my experience, most epic games are a grand affair with a cast of thousands. Most epic PC's have become mighty lords or ladies with their own personal entourages of followers and henchmen. Armies clashing, mighty magics, and the labyrinthine politics of sprawling empires are the rule. To make epic games work, you also have to be willing to embrace the grand scale that goes along with it.

To me this is what epic fantasy is all about. Its a shame that more designers don't take the initiative and make an epic level friendly campaign world that can really show off the benefits of epic level games. In my experience, everything that can be done in a low-level game with all that gritty intimacy, can not only be done in an epic level game, but can be done better!

Does anything about "epic" play require that the PCs be 30th-level? 20th-level? 10th-level? Character level has little to do with entourages of followers, clashing armies, and byzantine politics.

 

[Dragonblade]

Lets clarify a few things. A few of you use the word "Epic" to refer to a particular play style. Such as a campaign where the PC are extremely powerful heroes renowned throughout the world.

To me "epic" is simply levels above 20 and the play style you refer to is "mythic". But thats all semantics.

I have noticed that that of everyone who dislikes the epic level rules, they fall into three categories:

1) They tried the ELH with "mythic" play and discovered it doesn't work well.
2) They read the ELH and decided they didn't like, but don't actually have any facts to back up their opinion.
3) They tried to use the ELH but were not willing to scale NPC's to match the epic PCs.

Most of you who didn't like the ELH are lacking when it comes to specific factual examples of imbalanced rules. I challenge any of you to provide a specific example of poor game mechanics or an imbalance in the rules that cannot be rectified by scaling NPCs or monsters. And I already concede that epic spells don't work, so that doesn't count.

Simply put, almost all of you who had trouble using the ELH, had those problems because you didn't scale NPC power, monsters, or challenges. Trying to run 20+ level PCs in a low-level world (i.e. mythic play) will fail every single time.

I concede that the ELH doesn't work with mythic play (you have to scale NPCs and Monsters). And I concede that the epic spells need work.

But the ELH works wonderfully once you understand that you have to scale NPCs, monsters, and challenges.

 

[Dragonblade]

To clarify my previous post. Many of you provided examples, that could apply to all of D&D. I'm looking for specific examples why playing at 20th level works fine, but going up to say 30th level with epic feats and magic, suddenly breaks the game.

 

[Will]

Hmm. I don't see the problem that much... to me, Epic and Planes go hand in hand.

Players become the most powerful guys on the planet? Well, cool. Now they have cross-planar stuff to deal with, like that multidimensional horde sweeping through the multiverse from Dragon (I think it was).

Personally, it makes sense that special cities/locations would contain much more powerful 'regular' folk.

In my 'center city' of the multiverse, the police are staffed primarily by Inevitables. Sure, there are also 1st level merchants, but the level mix goes MUCH higher than typical communities back home.