The Slow Death of Epic Tier

[the Jester]

Or, you know, Epic by it's own nature is just boring.

And your party kills another god *yawn*. Let's go out drinking.

It's not that Epic tier doesn't contain challenge. It just doesn't contain an easily usable plot devices. It pushes the DM into the hole of "fight the god of the week" territory because that is Epic tiers crutch.

This is exactly why we need some good epic support.

I have run up to high paragon and can't wait to get to epic. I have a good idea of what the end bad guy will be, and all that; but-

Epic tier gaming doesn't have to focus on adversaries at all. The pcs could become the motivators instead. An epic campaign could include

• The founding of an empire and a dynasty by one pc
• The founding of a religion by another
• The creation and population of a plane
• The extermination of a species of monster

There are lots of possibilities other than "fight gods, rinse, repeat"- but a good examination of those possibilities would be really nice to see. Maybe the planet's orbit is wobbling and the pcs must figure out how to stop it (maybe they have to talk to the turtles). Who knows? But a good book akin to the 2e DM's Option: High-Level Campaigns would be excellent.

 

[ArcaneSpringboard]

This is no longer true. Epic tier combat is now as challenging and in fact can be just as lethal as any other tier. I use demons as an example commonly, but that's because demons are truly the most amazing epic tier antagonists available and are extremely well developed. A MV Balor swapping variable resistance for soul stealer is one of the most fierce creatures in all of 4E. The amount of synergy they get really reinforces them as immensely lethal epic tier antagonists, who are almost certainly not the sort to care much for diplomacy (they are demons after all).

It isn't hard to make fighting off hordes of demons both challenging and something that feels essential to the plot (and indeed, the entire multiverse as in many settings daemons have consistently been able to slay Gods when they get the chance). The problem really is variety: What is there is excellent but there is a very limited amount of it. Your options at epic are demons and then everything else supporting them. A book on devils would at least give us another option, but it doesn't fix the problem there aren't enough epic antagonists that aren't strictly planar related or based. While Eberron can have a daemonic invasion, as Khyber is linked to the Abyss far enough down your players are going to get really bored when every campaign is featuring daemons.

For Eberron, theoretically there are the Lords of Dust, the Dragons of Argonnessen and the Daelkyr. But with the Daelkyr, the main abberations all end around Level 20.

 

[Aegeri]

I think people get very obsessed with killing Gods in epic because it seems like a novel and interesting thing to do. There are other things one can do in epic though, like being more involved in the overall world politics (because honestly, how many level 20+ characters are there anyway?) or undergoing quests that others couldn't ever imagine achieving: Like getting deep into Xen'drik in Eberron or into the heart of the Frostfell for example. An "extreme explorer" epic tier would be exciting and interesting as well.

 

[Dungeoneer]

I don't know if it would be a good idea with people complaining that paragon goes by too fast, but maybe something that would make Epic feel more Epic would be to have an 'ascension', where something happens to imbue the players with power and they actually skip a couple levels. Or maybe picking up your ED already feels like that. Never having made it to Epic I just don't know!

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

What is Soul Stealer? Sounds interesting.

 

[Mercurius]

If there is one thing that 4E did right it is that it kept the different tiers interesting and distinct. I speak more from anecdote and imaginative extrapolation as my group has yet to even dip into Paragon tier (we're at 10th level), but I'm exciting about the two tiers going forward and everything I've read points to a positive experience.

The lack of support is problematic and something WotC should probably address with a DMG 3. But I disagree with the notion that Epic adventure ideas are rare and rather monolithic; in addition to what some have said, an Epic campaign could be focused on creating other worlds, uncovering deep truths, guiding the rise and fall of civilization, etc.

I've designed my own campaign world somewhat unconsciously to have different regions more or less appropriate to different tiers. For example, there is a region behind a high mountain range called the Storm Lands that is wracked by terrible magical storms and filled with roaming gargantuan monsters ala the Tarrasque and dragons. The Storm Lands hold the key to many of the secrets of the world; if the PCs get to Epic tier, I will likely provide opportunities and incentive for them to go into it. It isn't a different plane in that it is set in the main world, but its laws are very different.

I also like the idea of a single 30-level campaign bringing a given world to resolution, some kind of finality--some degree of apocalyptic, so that the next campaign would either be set many years in the future after the fall-out of the last campaign, or in an entirely different world. In that sense, Epic tier can be about climaxing the entire campaign setting - a great war, cataclysm, world-saving (or ending) battle or quest. The PCs become new gods for the next campaign, or mythic saviors (or destroyers) of the Old World.

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with ending a campaign at 20th level. Paragon characters are the true heroes of a world; Epic characters are extremely rare, living myths. Paragon characters are the celebrities of a given city or nation; Epic characters have transcended to the level of rulers or legendary heroes. A campaign could end when the characters get to Epic, because they are "off stage" now, no longer adventuring. Lots of different ways to configure this.

 

[Aegeri]

What is Soul Stealer? Sounds interesting.

It replaces variable resistance. It gives a daemon a free action attack with +5 bonus to the attack and damage roll whenever an enemy within the aura (aura 1) spends a healing surge.

 

[FireLance]

Let me throw in what may be a fairly controversial idea: many DMs don't like Epic-level play because Epic-level PCs should have a great deal of ability to change the world, and this is something that they either do not want, or do not feel equipped to handle.

Take a look at the list of motivations for high-levels PCs that the Jester came up with in his post:

The founding of an empire and a dynasty by one pc
The founding of a religion by another
The creation and population of a plane
The extermination of a species of monster​

A DM who is invested in "his" homebrew might not want the PCs' actions interfering with "his" creation. Conversely, a DM who has gone through the Heroic and Paragon tiers by basically running dungeon crawls may find it difficult to switch gears when the PCs' ambitions expand beyond killing monsters and taking their stuff.

I think WotC has tried to address this by tying the flavor of their Epic destinies to the achievement of such goals. If you want to establish an empire and found a dynasty, take the "Dynast Emperor" epic destiny, and after you complete your 30th level quest ("You enter the final 10-square by 10-square room in the Epic planar dungeon. An Epic planar god is guarding an Epic planar artifact.") you automatically succeed at your goal with no additional rolls or effort required on the part of either you or the DM. After that, the campaign reboots and the DM doesn't have to worry about how what you have done will change the campaign setting thereafter. IMO, it's a way of handling PC ambition, but it's not a very satisfying way to do so.

IMO, Epic-level play should be about the PCs trying to make fundamental changes to the world, and seeing the effects of those changes. I guess there's not much that can be done about DMs who don't want the PCs messing with "their" creations, but for the rest, I think a sourcebook on how to handle the types of things that Epic-level PCs might want to do, how to craft problems related to those ambitions that would be challenging but not impossible to overcome, and how the PCs can actually experience (directly or indirectly) the effects (beneficial or otherwise) of their efforts to change the world before the campaign ends would be invaluable. However, given the scope and variety of possible Epic-tier goals, I'm not sure if it is possible.

 

[SKyOdin]

Part of the problem is that the Epic Tier lies beyond the scope of a lot of the fiction that D&D traditionally draws from. A lot of traditional fantasy tends to resemble the heroic tier and sometimes the paragon tier, but very rarely the epic tier. In order to create material for the Epic Tier, D&D may need to expand its general style and source of inspiration.

As it is, D&D cosmology limits it to evil gods being the primary opponent at Epic Tier. This is a bit limiting, and is one of the reasons the monster manuals are a bit anemic at Epic Tier.

I also definitely agree that making the Epic Tier about planar travel is a bad idea. Of course, I never really liked the planes in the first place. If powerful world-shaking monsters and gods dwelled closer to home, Epic Tier D&D would feel a lot more natural.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think the same problem is the root cause of WotC not being able to do Epic Tier right and not being able to make a really good adventure.

Big Numbers Aren't Enough.