Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SKyOdin" data-source="post: 5389684" data-attributes="member: 57939">The truth is that the distinction between truly powerful mortals and gods can be somewhat vague in non-monotheistic religions. Confusing the issue is that there are many grey areas between mortal human and god, such as demi-gods and mortal incarnations of gods.More than anything else though, epic heroes are supposed to be the strongest heroes who are capable of fighting off enemies that threaten the world as a whole. It isn't really possible to create a tier above that without weakening the basic premise of Epic Tier.I will generally agree with that, though it depends somewhat on the god. The term god is pretty broadly defined in polytheistic religions. I wouldn't put the god of a minor river on par with Zeus, for example. The protective god of a single house would likewise not really count as being very epic.This I definitely have to disagree with. There is no way I would put Arthur and Lancelot in separate tiers, to start with. The kind of adventures the Knights of the Round go on tend to be generally similar, and all of them are roughly the same overall strength. Saying that Lancelot gets to be Epic tier is rather arbitrary. I would peg them both as being Paragon tier.Moreover, being Epic isn't about being the strongest in the world. It is about being powerful enough to significantly change the world. By my reckoning, Epic level heroes should only show up once every few centuries within a D&D world, and leave a lasting impact whenever they do. Merely being the strongest in the world isn't enough to be Epic.</blockquote>

Verification