The Ten Commandments of Epic Gaming

[keterys]

Interesting article, thanks for writing it - though I'd suggest only linking to things that are already out, rather than advertising so much.

Your timing was pretty impressive, since I just came off a ton of low-epic (22nd) work, helping write and playtest a module for LFR... and that was a bit of an eye-opener. And things only go up from there.

#1 Big Battles
There is a certain scale of verisimilitude that different people will land on here. I think that such battles should certainly be happening - the gods muster their legions, demons roar out in hordes, etc - but a lot of people actually _won't_ like their fighter doing, say, a "Come and Get It" and pulling in 4 units of 10,000 soldiers to "bloody" them, killing 20,000 soldiers with a swing. Others, though, will be all for it.

That said, I've gotten some shocked looks from people when I talked about hypothetical battles for epic and mentioned the idea of using Dragon minions or Beholder minions. What was a Solo at 9th, could easily be a minion at 26th. And, sure, you can have 20 of them on the field, add 5 every round, _and_ still have a solo Tiamat or whatever to fight.

Don't hedge yourself in with formula ("If you have to represent 64 Orcs then use six units of 10 and 4 individual Orcs.")

#2 Challenging
In talking about epic recently, I basically told someone that you almost have to "cheat" with some parts of encounter design to truly challenge epic PCs. Monkey with damage expressions or monster abilities, liberally apply some themes, make custom hazards, respawn creatures, do back to back encounters, go absolutely nuts with minion xp - anything you're sure would have TPKed people back in heroic, that's a tool in epic.

#3 Collateral Damage
There is a danger here - there is a fine line to tread between something the PCs will care about, and a level of devastation that becomes background noise. In some cases, you'll find that the PCs will shrug off the murder of a deity and explosion of an astral dominion, to fly into a panic that their favorite tavern and barkeep are in danger. You want to make sure you have it, but carefully consider impact as well.

#4 Contrasting Cut Scenes
An interesting technique, particularly with certain groups or if used sparingly, but not unique to epic and one that will be harmful for certain groups. So, a good general DM advice thing to try, but not appropriate for an epic must have. As a counter-example, sometimes it might good to show the heroic group working on stopping a ritual, while the epic group fights against the world ending monster, and only succeeds due to the heroic group.

#5 Explore the Unknown
I absolutely agree with your core statement ("keep something unique for each tier of play, making it stand out more."), but your advice to not go into the planes before epic will be counterproductive for a lot of games, and it's worth note that you still need to occasionally touch back to the known. If the PCs leave their homes and kingdoms and entire world at 21st, and never return, it lessens the impact of their deeds throughout all of epic. Sure, they offed a god, but no one they actually cared about was involved.

#6 Increasing Encounter Difficulty
I think you're a lot better off thinking of it less in terms of "adding levels" to the encounter, as that constrains you. It's good to be prepared for adding additional monsters, or combining an encounter with another, or adding environmental hazards or terrain features - whatever it takes. Also, this is touching back to general DM advice, rather than epic specifically again.

I also think you might be going more towards: The PCs should not expect to blindly charge in and be able to deal with everything, or Sometimes, the PCs should have to either be very careful or have to run.

#7 Titanic Monsters
First, it deserves to be said - gargantuan monsters aren't necessarily 4 x 4. That's simply the minimum size for gargantuan. If you want the Tarrasque to be 20 x 20, make it so.

More on the actual concept - absolutely, PCs should fight a living mountain or castle, fight through the digestive system of the world devourer, or whatever is the appropriate campaign version of Unicron. You can probably only get away with doing it a few times in the course of an entire epic campaign though. And certainly the PCs should also fear small things. Graz'zt should fill them with fear, even as he sits there sipping wine at his merely Medium-ness.

In a lot of cases, an epic threat is less about its statistics and more about its manipulation of events and access to plot powers (rituals, allies, magical allies, etc). For instance, the ancient red dragon that has compelled every dragon with a drop of its blood to burn the world, while it channels a ritual to crack open the earth to cover it in flames can have the same stats as the ancient red dragon that sleeps in a cave waiting for adventurers to kill it, and that's just a presentation question.

#8 Politics
Weirdly, by your charts politics should actually have been embraced in paragon, not epic. Epic is often more about religion and ties to creation. So, more about gods dying or being created, about the war for control of creation or destruction, the Far Realms, shard of evil for the abyss, etc.

#9 Epic Expectations
Absolutely agreed about the premise, and not at all about the solution. Some games could be about worshippers and god-making, and some simply won't be. In particular, it's going to be a hot button take it or leave it for some players and for many character concepts.

#10 Artifacts
I actually like the 4E artifact system, that's usable from base level. I will say that 4E isn't usually about singular awesome items, but in a "total package" that end up tremendously powerful, so you might actually want to have less items and focus more on spectacular single items with your method.

That, and most "REALLY COOL TM" items really aren't all that much. Krull's Glaive? Oh, you mean the +1 Rebounding Handaxe (Level 2)? I mean, it returned to his hand and could bounce into other things!! A lot of the times, it's all about comparisons and context, and how easy it is to get magic items in general.

Anyhow, for what it's worth, EPIC3-2 Cracks in the Crimson Cage for LFR would hit #s 1, 2, 3, 5, 7... maybe 10 depending on what's approved. Possibly #6 depending on what you're actually going for there (less DefCon levels and more "You can't deal with this right now"). #4 and #8 usually won't work for the LFR campaign structure as well as they do for a home game. Your solution for #9 would actively harm the adventure, but I think the premise is served regardless... so perhaps #9 could be added to the list, in a different way

I can't speak too much on E1-3, as I haven't played E2 or E3 at all, but I can say that "Nightbringer" from that series would likely qualify for #10, and fighting for control of souls and resurrection is fairly epic. The worm in E1 with various body parts could have also easily been declared much larger, if you wanted to go that route.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Interesting article, thanks for writing it -

I appreciate the kind words and thanks for taking the time out to pen such a lengthy reply.

I grew up on epic and it just seems weird that 4E isn't getting it right...even though the system is (potentially) near perfect for it. Hopefully all it takes is a bit of nudging in the right direction.

though I'd suggest only linking to things that are already out, rather than advertising so much.

Noted.

Your timing was pretty impressive, since I just came off a ton of low-epic (22nd) work, helping write and playtest a module for LFR... and that was a bit of an eye-opener. And things only go up from there.

Sounds interesting, I'll keep my eye out for it. Best of luck with the module.

#1 Big Battles
There is a certain scale of verisimilitude that different people will land on here. I think that such battles should certainly be happening - the gods muster their legions, demons roar out in hordes, etc - but a lot of people actually _won't_ like their fighter doing, say, a "Come and Get It" and pulling in 4 units of 10,000 soldiers to "bloody" them, killing 20,000 soldiers with a swing. Others, though, will be all for it.

Theres nothing that says it has to be that way, but as you note (and I agree) some people are just going to get a big kick out of that.

That said, I've gotten some shocked looks from people when I talked about hypothetical battles for epic and mentioned the idea of using Dragon minions or Beholder minions. What was a Solo at 9th, could easily be a minion at 26th. And, sure, you can have 20 of them on the field, add 5 every round, _and_ still have a solo Tiamat or whatever to fight.

Agreed. When I first saw the 4E rules I was all for Gargantuan minions at epic (and so forth) simply through rank scaling, but the game itself blatantly shies away from that approach to the extent where I started questioning whether it was the best way forward. Glad I came to my senses though.

Don't hedge yourself in with formula ("If you have to represent 64 Orcs then use six units of 10 and 4 individual Orcs.")

It does look a bit slanted when representing 9999 orcs or whatever, when really you can always just lower the level by 1 and treat it as a 10,000 strong mob.

#2 Challenging
In talking about epic recently, I basically told someone that you almost have to "cheat" with some parts of encounter design to truly challenge epic PCs. Monkey with damage expressions or monster abilities, liberally apply some themes, make custom hazards, respawn creatures, do back to back encounters, go absolutely nuts with minion xp - anything you're sure would have TPKed people back in heroic, that's a tool in epic.

Mike Shea's document on Running Epic Tier Games really should be the wake up call for not only those running Epic tier campaigns but also Epic tier game designers.

#3 Collateral Damage
There is a danger here - there is a fine line to tread between something the PCs will care about, and a level of devastation that becomes background noise. In some cases, you'll find that the PCs will shrug off the murder of a deity and explosion of an astral dominion, to fly into a panic that their favorite tavern and barkeep are in danger. You want to make sure you have it, but carefully consider impact as well.

Well exactly, closer to home something is, the more we care about.

#4 Contrasting Cut Scenes
An interesting technique, particularly with certain groups or if used sparingly, but not unique to epic and one that will be harmful for certain groups.

Harmful?

So, a good general DM advice thing to try, but not appropriate for an epic must have.

I still think it sneaks into the top ten simply by way of introducing contrast.

As a counter-example, sometimes it might good to show the heroic group working on stopping a ritual, while the epic group fights against the world ending monster, and only succeeds due to the heroic group.

There are a good number of possible derivations on this theme.

Might be tricky to pull off but I'd love to set it up whereby the two groups thought they were acting in concert but were unwittingly working against each other (maybe an illusion clouding the mind of one group).

#5 Explore the Unknown
I absolutely agree with your core statement ("keep something unique for each tier of play, making it stand out more."), but your advice to not go into the planes before epic will be counterproductive for a lot of games, and it's worth note that you still need to occasionally touch back to the known.

Well I was thinking that in the Paragon tier, rather than go to the planes you could have them come to you. That way you sow the seeds for later trips out there.

If the PCs leave their homes and kingdoms and entire world at 21st, and never return, it lessens the impact of their deeds throughout all of epic. Sure, they offed a god, but no one they actually cared about was involved.

Who says they never return? Having something new does not mean you automatically disregard something old, far from it.

#6 Increasing Encounter Difficulty
I think you're a lot better off thinking of it less in terms of "adding levels" to the encounter, as that constrains you. It's good to be prepared for adding additional monsters, or combining an encounter with another, or adding environmental hazards or terrain features - whatever it takes.

I just wrote a page yesterday on this (much better than the throwaway comments made in the article)...but no point advertising that till its out I guess.

Also, this is touching back to general DM advice, rather than epic specifically again.

True, but as you noted previously, at epic you have to almost cheat to challenge the PCs, meaning such tricks are much more important for a DM to have up its proverbial sleeves.

I also think you might be going more towards: The PCs should not expect to blindly charge in and be able to deal with everything, or Sometimes, the PCs should have to either be very careful or have to run.

Theres so little of that required from Epic PC parties that you wonder if DMs will have to signpost it a few times before the players get the hang of it.

DM: "It was Orcus riding a Tarrasque against the PCs who were stripped naked and left with no equipment...why didn't you run"
Player: "Hey...were Epic Level...I still thought we could've taken 'em."

#7 Titanic Monsters
First, it deserves to be said - gargantuan monsters aren't necessarily 4 x 4. That's simply the minimum size for gargantuan. If you want the Tarrasque to be 20 x 20, make it so.

I know, the planet in MM3 is Gargantuan...with a reach 4.

There are no rules for really big monsters and I will refrain from further speculation about any for 4-5 weeks.

More on the actual concept - absolutely, PCs should fight a living mountain or castle, fight through the digestive system of the world devourer, or whatever is the appropriate campaign version of Unicron. You can probably only get away with doing it a few times in the course of an entire epic campaign though.

I'm guesstimating you might get away with it once every 3 levels or so, maybe dropping to once every other level at the Immortal Tier.

And certainly the PCs should also fear small things. Graz'zt should fill them with fear, even as he sits there sipping wine at his merely Medium-ness.

I don't judge Yoda by his size either.

In a lot of cases, an epic threat is less about its statistics and more about its manipulation of events and access to plot powers (rituals, allies, magical allies, etc). For instance, the ancient red dragon that has compelled every dragon with a drop of its blood to burn the world, while it channels a ritual to crack open the earth to cover it in flames can have the same stats as the ancient red dragon that sleeps in a cave waiting for adventurers to kill it, and that's just a presentation question.

I agree on the Ritual side of things. Statistically you don't need to individually be able to blow up a city when you can do it with a ritual.

I remember that in our campaign Graz'zt was able to Temporally Stasise a continent.

#8 Politics
Weirdly, by your charts politics should actually have been embraced in paragon, not epic. Epic is often more about religion and ties to creation. So, more about gods dying or being created, about the war for control of creation or destruction, the Far Realms, shard of evil for the abyss, etc.

Yes, start introducing politics at Paragon tier. Epic politicking often has a religious element. Especially if the PCs are gods or god-wannabe's.

#9 Epic Expectations
Absolutely agreed about the premise, and not at all about the solution. Some games could be about worshippers and god-making, and some simply won't be. In particular, it's going to be a hot button take it or leave it for some players and for many character concepts.

I know, but I can only go on my own experiences here. The worship 'angle' was probably the single greatest facet of the epic experience - it really does tie the players emotions to the events which impact the little people. I can't wax lyrical about this enough, but I know its a hard sell.

#10 Artifacts
I actually like the 4E artifact system, that's usable from base level. I will say that 4E isn't usually about singular awesome items, but in a "total package" that end up tremendously powerful, so you might actually want to have less items and focus more on spectacular single items with your method.

The 4E artifact system is great. I am debating (with myself) the idea of whether non-artifact items should scale beyond level 30 for a hypothetical Immortal Tier.

That, and most "REALLY COOL TM" items really aren't all that much. Krull's Glaive? Oh, you mean the +1 Rebounding Handaxe (Level 2)? I mean, it returned to his hand and could bounce into other things!! A lot of the times, it's all about comparisons and context, and how easy it is to get magic items in general.

I saw the Glaive as more of a +6 dancing vorpal super-shuriken.

Anyhow, for what it's worth, EPIC3-2 Cracks in the Crimson Cage for LFR would hit #s 1, 2, 3, 5, 7... maybe 10 depending on what's approved. Possibly #6 depending on what you're actually going for there (less DefCon levels and more "You can't deal with this right now"). #4 and #8 usually won't work for the LFR campaign structure as well as they do for a home game.

Anywhere we can get more info on this...google wasn't a great help.

Your solution for #9 would actively harm the adventure, but I think the premise is served regardless... so perhaps #9 could be added to the list, in a different way

Some things, like #9, need built into the campaign rather than a single adventure.

I can't speak too much on E1-3, as I haven't played E2 or E3 at all, but I can say that "Nightbringer" from that series would likely qualify for #10, and fighting for control of souls and resurrection is fairly epic. The worm in E1 with various body parts could have also easily been declared much larger, if you wanted to go that route.

Coincidently enough I was just working tonight on a review of E2: Kingdom of the Ghouls for the website. Nightbringer is pretty cool (they should have made a bigger fuss about it in the module).

Maybe I was too harsh saying the E series rates a 0 out of 10 on the epic checklist. But in all honesty I think WotC need a kick up the pants as regards the Epic Tier (though the Shademaw article is certainly a step in the right direction).

 

[keterys]

I just wrote a page yesterday on this (much better than the throwaway comments made in the article)...but no point advertising that till its out I guess.

Hah, some advertisement good - but you hit up two products off the bat and two more later in, and it actually felt like more when I read it the first time through.

In general, the premise that epic has flaws and they should be addressed (as you and Mike Shea have done) is absolutely a good thing to talk about, it just felt a little odd to have multiple "I'll do this soon" products cited as _the_ way to fix things.

Theres so little of that required from Epic PC parties that you wonder if DMs will have to signpost it a few times before the players get the hang of it.

Yeah, I'm hoping the sign posts are large enough in the encounter I'm thinking of...

DM: "It was Orcus riding a Tarrasque against the PCs who were stripped naked and left with no equipment...why didn't you run"
Player: "Hey...were Epic Level...I still thought we could've taken 'em."

Perfect!

There are no rules for really big monsters and I will refrain from further speculation about any for 4-5 weeks.

Heheh.

I'm guesstimating you might get away with it once every 3 levels or so, maybe dropping to once every other level at the Immortal Tier.

Exactly what I was thinking.

I saw the Glaive as more of a +6 dancing vorpal super-shuriken.

Oh, I'm sure most people would think of it as something more awesome than what I said - I was just going for kind of a least common denominator example

Anywhere we can get more info on this...google wasn't a great help.

It's not out for another month or so (May 23rd in theory, but out of my hands), and it's... for a very different market (Living Forgotten Realms) than a lot of groups, but I guess it'll be up for download and easy to steal ideas from, or work in any Carceri adventure, so, sure, let's see...

It's a sequel to EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt, where freshly epic PCs are summoned to save Corellon's Realm of Arvandor
EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt
Corellon's realm of Arvandor is known for more than its majestic forests and splendid islands. The exalted of Arvandor track down and destroy abominations that carve paths through the dominion in an eternal event known as the Glorious Hunt. When Corellon and his exarchs receive more than they bargained for, will you join the hunt? A three-round Living Forgotten Realms adventure set in Arvandor for 21st level characters. This adventure is the premier of the Living Forgotten Realms epic campaign.
Free Download: http://www.livingforgottenrealms.com/adventures/EPIC0301LFR.zip

And its writeup is something like
EPIC3-2 Cracks in the Crimson Cage
The trail of a plot to assassinate a god and despoil his realm leads to Carceri, an astral prison that detains powerful abominations, disobedient angels, and horrors from beyond the known planes. Do you dare risk being trapped for eternity with beings feared even by the gods? A three-round Living Forgotten Realms adventure set in Carceri for 22nd level characters. This adventure is a direct sequel to EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt.

Maybe I was too harsh saying the E series rates a 0 out of 10 on the epic checklist. But in all honesty I think WotC need a kick up the pants as regards the Epic Tier (though the Shademaw article is certainly a step in the right direction).

I think their realization that they do is part of why we're not seeing as much epic stuff lately - until they can kinda figure stuff out.

 

[Barastrondo]

A world is a big place, can the PCs be everywhere at once though...its very unlikely.

One of the basic rules of world-building I set for myself is that if a culture exists, it should be interesting and accessible enough that players would enjoy playing characters from, or exploring, that culture. This is probably one of those things that goes against me: the best way to make something expendable is to make sure that nobody is that attached to it (like those throwaway civilizations blown up in comic books, for instance). Of course, for a civilization to justify its existence in the first place, it needs to be sufficiently interesting that players become attached to it...

As you yourself note, you mostly play Heroic Tier.

Does that imply tyranny?

Or maybe we lend an extra layer of angst for those who hail from [insert place] who were out of the country when it got blew up.

Maybe, but to go back to that one point I've been stressing, the players' preferences should be considered. Character angst is good. Player angst is a different thing. "But I wanted to go back there

Exactly, its a tried and tested trope for establishing the threat posed by a villains and monsters.

Sure, but the Worf effect is still a potential pitfall. When it's done well, it can be effective: but when it's done poorly, the writer's hand becomes more evident. When you have something like a city fall or a civilization be wiped out, I think it's much more effective if it's seen as the natural result of events that have been playing out all along. I've been in games where the GM tried to establish stakes by gestures like this, but it was evident that establishing stakes was the main reason that the destruction happened, and the in-game rationale was added after the fact. It knocked us out of the game rather than drawing us in. So while the tactic can work, it's far from infallible.

While that can certainly mean the scale of destruction (and often does since combat is one of the focuses of the game), it can also mean the scale of creation, be that natural creation, like the great world tree Yggdrasil, or something forged like a Flying Fortress carved from a mountain.

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about. Epic exploration, or epic culture-founding, don't necessarily need invoked apocalypses.

So to answer your question, you can have epic without epic destruction just as much as you can have D&D without combat.

Hm. I'm still not sure I agree with that. If you can have epic combat without cataclysmic destruction, then I think there are more variables at play. That said, I'm suspecting that part of the issue may be the 10-level band of an entire tier: if you're trying to fill it up, and there are fewer themes available to you, it's either be repetitive or use every one of the more limited tools. If epic ran only for 3-5 levels you would run less risk of repetition.

The ideas mentioned seem better expressed in the Heroic and Paragon Tiers. Some stories or themes are better handled in the lower tiers.

That's what I'm worried about. I really don't want epic to blend together into a more generic D&D-style melange, where cultural distinctions and themes are set aside and every setting becomes Planescape or Spelljammer. Variety is one of the things that keeps me coming back to D&D; optimally, I would like every game to be just as distinctly thematic at the climax as it was when the players started out.

[The epic tier can have its own variety. This returns us to something I mention in the article itself. Keep something unique for each tier of play. Each tier should have its own new wonders to reveal.

Something akin to Italian-themed Urban-intrigue at the Epic tier might revolve around a plot to assassinate the Lady of Pain in Sigil.

That's unfortunate, because it loses its cultural distinction: the Italian-style feuding houses and vendettas style of urban play winds up in the same place as the sword-and-sorcery Lankhmar-inspired style of urban play, and the previous 20 levels of visuals and bibliography don't inform it.

I think you may just want to stick to Heroic and Paragon tier affairs and assume that any epic 'world-shaking' business is happening 'off-stage' and being taken care of by a group of epic NPCs working behind the scenes.

Such is my suspicion (although minus the epic NPCs and the "world-shaking"; can't think of a reason to include them if they aren't necessary, and epic NPCs tend to leave an Elminstery taste in some players' mouths).

I'd still like to address some of the things that are normally reserved for epic tier: the concepts of epic destinies and the odd "retirements" that they give players are very neat, as are some of the power players like djinn and efreet. But it may simply be a matter of working them into high paragon. If we're not sustaining epic-inspired play over a band of 10 levels, there may be more room for thematic variety.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hah, some advertisement good - but you hit up two products off the bat and two more later in, and it actually felt like more when I read it the first time through.

I have a habit of that, apologies.

In general, the premise that epic has flaws and they should be addressed (as you and Mike Shea have done) is absolutely a good thing to talk about, it just felt a little odd to have multiple "I'll do this soon" products cited as _the_ way to fix things.

Well, some answers are just bigger than others.

Yeah, I'm hoping the sign posts are large enough in the encounter I'm thinking of...

It's not out for another month or so (May 23rd in theory, but out of my hands), and it's... for a very different market (Living Forgotten Realms) than a lot of groups, but I guess it'll be up for download and easy to steal ideas from, or work in any Carceri adventure, so, sure, let's see...

Best of luck with it.

It's a sequel to EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt, where freshly epic PCs are summoned to save Corellon's Realm of Arvandor
EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt
Corellon's realm of Arvandor is known for more than its majestic forests and splendid islands. The exalted of Arvandor track down and destroy abominations that carve paths through the dominion in an eternal event known as the Glorious Hunt. When Corellon and his exarchs receive more than they bargained for, will you join the hunt? A three-round Living Forgotten Realms adventure set in Arvandor for 21st level characters. This adventure is the premier of the Living Forgotten Realms epic campaign.
Free Download: http://www.livingforgottenrealms.com/adventures/EPIC0301LFR.zip

Thanks for the link. I have downloaded it and had a quick flash through, hopefully I'll get to spend a bit more time with it over the next few days and have a proper read.

If I had to make one criticism at this stage (which could be WAY off the mark) it would be that the Encounter Levels are too low for a 21st-level Party.

I'll have to link people to it on my website given that its an epic adventure after all.

And its writeup is something like
EPIC3-2 Cracks in the Crimson Cage
The trail of a plot to assassinate a god and despoil his realm leads to Carceri, an astral prison that detains powerful abominations, disobedient angels, and horrors from beyond the known planes. Do you dare risk being trapped for eternity with beings feared even by the gods? A three-round Living Forgotten Realms adventure set in Carceri for 22nd level characters. This adventure is a direct sequel to EPIC3-1 The Glorious Hunt.

Sounds really cool.

I think their realization that they do is part of why we're not seeing as much epic stuff lately - until they can kinda figure stuff out.

We can hope.

 

[Upper_Krust]

One of the basic rules of world-building I set for myself is that if a culture exists, it should be interesting and accessible enough that players would enjoy playing characters from, or exploring, that culture. This is probably one of those things that goes against me: the best way to make something expendable is to make sure that nobody is that attached to it (like those throwaway civilizations blown up in comic books, for instance). Of course, for a civilization to justify its existence in the first place, it needs to be sufficiently interesting that players become attached to it...

Certainly if you are going to put a lot of work into constucting a culture you don't want it destroyed overnight. Seems like a microcosm approach the opposite of our macrocosm style.

Does that imply tyranny?

Absolutely.

Maybe, but to go back to that one point I've been stressing, the players' preferences should be considered. Character angst is good. Player angst is a different thing. "But I wanted to go back there

Its an epic campaign...they can always go back in time to when the place still existed.

Sure, but the Worf effect is still a potential pitfall. When it's done well, it can be effective: but when it's done poorly, the writer's hand becomes more evident. When you have something like a city fall or a civilization be wiped out, I think it's much more effective if it's seen as the natural result of events that have been playing out all along. I've been in games where the GM tried to establish stakes by gestures like this, but it was evident that establishing stakes was the main reason that the destruction happened, and the in-game rationale was added after the fact. It knocked us out of the game rather than drawing us in. So while the tactic can work, it's far from infallible.

Its all going to be in the execution, I remember that big things happened all the time in our campaign and it never felt forced, probably because either PCs (or NPCs if the PCs were not of sufficient level) would always try to oppose the bad things happening with mixed success.

But the various nations and powerful organizations were always up to something and events just seemed to flow and evolve naturally.

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about. Epic exploration, or epic culture-founding, don't necessarily need invoked apocalypses.

True...but epic combat almost certainly does.

Hm. I'm still not sure I agree with that. If you can have epic combat without cataclysmic destruction, then I think there are more variables at play. That said, I'm suspecting that part of the issue may be the 10-level band of an entire tier: if you're trying to fill it up, and there are fewer themes available to you, it's either be repetitive or use every one of the more limited tools. If epic ran only for 3-5 levels you would run less risk of repetition.

Epic combat without the epic is just combat.

That's what I'm worried about. I really don't want epic to blend together into a more generic D&D-style melange, where cultural distinctions and themes are set aside and every setting becomes Planescape or Spelljammer. Variety is one of the things that keeps me coming back to D&D; optimally, I would like every game to be just as distinctly thematic at the climax as it was when the players started out.

I don't think you would have any problem keeping each tier unique if you follow the ideas I outline in the article.

That's unfortunate, because it loses its cultural distinction: the Italian-style feuding houses and vendettas style of urban play winds up in the same place as the sword-and-sorcery Lankhmar-inspired style of urban play, and the previous 20 levels of visuals and bibliography don't inform it.

I disagree, I think you could set up the various factions of Sigil to parallel those same ideas of vendettas and feuding.

Such is my suspicion (although minus the epic NPCs and the "world-shaking"; can't think of a reason to include them if they aren't necessary,

Thats my point, theres no need for you to include them. Its just a 'handwave'. Big things may be happening 'off stage' that the PCs probably won't be aware of.

and epic NPCs tend to leave an Elminstery taste in some players' mouths).

Usually the first to die in our campaign.

I'd still like to address some of the things that are normally reserved for epic tier: the concepts of epic destinies and the odd "retirements" that they give players are very neat, as are some of the power players like djinn and efreet. But it may simply be a matter of working them into high paragon. If we're not sustaining epic-inspired play over a band of 10 levels, there may be more room for thematic variety.

Well best of luck whatever approach you settle on.

 

[Barastrondo]

Certainly if you are going to put a lot of work into constucting a culture you don't want it destroyed overnight. Seems like a microcosm approach the opposite of our macrocosm style.

I think so, yes. Microcosm is probably a good way to describe how different games can run in the same world with different themes, much as how The Count of Monte Cristo and Romance of the Three Kingdoms take place in the same "game world."

Its an epic campaign...they can always go back in time to when the place still existed.

Ha, point! And then pretty much work to undo that cataclysm or something.

True...but epic combat almost certainly does.

Here I think our experiences may vary, albeit system is different. I'll explain below.

Epic combat without the epic is just combat.

True, but I've run actual fantasy superhero games using Champions, with plenty of epic. Fighting on the back of the Leviathan, scaling a terra-cotta colossus mid-battle, derailing a gehennium doomtrain, rescuing cities from Pandaemonium: they did stuff. Cities weren't wiped out each adventure then; there was a threat, but the players being the champions of the realm, they worked hard to make sure tidal waves were stopped before they hit the coast, that invasions were halted in their tracks, and so on. The stakes were always pretty clear, but it was also pretty clear (it being a superhero engine) that the players were allowed to succeed if they wanted to prevent disasters. Not that it was a given, mind, but they had as good a chance of preventing a disaster as they did of winning a combat overall.

Which is why I don't think epic combat has to involve large-scale devastation. I think it's a style of play, and a useful tool to have in the box, but I'm fairly certain that we had a pretty epic game without it one system over.

I disagree, I think you could set up the various factions of Sigil to parallel those same ideas of vendettas and feuding.

Right, but are the players going to care as much about the Transcendent Order as they did about House Iluni? The latter are the people they grew up with, developed prejudices to and for; the former are a bunch of guys they just met. It may be an insurmountable problem that heroic/paragon offers a lot more intimacy and customization at the expense of scale.

Thats my point, theres no need for you to include them. Its just a 'handwave'. Big things may be happening 'off stage' that the PCs probably won't be aware of.

Well, more to the point, they probably don't even need to exist in the first place unless I have a really good idea. I'm not quite the kitchen-sink style of DM. I don't even use beholders.

Well best of luck whatever approach you settle on.

Thanks! I appreciate the effort in helping me get a handle on things, even if it doesn't seem this particular style of epic gaming is for me.

 

[erleni]

Nightbringer is pretty cool (they should have made a bigger fuss about it in the module).

It is probably the best artifact in 4th edition so far from a design point of view.

 

[Upper_Krust]

I think so, yes. Microcosm is probably a good way to describe how different games can run in the same world with different themes, much as how The Count of Monte Cristo and Romance of the Three Kingdoms take place in the same "game world."

As noted our approach was more macrocosmic and a lot of events would just evolve naturally with or without input from any PCs.

Ha, point! And then pretty much work to undo that cataclysm or something.

Or make it worse.

True, but I've run actual fantasy superhero games using Champions, with plenty of epic. Fighting on the back of the Leviathan, scaling a terra-cotta colossus mid-battle, derailing a gehennium doomtrain, rescuing cities from Pandaemonium: they did stuff. Cities weren't wiped out each adventure then; there was a threat, but the players being the champions of the realm, they worked hard to make sure tidal waves were stopped before they hit the coast, that invasions were halted in their tracks, and so on. The stakes were always pretty clear, but it was also pretty clear (it being a superhero engine) that the players were allowed to succeed if they wanted to prevent disasters. Not that it was a given, mind, but they had as good a chance of preventing a disaster as they did of winning a combat overall.

All that sounds pretty epic to me.

That said, are you familiar with Oeridian history and events such as the Invoked Devastation and the Rain of Colourless Fire? If two powerful rival nations go to war in your campaign, whats it necessarily got to do with your PCs until it spills onto their doorsteps?

Most campaign worlds have a (Historical) Timeline wherein all the major events are chronicled (in particular wars). I have often pondered how your campaigns Timeline unfolds in this way.

Which is why I don't think epic combat has to involve large-scale devastation. I think it's a style of play, and a useful tool to have in the box, but I'm fairly certain that we had a pretty epic game without it one system over.

If you watch any big war movie, disaster movie, giant monster movie and so forth...there is always massive collateral damage; its a badge of epicness.

Right, but are the players going to care as much about the Transcendent Order as they did about House Iluni? The latter are the people they grew up with, developed prejudices to and for; the former are a bunch of guys they just met. It may be an insurmountable problem that heroic/paragon offers a lot more intimacy and customization at the expense of scale.

Is the question "Are the players going to care for something they have had a session or two familiarity with versus something with several years of familiarity?" Thats not so much a question as a statement.

Of course familiarity can also breed contempt, which is why a little variety is never a bad thing.

Well, more to the point, they probably don't even need to exist in the first place unless I have a really good idea. I'm not quite the kitchen-sink style of DM. I don't even use beholders.

What about a Bee-holder like a giant face honeycombed with hexagons releasing deadly swarms of killer bees?

Thanks! I appreciate the effort in helping me get a handle on things, even if it doesn't seem this particular style of epic gaming is for me.

Happy to help mate, your Heroic/Paragon tier campaign sounds great as it is.

 

[Barastrondo]

All that sounds pretty epic to me.

That said, are you familiar with Oeridian history and events such as the Invoked Devastation and the Rain of Colourless Fire? If two powerful rival nations go to war in your campaign, whats it necessarily got to do with your PCs until it spills onto their doorsteps?

I'm unlikely to kick off a war that has nothing to do with the PCs, largely because that's a lot of work! If I were to do something like that I'd want it to be a major showcase of one campaign or another; the players would start caring pretty quick. We're working pretty hard to avert a civil war in another of my friends' campaigns right now, actually. It's interesting because if we were interested in fighting the war we might find metagame ways to let it break out and then pick sides, but both players and characters would rather it not happen. There's plenty of stuff already to do without a war going on.

Most campaign worlds have a (Historical) Timeline wherein all the major events are chronicled (in particular wars). I have often pondered how your campaigns Timeline unfolds in this way.

Several cars running along the same track at different speeds. It's 2719 in some games, 2720 in others, one may have hit 2721 -- a side effect of playing some campaigns more frequently than others. We might revisit a game with old college friends that hasn't been played in years. Another game chugs on every other week. New games tend to take the form of new areas within the same world, happening generally concurrently.

I did let the players of one campaign find out, on a visit to a foreign land, some hints that a previous game they'd played there had taken place about 20 years ago, instead of actually being concurrent, but they didn't linger much on the topic, as they were a bit concerned with going into Limbo to fight off valkyries to bring back the soul of their warrior-priest NPC companion. (I'm not much of a fan of raise dead as a reliable process with no prerequisites other than money...)

If you watch any big war movie, disaster movie, giant monster movie and so forth...there is always massive collateral damage; its a badge of epicness.

To be fair, that's kind of self-selecting. These are movies about cataclysms, so yeah, they're pretty cataclysmic. On the other hand, superhero movies may or may not feature collateral damage on the same scale: often averting it is what makes the superheroes seem epic in the first place. Same thing with some high fantasy: Minas Tirith takes a good beating but isn't destroyed to showcase the power of Mordor, for instance. Massive destruction to demonstrate epicness is a tool, but I don't really think it's required to engage an audience. It's just one technique among many.

(Of course, I may be slightly biased because I don't think Roland Emmerich movies are particularly good, for instance, so there may be some failure to inspire going on there...)

Is the question "Are the players going to care for something they have had a session or two familiarity with versus something with several years of familiarity?" Thats not so much a question as a statement.

Of course familiarity can also breed contempt, which is why a little variety is never a bad thing.

Sure. But remember that I got into this saying "Take the players' attitudes into account." Don't keep something intact if they're actually quite bored with it, but also don't blow a major set piece up to fix their boredom if they're not bored with it. That's my philosophy.

What about a Bee-holder like a giant face honeycombed with hexagons releasing deadly swarms of killer bees?

I like not sleeping on the couch. Puns are a way to provoke the wife.