Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5554495" data-attributes="member: 87792">Here I'm with you.  From my own observation I doubt that one campaign in every twenty gets into Paragon tier; the overwhelming majority of them start at level 1 and either fizzle in low heroic or end in high heroic.  This has nothing to do with the level of support provided.  (And campaigns that start at Paragon or higher are IMO the most likely to fizzle of all). Of the campaigns that make it into paragon, by attrition I doubt that one out of every five makes it into epic.  It gets slower and more complex.  And requires time investment to get there.   Which means I doubt that one campaign in every hundred makes it into epic tier.  And this has nothing to do with the level of support provided.  It has to do with level of complexity, time of play, and natural attrition. And this also means that for the target audience of Monster Vault - new DMs - an overwhelming focus on the Heroic tier is absolutely the right thing.  Most of those DMs are never going to go near Epic tier - and you could provide all the support you want for epic tier and this would not change.  And of that tiny minority that does, most are going to put serious investment in and therefore be the sort that buy books like the Monster Manual 3 and the Dark Sun Creature Catalog. You clearly want Epic to be as supported as Heroic tier.  As far as the overwhelming majority of games are concerned, Epic might as well not exist - and epic support just pads out pages.  This is doubly true for books such as MV that are intended to allow new DMs to hit the ground running.  Every page spent on epic monsters is a page that will almost never be used.  Epic support is massively disproportionate to the amount of play it gets.  But you want more.  You want WoTC to clutter up their books with what is, for their target audience, utterly useless information just so the very few epic tier players can have more than was already produced.   Equal support for epic tier to heroic tier would be like equal support for undead and living PCs in D&D.   Hell, I don't think there's as much support for undead as for living PCs in the World of Darkness.  And that despite WoD being driven by the vampire coolness factor.  Agreed on all counts.  And especially about the Binder. I don't agree that the Vampire's mechanics are worthless - merely that they are not suited to a high lethality campaign, although I believe they are well suited to other campaigns.  They involve an interesting and fluffy serious tweak to the mechanics and I'm very glad 4e is trying that sort of thing.  I'd also rather they underpitched the strength rather than overpitched.  I'm also a fan of the Executioner, the Blackguard, the Nethermancer (I think Necrotic energy should have warped bodies with feats or features), the Gloom Pact Hexblade, the Death Priest, and more Warlock powers.  Mind explaining some of them please?  I found PP good for monks (I love 4e monks).  But I still find the other three classes meh.  Ardents IMO should have been folded under the heading of Bard.  I don't know who was asking for the Fightbrain.</blockquote>

Verification