What's wrong with Epic Tier and how do we fix it?

[UngeheuerLich]

Just let the monsters use their treasure (don´t forget to distract the treshold)

this should at least easily fix humanoid monsters which can use weapons...

 

[FourthBear]

My initial thought is to lower all defenses by 1 for 21-25 level monsters, and 2 for 26-30 level, to reduce all hitpoints by 1/3 to 1/2 depending on the monster, and to flat out double all monster damage. Does that sound good to the math gurus?

I think that directly changing the monster's damage and hit points is the way to go. One of the advantages of 4e's more transparent math for generating opponents is the ability to spot and correct problems exactly like this. My guess is that the designers figured that by the time that characters got to Epic, they would have more frequent uses of Daily and Encounter resources and that bonuses to hit from those and similar sources would be more common. However, I don't think most Leader powers give out enough bonuses to hit at every tier. And, of course, that depends strongly on party composition. As to monster damage, I think this may be a case of the monster designers not following the DMG's own suggestions. According to the table on page 185 of the DMG, at 25th level, a monster's basic attack should be doing 3d8+9 points of damage and its special attacks 5d10+9. A quick flip through the MM shows that many monsters at or near this level have far lower damage expression.

In any case, if you and your table are noticing that Epic play is dragging on for too long, your changes are almost certainly well founded, not matter what party composition you've got.

 

[Runestar]

Seems like a circular problem. You need the leader's bonuses to hit more consistently, yet leader powers tend to be dependent on them hitting first before you can get the bonuses...

 

[Cadfan]

Giving monsters the player critical hit bonus damage won't change anything.

First, the problem you complained about was monsters taking too long to die. Increasing the damage they deal has nothing to do with that.

Second, boosting monster critical hit damage like this has a mathematically negligible effect on monster damage per round, while simultaneously making combat more erratic. At epic tier, this change is about like increasing monster damage by 1 per attack.

 

[FourthBear]

Seems like a circular problem. You need the leader's bonuses to hit more consistently, yet leader powers tend to be dependent on them hitting first before you can get the bonuses...

Yes, I would definitely agree that this is a problem as well. In fact, I think it leads into a more general issue with the powers so far: they have too little effect on a miss. In the previous editions of D&D, it was a very low probability at higher levels that the warrior types would end up accomplishing nothing in a round, IME. Especially in 3e, multiple attacks and high initial attack bonuses practically guaranteed a hit with your first strike. So the effect that most of the time, rolling poorly simply meant that you missed with two out of three attacks. This mostly meant your warriors were accomplishing some kind of progression for victory every round. Your spellcasters often used spells that caused half damage on a save or high gamble effects that had a low probability of success, but shut down opponents completely (this is complicated by spell resistance).

In general, I like the way that 4e has cut down on multiple attacks and pushed the attack bonus/defenses such that they scale better with level. However, with the current mix of powers, it can result in frustration when a rash of low die rolls comes around. While that's not necessarily a bad thing, I think there have been enough complaints about wiffs, grinding combats and the like to take another look at the math and power mixes. As you noted, Leaders can provide to hit bonuses to others, but very often these depend on the Leader hitting in the first place, resulting in uneven cascades. I think that in general, more 4e powers at the will and encounter frequencies should have some positive effects on a miss.

 

[Shadowsong666]

But the question is - for what kind of players do you aim when you try to "fix" epic levels?

For the ones that don't create optimized characters of the folks that do such things?

I mean, i am pretty sure that when my group reaches epic level and see a dragon around their level they will simply shred him to pieces. our dwarven defender will soak around 18 points of damage per attack. The moment he sees the dragon he will surely scream "oh well, go make the camp - i will be there in about an hour. ah and don't forget - i want my beer warm."

on the other hand, our bow ranger, will just get torn to pieces before the dragon gets bloodied and will have no chance of survival as far as i know what he is aiming for. He really needs the group to get the beast slain as he is all "avoid the enemy and do damage" without an eye on defenses.

Now - for "fixing" epic level. What to look at? The individual players or the group alltogether? I mean, an unoptimized group will get the solo dragon down, but will need the full group. an optimized group does need... uhm.. one player? maybe two? But on the other hand - fixing it for the optimized gamers will ruin it for the rest - because they will need to optimize or die. Moment that happens i don't see a reason for having so many choices anymore...

i think its OK as it is because you just need to adjust your encounters regarding the group you GM for. I am thinking that you need to provide encounters which play into their favor (so that the enjoy the game) and into their weak sides as well (so that they know where to get better).

I mean - you DM for them having fun. You provide the story, you provide the fights and you show them what they need and might need for their character (after a week fighting dragon-kin they might get a clue that they should aim for specific abilites against that kind of creatures... perhaps)...

So what will i do when my group encounters the next creature that would not stand a chance alone? I will make sure he gets backup after he gets bloodied to make the second half of the game harder for everyone.

Don't forget minions - they are a great feature to add extra oomph to the encounter. In KoTS there is the encounter on the grave, with the circle and the undead. I just added about 30 minions in that encounter and my group came close to a TPK but managed to kill everything before that could happen. That was fun.

 

[Deverash]

There was a post (or maybe a podcast) by I believe Mr. Noonan that had stated that he uses minions in the epic tier as 1/8 or even 1/10 of a regular creature, with a similiar reduction in their exp.

 

[RodneyThompson]

Another thing to keep in mind is that you might want to build your encounters out of monsters that are below the encounter level. You get more of them, but they die faster. That said, I'd try and limit the number of soldiers, elites, and solos (due to the higher defenses), and don't be afraid to just use simple, straightforward monsters when possible.

 

[Kraydak]

First, you need to work on the foundations. 4e's Epic tier math is wonky, and leads to huge "well-built buffing leader/no well-built buffing leader" discrepancies. I would suggest all of:

1) change all the stat bumps to bump either all stats (like the 11/21) or 4 stats, at least one in each pair (str/con; int/dex; wis/cha).
2) increase the bonus of all stat bumps to 2
3) the above increases stat modifiers by 4. Masterwork heavy armor gives 6 points. So remove current masterwork heavy armor, add the 4+6=10 points and distribute them to taste. I would suggest 2 per +, starting at +2s.
4) IMPORTANT: go through all powers that CAN add +stat to ANOTHER person's attack roll, and change it to a flat +2, and change similar bonuses to damage to flat +4s. (modifying miss effects and other complications accordingly).

We have now "fixed" the circa 4 points advantage that NPCs get due to superior scaling (by boosting stats) and fix the problem of too large non-AC-defense holes (by making sure everyone boosts a stat for each defense). We have also nerfed Leader bonuses to the point that they don't dominate d20 rolls, made it possible to compare parties with/without leaders, and removed the massive swing effect that landing, say, an epic tier Lead the Attack can have (it is still a huge buff).

In other words, you now have a reasonable foundation to build on that won't be party specific.

Now, play a session or 3, and then boost/nerf monster HP and damage (note: not attack or defenses) to taste. I would suggest percentage HP modifiers and maybe an extra die or two on attacks (according to damage die size, probably near the d8-d10 range, so 2d4s, 1 or 2d6 etc...). Modifying NPC crits alone will be too swingy if it is a large enough change to be effective.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey all!

Very interesting thread. I agree with many of the suggestions: x4 hit points for solo monsters, add monster crit damage, ensure monster damage meets minimum requirements.

On that last point, as others have noted, virtually every epic monster in 4E falls short of the mark. A few will be on the mark with one attack, but well down again with others. Unfortunately, this also seems to hold true not just in the Monster Manual but also in the likes of the Draconomicon, Manual of the Planes and Open Grave. Basically the damage output of almost every epic monster is sub-par.