Why the assumption that epic levels are purely optional?

[jmucchiello]

I think it's also because most characters won't make it to level 20. If you're playing an epic game, you probably started there, in which case you're playing a D&D variant system.

Gee, I remember when my 25th level character was 1st level. We're still running that same story arc. Designing the game to run from 1st through to Epic levels does work if you want it to.

Truly the only annoying thing about the Epic rules is they are 3.0 based. So whenever a magic items/feats reference haste and similarly altered effects, you have to figure out if it really does what you think it does. (I'm the mage and the Epic spells are not really worth bothering with until you have a devastating spellcraft roll and lots of XP to burn. My character wouldn't take the epic spellcasting feat until she was 30+ level at a minimum. Since the campaign scheduled to end at around 30th level, we just decided to ignore the Epic spell system.)

 

[Shade]

Gee, I remember when my 25th level character was 1st level. We're still running that same story arc. Designing the game to run from 1st through to Epic levels does work if you want it to.

Same here. I've played my current character from 1st up to 21st, and the players I DM for have gone from 0-level characters to 25th level. We're still exploring some plot hooks introduced early on in both campaigns.

As others have pointed out, the game gets pretty over-the-top long before 20th level, what with the ease of flying, invisibility, and resistance/immunity to nearly everything. The transition from high-level to epic-level was seamless.

 

[Mystery Man]

It's not that...I'm more than comfortable using them in my game (and am doing so happily). I'm bothered by the fact that they are being virtually ignored in recent supplements. People seem to believe that the game stops at 20th level according to the core rules, and use this to justify nerfing all the epic material (such as many of the epic feats being downgraded, the nerfing of the demon princes, etc.) I fear that support for high-level gaming is vanishing from the game, and I'd like to know why.

I keep hearing about this mysterious "market research" that indicates that there isn't enough support to justify epic gaming, yet they obviously thought it was used enough to put it in a core book. If I'm truly in a tiny niche, I'll accept it and move on. But based on the number of epic supporters on these forums and others, I don't think that's the case.

With this post you've made your motives a bit more clear. I'm grieved that there is not enough quality material for epics out there as well.

It may be a tiny niche, but its also a very hard one to write for. The limited modules out there for epic play just don't cut it for me personally and I assume because its so hard to actually write one that would have a plotline stick. It's a bit easier to predict which direction the player's will go at lower levels. That's my take on it anyway.

 

[Whimsical]

The epic rules have been updated to 3.5 in the SRD. You can consider that section the 3.5 epic book.

 

[Psion]

With this post you've made your motives a bit more clear. I'm grieved that there is not enough quality material for epics out there as well.

ENPub was supposed to put out an epic magic book. I wish that had materialized.

 

[JustaPlayer]

Mongoose has an Epic monster book coming out. I hope it's better than the monster books they released last year. Problem with them is they are so hit and miss.

 

[Sejs]

20th??? I'm in the 8-10 range and I'm already sick to death of haste, bless, and inspire courage. I've taken to writing the effects on index cards and putting them out on the table so we can all figure out the bazillion different buffs active at any given moment.

I can't even begin to wrap my brain around what epic's gonna look like.

Perfect haste, epic bless, and inspire fervor, Gneech. *nod*

 

[kigmatzomat]

the reason I think so many people dislike Epic is becouse it takes so much work. However, if done properly it can be even more rewarding than non-epic. If the DM is willing to put in the time and effort to make a huge,epic setting w/high level NPCs and grand story arcs, and the layers are willing to handle figuring out and playing their characthers with a huge number of options and rules, playing in an epic campign can truly be just that: Epic.

This sums it up. Most DMs give up at teen-level play because they have to do something different: think. Up to 10th level they can run a knee-jerk game with no problems. They don't make any plans for how their world would deal with the 12th level characters so the games fall apart. Epic is the same, planning a post-20th campaign pretty much has to start around 10th level so that versimilitude can be achieved and the setting doesn't collapse under a sudden change.

The biggest shame, IMO, is that the process of determining how the world deals with the higher level beings helps shape the campaign and generally suggests a plethora of campaign ideas which generally reduces the DMs work. The process of determining the base assumptions leads the DM down paths that further the game development.

Every 7-8 levels I have to re-evaluate the campaign to make sure it is still viable and that I'm not just going through the motions. I need events at the near-, mid-, and long-term that are derived from the current game history. I also need to make sure that there are new events, possibly related to past events but only indirectly, so the game doesn't repeat itself.

It's a failure or unwillingness of the DM to believe the game they are running is imperfect that prevents them from taking the steps beyond the simple little sandbox of 1st-7th level.

 

[WizarDru]

This sums it up. Most DMs give up at teen-level play because they have to do something different: think. Up to 10th level they can run a knee-jerk game with no problems. They don't make any plans for how their world would deal with the 12th level characters so the games fall apart. Epic is the same, planning a post-20th campaign pretty much has to start around 10th level so that versimilitude can be achieved and the setting doesn't collapse under a sudden change.

I'm not sure I'd word that quite so strongly, but in general I agree. Having run a campaign from 1st to 28th, I think I can safely say that high and then epic-level play offers rewards for a dm and gamers who are interested in it. It's also very true that the transition to Epic is far less work than the transition from low/mid-levels to high ones. My players were in the late teens (17-19) when they single-handedly turned back a Githyanki invasion of the Prime. Ever seen what a Firestorm can do? Yeah. Now imagine that a druid and cleric unleash them on a charging army. Not pleasant.

Epic has it's own internal verisimilitude that doesn't even require that much reinforcement...but the days of crawling quietly down a 10' corridor are long since gone. In our penultimate adventure, the players stared down Orcus...and BACKED DOWN. Because 28th level characters or not...some things are a little to scary to push your luck with. They already slain one Demon Prince...and that was pushing it.

As to the core question, it's been answered with the several common reasons why Epic is considered optional. Another one I'd add is Legacy; the basic D&D game did go to Deific levels, but the core AD&D game topped at 20th...and most characters never went nearly that high. So for many, it's ingrained.

I would also posit that as much as I enjoyed Epic, I think the Epic magic system is a complete and utter waste of time and we constantly wrestled with it but largely ignored it.

 

[Uder]

This sums it up. Most DMs give up at teen-level play because they have to do something different: think.

Ah, that's what it was. I just stopped thinking the last couple times our game got up around (and above) 20th level.

No.

I became aware that the amount of time spent on *one* combat was taking the place of what we spent on several RP encounters, shopping, BSing and running multiple lower-level battles. I was also juggling a quite a bit to hide the terrible rules artifacts that pop up around those levels.

I had a table of 8 people (9 counting me) and we weren't having as much (if any, in some of their cases) fun. When people aren't having fun playing a game, you change it, or you lose the game.