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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 2860814" data-attributes="member: 151">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 <a href="http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/spellsFtoG.html#fire-storm" target="_blank">Firestorm</a> 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.</blockquote>

Verification