Removing Paragon and Epic Tier Altogether

143 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have to admit that I love having the three tiers of play: heroic, paragon and epic. My idea of removing them will not prove to be popular with 4th fans.

The disparity between an epic tier monster and a heroic PC seems disjointed. If PCs are meddling with an Ancient Red Dragon's plans, why can't he just swoop down and roast them alive at heroic level? An coming up for reasons why the red dragon wouldn't bother leads to stupid or busy villains.

Removing the paragon and epic tiers and having Balors, Dragons, and what-not, at the top of heroic (10th level threat) level, gives them a more active participation in a lower level PCs career. It also puts these critters in striking distance at mid-heroic level (maybe).

This would cut campaign times down but it can be extended by having the XP required to go up for each level.

If removing both paragon and epic tier is too much, then Epic needs to go. Plus, with lesser levels to play, players can try out a lot more of the different classes during the life of an edition.

TL;DR- tiers of play too long; axe both Epic and Paragon- Epic at least .
totally disagree. the idea of actually being forced by a dm to stay at 1st level for even longer strikes me as one of the most uniquely terrible dnd ideas ive ever heard, going back to 1982
I don't realy care about epic tier and are planning on going to lvl 20.  If the players realy want to go over that (assuming we get to lvl 20) I'll consider it and see how much fun I'm having as well.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

With a bit of planning and thinking I don't come across the issues you mention. After all, heroic characters will just be disrupting some of the minor plans of that ancient red dragon and if the red dragon is going to personally kill those pesky fleas it means some other more important plans will fail, not to mention that the dragon just painted a big bull's eye to all his enemies to the fact he has a vested interest in the area. For the three tiers to work, you must take care to also keep adventure focus on the right scale for the specific tier or else you will indeed need to look for excuses on wy the dragon does not scourge the PCs or how to top your plot once again.

Besides, reducing the xp, and removing paragon play is very drastic. From observing my players, they need to changes to their charaxters once every 8 encounters. If you reduce the number of xp, you probably need to make leveling a bit more significant. Wouldn't it be easier to simply start at level 11? ;)

As for epic, that is already more or less an optional level. There is no reason to use it. I never had the characters fight deities and demon lords in my previous editions, and I did not had to look for excuses to keep them from direct involvement. So why should that be harder in 4E? Mind you, I am looking forward to giving it a try in my current game. It is the first time the epic rules look this workable ;)
I don't think they need to be "officially" removed though.  Unless you are saying to compress all 30 levels into 10 (i.e. using +6 weapons at level 10 type of deal).

If I wanted the players fighting creatures of that sort in my game by level 10, I would just lower the level of the monster and tweak the stats so that it would be an appropriate challenge (or on the hard side if it was ment to be the final climatic battle).

I don't think it's a bad idea, however.

Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
It's not like players enter the game with a big sign over their head stating "will be killing ancient dragons in about 2 years". That dragon probably has something better to do.
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
It's standard fantasy. In a world of random heroes most big villians probably expect some hero meddling. Perhaps there is another group of higher level the BBEG was dealing with while your rag tag group of adventurers stopped a different facet of the plan.

"OK, I am just going to send waves of peons at you until you finally show up in my lair where I will take you out personally, which you should take as a great honor that I even bother with you."

They just don't realize how much of a pain the PC's are until it is too late.
A few other possible approaches that I find personally very rewarding and require no hand-waving, lamp-shading or other silliness are:



  • Whether by purpose or accident, the players create/unleash the BBEG.  Big Bad isn't stomping them down, because he's simply not around to do so.

  • Again, purposefully or unwittingly, the players have been working for towards the BBEGs ends throughout the campaign.  People do "the wrong thing for the right reasons" all the time.  Every action they take may not have been beneficial to Big Bad, but the fact that much of what they've done has been useful in some fashion.

  • Mix in some "villain of the week" type storytelling.  Your campaign may have an over-arching storyline and Big Bad, but every moment of every day hasn't been thwarting their plans...  The party may not even know there are plans to foil.  Every goblin raid isn't masterminded by some eldritch evil, and every war isn't spurred on by some violence craving demon.  Sometimes people do @#$%ed-up things because they want to, and the PCs stopping this isn't thwarting some great scheme, just them doing what's right in the situation.


Of course, you can mix and match all of these--or ignore the whole of it and just play a straight up 1-10 campaign.  Some folks appreciate this, and it works well for a lot of groups and players.  Removing it wholesale from the game, (ripping this content out of everyone's books and not publishing it in the future) however, isn't enabling story, it's making it harder to create.
Jackonomicon™ It's not always safe for work, but it's great for play. It's my blog, yo.
I'm not averse to the idea. However, I have comfortably ignored experience points for the past eight years, so however many levels the game is compressed into will not affect my game much. The party will still level when my campaign design is ready for them to.

For example, I am currently running Scales of War. However, I have cut at least a third of the encounters of each adventure arc thus far -- removing all of the filler encounters, collapsing two successive encounters into one in some, and turning a few others into "nothing to fight here" exploration encounters in others. Because of this, the party has made it to the mid-point of Shadow Rift of Umbraforge (and fifth level) in just six sessions. We anticipate finishing the first eight adventures (and 11 levels) by the end of the summer, playing just once a week.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
If PCs are meddling with an Ancient Red Dragon's plans, why can't he just swoop down and roast them alive at heroic level? An coming up for reasons why the red dragon wouldn't bother leads to stupid or busy villains.



"...leads to stupid or busy villains..."? Ummm, how? Top brass always has underlings to do exactly this sort of work. If you get a bad tire from Les Schwab Tires, Les himself isn't going to come down and replace the tire for you. He's going to have his stores and their management tiers deal with things according to a structure he set up. Bin Laden himself wasn't running around with a bomb tied to his waist. He had lesser idiots to do the dirty work. An Ancient Red Dragon who is apparently working on something dire enough to involve adventurers isn't doing it on his own. He has his own chain of command, power-structure, management tiers, or whatever, with people whose job it is to deal with the possibility of heroes galloping in to thwart his plans.

I don't buy the stereotype of the arrogant villain sitting confidently on his velvet cushions until the heroes beat in the door to his room. Each tier of underlings is like the wall of a fortress. If the heroes defeat the heroic tier walls, the dragon raises an eyebrow and reinforces the paragon tier walls. If they get through those defenses, the dragon reinforces the epic tier walls and maybe takes a more direct hand. This means he has to put other parts of his grand plan on hold, but the party needs to be dealt with directly, not unlike the notion of Les Schwab coming down personally to supervise the changing of your tire. As the epic tier walls begin to crumble, if the PCs have been so lucky, the dragon takes a more direct hand, maybe personally reinforcing the remaining epic tier defenses. (Les personally changes your tire.)

It's not stupid nor is it too busy. It's organization and prioritizing.
Wouldn't an Ancient Red Dragon, who has been around for ages, quickly learn that there is a pattern or cliche going on? I'm sure watching waves of heroes start out weak, and then eventually mowing through underlings, and then killing the big dude at the end would leave an impression.

Evil Boss 101- if you see a bunch of heroes going on adventures, kill them like bugs before they get too poweriful and threaten your very existence. Now that's good top brass thinking. Eradicate the threat before it's s problem.

I guess I'm weary of the cliche of heroes working their way up to the big boss.

No boss or evil lord worth his salt would tolerate heroes picking off his lieutenants, one by one.
In the red dragon example what exactly are the PCs disrupting at such a low level that gains the attention of the dragon himself?

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

Wouldn't an Ancient Red Dragon, who has been around for ages, quickly learn that there is a pattern or cliche going on? I'm sure watching waves of heroes start out weak, and then eventually mowing through underlings, and then killing the big dude at the end would leave an impression. Evil Boss 101- if you see a bunch of heroes going on adventures, kill them like bugs before they get too poweriful and threaten your very existence. Now that's good top brass thinking. Eradicate the threat before it's s problem. I guess I'm weary of the cliche of heroes working their way up to the big boss. No boss or evil lord worth his salt would tolerate heroes picking off his lieutenants, one by one.



He'd be hunting around the world all the time, wiping out insignificant heroes. He wouldn't have any time left to actually attend to his evil schemes anymore.

And then when he'd finally be done with all the pesky heroes on his home plane, he'd have to deal with the other planes as well... and by then new heroes would've arrived.

While an interesting and slightly insane villain, ultimately he'd be unable to accomplish more then the slaughter of insignificant enemies before being struck done by a group of already powerful opponents who he had been ignoring far too long.
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
I guess in addition are you saying that the red dragon doesnt trust his underlings to do anything?  the first time they meet with any resistance he swoops in to do all the work because "they might be PCs!"

I think you are seriously overestimating the impact of PCs in the heroic tier in comparison to the other tiers of play.  While the PCs might be disrupting some low level plan of the dragon he is probably more interested in maintaining his alliance with a powerful fire elemental or maintaining a battlefront against a rival dragon.

In short I think you are looking at it without any focus on what might br happening at other tiers of play. 

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

The idea of the genre-savvy villain is a fun thing to play with.

Also "you have been noticed" also need not equate to "you are dead."  I've had entire campaigns where the players were on the run until the final act.  As long as you intersperse some moments of triumph so it's not all doom, gloom and desperation, it's a lot of fun.
Jackonomicon™ It's not always safe for work, but it's great for play. It's my blog, yo.
To draw a real world parallel to your ideas; it would be a special ops team being inserted into hostile territory in the middle of a war to assassinate all 18-year old farmer kids who just witnessed their parents' death and obtained their fathers rifle.
Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
Wouldn't an Ancient Red Dragon, who has been around for ages, quickly learn that there is a pattern or cliche going on? I'm sure watching waves of heroes start out weak, and then eventually mowing through underlings, and then killing the big dude at the end would leave an impression.

Except that now you are meta-gaming. You are seeing the cliche because that is what happens with the PCs over various campaigns, but it not something that happens too often in the real world. The dragon does not know that the PCs are PCs, and the group opposing his kobolds on the side of the continent NPCs.

If you as a player/DM are tired of the cliche, reducing the number of levels is going to solve a thing. At most it makes it somewhat easier for the DM to plan. XP and levels is a purely meta-gaming construct that only exists outside of the game. By limiting yourself to 10 levels you are just moving the problem, since now you are going to ask yourself why that ancient red dragon is not attacking the 1st level PCs ;) Not to mention that you as a DM have full control over XP. Whether or not the group is at level 5 or 15 when they reach point X in your story is entirely up to the DM.

I don't think you can avoid the cliche easily in D&D. It is inherent to D&D with classes and levels, and long term campaigns. If you want to avoid it, you are probably better off with a classless system, especially ones where the PCs do not get very strong quickly, or with shorter D&D campaigns where you start at a higher level than normal.

To draw a real world parallel to your ideas; it would be a special ops team being inserted into hostile territory in the middle of a war to assassinate all 18-year old farmer kids who just witnessed their parents' death and obtained their fathers rifle.

"Actual, we have a problem."
"Go ahead."
"We're under heavy fire from a group of unidentified hostiles who seem to be in posession of a powerful device."
"Clarify.  What are we looking at here?  WMDs?  Biological agents?"
"No, sir.  A literary device. They're a Five Man band."
Jackonomicon™ It's not always safe for work, but it's great for play. It's my blog, yo.

When we do any fantasy d20 based RPGs, we top out at 10th level. (We do a lot of homebrew RPGs specifically designed to be 10 levels. When playing dnd we leave the levels alone)


We play once a month and level every session. In a year of playtime we go through the entire spectrum, and are usually itching to try something new.


We found that when you have levels 1-20, or especially 1-30, we never had campaigns go long enough to actually hit those levels starting from 1. It seemed a waste to have all those rules and things for levels 1-8 if we are starting at 9, so we just rescaled everything. We found it also helps keep number bloat in check.Why have +30 vs AC40, when we can have +5 vs AC 15. (Yes I know because then the +5 guy never hits the AC 40 guy) We found that the guy with +5 going against the higher level threats can't beat them for other reasons even if they have similar numbers, and so giving comparable numbers didn't matter. They both are at +5, but one can magically fly. Guess who auto wins that fight. Magic flight comes online at level 4. You probably can't beat a flier until level 4.


In the end you just have the jump from level1 to 2, and 2 to 3 be a bigger jump each time in power scale. It speeds up leveling, and means you need less actual rules to play the game.


Note I can't think of a way to apply this to 3.5 or 4e, but think it would be a good thing. (I guess for 3.5 you could play e6? That is similar) I am also not going to try to argue that red dragon example I don't really follow the logic.

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"                                                  "I'd recommend no one listed to Krusk's opinions about what games to play"

I guess I'm weary of the cliche of heroes working their way up to the big boss.

It is only a cliche because you, as an external-to-the-game-world viewer have seen it over and over again.

The heroes in *my* game world are the legends that the future will write about. The legends of the past are not littered with the names of heroes who waded through the ranks picking off the lieutenants. The legends of the past are of the heroes who killed the evil overlord, with no mention of slaying their way through the ranks. Heroes of legend never have a ramp-up phase. Persues slayed the Medusa and Theseus slayed the minotaur. But they didn't work their way up to it. They were completely off the radar, and then they were the stuff of legend.

In the shared narrative at my gaming table, we do not assume that the previous six campaigns that I have run are the history of the land. The party are unknown heroes in points of light with few equals until they become heroes of the land with no equals.

(Disclaimer: I do not play in the Realms, where the entire history is cluttered with the names of heroes who grew to uber-powerful heights, and many of whom still wander the lands.)
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
I have been playing RPGs since I was 12. I am 34 now. In every game with levels, where XP was used and they started at level 1, no game ever GOT over level 10 anyway. The only games I have played over level 10 were Game Days that started over level 10 and campaigns that started over level 10 for plot reasons. Of the games that started at level 1 and used clevels/classes set ups--



  • Basic D&D - Game made it to level 9. Never got into Wrath of the Immortals, because game ran long time and we got bored of it. Sadness. Boxed set looked cool.

  • AD&D 2nd Ed - All of L4 before we got tired of it.

  • Palladium Fantasy - L5 to L7, depending on the class (not all classes used the same scale). Due to compartive power levels, that felt epic though.

  • D&D 3.0 - Level 3. By then we already figured out it was borked.

  • D&D v3.5 - Level 7.

  • D&D v3.5 Eberron - Level 5. (The game that started at level 4 made it to level 9)

  • RIFTS - Level 4.

  • d20 Modern - Level 9.

  • Star Wars d20 - Level 9. (Started with RCR and Moved game into Saga)


Gamma World only goes from level 1-10, and I hear it seems to play better for it. I have only ran a couple of test games at first level, and have not started a 'game' per say to test this myself yet. So, there is a precedent for just axing levels 11-30. It would seem like you coudl use the same 'monster math' that is used to level them up in reverse and level them down. If you have the old Monster Builder still, this is done easily by just clicking the monster level down.
No one wins in the Edition Wars. The whole hobby loses. Wizards did not lose me as a DDI subscriber with the Online CB, they lost me long before that. And I have let my Herald Level GM Status lapse after 8 years. Wizards lack of support and the Edition Wars Trolls that are poorly moderated just managed to take all the fun out of public events. ~~ KT
thank god the designers dont think like you

its also amusing to read people say negative things about paragon and epic when they have never even played at those levels.

personally i just played a level 30 game last week, it was kick butt. it would be a shame to lose that just bc some people cant keep their gaming group together or *shudder* start at a level other than first
There are several responses, but the gist of it is, there is value to be added by each tier of play.  There is value in a 1-30 campaign that is distinct from a 1-10 campaign.

I think the initial flaw is in assuming that the epic villian has to be the villian of the story from the get go.  Some foes become epic as the heroes do.  Sometimes defeating the arch-villian of one tier reveals the plots and the arc that will emerge in the next teir.  This is another way in which the tiers distinguish themselves.   Heroic tier characters save lives, Paragon tier characters save nations, Epic tier characters alter the canon of thier world. 
I think the initial flaw is in assuming that the epic villian has to be the villian of the story from the get go.




excellent point.  We have done a pair of 1-30 campaigns so far, and had the same villain be our nemesis from start to finish in either one it would have felt railroady and artificial.  

In the 1st, it was the same villain, but it wasn't until mid-paragon that we were able to sort out the arcing plot from the sidequests and figure out who was behind everything before we could progress from being merely annoying to becoming an active threat.  In the 2nd, we had a different villain like every 5 levels or so, plus one that sort of 'carried' us from Heroic to Paragon, from Paragon to Epic, and from Epic to retirement.

Paragon and epic are awesome tools in the hands of the right DM with the right player buy-in.  I think Paragon is actually my favorite tier so far, but Epic isn't far behind.  The combination of straight-up breaking rules and performing crazy stunts with PP and ED class features, having to do it all in extreme, insane environments while facing unimaginable foes that come at you from all sorts of odd angles with their own unique tricks is exactly what I like in a game.  I would miss 11-30 terribly.

INSIDE SCOOP, GAMERS: In the new version of D&D, it will no longer be "Edition Wars." It will be "Edition Lair Assault." - dungeonbastard

thank god the designers dont think like you

its also amusing to read people say negative things about paragon and epic when they have never even played at those levels.

personally i just played a level 30 game last week, it was kick butt. it would be a shame to lose that just bc some people cant keep their gaming group together or *shudder* start at a level other than first


I too enjoy paragon and epic. Looking to play a lot more epic soon via LFR and Scales of War.
I've played through epic tier 3 times now (we play an insane amount of delves). I love the tiers but sometimes it just feels too stretched out. Plus, I'd like to see rules for D&D where paragon and epic tier are squished into Heroic levels.

I sometimes wonder if the Epic tier is somehow damaging 4th edition. Or better put- is it really necessary and has it bloated gameplay? Any thoughts on this?
If PCs are meddling with an Ancient Red Dragon's plans, why can't he just swoop down and roast them alive at heroic level? An coming up for reasons why the red dragon wouldn't bother leads to stupid or busy villains.



"...leads to stupid or busy villains..."? Ummm, how? Top brass always has underlings to do exactly this sort of work. If you get a bad tire from Les Schwab Tires, Les himself isn't going to come down and replace the tire for you. He's going to have his stores and their management tiers deal with things according to a structure he set up. Bin Laden himself wasn't running around with a bomb tied to his waist. He had lesser idiots to do the dirty work. An Ancient Red Dragon who is apparently working on something dire enough to involve adventurers isn't doing it on his own. He has his own chain of command, power-structure, management tiers, or whatever, with people whose job it is to deal with the possibility of heroes galloping in to thwart his plans.



Basically the Ancient Red Dragon is too “busy”. If Heroic tier heroes have any chance at all against the machinations of an Epic tier villain, it is because the villain is a leader, with underlings of a conveniently lower tier to do the dirty work.



Also, tiers coordinate well with leadership flavor.

During Heroic tier, heroes can be famous nationally - interacting with others in their nation. Even be prominant leaders of a city - especially at higher Heroic levels.

During Paragon, heroes can BE the nation - being kings and other kinds of national leaders - interracting on the international scene across the entire world.

During Epic, heroes can BE the world - representatives of the entire plane - interracting on the multiplanar scene.



So Epic tier BBEG may literally be somewhere else on another plane doing other things. Example: Busy fighting one-on-one with Epic tier nonplayer heroes.



To fight Epic evil when the hero is modestly Heroic, is fun. But BBEG dont have to Epic. Fighting local thugs of the same tier can also be fun.
I've played through epic tier 3 times now (we play an insane amount of delves). I love the tiers but sometimes it just feels too stretched out. Plus, I'd like to see rules for D&D where paragon and epic tier are squished into Heroic levels. I sometimes wonder if the Epic tier is somehow damaging 4th edition. Or better put- is it really necessary and has it bloated gameplay? Any thoughts on this?



Simpler tighter math, with smaller numeric bonuses leading upto Epic tier, can go a long way to stabilizing the upper levels.
I've played through epic tier 3 times now (we play an insane amount of delves). I love the tiers but sometimes it just feels too stretched out. Plus, I'd like to see rules for D&D where paragon and epic tier are squished into Heroic levels. I sometimes wonder if the Epic tier is somehow damaging 4th edition. Or better put- is it really necessary and has it bloated gameplay? Any thoughts on this?



Simpler tighter math, with smaller numeric bonuses leading upto Epic tier, can go a long way to stabilizing the upper levels.

This. I think that if the numbers were smaller (to hit, defenses, skill bonuses, HIT POINTS MY GOD THE HIT POINTS) across all tiers evenly, to where the difference was closer to +0 to start and +5 by epic it would not be as much as a pain.

This is D&D, not Final Fantasy. In 1st Edition AD&D, Orcus had 120 HP (yes, I'm that old, I remember). 4th Edition 1st printing has 1,525 HP! Even with all the dirty tricks you can muster, that just takes stupid long to deal with.
No one wins in the Edition Wars. The whole hobby loses. Wizards did not lose me as a DDI subscriber with the Online CB, they lost me long before that. And I have let my Herald Level GM Status lapse after 8 years. Wizards lack of support and the Edition Wars Trolls that are poorly moderated just managed to take all the fun out of public events. ~~ KT

If I wanted the players fighting creatures of that sort in my game by level 10, I would just lower the level of the monster and tweak the stats so that it would be an appropriate challenge (or on the hard side if it was ment to be the final climatic battle).



This.

Though releasing a Basic D&D that was levels 1-10, and then releasing Advanced D&D 11-20, and finally Epic D&D 21-20 with appropriate setting/concept ideas to deal with the ideas of godhood would be great in my opinion.

Um. If you don't want to play Paragon or Epic, then....don't play them? Am I missing something?

Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid

Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade.

"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,

"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling

 

Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!

 

57019168 wrote:
I am a hero, not a chump.
no, you pretty much nailed it
With settings like Neverwinter coming out that is for heroic only, and Monster Vault Threats to the Nentir Vale having a heavy focus on Heroic, I would say it is very easy to make lvl 10 feel like the epic end to a heroes journey and there to have it, D&D in 10 lvls, close your books and go home!
In the Nentir Vale, all injured creatures are required to wear a name tag!
With settings like Neverwinter coming out that is for heroic only, and Monster Vault Threats to the Nentir Vale having a heavy focus on Heroic, I would say it is very easy to make lvl 10 feel like the epic end to a heroes journey and there to have it, D&D in 10 lvls, close your books and go home!



This.  If you want to stop at 10, stop at 10.  If you want to start at 21, start at 21.  There's no reason to remove paragon and epic play; if you don't want to play there, just ... don't.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
TL;DR- tiers of play too long; axe both Epic and Paragon- Epic at least .




In our two long-running campaigns we have discussed that the game will end at or about L20.  At L9, one of our DMs is showing signs of starting to want a simpler, lower level game.

I'm curious about Epic myself, but have yet to play an Epic character in any game - so I can't comment any further ;)    

I think the main problem is there is really no need for Paragon and Epic tier in the game.  The only thing that really happens is you play with bigger numbers.  What makes the higher levels feel worth it are when you gain access to completely new things.  All you have to do is keep the math in the same parameter and you are good to go. 

Keep the math low but have something brand new to choose from at each level.

Edit: We have found that 1-10 is the sweet spot of fourth edition.  By that time we are ready to wrap it up and start with new characters.
I think Paragon and Epic fit perfectly where they sit. I prefer that these higher reaches be harder than easier, since Heroes should face bigger threats then at Heroic Tier...

What i dislike is that unfortunatly the ammount of Options and Powers available within the party inevitably grows and can slow things down even more. You have so many Powers Feats and Items in Epic that complexity is significant.
I think Paragon and Epic fit perfectly where they sit. I prefer that these higher reaches be harder than easier, since Heroes should face bigger threats then at Heroic Tier...

What i dislike is that unfortunatly the ammount of Options and Powers available within the party inevitably grows and can slow things down even more. You have so many Powers Feats and Items in Epic that complexity is significant.



Isn't complexity what Epic is all about?  Your to hit ratio is about the same in Epic as it is in heroic so really why do we need Epic and paragon?  Okay instead of hitting for 100 points of damage to that monster with 900 hp you hit that 30 hp monster for 5 hp.  really this is the only thing that seperates the tiers.  Okay you can push, pull, and slide creatures a little farther that you could at lower level.
I have been playing RPGs since I was 12. I am 34 now. In every game with levels, where XP was used and they started at level 1, no game ever GOT over level 10 anyway. The only games I have played over level 10 were Game Days that started over level 10 and campaigns that started over level 10 for plot reasons.



I have to agree. I've been playing D&D for near on 30 years, since I was 12 in 6th grade. And with the exception of some really bad 1E AD&D games were our thieves stole tons of magic items and gemstones, and thus got to stupid levels. We have never gotten above 12th or 13th level.

I would just leave Paragon and Epic in the rules, as they hurt nothing by being there, and many of us will just ignore them.

You may know ALL the rules, but I KNOW the Spirit of the Game.

Don't underestimate the complixity that Feats and Features brings. Also, you don't Retrain Utilitiy Powers as you gain Levels, compared to Encounter and Daily attack Powers.

Your Paragon Path alone gives you 1 more Encounter Attack Power, 1 more Utility Power and 1 more Daily Attack Power, while your Epic Destiny gives you 1 more Utility Power as well (not to mention their Features) 

A Level 26 Character has like 19 Powers in his hand that a majority are Encounter Ressources

1 Racial Power
2 At-will Attack Powers 
4 Encounter Attack Powers
4 Daily Attack Powers
8 Utility Powers 

And the complexity is exponential when multiplicated by 5 PC...

Combat are slow you say ? I can only imagine it be slower in Epic....
This is off topic a little, but...

One thing I think is interesting is that numerous Players have pointed out how they can take thier character from level 1 through 30, yet the PHB1 over and over again says how rare powerful NPCs are. Scrolls are supposed to be hard to get because people who have Ritual User is so rare. Same with magic items. Rare because there is hardly anyone to make them, yet PCs seem to fly up the levels.

I just find it interesting.

Would NPCs suffer if Paragon and Epic was removed? Probably not IMO.

You may know ALL the rules, but I KNOW the Spirit of the Game.

Sign In to post comments