Community

Apr 13, 2010 -- 2:44PM, Alphastream1 wrote:

Yes. The guidelines are made to closely approximate the intended leveling progression - how many encounters you should play before leveling - which is then converted to adventures.

And, of course, the levelling progression is designed for a campaign intended to span eighteen months of a module per week, with equal time spent at each level.  To the extent that this is not the goal of the LFR campaign, it would be nice if they modified things accordingly.

In particular (and off the topic), as we're probably at the point where plans are starting to be made for epic modules, I would strongly advocate an across-the-board halving of the amount of XP given out there, so that PCs do not rocket across the final level band.

Apr 13, 2010 -- 2:44PM, Alphastream1 wrote:

Yes. The guidelines are made to closely approximate the intended leveling progression - how many encounters you should play before leveling - which is then converted to adventures.

What I think is being forgotten is that we are not just playing any campaign. We are playing LFR. Living Forgotten Realms is a high fantasy / high adventure campaign. The most recognizable shift away from a core rules campaign is that PC's can regularly obtain and use magic items 4 levels above the level of the character. This is a drastic difference in power level of the PCs versus a campaign where PCs use items of their level or lower.

For this reason the encounter levels the PCs face are suppose to be harder than normal. Again, Forgotten Realms is a high fantasy / high adventure campaign world. Saying that a level 4 players, playing a H2 mod low, might have to face a level 7 skill challenge isn't that out of line if the skill challenge is a pivotal part of the module. If it is a pivotal part of the module then XP should be spent on that part of the module anyway. If no skill challenges are ever used as the pivotal part of a modules then that is bad campaign construction.

As for leveling progression and epic play, I think people get so wrapped up in XP that the style of encounter is pushed to the side. Heroic Tier should have a scope of a village / city, Paragon Tier a country / region, and Epic a world / planer scope of setting. There is another concept that runs parallel.

The Stratagem of the antigonists is suppose to increase as the level increases. In Heroic tier, the adventures are designed to be more straight forward less tactics by the antagonists. Begining players spend the first 10 levels learning how powers and rules and tactics can be used against the NPCs.

Paragon is suppose to be more tactical, where the antagonists are more thoughtful of their approach in each encounter. Think more period military tactics like the PCs starting in the middle of a map instead of the edge because the NPC's have 3 flanks covered. Paragon is more about the players seeing tactics used against them.

Epic though, is no longer about just tactics, it is about strategy. When looking at an epic experience you are looking at every encounter influencing outcomes of the strategy of the antagonists. Encounters could have scouts, scouting the combat encounters to report back the tactics the PC's use and use those tactics against them in the final combat. NPCs might be spies to find out which PC's have the diplomacy skills and try to assassinate / curse / debuff / abduct them in combat so that the diplomat of the party won't be nearly as able to then go into a negotiation and be at their best. There could even be story awards in higher level epic play that when you play the continuation module the story award tells the DM how the NPCs would attack that PC because of what the learned about the PC in the first module.

When asking how to make Epic more well...epic. Do it by the story and the level of organization of the NPCs not just by XP. In epic play, my suggestion would be to morph the viewpoint of antagonists thinking, "We succeed as bad guys by killing the PCs" and shift the concept to, "We succeed as bad guys by causing the PCs to fail."

To me an epic villian might be the villian that thinks.... "Let the PCs that fail live, I know I can beat them again. I fear the PC's that I don't know and who could defeat me. Wa ha ha."

As an aside - The use of a skill challenge with a map might be interesting. A skill challenge that is contested by the NPCs. Where the PCs have to move around the board working together to counter the NPCs and to succeed in the end.

Apr 14, 2010 -- 8:47AM, bgibbons wrote:

In part, this is also because I believe the best fit for epic adventures will be double-length modules.  Story-wise, I think they'll need that length to get any type of proper epic feel. 

Assuming this does turn out to be the case, combining standard XP awards with double-length modules would mean that PCs will be leveling two out of every three times they play, which seems like a pretty rushed end to a character's career.

You could possibly do the same system that is used for Scepter Tower of Spellguard. Core4-X and Core 4-(X+1) You must play the first module to play the second and you have to play that second module after the first module. Just release them on the same day. Put them togethr for one 8 hour slot or for those places that can't run 8 hour slots, do them as 2, 4 hour slot.

You could even use the story award sysem to check off which loot options that character will earn in the second mod and backload the treasure and quest XP for the second mod so there isn't a benfit to not playing the second mod regardless.