I played a campaign that went epic from level 1, and the general consensus among our group was that everything past 20 was "jumping the shark". It just didn't feel the same, and the numbers became almost unmanageably high. Furthermore, it just didn't feel challenging- everyone was running around like freaking Jean Grey.
"Death? What death?" *reality revision*
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
There's one thing that makes epic unappealing to me. No more growth. Being primarily a console RPGamer, I'm addicted to levels and everything that comes with them. I was really disappointed with our campaign that went to epic because nothing grew anymore and everything was so easy. Of course, I was also playing a Druid so that might've had something to do with it =)
And you forget, Josh, that we had at least a couple of dieties on our side in that campaign. In fact, they even sat down to tea with our characters.
The only real challenge the GM could throw at my epic character, was a serious social one. He was forced into a social confrontation with a notorious uncle of his. Roland is Lawful good and his uncle is lawful evil, and I mean evil in the truest sense. His uncle had claimed his right over the family estate (they are nobility), and there was nothing Roland could do about it legaly.. so it was rough.
Nothing like having a lesbian art goddess randomly popping up and taking your characters out to dinner in Sigil.
Hehe! In our one epic game, we kept a running tally of how many gods we had met and hung out with. I believe it was up to 18 total.
How in the hell are you supposed to get a +5 holy musket other then saving the god of invention's butt?!
We also killed two gods, but that's a long story. It was no simple matter.
Edit: Since it's not copywritten anymore, I can post info on second edition gods. No fanboyisim here, seriously.. but in all honestly, they are 10 times more flavorfull and believable then the newer D&D gods.
Oh I dunno. A Psychic Warrior with Craft Psionic Arms and Equipment and enough experience to spare can make anything
I've never had much love for D&D gods. Usually, when we do include dieties in our campaigns, we make up our own. Either that or I'll play a much more animistic role - another reason I adore Incarnum. It makes playing a native or a Pagan so much easier!
Edit: Since it's not copywritten anymore, I can post info on second edition gods. No fanboyisim here, seriously.. but in all honestly, they are 10 times more flavorfull and believable then the newer D&D gods.
Hmm.
In some ways, but I think second edition has its own fair share of cheese as well.
I've never had much love for D&D gods. Usually, when we do include dieties in our campaigns, we make up our own. Either that or I'll play a much more animistic role - another reason I adore Incarnum. It makes playing a native or a Pagan so much easier!
I suspect my problem with D&D deities is the same problem I have with D&D cosmology in general. The way that the planes and alignments work is just... contrary to my philosophical knowledge, and it makes it really difficult to suspend disbelief.
I find the deities with 21+ rank to be the most appealing because they seem to be the most involved with creation of the multiverse and absolute transcendence... but you can't worship them at all, I guess because it would overshadow the standard gods. Meh.
but you can't worship them at all, I guess because it would overshadow the standard gods
Sure you can. They just don't have a canonized domain list or any standard information. One could very easily worship an overdeity, and it wouldn't take much to come up with a balanced domain list- after all, a cleric can pick any two domains and be a godless cleric, anyway, so allowing someone to worship a non-mechanical entity is not any more unbalancing...
Unless that entity is the Lady of Pain, in which case, roll a new character sheet.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
That is a contributing factor, I'm ashamed to admit. Male Half-Giants are about three times more male than a male of any other species, so that was an immediate attractor =)
I suspect my problem with D&D deities is the same problem I have with D&D cosmology in general. The way that the planes and alignments work is just... contrary to my philosophical knowledge, and it makes it really difficult to suspend disbelief.
I find the deities with 21+ rank to be the most appealing because they seem to be the most involved with creation of the multiverse and absolute transcendence... but you can't worship them at all, I guess because it would overshadow the standard gods. Meh.
To an extent, I found a lot of D&D's cosmology to be convoluted. From a mechanical standpoint I can totally understand why there needs to be a god for everything - it's more or less a necessity considering how many varying playstyles and game groups there are. I do think Dieties and Demigods brought a lot to the table, though; specifically in regards to dieties from existing mythologies. I was really happy to see figures like Freya and Hermes statted up for casual use.
The Lady of Pain is somewhat of an Enigma. She is the ruler of the great planar city of Sigal. Many believe her to be a goddess, but she doesn't seem to require followers, nor does she give a flip.
.. at least in 2nd. I'm not versed in third plainscape
Edit: So does anyone like my archer/mage (in the first post)?
A fairly mysterious and intimidating figure from the Planescape setting.
but she doesn't seem to require followers, nor does she give a flip.
It's not even so much that she doesn't seem to require them (the whole "deities need followers to survive" convention seems to be primarily an optional flavor thing in 3.X), she actively discourages them on pain of irrevocable death.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
Only Lady of Pain I know of is Loviatar...probably not the same one, though.
I enjoy epic levels because things start to get interesting then....the whole multiverse is up for grabs, with all the big bad nasties that all that entails. I don't actually have many epic characters, though...only three, and two of them are rogue based. The other is the uberbroken spellcaster that I keep barraging the rules thread about, because I actually never foresaw the interaction between those feats and class abilities.
The campaign I've been playing in most recently is an epic one, where the big bad nasty guy is attempting to release the Godslayer (a friggin' hecatoncheires, think something like a creature with 100 arms and broken to-hits). This part will probably end next week or so, when our other member of the gaming group comes back. I am expecting a major buttkicking, because it has SR of 70+ and I only take +46 to overcome it...sigh...wizards suck in melee...
And yes, no incantatrix for you. Or anyone. That class makes puppies cry. Mostly because they are the former Big Bads who have been Baleful Polymorphed into said puppies. By you. Because you're an incantatrix.
Quote from Yukora »
This is Deraxas we're talking about.
Remember, the girl that just killed an aspect of herself before literally consuming her?
Yeah, I don't see her handling a pissing match in any way other than a duel.
Quote from RedDwarfian »
Yes mistress...
Quote from About epic-level D&D »
There are only so many epic, psuedonatural barbarian/blackguard half-dragon akutenshai vampire balor paragons they can throw at you, right?
Quote from Concerning breeding habits of humans in fantasy games »
I suppose it's true. Though the logistics implied in a human/Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon pairing makes me shudder.
...Something tells me that even should all arcane casters in the world unite, that the Grease spell would NOT be sufficient.
Sure you can. They just don't have a canonized domain list or any standard information. One could very easily worship an overdeity, and it wouldn't take much to come up with a balanced domain list- after all, a cleric can pick any two domains and be a godless cleric, anyway, so allowing someone to worship a non-mechanical entity is not any more unbalancing...
Unless that entity is the Lady of Pain, in which case, roll a new character sheet.
Hmm.
I guess I've had previous DM's who were less inclined about this, essentially citing the deistic (and not theistic) nature of overdeities as making them incapable of granting spells.
But those DM's also don't allow for godless clerics, so that's a contributing factor.
That is a contributing factor, I'm ashamed to admit. Male Half-Giants are about three times more male than a male of any other species, so that was an immediate attractor =)
Hah.
I think I'd be more interested in having such in my party than playing it myself, probably. Eye candy over self-emulation.
The feats are nice, though. That gives me an idea for a character class...
To an extent, I found a lot of D&D's cosmology to be convoluted. From a mechanical standpoint I can totally understand why there needs to be a god for everything - it's more or less a necessity considering how many varying playstyles and game groups there are. I do think Dieties and Demigods brought a lot to the table, though; specifically in regards to dieties from existing mythologies. I was really happy to see figures like Freya and Hermes statted up for casual use.
I suppose in a sense what it comes down to is that the deities are awfully specific when everything else in the D&D world is very open-ended. I guess I would prefer a couple "example deities" to use as a base archetype and then give world-builders the tools they need to, mostly, create their own deities, and emphasize only a couple in certain campaigns depending upon the conflict and whether it includes a holy war.
We just worked it as if you worshiped the entire pantheon. Much like in ancient times, you didn't have people worship Athena and denouncing the other gods and goddesses, they generally worshiped the entire pantheon but then chose one or a handfull to focus on personally.
The feats are nice, though. That gives me an idea for a character class...
OK. Let me pose this question to you guys:
My idea is a character class that casts both arcane spells as a wizard of half his class level and divine spells as a cleric of half his class level (rounding down in both cases). If he has levels of wizard or cleric, the levels stack for the purpose of determining spells per day and caster level, but otherwise the class wouldn't have other abilities of the cleric or wizard (like turning undead) or be able to do fancy stuff with their magic (like specialize in a school or convert spells into cure or inflict spells).
To offset this from being no different than simply multiclassing, he gets frequent bonus feats (either every odd level, or using the psychic warrior's feat progression), which makes him better than a simple cleric/wizard, but worse than a single-classed cleric or wizard. Also, a multiclassed cleric/wizard with a third class would have its potency reduced to 1/3 in each class if the levels are distributed evenly, whereas this class would have its potency reduced to 1/4 if it ever multiclassed at all.
I guess I find it an interesting idea for a character class to be both an arcane and divine spellcaster.
Is this inherently broken or inherently pointless?
Seems a like a bit of wishful thinking. Cleric/Wizard has tools available to smooth its multiclass progress via the Mystic Theurge and other similar PrCs. A base class that is an inherently multiclassed is strange, and fairly unwieldy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
The best option is this feat in the Complete Divine. I can't remember the name of it, but it gives you access to one set of Domain spells. This way, you can be a single class arcane caster, but also have a smattering of good cleric spells. You can purchase the feat multiple times to gain access to other domains as well. All the while, you will have a wizards metamagic and item creation feats.
That may be mostly because of its ability to stack its levels.
My original idea in a vacuum was for the character to use the cleric and wizard spell lists to cast his arcane and divine spells, and essentially give him spells per day not as though he had half as many levels as a cleric or wizard, but using them as a model to determine his spells per day, or in other worlds using the numerical amounts of spells per day to formulate the progression as opposed to simply treating him as a wizard of half his class level and a cleric of half his class level. But this would be about impossible to put all into one table, which is why I took the easier route.
I tried to use the pre-existing context of how a Paladin turns undead and casts spells as well as the Bard and the Psychic Warrior as the basis for this.
The reason that you would take the class would be the feats, for potentially a lot of versatility, and maybe whatever class features that get thrown in.
I think if the levels were independent instead of stacking, it would seem less like multiclassing or being a prestige class. I'm not sure how else you would do a class that was both an arcane and divine spellcaster unless you allowed the character to choose his spells from either spell list, I suppose. Which sounds harder to balance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It was above and beyond fun.
"Death? What death?" *reality revision*
I think I'd lose both my Jewish and homosexual membership cards if my ambitions were any less than world domination.
And you forget, Josh, that we had at least a couple of dieties on our side in that campaign. In fact, they even sat down to tea with our characters.
Hmm.
Well, I always thought I'd be a benevolent dictator, so no. *hides masses of slain armies who stood against my dominion of the earth behind halo*
Hahaha. That was right.
Nothing like having a lesbian art goddess randomly popping up and taking your characters out to dinner in Sigil.
I do find them somewhat sordid.
Hehe! In our one epic game, we kept a running tally of how many gods we had met and hung out with. I believe it was up to 18 total.
How in the hell are you supposed to get a +5 holy musket other then saving the god of invention's butt?!
We also killed two gods, but that's a long story. It was no simple matter.
Edit: Since it's not copywritten anymore, I can post info on second edition gods. No fanboyisim here, seriously.. but in all honestly, they are 10 times more flavorfull and believable then the newer D&D gods.
I could even make a thread about it.
I've never had much love for D&D gods. Usually, when we do include dieties in our campaigns, we make up our own. Either that or I'll play a much more animistic role - another reason I adore Incarnum. It makes playing a native or a Pagan so much easier!
Hmm.
In some ways, but I think second edition has its own fair share of cheese as well.
How not, with those big, burly arms?
I suspect my problem with D&D deities is the same problem I have with D&D cosmology in general. The way that the planes and alignments work is just... contrary to my philosophical knowledge, and it makes it really difficult to suspend disbelief.
I find the deities with 21+ rank to be the most appealing because they seem to be the most involved with creation of the multiverse and absolute transcendence... but you can't worship them at all, I guess because it would overshadow the standard gods. Meh.
Sure you can. They just don't have a canonized domain list or any standard information. One could very easily worship an overdeity, and it wouldn't take much to come up with a balanced domain list- after all, a cleric can pick any two domains and be a godless cleric, anyway, so allowing someone to worship a non-mechanical entity is not any more unbalancing...
Unless that entity is the Lady of Pain, in which case, roll a new character sheet.
That is a contributing factor, I'm ashamed to admit. Male Half-Giants are about three times more male than a male of any other species, so that was an immediate attractor =)
To an extent, I found a lot of D&D's cosmology to be convoluted. From a mechanical standpoint I can totally understand why there needs to be a god for everything - it's more or less a necessity considering how many varying playstyles and game groups there are. I do think Dieties and Demigods brought a lot to the table, though; specifically in regards to dieties from existing mythologies. I was really happy to see figures like Freya and Hermes statted up for casual use.
Edit: So does anyone like my archer/mage (in the first post)?
A fairly mysterious and intimidating figure from the Planescape setting.
It's not even so much that she doesn't seem to require them (the whole "deities need followers to survive" convention seems to be primarily an optional flavor thing in 3.X), she actively discourages them on pain of irrevocable death.
I enjoy epic levels because things start to get interesting then....the whole multiverse is up for grabs, with all the big bad nasties that all that entails. I don't actually have many epic characters, though...only three, and two of them are rogue based. The other is the uberbroken spellcaster that I keep barraging the rules thread about, because I actually never foresaw the interaction between those feats and class abilities.
The campaign I've been playing in most recently is an epic one, where the big bad nasty guy is attempting to release the Godslayer (a friggin' hecatoncheires, think something like a creature with 100 arms and broken to-hits). This part will probably end next week or so, when our other member of the gaming group comes back. I am expecting a major buttkicking, because it has SR of 70+ and I only take +46 to overcome it...sigh...wizards suck in melee...
"I am in the arcane, and the arcane is in me."
Official Matron Mother of Clan Planar Chaos
Awesome Avatar and signature by DarkNightCavalier
Deraxas, Dark Maiden of Shimia,, still oddly obsessed with a mindmage.
Hmm.
I guess I've had previous DM's who were less inclined about this, essentially citing the deistic (and not theistic) nature of overdeities as making them incapable of granting spells.
But those DM's also don't allow for godless clerics, so that's a contributing factor.
Hah.
I think I'd be more interested in having such in my party than playing it myself, probably. Eye candy over self-emulation.
The feats are nice, though. That gives me an idea for a character class...
I suppose in a sense what it comes down to is that the deities are awfully specific when everything else in the D&D world is very open-ended. I guess I would prefer a couple "example deities" to use as a base archetype and then give world-builders the tools they need to, mostly, create their own deities, and emphasize only a couple in certain campaigns depending upon the conflict and whether it includes a holy war.
OK. Let me pose this question to you guys:
My idea is a character class that casts both arcane spells as a wizard of half his class level and divine spells as a cleric of half his class level (rounding down in both cases). If he has levels of wizard or cleric, the levels stack for the purpose of determining spells per day and caster level, but otherwise the class wouldn't have other abilities of the cleric or wizard (like turning undead) or be able to do fancy stuff with their magic (like specialize in a school or convert spells into cure or inflict spells).
To offset this from being no different than simply multiclassing, he gets frequent bonus feats (either every odd level, or using the psychic warrior's feat progression), which makes him better than a simple cleric/wizard, but worse than a single-classed cleric or wizard. Also, a multiclassed cleric/wizard with a third class would have its potency reduced to 1/3 in each class if the levels are distributed evenly, whereas this class would have its potency reduced to 1/4 if it ever multiclassed at all.
I guess I find it an interesting idea for a character class to be both an arcane and divine spellcaster.
Is this inherently broken or inherently pointless?
My original idea in a vacuum was for the character to use the cleric and wizard spell lists to cast his arcane and divine spells, and essentially give him spells per day not as though he had half as many levels as a cleric or wizard, but using them as a model to determine his spells per day, or in other worlds using the numerical amounts of spells per day to formulate the progression as opposed to simply treating him as a wizard of half his class level and a cleric of half his class level. But this would be about impossible to put all into one table, which is why I took the easier route.
I tried to use the pre-existing context of how a Paladin turns undead and casts spells as well as the Bard and the Psychic Warrior as the basis for this.
The reason that you would take the class would be the feats, for potentially a lot of versatility, and maybe whatever class features that get thrown in.
I think if the levels were independent instead of stacking, it would seem less like multiclassing or being a prestige class. I'm not sure how else you would do a class that was both an arcane and divine spellcaster unless you allowed the character to choose his spells from either spell list, I suppose. Which sounds harder to balance.