That's not really the purpose of the question, but if it plays into your answer of it, it's a valid concern.
I mean, a poll isn't really that interesting if what it's saying is "should we have niche feature X?" ignoring the opportunity cost of X. Should we have a 100-page book on flumphs? I'd say obviously yes so long as it doesn't divert resources away from other stuff.
Well, the poll itself isn't really supposed to be interesting. It's just to gain numbers of this community, and have a discussion on it below.
Yes, it shouldn't take away from other books, but I personally would be fine if it took away from another M:tG book.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Whether any one person would ever be inclined to use them or not, YES they should exist.
At least some people will want to use them.
...
Back in 3.5, there was the book Libris Mortis, which included possibly-player-appropriate content (e.g., the Corpsecrafter feats). Not every GM would have allowed them; not every player would have even wanted them.
I, for one, loved them. :)
I think the tacit question is not whether the rules should exist, but whether the devs should expend the time and effort on developing a new epic level system when most people aren't going to use it. If there are 2-3 books per year, and maybe one crunchy book, I see epic level stuff as very low priority next to things like wrapping up psionics, giving fair treatment to planar games, etc.
to be fair honestly planar adventures would most likely come out alongside epic rules. Traversing planes is usually done at very high levels 15+ to epic normally.
Not necessarily. The whole point of the Planescape setting was to provide a means for low-level adventures to happen in the planes, using Portals to get from place to place rather than relying on high-level teleportation magic (back in the days when Teleport could take you between planes).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I just want the ability to multiclass and have each chosen class be able to reach level 20, instead of having total class levels capped at 20. It would also be nice to be able to "multiclass" into the same class so you can pick another subclass or just stick with the same subclass and be able to stack your class features or use them more frequently. That feels like the easiest thing to implement since Wizards does not have to come up with any new material outside of adding an optional rule saying that you can multiclass into the same class or something after level 20.
When I played 2nd edition back in the day it never occurred to me once to stop the campaign when the players reached a certain level. We just kept going. Sure there were deaths along the way but we played through until everyone was level 27 or so. In order to make battles challenging there were a lot of NPCs or fighting on external planes.
It seems weird to me to design a later edition where everything comes to an end at level 20.
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Yeah but in 2nd edition my fighters were getting magic items and things that made up for not getting more spells. So in general everyone was pretty balanced.
Why would epic levels be empty levels though? I would just do post level 20 choose a prestige class that would either be a more powerful version of your existing class or allow you to do things your class ordinarily wouldn't be able to do. Plus it lends itself to the story reason for taking your epic level test.
Why would epic levels be empty levels though? I would just do post level 20 choose a prestige class that would either be a more powerful version of your existing class or allow you to do things your class ordinarily wouldn't be able to do. Plus it lends itself to the story reason for taking your epic level test.
I would just allow you take a different subclass I. The same class and treat it like an MC. Or actually just MC. Keeps the character classes levels capped at 20, but the character could go all the way up to 40 (although I would cap it at 25-30) that way. Start letting stuff like Extra Attacks stack at that point too. Keeps it simple.
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Yeah but in 2nd edition my fighters were getting magic items and things that made up for not getting more spells. So in general everyone was pretty balanced.
Wizards and clerics got magic items as well, and 2nd edition was the poster-child of Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards. In general, everyone was not balanced.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Yeah but in 2nd edition my fighters were getting magic items and things that made up for not getting more spells. So in general everyone was pretty balanced.
Wizards and clerics got magic items as well, and 2nd edition was the poster-child of Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards. In general, everyone was not balanced.
Also, the 1E Players' Handbook specifically calls out that the most powerful magic items in the game, are useable only by Wizards er, Magic-Users, as they were called back in the day. ("Wizard" being the class's "name level", at 11.)
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Yeah but in 2nd edition my fighters were getting magic items and things that made up for not getting more spells. So in general everyone was pretty balanced.
Wizards and clerics got magic items as well, and 2nd edition was the poster-child of Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards. In general, everyone was not balanced.
I am not talking about your games, I am talking only about MY games, and in MY game, all the players were balanced.
I'm talking about the actual rules. And given the sheer difference in what spellcasters could do vs what non-spellcasters would do, I highly doubt your games were balanced unless everything ended at 6th level and you never gave out any magic items that could be used by anyone other than fighters or thieves.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I'm talking about the actual rules. And given the sheer difference in what spellcasters could do vs what non-spellcasters would do, I highly doubt your games were balanced unless everything ended at 6th level and you never gave out any magic items that could be used by anyone other than fighters or thieves.
There were player to player fights when they were 25th level or so. The saving throws on the fighters were in crazy land. So yes, they were balanced. Ultimately the fighter/mage was the strongest, but some fighters beat pure mages and overall they were VERY balanced.
Please don't talk about "my games" when you no nothing Jon Snow....
First of all, PvP is not and never has been a determination of balance.
Second of all, a 25th level wizard should have enough defensive spells to be outright impervious to harm from a fighter, enough debuff spells to strip said fighter of all their own buffs and defenses, and enough offensive spells to reduce a fighter into being a greasy stain on the ground or less before the fighter can even think of retaliating. I don't care if that wasn't what was happening in your game because apparently your game wasn't actually running the rules as printed in the books.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
First of all, PvP is not and never has been a determination of balance.
Second of all, a 25th level wizard should have enough defensive spells to be outright impervious to harm from a fighter, enough debuff spells to strip said fighter of all their own buffs and defenses, and enough offensive spells to reduce a fighter into being a greasy stain on the ground or less before the fighter can even think of retaliating. I don't care if that wasn't what was happening in your game because apparently your game wasn't actually running the rules as printed in the books.
Clearly you didn't play 2nd edition at the highest levels. Its fine, you stick with your 6th level characters !
Well, the poll itself isn't really supposed to be interesting. It's just to gain numbers of this community, and have a discussion on it below.
Yes, it shouldn't take away from other books, but I personally would be fine if it took away from another M:tG book.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Not necessarily. The whole point of the Planescape setting was to provide a means for low-level adventures to happen in the planes, using Portals to get from place to place rather than relying on high-level teleportation magic (back in the days when Teleport could take you between planes).
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I just want the ability to multiclass and have each chosen class be able to reach level 20, instead of having total class levels capped at 20. It would also be nice to be able to "multiclass" into the same class so you can pick another subclass or just stick with the same subclass and be able to stack your class features or use them more frequently. That feels like the easiest thing to implement since Wizards does not have to come up with any new material outside of adding an optional rule saying that you can multiclass into the same class or something after level 20.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
When I played 2nd edition back in the day it never occurred to me once to stop the campaign when the players reached a certain level. We just kept going. Sure there were deaths along the way but we played through until everyone was level 27 or so. In order to make battles challenging there were a lot of NPCs or fighting on external planes.
It seems weird to me to design a later edition where everything comes to an end at level 20.
Well, part of the difference is that game designers have become increasingly prone to trying to do away with empty class levels. In 2nd Edition, especially if you weren't a spellcaster the only changes you got from leveling up were a boost to your HP and maybe your THAC0 and saving throws. Sometimes you got a weapon proficiency. By comparison, in 5th editio it's pretty rare to gain a level and not have anything get added to your character's actual abilities.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
There's nothing wrong with adding more content. If the DM and the players don't like it... don't use it. It's there for those who do.
"The Epic Level Handbook wasn't that bad, guys.
Guys, pls."
Yeah but in 2nd edition my fighters were getting magic items and things that made up for not getting more spells. So in general everyone was pretty balanced.
Why would epic levels be empty levels though? I would just do post level 20 choose a prestige class that would either be a more powerful version of your existing class or allow you to do things your class ordinarily wouldn't be able to do. Plus it lends itself to the story reason for taking your epic level test.
I would just allow you take a different subclass I. The same class and treat it like an MC. Or actually just MC. Keeps the character classes levels capped at 20, but the character could go all the way up to 40 (although I would cap it at 25-30) that way. Start letting stuff like Extra Attacks stack at that point too. Keeps it simple.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Wizards and clerics got magic items as well, and 2nd edition was the poster-child of Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards. In general, everyone was not balanced.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Also, the 1E Players' Handbook specifically calls out that the most powerful magic items in the game, are useable only by
Wizardser, Magic-Users, as they were called back in the day. ("Wizard" being the class's "name level", at 11.)LF/QW was a deliberate design goal, back then.
I am not talking about your games, I am talking only about MY games, and in MY game, all the players were balanced.
I'm talking about the actual rules. And given the sheer difference in what spellcasters could do vs what non-spellcasters would do, I highly doubt your games were balanced unless everything ended at 6th level and you never gave out any magic items that could be used by anyone other than fighters or thieves.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
There were player to player fights when they were 25th level or so. The saving throws on the fighters were in crazy land. So yes, they were balanced. Ultimately the fighter/mage was the strongest, but some fighters beat pure mages and overall they were VERY balanced.
Please don't talk about "my games" when you no nothing Jon Snow....
First of all, PvP is not and never has been a determination of balance.
Second of all, a 25th level wizard should have enough defensive spells to be outright impervious to harm from a fighter, enough debuff spells to strip said fighter of all their own buffs and defenses, and enough offensive spells to reduce a fighter into being a greasy stain on the ground or less before the fighter can even think of retaliating. I don't care if that wasn't what was happening in your game because apparently your game wasn't actually running the rules as printed in the books.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Clearly you didn't play 2nd edition at the highest levels. Its fine, you stick with your 6th level characters !
I played characters who were far higher level that 6th. But we fought more things than just strawmen.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Gentlemen. This is wildly off topic and largely irrelevant. Stick to 5e for the duration, perhaps?
Please do not contact or message me.
nevermind
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.