| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| brjr2001 |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 23:55:24
like for all classes they royally suck. i was checking it and it just seemed like they could have done a better job at epic lvl |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| warlockco |
Posted - 05 May 2007 : 21:57:39
It is supposed to be 3.5E compliant. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 04 May 2007 : 21:40:18
>>For those that don't like WotC's rules for Epic play, Sword & Sorcery did put out their own >>Epic Rules: Advanced Player's Guide http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Players-Guide-Sorcery->>Studios/dp/1588469611/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-2176262-2268727?>>ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1178298955&sr=8-1
I really liked the concepts that Sword & Sorcery put out with their world with all the titans and the gods at war. If I couldn't play in the realms, I'd love to run a campaign there (or one of the offshoot continents of Eberron.. I like the idea of the Inspired, even if it is kinda Stargate'ish). However, I found a lot of their stuff was lacking in balance (I remember their variant of bloodmage making me want one as a player but saying no to myself as a DM). I'm betting they cleaned it up more when 3.5 came out. Do you know how old these rules are? |
| warlockco |
Posted - 04 May 2007 : 18:17:02
For those that don't like WotC's rules for Epic play, Sword & Sorcery did put out their own Epic Rules: Advanced Player's Guide http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Players-Guide-Sorcery-Studios/dp/1588469611/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-2176262-2268727?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1178298955&sr=8-1 |
| Drew.Davis |
Posted - 04 May 2007 : 06:09:15
Yeah... you have to re-work some things... like the cure disease stops and add more to the number of smites or up his turning abilities for the Paladin. The 4 attacks is a time saver and nothing more think someone with perfect two weapon fighting and the speed ability on their swords thats 10 attacks a round... and EXTRA attacks on that... thats just no in my eyes... and you give the characters a choice thats given in the FR campaign book, +1 to attack OR a +1 level to spell casting OR a bonus feat ONLY from the epic handbook (my own rule on the feats) lets them pick and choose. And especially in the FR campaign setting the epics become more of nation building then actual fighting so you kinda point them in the direction of leaderhip feats... power of faerun helps out with that!
To compensate for the high ability mods required... yer the DM, fudge the numbers abit, like if a fighter needs 25STR make it 23 its more easily attainable.
The epic level handbooks helps out ALOT!!! |
| Weiser_Cain |
Posted - 06 Mar 2007 : 10:28:04
I don't like how abrupt the cut off on additional attacks is or how you suddenly gain access to new abilities. It should have smoothed out the transition to epic or at least explain why 20 is such a magical number. The same with epic spells, they shouldn't be so different from normal spells I would have like to have seen some of the restrictions on magic in general lifted as you progressed, revisit those lower level spell slots. |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 01 Mar 2007 : 00:41:00
I personally think that there two primary reasons why the Epic Level Handbook sucks:
1) Non-existent epic class features... come on, more Remove Diseases for the epic paladin? Just some extra feats for some of the classes? Excerpt from the back cover: "...using powers and abilities that rival even the Gods"  
2) Too-high stat requisites for some of the epic feats. Alright, your epic fighter might have STR 25 with insight and/or enhancement bonuses, but it has surely been very rare in our campaigns. |
| Xysma |
Posted - 27 Feb 2007 : 19:33:23
quote:
Originally posted by ShadezofDis
The only problem that I have with the whole "epic levels" thing is that if I were to want to incorperate it into my campaign I'd need to rework a lot of NPCs.
Personally I don't think I'm going to ever use epic levels unless I decide to run a planar game, which is VERY unlikely ;)
The way our group works we start completely new campaigns every few months, so we would never have the chance to become epic level. On the rare occasion that we play an epic level campaign, we start out that way, so whoever is running just creates the NPCs to match. Otherwise I would feel your pain. I know in the current campaign I am running, there are far too many NPCs for me to want to update and I've only been running this campaign since November. |
| ShadezofDis |
Posted - 27 Feb 2007 : 18:30:52
The only problem that I have with the whole "epic levels" thing is that if I were to want to incorperate it into my campaign I'd need to rework a lot of NPCs.
Personally I don't think I'm going to ever use epic levels unless I decide to run a planar game, which is VERY unlikely ;) |
| Xysma |
Posted - 27 Feb 2007 : 16:45:14
Having run and played in epic level campaigns, I don't have any problem with the epic level ruleset at all. What specifically do you think "royally sucks"?
|
| Kaladorm |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 03:25:44
Any chance you could give us some specifics that you don't like? Kinda hard to discuss  |
| Sanishiver |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 02:28:39
Having run a Realms Campaign with 8 Epic PCs in it, I have to say based on my player's feedback that it does not suck.
You've got lots of gold, lots of reputation, lots of NPC contacts, lots of spells, lots of magic items and you can pick up Epic Spellcasting and/or Epic Feats....
Look past the adjusted progression to actual play and you'll see it's not so bad.
 |
| Dreamstalker |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 00:44:43
I agreed they could have done better. Personally, I think it came rather too early in the system. For what they did at the time I find they did fairly decent.
A few of my points of contention was they did not support 11th to 20th level warriors before they got around to Epic, Epic Spellcasting is based off of a skill rather than a Caster Level Check, they did not spend enough time balancing out Saving Throw DCs of Spells and they mostly gave boss monsters with few fodder monsters.
I am very pleased with the focus over to a feat based class feature system. The steadying off of base saves and base attack made a lot of sense though there are a few quirks.
Hardly perfect yet some good innovative ideas in my opinion. |
