4E Epic Destinies

[Fyorl]

I don't know if anyone's been reading up on the new 4th edition D&D rules. I thought I'd take a quick look through some of the information out there.

 

One thing I gathered which was a little disturbing was the idea of 'Epic Destinies'. My understanding of it is that once a character hits level 30, they gain some sort of special power and achieve their 'epic destiny'. Once that's done it's back to square one. You start a new campaign with different characters.

 

One of the quotes I read was:

"Some people are unhappy that they'll have to end their games at level 30, but just like with everything else in D&D, you can ignore our suggestions and keep going if you want to."

That's all well and good but I'd rather not have to design an entire rule system for levels above 30. I mean, isn't that your job? I know in 3E I tweaked a lot of the Epic Level rules because, quite frankly they were a little broken. But I couldn't have designed them from the ground up. It's one thing to tweak existing content and quite another to create it from scratch.

 

I've been away from D&D a while and I toyed with the idea of starting up again maybe when I go off to Uni with 4E. But after reading this I don't think I will. I'll just stick to 3.5E (which apparently also has epic destinies but also rules for continuing your characters past a moronic level-cap).

 

Am I over-reacting here? Throwing out all the goodness of revamped D&D rules simply because I'm not up to the challenge of taking those rules further than the published material?

 

I just don't see why adventures have to stop at level 30. So what if you character becomes a demi-god (one of the epic destinies)? Are there no challenges to be had on the celestial plane? I know for evil characters there's definitely a Blood War to be getting involved in.

[devSin]

Actually, there is no Blood War in 4E. It never happened.

 

One of either demons or devils are now more elemental in nature, with the other taking on all the "demonic" baggage.

[Fyorl]

Oh... how boring. They might as well start opening the lower planes to tourists now.

[Caedwyr]

Actually, there aren't lower planes anymore. It is all part of the Elemental Chaos?Maelstrom? I can't remember which is the term.

[theacefes]

Lazy bums.

[Caedwyr]

4th Edition does sound like an interesting cross between a CCG, Tabletop wargame/minature game and a RPG. It'll be interesting to see how it takes.

[Fyorl]

Indeed. 3E moved more into the realms of tabletop gaming but I thought it was a nice touch to make battles a little less vague. Looks like other people thought it was a good thing too so they tried to mix more of it in.

[Lord Ernie]

Hrm... I'd say read the whole system before you judge anything (if you are so inclined, certain sources around the net already have acquired versions of the books).

 

As for a lack of Blood War being boring: again, read the books. I for one would say 'eternal war between two evil parties' sounds boring enough as it is.

 

Oh, and as for stopping at level 30: besides the very high probability of someone (either WotC or a 3rd party) releasing an add-on of "Adventures beyond Epic - saving the Multiverse" that will take you beyond level 30, I can't see the greatness, honestly. By the time I'd have a character reach level 30 (I never, ever reached level 20 in 3.5) I'd be more than ready to move on to another character. Playing without a level cap only signals "Yeah, you're good now, but you can always, always get better.". I like the idea of my character eventually having the potential to become the best there is at what he does.

 

Also... note that they purposely put Epic Level play (levels 20-30) within the core rules, since the tacked-on mess that was 3rd Edition Epic Levels came out of not doing that in the first place.

[Fyorl]

Yeah you make some good points. I guess I'll try to read up on everything first. I just don't want to invest in all the rulebooks until I'm sure I won't regret it.

[Bri]

I doubt that I will be a big fan of fourth Edition myself.

 

Actual rules changes, such as altering the mechanics of the game system, and such, I have no problem with. All RPGs do that...I know some people who used to get aggravated with trying to collect all the various errata which would come up with rules problems, and changes, and such.

 

And yeah, given the nature of the RPG business they do try to reinvent themselves every few years to convince people to buy the books. Of course, this would be more helpful if they actually brought more people into role-playing, but they don't as a whole.

 

The problem I do have with is the whole "This is going to be the new outlook of the official AD&D universe" and essentially pulling one giant retcon which basically invalidates of much which went on earlier...and this doesn't constitute as a rules problem, but rather a setting change, and a poorly done one at that.

 

Mind you, most of the complaints which led to the changes do have some validity, but then they would have been better served to just create a whole new game world, and call it their new 'official one'.

[Fyorl]

I wonder what the Forgotten Realms authors will do? Some of the universe changes seems pretty drastic and it's not like Forgotten Realms is disconnected from the D&D universe, it's just got extra bits.

[Lord Ernie]

Actual rules changes, such as altering the mechanics of the game system, and such, I have no problem with. All RPGs do that...I know some people who used to get aggravated with trying to collect all the various errata which would come up with rules problems, and changes, and such.

 

And yeah, given the nature of the RPG business they do try to reinvent themselves every few years to convince people to buy the books. Of course, this would be more helpful if they actually brought more people into role-playing, but they don't as a whole.

The two big design goals they've stated for 4th were just that: simplify/straighten the math behind the game and get rid of several issues, and lure in new players. It remains to be seen if they make good on it, but it's a noble goal, no?

 

The problem I do have with is the whole "This is going to be the new outlook of the official AD&D universe" and essentially pulling one giant retcon which basically invalidates of much which went on earlier...and this doesn't constitute as a rules problem, but rather a setting change, and a poorly done one at that.

To each their own, but to me the old flavour that came with the system was little more than Greyhawk leftovers, and what there was of it was bland. The only thing I tended to leave standing were the gods.

 

And, also... no, this isn't a rules issue, but some of the old Greyhawk approaches, while being popular amongst the old crowd, could be rather confusing and weird to new players (I should know ). The new setting promises to be open enough for DM interpretation, but with some elements of its history defined enough to help a beginning DM on his way. Looks good to me.

 

As for the other settings' changes: I actually like what I've seen from what they did to the FR (finally, there's no level 30 spellcaster around every damn corner), and I've got no idea on the other ones.