Leaders (5)
Clerics, Warlords, Bards, Shaman, Artificer
Defenders (4)
Fighters, Paladins, Swordmages, Wardens
Strikers (6)
Rangers, Rogues, Warlocks, Barbarians, Sorcerers, Avengers
Controllers (3)
Wizards, Invokers, Druids
Ok we all knew strikers would get the most love...but Leaders in second suprised me...but controllers are still looking a little weak...onl 3...1/2 as many as the striker...
Now ebberon may have another class, but we are not sure of it yet...
Ebberron's class is Artificer.
I did list that...but there may be a second one we don't know about yet...heck there could be 4 for all we know...that is why I left it open...
I did list that...but there may be a second one we don't know about yet...heck there could be 4 for all we know...that is why I left it open...
Possible, but it seems unlikely to me.
Looking purely at the numbers is foolish. Maybe if you looked at the secondary roles that are included in many of the class descriptions you would see more balance between Strikers/Defenders/Leaders.
If the sorcerer had been a controller, we would've had only one long-range striker (warlock) and one sometimes-long range (ranger). Assuming that the avenger is a short-range striker, of course.
However, I'm going to predict that PHB2 keeps the number of striker classes down to two (monk and something else, maybe ninja), and delivers three controllers, one leader and two defenders.
Why? Out of the probable PHB3 sources (shadow, ki, psi), shadow and psi demand a controller class each. A ki controller or even a second shadow one are likely. I think there'll be a shadow leader, with ki and psi leaders saved for another PHB. The two defenders could come from any of the sources, and would make up for only one defender in PHB2.
The problem now will be that the other roles need to play "catch up" to Strikers, though I doubt we'll see a supplement without striker support.
I'd like to note (don't think it was previously noted) that, considering core classes only (so, removing Artificer and Swordmage), the numbers are a bit more balanced (4/3/6/3) - Strikers are still the anomaly, but controllers are actually much close to "up to snuff."
The problem now will be that the other roles need to play "catch up" to Strikers, though I doubt we'll see a supplement without striker support.
Artificer and Swordmage are core, BTW. Just like everything else.
Artificer and Swordmage are core, BTW. Just like everything else.
Yes. That's why when they come out with the Players Guides for each setting the new classes are so fluff free. The Paragon Path's might not be, but mechanically they're 'core'.
Keep in mind that controller tends to be the worst role to have multiples of. You can always use another striker or defender, and it takes a fairly high proportion of leaders for their diminishing returns to kick in, but multiple controllers tend to get in each others' way.
Indeed. Also, take a look at what classes are controllers... they are all special, uniquely powerful wielders of their power source. It makes sense to me on the "how does X class fit into the world"-level that controllers are *clears throat* the few, the proud, the elite.
(Am I suggesting that the Marine should be a Martial Controller?... Well, that is a discussion for another thread! *hides from flames*)
Is the avenger actually confirmed as a striker? I thought that was just speculation.
pure speculation...
Possible, but it seems unlikely to me.
Agreed. FRPG only had one class, and it seems doubtful to me that the EPG is going to have more than one. For one, we've heard nothing of the sort. Second, it's a setting book. They're not going to cram it full of setting neutral classes. It'd certainly be nice, but I sincerely doubt it, and can't imagine what other class they could potentially put in the Eberron Player's Guide.
And yes, some more Controller variety would be nice. We've had to make due with just one Controller for 9 months. Thankfully we're getting two more with the PHB2. Still, one more, minimum, would certainly be nice. Just wishful thinking on my part, of course.
Eberron. ONE B TWO R.
Because it's a made-up name for an imaginary place?
Artificer and Swordmage are core, BTW. Just like everything else.
If these are core, I'd sure like to see them published in something other than a setting book. Why should I have to buy two books for a setting I'm never going to use to get core classes?
If these are core, I'd sure like to see them published in something other than a setting book. Why should I have to buy two books for a setting I'm never going to use to get core classes?
well swordmage will also have support (but not reprint) in Arcane Power...oh and the idea is that players guide to settings have lots of things that can be used in ANY setting...so I bought the FRPG for 2 classes, and a warlock pact (Lets not forget dark pact and spell scared), and 2 races, and a bunch of new feats...all of witch I see as good general stuff...
of cource you asked
Why should I have to buy two books for a setting I'm never going to use to get core classes?
you could subscribe to DDI and get the compandium instead...that is two options to get those CORE classes
If these are core, I'd sure like to see them published in something other than a setting book. Why should I have to buy two books for a setting I'm never going to use to get core classes?
Because they're purposefully designed the Player's Guide to be useful to all players, not just those playing in the setting. You don't just have the Swordmage class in there. You also have the Drow and Genasi player races (You can't say Drow are strictly Forgotten Realms. They're most definitely core. And Genasi have existed in Planescape, too, not just the Realms), for one. The Spellscarred and Paragon Paths are easily translated to other settings by just reflavoring some bits here and there. The Chosen Epic Destiny is just the Demigod Epic Destiny with more available choices. Regional Benefits are going to be core in the PHB2, so the Regional Benefits in the FRPG just provide you with more options to choose from. And the Feats and Rituals are easily used in core. Not to mention the aformentioned Dark Pact, which can exist in any setting, not just the Realms.
So if you were to buy the FRPG, it's not as if you'd be short on new player options. That book's essentially the PHB 1.5 with some Realms flavor thrown in. And to answer one of your questions, let me put it another way. Let's assume they included the Swordmage in the PHB2. Why should those who already bought the FRPG have to pay for it twice? Which is better? Your having to buy a second book to get all-new material, or others buying two books which both contain some of the same material? Seems to me that the latter is more of a ripoff than the former.
Last but not least, the Swordmage is being covered in Arcane Power alongside the Wizard, Bard, Warlock, and Sorcerer. I'd say that qualifies as core.
Maybe something shifter or warforged related, like a druid class that thematically ties in with a shifter, or a Warforged-themed Fighter variant like the "shield master" or something.
There could also be a class variant based on a world-based theme like a Purging Paladin (of the silver flame) variant or Wizard variant that uses air spells based in Sharn or the like.
And, of course, Dragonmarks will follow the path set up by spellscarred in FR.
The striker role covers two major archetypes - short-ranged and long-ranged. Skirmish and Artillery, you might say. Since both of these need to be represented, and most striker classes focus on one or the other, it makes sense to me that there's more strikers than any others.
If the sorcerer had been a controller, we would've had only one long-range striker (warlock) and one sometimes-long range (ranger). Assuming that the avenger is a short-range striker, of course.
However, I'm going to predict that PHB2 keeps the number of striker classes down to two (monk and something else, maybe ninja), and delivers three controllers, one leader and two defenders.
Why? Out of the probable PHB3 sources (shadow, ki, psi), shadow and psi demand a controller class each. A ki controller or even a second shadow one are likely. I think there'll be a shadow leader, with ki and psi leaders saved for another PHB. The two defenders could come from any of the sources, and would make up for only one defender in PHB2.
I'm thinking the three power sources for PHB3 will be Psionic, Ki, and Shadow. A possible set-up could be:
Defenders(2 in book, 6 total): Samurai/Sohei (Ki Defender), Psychic Warrior? (Psionic Defender)
Strikers(2 in book, 8 total): Monk (Ki Striker), Soulknife? (Psionic Striker)
Leaders(1 in book, 6 total): Empath (Psionic Leader)
Controllers(3 in book, 6 total): Psion/Telepath (Psionic Controller), Illusionist/Shadowcaster (Shadow Controller), Necromancer (Shadow Controller, could also be a Leader depending on focus)
This would bring about a more "balanced" setup, with Strikers slightly ahead due to the popularity of "damage" classes.
The striker role covers two major archetypes - short-ranged and long-ranged. Skirmish and Artillery, you might say. Since both of these need to be represented, and most striker classes focus on one or the other, it makes sense to me that there's more strikers than any others.
If the sorcerer had been a controller, we would've had only one long-range striker (warlock) and one sometimes-long range (ranger). Assuming that the avenger is a short-range striker, of course.
However, I'm going to predict that PHB2 keeps the number of striker classes down to two (monk and something else, maybe ninja), and delivers three controllers, one leader and two defenders.
Why? Out of the probable PHB3 sources (shadow, ki, psi), shadow and psi demand a controller class each. A ki controller or even a second shadow one are likely. I think there'll be a shadow leader, with ki and psi leaders saved for another PHB. The two defenders could come from any of the sources, and would make up for only one defender in PHB2.
As is the case with startling frequency, Nautilus, you have stated my feelings on this almost exactly. You seem nice, but sometimes I find myself worrying about how often I agree with you. Really. ( :P )
In particular, I like your comment about Striker role being both "skirmishers" and "artillery". Having been thinking a lot about roles lately, I definitely think that they will remain a part of D&D in future editions -- whether explicitly or not. However, I also think that the specific breakdown of roles will definitely change in the next edition of D&D.
While Defenders and Leaders are relatively clear-cut, Controllers are notoriously hard to define, and it would appear that Strikers actually represent a couple of distinct (albeit overlapping) roles. It certainly explains why Strikers are as numerous as they appear to be. I find myself wondering if a better breakdown wouldn't have been Defender, Striker, Leader, and Artillery, with the "(Controller)" sub-role tag appended to certain classes as (Leader) is to certain monsters.
These are just some thoughts, not necessarily suggestions.
I'm thinking we're more likely to see two power sources in the next PHB. Probably a mix of Psionic and Ki classes. That way we can get Psionic Power and Ki Power soon after. Then the PHB4 can be about Elemental and Shadow characters.
I guess that all depends on which the devs are more intersted in developing or which class is getting more clamor to produce. Monk or Necromancer. :D
Though thinking about it, there's been some talk of two Shadow classes, the Illusionist and the Necromancer, while there's only been talk of one Ki class, the Monk. In addition, I imagine that the devs know that there's far more people interested in playing Illusionists and Necromancers than there are people interested in playing whatever Ki classes they come up with. So maybe Shadow does have a better than 50% chance of coming out ahead of Ki?
I guess that all depends on which the devs are more intersted in developing or which class is getting more clamor to produce. Monk or Necromancer. :D
*remember's the last podcast* "We do like necromancers...."
Oh, looks like we won't get monk til 2011.
Ki Striker
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Ki Controller
Shadow Striker
Shadow Controller
Elemental Defender
Elemental Leader
Then PHB 4 might have . . .
Psionic Striker
Psionic Controller
Psionic Leader
Psionic Defender
Shadow Defender
Shadow Leader (or second striker)
Elemental Controller
Elemental Striker
. . .Or some variation therein
Doing things like that means that they'll only be able to release one Power book after the PHB3. Focusing on two power sources, on the other hand, means they can get two power books out in the interim, instead. That, IMO, seems like a likelier route for them to take. Player's Handbook 3: Psionic and Shadow Heroes, followed by Psionic Power and Shadow Power, and Player's Handbook 4: Elemental and Ki Heroes, followed soon after by Elemental Power and Ki Power.
IFocusing on two power sources, on the other hand, means they can get two power books out in the interim, instead. That, IMO, seems like a likelier route for them to take. Player's Handbook 3: Psionic and Shadow Heroes, followed by Psionic Power and Shadow Power, and Player's Handbook 4: Elemental and Ki Heroes, followed soon after by Elemental Power and Ki Power.
That's a sensible observation, and you may be right. Of course, if there's only two sources in the PHB3, we won't see the monk, illusionist and psion in the same book. Given this model, I'd have ki and shadow in the PHB3, followed by psi and elemental in PHB4. Which would give the opportunity for the Dark Sun setting to be published afterwards.
That's a sensible observation, and you may be right. Of course, if there's only two sources in the PHB3, we won't see the monk, illusionist and psion in the same book. Given this model, I'd have ki and shadow in the PHB3, followed by psi and elemental in PHB4. Which would give the opportunity for the Dark Sun setting to be published afterwards.
I'd put Psionics before we see Ki. Ki plays into the Monk but the Psionic class features have been around since 1st Edition days. Baring that who knows.
It would also work well with the Kalashtar (which will either come out with the Eberron handbook or in PHB3), who also focus on psionics and monk classes.
It's strange, some of my favorite classes for 3.5 were the shadowcaster and the monk, but I've got no real wish to see them in this edition.
I'm thinking that if there's only two sources in PHB3, that Psionic and Ki have the most traction. It would also fit well if Githzerai/Githyanki are featured as playable races in that book, since those races' flavor suggests that they make good Monk and Psionic characters.
It would also work well with the Kalashtar (which will either come out with the Eberron handbook or in PHB3), who also focus on psionics and monk classes.
I think I'd like a more "varied" PH; Psionic and Ki just seem too similar (too internal) to me. Personally, I'd prefer Psionic and Shadow. I definitely think there's some wisdom to this idea of two power sources in PH3 and PH4.
As for the Kalashtar thing, that's totally an Eberron Player's Guide or Dragon Magazine thing. They're waayy too campaign-specific for a PH, IMO, despite how cool they are.
Well if PHB 1 & 2 are any indication, PHB 3 will have 4 classes of one power source and 2 classes for each of 2 power sources. Now considering that Arcane, Divine, Martial, and Primal each have 4 classes (Well, arcane has 6, but you get my drift) I do not think they will appear in PHB 3 or 4. So it whould look something like:
Ki Striker
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Ki Controller
Shadow Striker
Shadow Controller
Elemental Defender
Elemental Leader
Then PHB 4 might have . . .
Psionic Striker
Psionic Controller
Psionic Leader
Psionic Defender
Shadow Defender
Shadow Leader (or second striker)
Elemental Controller
Elemental Striker
. . .Or some variation therein
Never forget how Arcane turned out. I'd actually like to see...
Ki Striker
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Ki Controller
Shadow Defender
Shadow Controller
Elemental Controller
Elemental Striker
Then for PHB 4...
Psionic Striker
Psionic Controller
Psionic Leader
Psionic Defender
Shadow Striker
Shadow Controller
Elemental Defender
Elemental Striker
Elemental has huge potential for all roles except leader. I can see a Elemental striker who uses focused bursts of elemental energy and an Elemental striker who uses weapons infused with elemental energy. Another Shadow controller would help the dwindling number of controllers, and a shadow leader wouldn't have the bang as another shadow controller. A psionic Defender sounds like it could make an awesome class.
As for those supporting the 4/4 method so that the power books can be released faster, wouldn't it be even better to skip the hassle. Not even have any more PHBs and just release each of the 4 remaining power sources as their own dedicated stand alone book. Seems to me that from what WotC has said, the 4E policy is to avoid products like Psionics Handbook and Magic of Incarnum.
Alternatively, if PHB3 offers all three new power sources, I'd be a happy camper. :D Besides, I don't really see them coming up with too many primal classes after releasing Primal Power.
Well if PHB 1 & 2 are any indication, PHB 3 will have 4 classes of one power source and 2 classes for each of 2 power sources. Now considering that Arcane, Divine, Martial, and Primal each have 4 classes (Well, arcane has 6, but you get my drift) I do not think they will appear in PHB 3 or 4. So it whould look something like:
Ki Striker
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Ki Controller
Shadow Striker
Shadow Controller
Elemental Defender
Elemental Leader
Then PHB 4 might have . . .
Psionic Striker
Psionic Controller
Psionic Leader
Psionic Defender
Shadow Defender
Shadow Leader (or second striker)
Elemental Controller
Elemental Striker
. . .Or some variation therein
I think this will be more likely;
Psi Striker
Psi Defender
Psi Leader
Psi Controller
Shadow Striker
Shadow Controller
Ki Defender
Ki Leader
Then PHB 4 might have . . .
Elemental Striker
Elemental Controller
Elemental Leader
Elemental Defender
Shadow Defender
Shadow Leader (or second controller)
Ki Controller
Ki Striker
Psionics seem to be more strongly theme related than either ki or shadow and I don't think Elemental will be ready for PHB 3. Shadow doesn't look like to be a leader friendly source so I'm going to say a second controller to bulk up the number of controllers available.
Bel
As for those supporting the 4/4 method so that the power books can be released faster, wouldn't it be even better to skip the hassle. Not even have any more PHBs and just release each of the 4 remaining power sources as their own dedicated stand alone book. Seems to me that from what WotC has said, the 4E policy is to avoid products like Psionics Handbook and Magic of Incarnum.
And you don't see how those two thoughts contradict each other?
And you don't see how those two thoughts contradict each other?
Not in the slightest. Would you care to actually explain what contradiction your seeing?
Not in the slightest. Would you care to actually explain what contradiction your seeing?
You want them to release the remaining 4 power sources in their own books only... while at the same time acknowledging that WotC doesn't want to do books like that anymore.
I think he's pointing out that it's not going to happen, as with only two power sources per book it would just be easier to give each source its own book, and Wizards has said they don't want to do any more of that bs.
What he said. Also, just in case any additional clarification is needed, I am personally opposed to releasing the remaining power sources in such a way. I merely brought it up to point out that to those that feel there should be a need to release material faster this would seemingly be an even faster and more efficient method.
My personal support is for the "2010 PHB3 (4/2/2), Power Book; 2011 PHB4 (2/2/4), Power Book, Power Book, Power Book" model. True this means only one power book for 2010, but also it provides a better variety of power sources as well and I'm confident in WotC's ability to fill any gaps in the release schedule.
Possibilities could include but should not be limited to...
- Immortal's Handbook: Details play options for levels over 30. Effectively the 4E equivalent of the 3E Epic Level Handbook.
- Racial Power: Might be a bad title, but it provide of options for players who want to emphasize their character's race. Could perhaps be the start of a new "Races of..." series. I would personally love to see each race eventually end up with a a unique multi-class only option, at least as detailed as the Weapon Mastery feats (Dragon 368) and possibly as detailed as Spellscared (FRPG).
- Martial Power II: Even more options for D&D most notoriously neglected power source. Could possibly also include a multi-class only class, like spellscared, but exclusively for martial character or even an entirely new martial class (not very likely, but would be cool). While this would be a power book sequel before the completion of the currently understood first cycle, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing some more martial options since the source will probably be mostly ignored for 2009.
[*]Martial Power II: Even more options for D&D most notoriously neglected power source. Could possibly also include a multi-class only class, like spellscared, but exclusively for martial character or even an entirely new martial class (not very likely, but would be cool). While this would be a power book sequel before the completion of the currently understood first cycle, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing some more martial options since the source will probably be mostly ignored for 2009.[/LIST]
Another way this would be good is that given the amount of racial stuff in the first MP an MP 2 dealing with the races in PHB2&3 would probably be a good idea
Another way this would be good is that given the amount of racial stuff in the first MP an MP 2 dealing with the races in PHB2&3 would probably be a good idea
I'd like to see this kind of stuff done in a race book. Kinda like the "Races of..." series in 3.5. Maybe call them like "Martial Races," "Arcane Races," etc, as there are races that obviously favor some power sources over others, ie tiefling is a perfect fit for almost all the arcane classes, but not so much for martial.
Or just more "Ecology of..." columns in dragon mag.
Possibilities could include but should not be limited to...
- Immortal's Handbook: Details play options for levels over 30. Effectively the 4E equivalent of the 3E Epic Level Handbook.
Sorry Tharag, but who of sound mind and good conscience could seriously endorse this idea? After the damage such open-endedness did to 3E, you would will this fate upon our beloved 4E too? Oh, for shame.
...I wouldn't mind an Epic- and destiny quest-based handbook, as long as no levels are added beyond 30th! Divine ranks were always pretty cheesy, too. And magic items of higher than 30th level? No way. One major strength of 4E has been that it integrated its cap much more neatly and effectively than 3E ever could; I'm afraid of 4E losing that element of closure.
This is D&D; the "end game" revolves around destiny quests and story resolution, not leveling to beyond stupidity and collecting ever phatter lootz.[/badwrongfun]
Another way this would be good is that given the amount of racial stuff in the first MP an MP 2 dealing with the races in PHB2&3 would probably be a good idea
I'm assuming (hoping?) that this is close to what we'll get. MP 2 would have new options for everybody (powers, builds, "general" feats), but would only feature "racial" options for PH2 (and Eberron) races.
Sorry Tharag, but who of sound mind and good conscience could seriously endorse this idea? After the damage such open-endedness did to 3E, you would will this fate upon our beloved 4E too? Oh, for shame.
Excuse me, but how can an optional rule, from a specific book, damage any system?
If you don't want to run or play in such games that is entirely your purgative, however, that is no good reason to deny the option to the groups that don't like being told their adventures have to stop at some arbitrary level.
Excuse me, but how can an optional rule, from a specific book, damage any system?
If you don't want to run or play in such games that is entirely your purgative, however, that is no good reason to deny the option to the groups that don't like being told their adventures have to stop at some arbitrary level.
I probably should have put a :P in there to indicate how tongue-in-cheek I was trying to be.
That aside though, as "optional" as 3E's Epic Level Handbook was intended to be, my experience has been that those of powergaming tendency often assume that it's a de facto core book. In other words, it was not as "optional" as it was supposed to be. Worse, it was notoriously broken, though less as a result of poor development and more as a result of trying to extend 3E beyond its mathematical limitations.
Avoiding exactly this problem is the reason why 4E built an Epic-tier into the game. This poses another problem for any kind of 4E "post-Epic Level Handbook", because at the end of Epic tier, characters are already killing gods and demon princes directly; when characters are already on-par with the most powerful beings in the universe, what adventures would you have them face? There's nothing left for them to kill. (Shall we do things Diablo-style, and have characters "reload" and begin again by killing 31st-level Kobold Minions? :P)
Beyond 30th level, the only thing left is the mathematical collapse of the rules; there's no suitable challenges left for D&D characters to pursue at that point, except perhaps becoming deities themselves and engage in the day-to-day "trivialities" of deific life: creating races and worlds, setting heroes against your divine rivals, and micromanaging existence. While those things might make for an interesting game, one needs to realize that at this point, you're not even playing D&D, because you're no longer even using the vast majority of the rules for anything. This sort of play needs a totally different game system in order to do it any justice.
That aside though, as "optional" as 3E's Epic Level Handbook was intended to be, my experience has been that those of powergaming tendency often assume that it's a de facto core book. In other words, it was not as "optional" as it was supposed to be. Worse, it was notoriously broken, though less as a result of poor development and more as a result of trying to extend 3E beyond its mathematical limitations.
Again, and the fun and desire of others to play something (no mater how broken you believe it to be) is a bad thing how? Whether those people are powergamers or just players not yet ready to retire a favorite character and regardless of whether or not the math actually works, how is any of this a detriment to you? You can have your fun, let others have their own.
Avoiding exactly this problem is the reason why 4E built an Epic-tier into the game. This poses another problem for any kind of 4E "post-Epic Level Handbook", because at the end of Epic tier, characters are already killing gods and demon princes directly; when characters are already on-par with the most powerful beings in the universe, what adventures would you have them face? There's nothing left for them to kill. (Shall we do things Diablo-style, and have characters "reload" and begin again by killing 31st-level Kobold Minions? :P)
It's a world of fantasy. If the players have exhausted every challenge in their own world then they could always just travel to a new world. As an example, he far realm is said to be full of nightmares monsters undreamed of in any other plane; or maybe the players travel beyond the borders between life and death were they challenge the great legends (creatures who like themselves have transcended beyond the limitations of the mortal universe); or even ascend beyond the gods themselves and into realm were beings that are as to gods as gods are to mortals exist. There need be no limits. Anything can be possible.
As for "Diablo-Style", why not? If that's what a particular play group wants to do, why spoil their fun?
Again, and the fun and desire of others to play something (no mater how broken you believe it to be) is a bad thing how? Whether those people are powergamers or just players not yet ready to retire a favorite character and regardless of whether or not the math actually works, how is any of this a detriment to you? You can have your fun, let others have their own.
Tharag, I'm not in favour of forced retirement; I like the idea of destiny quests, which can last indefinitely. I indicated above that I would enjoy a product that went into detail about destiny quests as perhaps a post-Epic tier of the game. That said, I'm opposed to the idea of an official product which disregards the physical limitations of the system. I won't say that someone shouldn't disregard those limitations on their own, if that's what they really want to do, but neither will I say that such an option should be encouraged by being published. To offer an analogy, just because one could use a handgun as a can opener doesn't mean that the manufacturer should suggest this use in the manual; one ought to be able to use their property as they like, but the odds are that the effect will not be what was intended.
It's a world of fantasy. If the players have exhausted every challenge in their own world then they could always just travel to a new world. As an example, he far realm is said to be full of nightmares monsters undreamed of in any other plane; or maybe the players travel beyond the borders between life and death were they challenge the great legends (creatures who like themselves have transcended beyond the limitations of the mortal universe); or even ascend beyond the gods themselves and into realm were beings that are as to gods as gods are to mortals exist. There need be no limits. Anything can be possible.
As for "Diablo-Style", why not? If that's what a particular play group wants to do, why spoil their fun?
I dare say that if that's what a group has its hearts' set upon, then perhaps they would be as well served by keeping the same characters but beginning again at level 1 where the story ended; at least this way, you can count on the math of the game to remain balanced. You wouldn't even have to say that there was a drop in power-level, as you could simply say that the math of "level 31" will be represented by level 1, and hand-wave away all the extra powers and feats that characters no longer have as "ineffective in this new world".
My point, Tharag, is that you are advocating that D&D officially include rules which deliberately strain the mechanics of the game to their breaking point. We're arguing an old debate here: you've said, "Just because you don't like it, why can't the rest of us play how we like?", to which I respond, "Just because you like it, why force the rest of us to do it?" Once something is official, it's difficult to enforce optionality, especially when it offers such power to players.
My point, Tharag, is that you are advocating that D&D officially include rules which deliberately strain the mechanics of the game to their breaking point. We're arguing an old debate here: you've said, "Just because you don't like it, why can't the rest of us play how we like?", to which I respond, "Just because you like it, why force the rest of us to do it?" Once something is official, it's difficult to enforce optionality, especially when it offers such power to players.
You make some very valid points and I can appreciate that. Just to make my stand point clear, I am actually indifferent to weather or not level 30+ rules are ever release, however, I would be very interested in seeing how WotC would present such rules.
Having said that, I do believe that you are over stressing the concept of a mechanical breaking point in the 4E system. Making a comparison to how the epic level rules in 3.5 broke broke the math in the game is rather unfair, since it seems to be a fairly common opinion that 3.5 math actually started breaking down in the 12 to 16 range, if not earlier. The epic rules weren't inherently broken in fact they did their best to try and stabilize the already diverse spread of BAB and save progression. 4E math, by comparison, is fairly stable the balance between attack and defense scores of both monsters and PCs is mostly the same all the way from levels 1-30 and could be held stable long after with just a few minor tweaks.
As to the implications of WotC releasing official rules for level 30+. I will admit that it is reasonably valid to say that those who want to do so can just house rule it themselves, however, some of those people who want to run such also freely admit that they wouldn't know how to go about it or don't have the time to make it up themselves. While the numbers can be progressed indefinitely (requiring only as few minor tweaks to keep PCs and monsters in line with each other), the bigger issue is power progression. Since it would be impossible to print an endless list of powers for the endless number of post 30 levels, it would be necessary to create a system were by existing powers can be "leveled" instead. A list of post epic feats, likely with no restriction on the number of times you can take them (and which stack with themselves), would likely also be a useful feature for creating an unlimited level progression system.
Finlay, while yes it is hard to suppress a rule once it becomes "official", I should like to express that I don't think that it would be a problem for a post epic rule set. Restricting access to classes, races, power, feat, etc involves limiting player creativity and violates the "saying yes" principle of 4E. However, level is always the DMs choice. The DM determines what level the campaign starts and the DM determines when the campaign ends.