What do you all think?
I myself was hoping for them to be paragon paths, but as an Epic Destiny it works, especially since it's not like NPCs follow the PC rules.
I'm not super on par with my epic knowledge to know if the powers all are even good for the characters they are supposed to be for, so that might be nice to know too, but the destiny features seem really good.
The Mark of Warding creates a zone that enemies flat out can't enter. The Mark of Hospitality creates a zone that allies can teleport into as a move action (hm, charge out, then pop back every turn?). The Mark of Making utility lets an artificer flood the map with walls and zones and keep on fighting.
I especially like that most of these utilities offer direct benefits to the rest of the party: healing, movement, defense boosts. But even something "personal" like the Mark of Sentinel's auto-save vs. charms is going to be to the party's advantage when facing epic mind-controllers (typically a weak spot for fighters, the mark's recommended class).
I'd certainly welcome a few more paragon path options for heirs who don't fit the stereotype (see my first paragraph re: Vadalis ranger bias), but I'm pleased with this article.
It's kinda crap that all the greater mark and focus items are all DDI only...
I was pretty disappointed in them not being a paragon path. And even as an epic destiny, the mark powers didn't seem to have enough oomph for me. For instance, the Siberys Mark of Healing can't even raise allies from the dead (I would've thought it could at least do that, as a nice leaderish use of the "once per day when you die" rezzing powers people get in Epic.) Ad the sibers Mark of Storm I can't help but feel is pitiful compared to the Storm of Vengenace from 3.5. Yeah I know, power as a whole aren't that far-reaching anymore, but that's just another reason for me to feel like it should've been a paragon path.
To repeat what has been said at the Dragon/Dungeon forum: in 3E you got the mark by level 14. Level 14 in 3E is best comparable to level 21 in 4E. Making it an epic destiny makes sense. Furthermore, unlike in 3E there are absolutely no game mechanical reasons not to give low-level NPCs a sybernis mark without instantly making the character a demi-god.
As for the utility powers, they are exactly that, utility powers. It is the nature of the destiny, and hence it cannot be attack powers. Personally I think most of them are quiet powerful, if not always useful to the group.
To repeat what I said in the other forum:
If you're going to say that characters in 3e are higher level in 4e, I'm going to say the opposite using the example of the generic Demilich: CR 29 in 3e, Level 20 in 4e. Obviously a epic party in 3e is the equivalent of only high-paragon in 4e.
The level-equivalency game doesn't work, as it can go both ways. When I talk about the inappropriateness of the Siberys mark being epic, I'm only talking about flavor and story themes .
When I talk about the utility powers not being strong enough for some of the marks, I'm talking about the situation where "if you're going to make it Epic, make it right".
I'm beating a dead horse. I disagree with anyone that thinks house politics are a relevant story element in the Epic tier. I disagree with the implication of epic-level NPCs unnamed in Khorvairan history (only implied, I grant) or waiting in the wings, unknown, nameless, and faceless (the epic-level assassins the Houses would need to have stashed somewhere to be relevant threats to PC Siberys Heirs going off the reservation).
This is just my opinion. I feel that Siberys marks suddenly appearing on PCs is a much better fit, story wise, for the Paragon tier. Getting into continent-wide political intruige is what Paragon is for. If you only have the Siberys mark in Epic, you're already too powerful for any of those stories to make sense for Khorvaire.
Epic-level politics in Forgotten Realms? No sweat. Kings and Queens are epic-level threats and thousands of years old or whatever. It just doesn't fit in Eberron as previously presented after Paragon.
Mechanically, I also think it would've been better to do the Siberys Mark as a paragon path, as there's more design space for p-paths than epic destinies. You could do something like Storm of Vengeance as a 20th level p-path daily attack.
Sure it woulda been harder and longer to make a one-p-path-fits-all path that works for all the different dragonmarks. But, hell, you know, I think it would've been an awesome way to support Eberron in DDI if they released one Siberys mark p-path per month for an entire year. (They could even have set up the schedule so each mark's Siberys path was released on the month belonging to that mark, using the Khorvairian calendar.) That's probably just naive fancy, but c'mon, you can't tell me one Eberron fan would've been unhappy with that.
For more on why I think Heir of Siberys shoud've been a paragon path (as well as people who agreed with me way back when this was still speculation) I direct you to these threads:
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
I think I summed up my position more eloquently and without the sour twinge of dissappointment. (I also go into the level-equivlency game a bit more than with just the Demilich example). It's also fun to go back and see what people were speculating about dragonmarks. (A lot of people actually called the ritual thing dead-on.)
Your point about story is good. Although that is also mostly a matter of perspective and what you want to do with dragon marks and epic level plots. After all, if you let the dragons and lords of dust take an active interest in that sybernis mark you suddenly do have an epic storyline in which the regional politics are just a minor backdrop. For that matter, in the Dragon Belows series the character with the sybernis mark uses it to allow victory against what most people consider pretty epic threat (a dhelkyr on the verge of escaping) while its direct intra-house political effects are somewhat downplayed. Personally I would already downplay the difference between epic and paragon a bit in Eberron. The truly epic storylines in the PoL campaign all feel a bit over the top for Eberron to me anway.
Comparing CR and level of monsters as an argument is for me not a particularly good argument. After all, some CR 18 monsters are turned into epic monsters in 4E, so more than likely I can find a counter example which proved my point for each one you can find that proves yours.
Comparing CR and level of monsters as an argument is for me not a particularly good argument. After all, some CR 18 monsters are turned into epic monsters in 4E, so more than likely I can find a counter example which proved my point for each one you can find that proves yours.
This was actually my point to begin with. The level-equivalency arguement doesn't work either way, because points can be made back and forth ad nauseum. For every point you say that level 13 translates to Epic in 4e, I can find one that says it doesn't, so comparing relative power levels between editions is useless. Thats why I said my main objects were story objections.
As for the Dragons and Lords of Dust creating a truly epic story line, I agree 100%. A story like that s absolutely supported in the setting as it already exists.
I'm just going to point out that Rakshasas start being available monsters to fight in Paragon, and Dragons exist as usable enemies in all tiers. So this storyline can actually start in Paragon. And, in my opinion, it works better by starting it in Paragon because you can gradually introduce elements of it while the Marked PC is dealing with mundane politics, until it all comes together and he realizes something else is going on, that his Mark has greater implications. Or not, you can have the demons and dragons immediately start harassing the PC if that works for your game.
Rather, if you start the storyline in Epic, the Marked PC already knows something higher is going to happen because it ties to his Epic Destiny. There's not enough leway to gradually introduce the demon/dragon angle, because even if you have them disguising themselves as House agents using house politics, the PC is going to know something's up, because individuals working for the Houses aren't supposed to be that powerful.
It just seems like, to me, any story you can tell in Epic about Siberys Marks can start in Paragon and go into Epic, but the reverse isn't true. Not every story you can start in Paragon about Siberys Marks works if you try to start them in Epic.
The problem with codifying things in rules is that then people start believing that this is The Only Way It Can Be Done. As long as I never play under a GM who believes that, I'm quite happy with this representing the apex of the Siberys mark (rather than its entirety).
If, however, I go into a game as a level 1 Lyrandar storm sorcerer and say that my magic powers are the manifestation of my Siberys mark and some unimaginative GM says "You can't have a Siberys mark until level 21," then I conjure the Swimming Noodle of Death on them.
However I do like the idea of PCs with Marks being able to have them from the start. You could say an Assault Swordmage PC has the Siberys Mark of Passage, which he uses to constantly teleport about the battlefield.
There's also the question of Organized Play, hypothetically, if there's ever a living Eberron campaign for 4e. Theoreiclly, in that you would indeed be told "you can't have a Siberys mark until Epic".
However I do like the idea of PCs with Marks being able to have them from the start. You could say an Assault Swordmage PC has the Siberys Mark of Passage, which he uses to constantly teleport about the battlefield.
As I've mentioned in other threads, this is certainly the way I handle the marks. Your feat/path, if you have it, is an aspect of your mark; but your class abilities and the color you assign to them are equally important. You want to say your cleric isn't a cleric at all, but draws all his powers from his Mark of Healing? Go you. This is my feeling on the 4E lack of least/lesser/greater classifications; all these still exist, and simply reflect the powers you are capable of channeling. As your sorcerer gains levels, his mark grows in size. At some point, it will have moved from "least" size to "lesser" size - I'm happy to let you decide when.
There's also the question of Organized Play, hypothetically, if there's ever a living Eberron campaign for 4e. Theoreiclly, in that you would indeed be told "you can't have a Siberys mark until Epic".
There is a reason I avoid organized play
There's also the question of Organized Play, hypothetically, if there's ever a living Eberron campaign for 4e. Theoreiclly, in that you would indeed be told "you can't have a Siberys mark until Epic".
There is a reason I avoid organized play
The downside of sharing a world with a couple of thousend other players is that not everything is possible. Mind you, as long as your character is not expecting anything special from that Siberys mark, you can say what ever you want. Indivual DMs can also accept and run with it. I certainly have played along as a DM in Mark of Heroes and LFR when players described them selves as nobles, dragonmarked or whatever.