Dual paragons - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Dual paragons

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Chimerasame
Jul 10, 2009 11:28:42 Mostly on a theoretical basis, I've been thinking about the option of allowing someone to take a second paragon path in lieu of an epic destiny. They'd have to meet the various prerequisites by level 21, and they'd gain all the abilities and powers of their second path exactly 10 levels after what's stated.

First question:
How does a 10-level-delayed paragon path stack up against a typical epic destiny, in a bubble? (That is, considering just the powers of a typical PP against a typical ED.) It seems to me that PPs have weaker individual powers on the whole, but they have more of them. EDs have rule-warping powers, especially at level 30. Some PPs have close--the Divine Oracle comes to mind; "never surprised" is something I would find perfectly appropriate for an ED to grant at 21st level. But most PPs don't have that sort of thing, and even the stronger ones don't compare to, say, "never run out of encounter powers."

I think the player would be sacrificing some overall power in favor of versatility, kind of like paragon multiclassing.

Second question:
Casting off the bubble now, can anyone think of any sets of two paragon paths that would be particularly broken when combined?
#2
vebrandsson
Jul 10, 2009 14:07:59 The big problem that exists here is that a paragon path gives you one utility, one encounter attack, and one daily attack. An epic destiny gives you only one utility and the level you get it at does not line up with a paragon path even if you delay it by 10 levels. So you are either making the player miss out on powers, or allowing them more powers than they should have. If you can get past that mechanical nightmare however you may be able to make something work.
#3
Chimerasame
Jul 10, 2009 19:16:42 That did occur to me as a potential issue, but I'm not sure it's a "big" problem, much less a mechanical nightmare. I will admit I've not DMed or even played in the epic tier yet, though, so I could be mistaken.

There are many examples of characters having something other than the "base" number of powers in their arsenal.

For example, quite a few multiclass feats grant one of another class's at-wills as an encounter power--this doesn't replace anything you already have, it's an entirely new power.

There is also evidence of power/"feature" transparency, such as in the racial paragon paths for humans and gnomes, which grant only 2 paragon path powers instead of 3, and have an extra "class feature" to make up for it. (Granted, the class feature in question grants a lower level class power...)

I think the most important thing to note, though, is that Epic Destinies by their natures do weird things to change some of the not-quite-basic-premises-but-close of the game. The most flagrant example I can think of is the Demigod's Divine Miracle ability, essentially giving the character an unlimited number of encounter powers. (Okay, it's an unlimited use from a basic selection of a limited number of them--but that, honestly, should count.) Another example is Archmage's ability to turn one daily they know into an encounter power.

A character that dual-paragons isn't getting any of those things, but instead, s/he 'breaks the rules' and gets a couple more powers.

If the specific level that the powers come is a concern, then I'll note this:

Paragon paths gain powers or features at 11, 12, 16, and 20.

Epic destinies gain powers or features at 21, 24, 26, 30.

Is it not easy enough to say:
Everything a paragon path would gain at 11 comes at 21.
Everything a paragon path would gain at 12 comes at 24.
Everything a paragon path would gain at 16 comes at 26.
Everything a paragon path would gain at 20 comes at 30.

I think it's still a bit underpowered--unexpected synergies between two paragons aside.
#4
glak2
Jul 10, 2009 21:00:11 part of what makes 4e good is that it is hard to make a character that is super strong or super weak. Pretty much any character that you make is going to be at least decent. Your change breaks that limitation on character creation.
#5
Chimerasame
Jul 10, 2009 21:06:55
part of what makes 4e good is that it is hard to make a character that is super strong or super weak. Pretty much any character that you make is going to be at least decent. Your change breaks that limitation on character creation.

I welcome this sort of input, however--how does this potential rule change do what you're saying?

Is it too weak, or too strong? In what way?
#6
pyromancer2k
Jul 11, 2009 16:25:39
I welcome this sort of input, however--how does this potential rule change do what you're saying?

Is it too weak, or too strong? In what way?

I think he's just spouting typical anti-house rule propaganda. Because as for 4e making it hard to make characters that are superpowerful he obviously hasn't read the Char-Op section and some of the setups that can single handedly take down Orcus. As for weak side of things there are several builds you can do which make for very poor preforming characters.

As for your suggestion on 2nd PP instead of ED I think it could be viable. Many ED get an extra +2 to one or two stats which is pretty huge. Also they all pretty much have a once per day insta-rez when you hit 0 HP which is also huge. And by 30 they often have very powerful things like ability to reuse encounter powers or turn dailies into encounter powers and so on.

The PP would give you an extra encounter and daily and that's it. I think that is potentially viable compared to what you lose on some of the more commonly picked ED (aka the good ones). And honestly ED tend to be over the top on things so I doubt double PP will break things.
#7
glak2
Jul 12, 2009 9:42:47 Pyro, you have it wrong. I am very much for house rules. However you essentially argued that it would not work. You gave examples of how ED were over the top. If a character were allowed to select a second PP over an ED he would not be over the top. This would make him too weak. In 4e allowing a character to be too weak breaks the game. A house rule that allows a character to accidentally create a weak character is a bad rule.
#8
Chimerasame
Jul 20, 2009 1:23:09
A house rule that allows a character to accidentally create a weak character is a bad rule.

What would make it on-par, do you think? I'm looking at Eternal Seeker... it's pretty similar to this idea, but it also grants, at level 30, the level 24 ability from another epic destiny. Perhaps that could be added, and one of the PP powers removed. (Player's choice which of the three PP powers. The other two happen, in order, at 21st and 24th?)

(I think it's all too easy to create too-weak characters, incidentally, especially with Paragon Multiclassing and similar. To some degree the player has to know that he or she should think about options instead of blindly choosing. If necessary, though, I could always add in the sidebar present in the Hybrid characters playtest article, that this rule removes the 'protection' inherent in 4e that characters are all useful for a certain role, etc.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Chimerasame Jul 10, 2009 11:28:42	Mostly on a theoretical basis, I've been thinking about the option of allowing someone to take a second paragon path in lieu of an epic destiny. They'd have to meet the various prerequisites by level 21, and they'd gain all the abilities and powers of their second path exactly 10 levels after what's stated. First question: How does a 10-level-delayed paragon path stack up against a typical epic destiny, in a bubble? (That is, considering just the powers of a typical PP against a typical ED.) It seems to me that PPs have weaker individual powers on the whole, but they have more of them. EDs have rule-warping powers, especially at level 30. Some PPs have close--the Divine Oracle comes to mind; "never surprised" is something I would find perfectly appropriate for an ED to grant at 21st level. But most PPs don't have that sort of thing, and even the stronger ones don't compare to, say, "never run out of encounter powers." I think the player would be sacrificing some overall power in favor of versatility, kind of like paragon multiclassing. Second question: Casting off the bubble now, can anyone think of any sets of two paragon paths that would be particularly broken when combined?
#2 vebrandsson Jul 10, 2009 14:07:59	The big problem that exists here is that a paragon path gives you one utility, one encounter attack, and one daily attack. An epic destiny gives you only one utility and the level you get it at does not line up with a paragon path even if you delay it by 10 levels. So you are either making the player miss out on powers, or allowing them more powers than they should have. If you can get past that mechanical nightmare however you may be able to make something work.
#3 Chimerasame Jul 10, 2009 19:16:42	That did occur to me as a potential issue, but I'm not sure it's a "big" problem, much less a mechanical nightmare. I will admit I've not DMed or even played in the epic tier yet, though, so I could be mistaken. There are many examples of characters having something other than the "base" number of powers in their arsenal. For example, quite a few multiclass feats grant one of another class's at-wills as an encounter power--this doesn't replace anything you already have, it's an entirely new power. There is also evidence of power/"feature" transparency, such as in the racial paragon paths for humans and gnomes, which grant only 2 paragon path powers instead of 3, and have an extra "class feature" to make up for it. (Granted, the class feature in question grants a lower level class power...) I think the most important thing to note, though, is that Epic Destinies by their natures do weird things to change some of the not-quite-basic-premises-but-close of the game. The most flagrant example I can think of is the Demigod's Divine Miracle ability, essentially giving the character an unlimited number of encounter powers. (Okay, it's an unlimited use from a basic selection of a limited number of them--but that, honestly, should count.) Another example is Archmage's ability to turn one daily they know into an encounter power. A character that dual-paragons isn't getting any of those things, but instead, s/he 'breaks the rules' and gets a couple more powers. If the specific level that the powers come is a concern, then I'll note this: Paragon paths gain powers or features at 11, 12, 16, and 20. Epic destinies gain powers or features at 21, 24, 26, 30. Is it not easy enough to say: Everything a paragon path would gain at 11 comes at 21. Everything a paragon path would gain at 12 comes at 24. Everything a paragon path would gain at 16 comes at 26. Everything a paragon path would gain at 20 comes at 30. I think it's still a bit underpowered--unexpected synergies between two paragons aside.
#4 glak2 Jul 10, 2009 21:00:11	part of what makes 4e good is that it is hard to make a character that is super strong or super weak. Pretty much any character that you make is going to be at least decent. Your change breaks that limitation on character creation.
#5 Chimerasame Jul 10, 2009 21:06:55	part of what makes 4e good is that it is hard to make a character that is super strong or super weak. Pretty much any character that you make is going to be at least decent. Your change breaks that limitation on character creation. I welcome this sort of input, however--how does this potential rule change do what you're saying? Is it too weak, or too strong? In what way?
#6 pyromancer2k Jul 11, 2009 16:25:39	I welcome this sort of input, however--how does this potential rule change do what you're saying? Is it too weak, or too strong? In what way? I think he's just spouting typical anti-house rule propaganda. Because as for 4e making it hard to make characters that are superpowerful he obviously hasn't read the Char-Op section and some of the setups that can single handedly take down Orcus. As for weak side of things there are several builds you can do which make for very poor preforming characters. As for your suggestion on 2nd PP instead of ED I think it could be viable. Many ED get an extra +2 to one or two stats which is pretty huge. Also they all pretty much have a once per day insta-rez when you hit 0 HP which is also huge. And by 30 they often have very powerful things like ability to reuse encounter powers or turn dailies into encounter powers and so on. The PP would give you an extra encounter and daily and that's it. I think that is potentially viable compared to what you lose on some of the more commonly picked ED (aka the good ones). And honestly ED tend to be over the top on things so I doubt double PP will break things.
#7 glak2 Jul 12, 2009 9:42:47	Pyro, you have it wrong. I am very much for house rules. However you essentially argued that it would not work. You gave examples of how ED were over the top. If a character were allowed to select a second PP over an ED he would not be over the top. This would make him too weak. In 4e allowing a character to be too weak breaks the game. A house rule that allows a character to accidentally create a weak character is a bad rule.
#8 Chimerasame Jul 20, 2009 1:23:09	A house rule that allows a character to accidentally create a weak character is a bad rule. What would make it on-par, do you think? I'm looking at Eternal Seeker... it's pretty similar to this idea, but it also grants, at level 30, the level 24 ability from another epic destiny. Perhaps that could be added, and one of the PP powers removed. (Player's choice which of the three PP powers. The other two happen, in order, at 21st and 24th?) (I think it's all too easy to create too-weak characters, incidentally, especially with Paragon Multiclassing and similar. To some degree the player has to know that he or she should think about options instead of blindly choosing. If necessary, though, I could always add in the sidebar present in the Hybrid characters playtest article, that this rule removes the 'protection' inherent in 4e that characters are all useful for a certain role, etc.)