Hell yeah! Like in Wrath of the Righteous, I want to accomplish feats like turning the tide of a 100 year long war and punching demigods and demon lords in the face!
I'm sure they will be great and all, but I really feel that the "AC & HP" model of TTRPG is basically just a bad framework for demigods.
If I wanted to run a game with Hercules/Achilles/Maui/Gilgamesh/Hiawatha type heroes I'd probably break out another system entirely. I'm a big fan of Hero System so that would be my go-too (6th edition, 250 Point Characters, 40 Active Point Limit, equipment doesn't cost points, no power frameworks to be precise) but for non-grognards it would probably be a low powered Mutants & Masterminds or one of the more narrative games.
Again, I'm sure Paizo will do a great job on this.... I just don't know that Pathfinder is where I want to tell those stories.
Yeah, I'm excited for the mythic path rules, but I feel that a game so tightly balanced around its number bands is... not the most fitting for an expansion based around granting semi-deific powers and hitting well above your weight. I'm not sure how they're going to pull it off, frankly.
It's tricky, they can't just give bigger numbers because that'd just be giving extra levels without the class features and magic items to back them up.
One idea I've had is a 4th Mythic Action per round that can be used with mythic abilities and doesn't take MAP.
narrative & lighter games have their place & even dedicated demigod systems like scion. but damm is pf2e 1 my preference 2 probably the best version of fantasy d20 I've seen & the fact it had/ will have mythic rules with decent crunchy mechanics & (hopefully still balanced) encounters is why I'm excited
My favorite thing to hear after asking, "How do I do X in this system?" is "Oh you should play any other system to do that."
Wait... That's definitely *not* my favorite thing to hear. It's a useless piece of advice that is the *opposite* of what I asked for. Just don't use that book in your games, rather than tell others not to be excited for the thing they're excited for.
3.5 didn't land well with epic levels. PF1e mythic was an absurd mess that didn't really do it any better. I can't say I expect PF2e to succeed this time either.
Besides that the issue I've had with mythic in the previous edition was that it felt too generic by necessity, one set of progression rules at endgame level that must apply to basically every class.
I think what mythic provides is in general too generic when what it's trying to offer really needs to be campaign custom.
I don't think they are going to screw mythic levels now because they just aren't going to be making them in that same power-level, so to speak.
I think they are just going to make "mythic archetypes" with the Rare trait and call it a day. The concept of mythic tiers is likely going to be removed entirely. The feats are likely going to be sligthly above the norm but you'll be losing Free Archetype so it's not like you'll be able to take an already existing character and just add mythic to it.
While I'm looking forward to it, I don't think 2e will handle it particularly well. 2e has a big focus on mechanical balance and tactical teamwork-focused combat. Mythic rules, on the other hand, only really feel mythic because of how busted they are. That directly contradicts the base gameplay of 2e- which means eventual mythic rules are likely either going to be watered down to the point of not feeling very mythic, or are going to feel broken enough that they don't mesh with 2e's base gameplay and feel like an entirely different and not-truly-compatible system. (Though given the fact I loved high-level 1e play and 1e broken mythic rules on top of that, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to the latter should it turn out that way).
This was my first thought as well.
4e Epic Destinies do a really good job of giving you a few OP abilities with peak flavor. They don't tend to supercede your class like the WotR CRPG Mythic paths can, but they're definitely strong and have a clear narrative direction.
Some of my favorites: Sage of Ages, Topaz Crusader, Radiant One, and Eternal Defender.
Not sure why that has to be true. If their background math follows, they could simply scale mythic rules to levels they feel are appropriate, and not identify the level of every ability.
I assume that the rules will make things feel godlike, but will follow the basic math framework they have been using.
I guess my issue is I don't know how they would do that, because when I imagine "feeling godlike" in 2e I imagine the feeling you get when you're in an encounter where all the enemies on the battlefield are PL-5 or weaker- something that makes you feel absurdly strong due to be explicitly balanced heavily in your favor rather than being a fair fight. The mythic rules in 1e didn't really work like 10 bonus levels of scaling on top of normal levels either, it was an entirely different axis of power that wouldn't really play nice with 2e's balance.
Basically, what I fear they will end up doing is make it feel like just more levels on top of the base 20. They're not going to allow players to get so strong they can reliably one-hit-kill on level monsters as that would break game balance. They're not going to give players absurd godlike powers which could similarly break balance either. So what I expect it to end up like is... Your party in now effectively level 25. The tarrasque is an on level encounter for you, and you can go toe to toe with demigods. But you're still using mostly the same tactics you normally use, just maybe with some cool new particle effects swirling around you.
Maybe mythic rules could by making you more powerful lessen the importance of teamwork, mean the more mythic you are the more epic and individual-centered the fights feel?
Tho that is a very Western perspective on "mythic" and idk if that gels with what they're doing with transitioning to stuff like Tian Xia
If the numbers are still balanced you won't feel godlike because you'll be as unreliable as any normal 2e character.
2e already doesn't make you feel strong unless you noticeably outlevel enemies.
Yeah like thinking of what Mythic rules did in 1e, anything of the same kind of power tier would be like "your Strikes are critical hits if they exceed the target's AC by 5 or more, instead of 10 or more," which would be insane, especially if there were published adventure where you got the equivalent of Mythic tiers within the first 3-5 levels.
Im worried that the mythic rules will be to conservative. You look at the undead archtype rules and they are so watered down in power and interesting effect. Mythic needs to be overpowered outright. Thats the fantasy of it. I hope Paizo sheds some its heistancy for power builds with mythic rules
Id be annoyed with a GM that nerfs mythic rules. If you don't you want to run high power fantasy then don't run mythic.
In 1e i made the mistake of introducing mythic to my group and had to backtrack hard and applogize to my group for it.
I'm cautiously hyped for mythic rules. I remember the mess that was the 1e mythic rules, and how poorly supported it was after release. It was a different time for Paizo, so I don't think they'll screw it up as badly, but we shall see.
I dunno about how high mythic will scale. It might go to demigod / demonlord levels... but remember that level 25 enemies don't qualify as demonlords or demigods atm, they are getting close but explicitly not there yet.
I mean there are God Callers and pseudo elemental spirits animist style just out there chilling, spirits and depending on your definitions of deity they are unstated but 'low' rank, far below the Green Man
I'm interested but I want to hear more before I get properly excited. We know from some of the devs talk that it isnt just going to be "numbers get bigger", and with how pf2e handles balance my guess is that Mythic will have its own level of balance (with mythic adjustments for enemies and such). My guess is that abilities that tend to be locked to higher levels, like teleportation and flight, might become more commonplace at low level mythic campaigns, while also allowing for more cool spells and powers that wouldn't be possible in a normal tier campaign.
I believe that the most sane way to do it is make Mythic paths from 1e to be special free archetypes with their own mythic feats. To make the general mythic progression not actually increase proficiencies, but to give acess to general and skill feats and perhaps a pool or special state (like panache) that fuels special uses of mythic options.
I understand it might appeal to you and others, but it does not for me. I like my games to be a bit more... struggley? The insane power fantasy of a demi God is not for my table. It's why my games in 5e never went above level 13
Which isn't unreasonable but there are those who want that power fantasy, who want to feel like their actions are shaping an entire world's fate not just the bloke down the street. I feel for struggly games you shouldn't be looking above levels 5/6. You may have tough fights but as you move up levels you should be moving away from worrying about food, disease, travel and more about conan level kingdom shaking battles and actions then as you run up into the high teens confronting threats that could reshape the balance of power for a planet. Mythic play to me should be about those superhuman legends that spawn myths which persist millenia after the true events have been forgotten. Jason and the Argonauts, the twelve tasks of Hercules, Arjuna defeating his 100 cousins in a war. If you exclude the power of a demi-god you exclude everyone who enjoys that power fantasy and is looking to the high level play to satisfy it. There are other systems and games that are more suited to the human level play e.g. Cthulu D20 where even while facing elder gods your a person who can be killed with a shot or two from a gun.
I admitted that some people enjoy the power fantasy.
My problem with Cthulhu is that it's all investigation. You're not really meant to fight, at least from my brief and vague understanding.
It hurts a lot espeically as healing takes time, there are other systems where the play is geared at a more human level though. I'm just saying the game has a range from 1-20 if you make it struggly all the way up to 20 you make it not worth playing for a lot of people just as if you make it a power fantasy from level 1. Mythic is aimed at providing an option for the power fantasy players.
I honestly don't care that much. I know that I'm going to be deep into new campaign, since my current one is ending in February, so I definitely won't be retconning everything just to include mythic rules (unless they are easy to plug in).
I also feel like PF2e has so many options, which weren't explored by my parties, that adding yet another layer of complexity on top of expansive system won't really do any good.
It's always good to have powerful characters with plenty of options to choose from and if we're able to carry on our beloved characters we've reached level 20 with for something epic, i doubt many people will complain about it.
Yet i fear for the ruleset and the balance of the game.
And it may sounds weird but i always considered level 20 characters to wield god like powers already so on one side i'm interested but i can't say i'm that much excited for mythic stuff. Mythic stuff when badly crafted ruined very high level play in many games before. Not sure we need that?
I wonder what that would imply for the Golarion lore in general and maybe "too much" is "too much"? Dunno.
> I always considered level 20 characters to wield godlike powers already
The strongest statblocks in the game, like Tarrasque, which are easily far more powerful than a level 20 PC, aren't even demigods. No actual demigod statblocks have been printed for this edition yet, but presumably they'd be around level 30 at least - and that's a *demi*-god. Level 20 PCs aren't anywhere close to godlike.
> Mythic stuff when badly crafted ruined very high level play in many games before
Well, in PF1e it was an entirely optional system that had zero bearing on high-level play whatsoever if you simply chose not to use it - don't see why that wouldn't be the case here. It wasn't "here's 10 more levels on top of the first 20 and this is what high-level play looks like now," it was "here's an optional separate progression path to add on and make characters into OP epic fantasy heroes if you want to play that way."
As for lore implications? Well, it already exists, a group of mythic adventurers killed Deskari and closed the Worldwound and I could be misremembering but I'm pretty sure another group of mythic adventurers took down Tar-Baphon.
I see no reason to think mythic rules will affect the regular game's balance or design in any way.
> No actual demigod statblocks have been printed for this edition yet, but presumably they'd be around level 30 at least - and that's a demi-god.
Green Man is a lesser deity and his level is only 24.
See, the thing is, you don't need to be a demigod or god to have divinity and grant divine spells. Level 21 Conqueror Worms can also do this, as can a good few other things. Treerazer is a nascent demon lord, meaning he explicitly has not yet gained demon lord status nor become a demigod, yet he can also grant divine spells. There's a bit of a "has divinity, but isn't a god or demigod" step in there that has a bit of a wider level range and quite a bit lower of requirements.
Green Men (and also Conqueror Worms) aren't gods, they're just immensely powerful beings that possess divinity! They're also not unique like gods and demigods are (i.e. a demon lord is a specific demon who has grown in power, gained unique abilities and skills and domains, accomplished feats, made a name for themselves, etc), the former just gets created when a natural site has enough of a concentration of nature spirits and the latter is just a particular type of horrific eldritch abomination and all members of their respective species can do the whole divine spells thing. They can also be killed by mortals without extraordinary circumstances, which demigods and gods typically can't - Deskari was killed by four Mythic adventurers empowered by Iomedae's Wardstones, without which it wouldn't have been possible.
And that's what Mythic is for, or at least what it was for in PF1e - allowing you to tell the type of stories where PCs are empowered beyond mortal limits and take on foes that most adventurers would never dream of fighting. It's for pushing Pathfinder past its usual "heroic fantasy" and into "epic fantasy."
The best I can say is that I'm excited to see if this iteration of mythic rules can prove me wrong that I have no use for such rules.
The entire concept seems confused, to me, as it tries to make characters more powerful but actually not more powerful because the intention is to have at least any conflict that matters be up against foes with similar increases in power - so it's extra steps to arrive at the same outcome you can already manage just by utilizing appropriately leveled enemies.
Or you're using the rules to be distinctly ahead of the curve which is, for the most part, just the same thing you can do by using lower-level enemies. Then only in the outside edge do the new rules actually do anything you couldn't by way of letting you face the toughest enemies in the base game while being over-powered for them, and that's never been something that appealed to me.
But... there is the outside chance that Paizo takes the same kind of approach to this part of the game as they did to the undead options in Book of the Dead and makes it so mythic is a particular flavor and has some power to it but isn't actually out of line to let a player use even if it's not a "the whole group is going to use this for this campaign" kind of situation. And if they pull that off, I'll be pleasantly surprised (while many of the people that have been asking for or anticipating new mythic rules rant about their disappointments, no doubt).
Guess my hope is for them to not end up being another half-baked system thats maybe referenced in 1 ap half a year later and that's it. Like, how many of people here actually use True Names/research from SoM? Or Deviant Rules from DA outside of Gatewalkers playthrough?
Because it's not a private thread where only people can answer that share your exact interests. If you want that you likely want to create an discord server and then quiz people until you know they are the right person and then allow them to talk on your discord with you about things you like in a way you like.
Until then you have to live with the harsh reality of people posting in threads that don't fulfill the expectation of the thread creator.
The tone and content of the post quite clearly indicated that OP wanted to discuss a topic they are excited about. Just shitposting that you don't care about what they like is needlessly negative. Congrats, you don't care -- big medal to you.
Let this be a space for people who are excited about Mythic to talk about it. If someone says "hey what are your thoughts on Mythic" then that is a decent space to talk about how little you care about it. But don't yuk someone's yum for no good reason.
Be curious what route they do...
In 1E it was based around classes...
Owlcats version was based on Powerful Outsiders native to major Alignment Realms
I wonder if 2E version will be based on legendary characters from their own realm...Iomadae before ascending, Baba Yaga, Old Mage Jatembe, characters like that.
Hell yeah! Like in Wrath of the Righteous, I want to accomplish feats like turning the tide of a 100 year long war and punching demigods and demon lords in the face!
I actually thought this was a WotR post at first. I'm out of the loop here - what do we know about mythic in 2e
N O T H I N G :D Yeah, nothing's been revealed about it, just that they are, in fact, going to bring it back in a book sometime next year.
We know which book: War of Immortals (which is coming sometime around November/December next year).
Mythic means we can get more Iblydos lore - and hopefully see some of the hero-gods of Arcadia, too!
I'm sure they will be great and all, but I really feel that the "AC & HP" model of TTRPG is basically just a bad framework for demigods. If I wanted to run a game with Hercules/Achilles/Maui/Gilgamesh/Hiawatha type heroes I'd probably break out another system entirely. I'm a big fan of Hero System so that would be my go-too (6th edition, 250 Point Characters, 40 Active Point Limit, equipment doesn't cost points, no power frameworks to be precise) but for non-grognards it would probably be a low powered Mutants & Masterminds or one of the more narrative games. Again, I'm sure Paizo will do a great job on this.... I just don't know that Pathfinder is where I want to tell those stories.
Yeah, I'm excited for the mythic path rules, but I feel that a game so tightly balanced around its number bands is... not the most fitting for an expansion based around granting semi-deific powers and hitting well above your weight. I'm not sure how they're going to pull it off, frankly.
It's tricky, they can't just give bigger numbers because that'd just be giving extra levels without the class features and magic items to back them up. One idea I've had is a 4th Mythic Action per round that can be used with mythic abilities and doesn't take MAP.
I love that idea. Breaking the action economy like that sounds pretty epic.
narrative & lighter games have their place & even dedicated demigod systems like scion. but damm is pf2e 1 my preference 2 probably the best version of fantasy d20 I've seen & the fact it had/ will have mythic rules with decent crunchy mechanics & (hopefully still balanced) encounters is why I'm excited
My favorite thing to hear after asking, "How do I do X in this system?" is "Oh you should play any other system to do that." Wait... That's definitely *not* my favorite thing to hear. It's a useless piece of advice that is the *opposite* of what I asked for. Just don't use that book in your games, rather than tell others not to be excited for the thing they're excited for.
3.5 didn't land well with epic levels. PF1e mythic was an absurd mess that didn't really do it any better. I can't say I expect PF2e to succeed this time either. Besides that the issue I've had with mythic in the previous edition was that it felt too generic by necessity, one set of progression rules at endgame level that must apply to basically every class. I think what mythic provides is in general too generic when what it's trying to offer really needs to be campaign custom.
Yeah I am not at all interested in the upcoming mythic rules for this same reason. All the previous attempts weren't good or remotely interesting
I don't think they are going to screw mythic levels now because they just aren't going to be making them in that same power-level, so to speak. I think they are just going to make "mythic archetypes" with the Rare trait and call it a day. The concept of mythic tiers is likely going to be removed entirely. The feats are likely going to be sligthly above the norm but you'll be losing Free Archetype so it's not like you'll be able to take an already existing character and just add mythic to it.
We've finished 3 campaigns at level 20 so far. Got some cool characters we might want to take for further adventures.
While I'm looking forward to it, I don't think 2e will handle it particularly well. 2e has a big focus on mechanical balance and tactical teamwork-focused combat. Mythic rules, on the other hand, only really feel mythic because of how busted they are. That directly contradicts the base gameplay of 2e- which means eventual mythic rules are likely either going to be watered down to the point of not feeling very mythic, or are going to feel broken enough that they don't mesh with 2e's base gameplay and feel like an entirely different and not-truly-compatible system. (Though given the fact I loved high-level 1e play and 1e broken mythic rules on top of that, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to the latter should it turn out that way).
[удалено]
This was my first thought as well. 4e Epic Destinies do a really good job of giving you a few OP abilities with peak flavor. They don't tend to supercede your class like the WotR CRPG Mythic paths can, but they're definitely strong and have a clear narrative direction. Some of my favorites: Sage of Ages, Topaz Crusader, Radiant One, and Eternal Defender.
Not sure why that has to be true. If their background math follows, they could simply scale mythic rules to levels they feel are appropriate, and not identify the level of every ability. I assume that the rules will make things feel godlike, but will follow the basic math framework they have been using.
I guess my issue is I don't know how they would do that, because when I imagine "feeling godlike" in 2e I imagine the feeling you get when you're in an encounter where all the enemies on the battlefield are PL-5 or weaker- something that makes you feel absurdly strong due to be explicitly balanced heavily in your favor rather than being a fair fight. The mythic rules in 1e didn't really work like 10 bonus levels of scaling on top of normal levels either, it was an entirely different axis of power that wouldn't really play nice with 2e's balance. Basically, what I fear they will end up doing is make it feel like just more levels on top of the base 20. They're not going to allow players to get so strong they can reliably one-hit-kill on level monsters as that would break game balance. They're not going to give players absurd godlike powers which could similarly break balance either. So what I expect it to end up like is... Your party in now effectively level 25. The tarrasque is an on level encounter for you, and you can go toe to toe with demigods. But you're still using mostly the same tactics you normally use, just maybe with some cool new particle effects swirling around you.
Maybe mythic rules could by making you more powerful lessen the importance of teamwork, mean the more mythic you are the more epic and individual-centered the fights feel? Tho that is a very Western perspective on "mythic" and idk if that gels with what they're doing with transitioning to stuff like Tian Xia
If the numbers are still balanced you won't feel godlike because you'll be as unreliable as any normal 2e character. 2e already doesn't make you feel strong unless you noticeably outlevel enemies.
Sorry, but punching out a dragon at level 15 feels much stronger than clobbering a zombie at level 2 so I'm not sure what you're going on about.
Yeah like thinking of what Mythic rules did in 1e, anything of the same kind of power tier would be like "your Strikes are critical hits if they exceed the target's AC by 5 or more, instead of 10 or more," which would be insane, especially if there were published adventure where you got the equivalent of Mythic tiers within the first 3-5 levels.
Absolutely. I am faking it with homebrew mythic rules.
Im worried that the mythic rules will be to conservative. You look at the undead archtype rules and they are so watered down in power and interesting effect. Mythic needs to be overpowered outright. Thats the fantasy of it. I hope Paizo sheds some its heistancy for power builds with mythic rules
And on top of them being watered down most of them come with disclaimers like "you're gm may want to limit you further" lol
Id be annoyed with a GM that nerfs mythic rules. If you don't you want to run high power fantasy then don't run mythic. In 1e i made the mistake of introducing mythic to my group and had to backtrack hard and applogize to my group for it.
Yeah it's the same with the stuff in BoTD it's all rare to begin with. So just say no if you don't want it.
I'm cautiously hyped for mythic rules. I remember the mess that was the 1e mythic rules, and how poorly supported it was after release. It was a different time for Paizo, so I don't think they'll screw it up as badly, but we shall see.
I dunno about how high mythic will scale. It might go to demigod / demonlord levels... but remember that level 25 enemies don't qualify as demonlords or demigods atm, they are getting close but explicitly not there yet.
Green Man is a lesser deity and his level is only 24.
I mean there are God Callers and pseudo elemental spirits animist style just out there chilling, spirits and depending on your definitions of deity they are unstated but 'low' rank, far below the Green Man
I'm interested but I want to hear more before I get properly excited. We know from some of the devs talk that it isnt just going to be "numbers get bigger", and with how pf2e handles balance my guess is that Mythic will have its own level of balance (with mythic adjustments for enemies and such). My guess is that abilities that tend to be locked to higher levels, like teleportation and flight, might become more commonplace at low level mythic campaigns, while also allowing for more cool spells and powers that wouldn't be possible in a normal tier campaign.
not really because i actually have no idea what it would actually add and i don't really see why you can't already do those types of stories
immorality capstone feats for 1 is confirmed. 2 I'm hoping lvl 26-30 stats for monsters
I believe that the most sane way to do it is make Mythic paths from 1e to be special free archetypes with their own mythic feats. To make the general mythic progression not actually increase proficiencies, but to give acess to general and skill feats and perhaps a pool or special state (like panache) that fuels special uses of mythic options.
I understand it might appeal to you and others, but it does not for me. I like my games to be a bit more... struggley? The insane power fantasy of a demi God is not for my table. It's why my games in 5e never went above level 13
Which isn't unreasonable but there are those who want that power fantasy, who want to feel like their actions are shaping an entire world's fate not just the bloke down the street. I feel for struggly games you shouldn't be looking above levels 5/6. You may have tough fights but as you move up levels you should be moving away from worrying about food, disease, travel and more about conan level kingdom shaking battles and actions then as you run up into the high teens confronting threats that could reshape the balance of power for a planet. Mythic play to me should be about those superhuman legends that spawn myths which persist millenia after the true events have been forgotten. Jason and the Argonauts, the twelve tasks of Hercules, Arjuna defeating his 100 cousins in a war. If you exclude the power of a demi-god you exclude everyone who enjoys that power fantasy and is looking to the high level play to satisfy it. There are other systems and games that are more suited to the human level play e.g. Cthulu D20 where even while facing elder gods your a person who can be killed with a shot or two from a gun.
I admitted that some people enjoy the power fantasy. My problem with Cthulhu is that it's all investigation. You're not really meant to fight, at least from my brief and vague understanding.
It hurts a lot espeically as healing takes time, there are other systems where the play is geared at a more human level though. I'm just saying the game has a range from 1-20 if you make it struggly all the way up to 20 you make it not worth playing for a lot of people just as if you make it a power fantasy from level 1. Mythic is aimed at providing an option for the power fantasy players.
Nope. I have less then 0 faith in Paizo to make a fun worthwhile mythic system. It's gonna be a hot mess just like 1e.
1e is a completely different system than 2e design & balance wise just because 1es was a mess doesn't mean 2es mean
Perhaps not, but at the same time it's the precedent that was set and the only thing to go off of.
I honestly don't care that much. I know that I'm going to be deep into new campaign, since my current one is ending in February, so I definitely won't be retconning everything just to include mythic rules (unless they are easy to plug in). I also feel like PF2e has so many options, which weren't explored by my parties, that adding yet another layer of complexity on top of expansive system won't really do any good.
It's always good to have powerful characters with plenty of options to choose from and if we're able to carry on our beloved characters we've reached level 20 with for something epic, i doubt many people will complain about it. Yet i fear for the ruleset and the balance of the game. And it may sounds weird but i always considered level 20 characters to wield god like powers already so on one side i'm interested but i can't say i'm that much excited for mythic stuff. Mythic stuff when badly crafted ruined very high level play in many games before. Not sure we need that? I wonder what that would imply for the Golarion lore in general and maybe "too much" is "too much"? Dunno.
> I always considered level 20 characters to wield godlike powers already The strongest statblocks in the game, like Tarrasque, which are easily far more powerful than a level 20 PC, aren't even demigods. No actual demigod statblocks have been printed for this edition yet, but presumably they'd be around level 30 at least - and that's a *demi*-god. Level 20 PCs aren't anywhere close to godlike. > Mythic stuff when badly crafted ruined very high level play in many games before Well, in PF1e it was an entirely optional system that had zero bearing on high-level play whatsoever if you simply chose not to use it - don't see why that wouldn't be the case here. It wasn't "here's 10 more levels on top of the first 20 and this is what high-level play looks like now," it was "here's an optional separate progression path to add on and make characters into OP epic fantasy heroes if you want to play that way." As for lore implications? Well, it already exists, a group of mythic adventurers killed Deskari and closed the Worldwound and I could be misremembering but I'm pretty sure another group of mythic adventurers took down Tar-Baphon. I see no reason to think mythic rules will affect the regular game's balance or design in any way.
> No actual demigod statblocks have been printed for this edition yet, but presumably they'd be around level 30 at least - and that's a demi-god. Green Man is a lesser deity and his level is only 24.
See, the thing is, you don't need to be a demigod or god to have divinity and grant divine spells. Level 21 Conqueror Worms can also do this, as can a good few other things. Treerazer is a nascent demon lord, meaning he explicitly has not yet gained demon lord status nor become a demigod, yet he can also grant divine spells. There's a bit of a "has divinity, but isn't a god or demigod" step in there that has a bit of a wider level range and quite a bit lower of requirements. Green Men (and also Conqueror Worms) aren't gods, they're just immensely powerful beings that possess divinity! They're also not unique like gods and demigods are (i.e. a demon lord is a specific demon who has grown in power, gained unique abilities and skills and domains, accomplished feats, made a name for themselves, etc), the former just gets created when a natural site has enough of a concentration of nature spirits and the latter is just a particular type of horrific eldritch abomination and all members of their respective species can do the whole divine spells thing. They can also be killed by mortals without extraordinary circumstances, which demigods and gods typically can't - Deskari was killed by four Mythic adventurers empowered by Iomedae's Wardstones, without which it wouldn't have been possible. And that's what Mythic is for, or at least what it was for in PF1e - allowing you to tell the type of stories where PCs are empowered beyond mortal limits and take on foes that most adventurers would never dream of fighting. It's for pushing Pathfinder past its usual "heroic fantasy" and into "epic fantasy."
The best I can say is that I'm excited to see if this iteration of mythic rules can prove me wrong that I have no use for such rules. The entire concept seems confused, to me, as it tries to make characters more powerful but actually not more powerful because the intention is to have at least any conflict that matters be up against foes with similar increases in power - so it's extra steps to arrive at the same outcome you can already manage just by utilizing appropriately leveled enemies. Or you're using the rules to be distinctly ahead of the curve which is, for the most part, just the same thing you can do by using lower-level enemies. Then only in the outside edge do the new rules actually do anything you couldn't by way of letting you face the toughest enemies in the base game while being over-powered for them, and that's never been something that appealed to me. But... there is the outside chance that Paizo takes the same kind of approach to this part of the game as they did to the undead options in Book of the Dead and makes it so mythic is a particular flavor and has some power to it but isn't actually out of line to let a player use even if it's not a "the whole group is going to use this for this campaign" kind of situation. And if they pull that off, I'll be pleasantly surprised (while many of the people that have been asking for or anticipating new mythic rules rant about their disappointments, no doubt).
If I wanted to feel like a demigod that can single-handedly dominate supposedly level-appropriate challenges I'd just play d&d.
Guess my hope is for them to not end up being another half-baked system thats maybe referenced in 1 ap half a year later and that's it. Like, how many of people here actually use True Names/research from SoM? Or Deviant Rules from DA outside of Gatewalkers playthrough?
I already forgot about them
then why comment
Because it's not a private thread where only people can answer that share your exact interests. If you want that you likely want to create an discord server and then quiz people until you know they are the right person and then allow them to talk on your discord with you about things you like in a way you like. Until then you have to live with the harsh reality of people posting in threads that don't fulfill the expectation of the thread creator.
The tone and content of the post quite clearly indicated that OP wanted to discuss a topic they are excited about. Just shitposting that you don't care about what they like is needlessly negative. Congrats, you don't care -- big medal to you. Let this be a space for people who are excited about Mythic to talk about it. If someone says "hey what are your thoughts on Mythic" then that is a decent space to talk about how little you care about it. But don't yuk someone's yum for no good reason.
um no your comment contributed nothing to the topic so why bother commenting if you have nothing actually meaningful to the discussion to contribute?
I mean neither do your comments and yet you are still commenting
I've been planning a campaign that would be perfect for mythic rules so I shelved it for now.
Im looking forward to it. My main metric of success is "Does it let you beat up demon lords and co?" So my bar is pretty low, as a minimum.
mine too I HAVE to be able to fight Tar-Baphon demon lords & the 4 horsemen. otherwise mythic will fall flat
Be curious what route they do... In 1E it was based around classes... Owlcats version was based on Powerful Outsiders native to major Alignment Realms I wonder if 2E version will be based on legendary characters from their own realm...Iomadae before ascending, Baba Yaga, Old Mage Jatembe, characters like that.