|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 11:41:37 GMT -8
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jun 1, 2013 11:41:37 GMT -8
So, in math class I used to work out my problems and them look at the answers at the back of the book for confirmation. Saved me a lot of consternation.
AD&D 1e gives a fixed number of XP for each opponent. Obviously that system was designed by a smart man.
3.x gives me a headache.
So, what is the answer to this equation, teacher, please:
11 opponents at CR 1/4 + 2 opponents at CR 2 in one encounter. A party of 4 surviving good guys.
How much XP for each player?
I am just looking for a number. I will reverse engineer the answer, as I have done most of my life.
Information is on pages 37 - 38 DMG. (Yes, I read it and I am here asking anyways. I do not mind if you think me stupid. I just want the answer. Screw this velocity of an east bound train accellerating at a speed of X meeting the train travelling in the opposite direction at a velocity of Y meeting at the three-quarter point of a 600 mile journey crap.)
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 12:16:12 GMT -8
Post by The Northman on Jun 1, 2013 12:16:12 GMT -8
Still works the same way. All that average player level stuff is for designing encounters and determining if a conflict is so trivial (10+ levels below the group average) that it shouldn't even be worth experience. Reference Experience Point Rewards Table www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering#TOC-Awarding-ExperienceEither add up the column on the left and divide by # of players, or add up the column under the appropriate group size and give that amount to each. In this case, you've got 1,100 for 11 CR 1/4's + 1,200 for 2 CR 2's (2300/4 survivors = 575) or 275 + 300 if you use the individual column (also 575).
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 14:20:54 GMT -8
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jun 1, 2013 14:20:54 GMT -8
Thanks. I will bookmark this! This is one of those clear explanations that goes straight out of my head no matter how much cotton I plug into my right ear. So much for my geek cred. Again, thank you! Checking out your link, I have to say, Pathfinder speaks my language! Clear graphical representation. Good on them!
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 14:26:11 GMT -8
Post by The Northman on Jun 1, 2013 14:26:11 GMT -8
No problem. That whole OGC site is really fancy. The official Paizo one is prettier and much more mobile-friendly, but I usually find myself at the one I linked.
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 14:32:05 GMT -8
Post by Arcona on Jun 1, 2013 14:32:05 GMT -8
If all those creatures were in the same encounter then the above is not actually correct as opponents are not in vacuum.
Meaning that 1 dragon is hard. 10 dragons together are not just 10 dragons taken individually but rather a group of 10 with all the tactical benefits and diversity this can offer. Hence when the number of foes increases the CR also increases somewhat to compensate...
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 14:52:26 GMT -8
Post by The Northman on Jun 1, 2013 14:52:26 GMT -8
I know that's how you build appropriate encounters, but I always thought based on this sentence:
that the XP rewards were granted by adding the individual monsters up. If you're using the CR equivalencies, you're going to almost double the experience granted by the little buggers (which I'm not saying is wrong, as I'm now less confident in my answer).
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 1, 2013 15:25:24 GMT -8
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jun 1, 2013 15:25:24 GMT -8
For my money, 562 XP is enough for each player. 300/4 = CR 1/4 in v3.5. In the real game - if you will permit me to refer to AD&D 1e here - my 11 kobolds are worth 5XP +1XP/hit point. And the experience level up is in the vacinity of 2,000 XP. The CR 2 guys are valued at 125 +4/hit point.
Thus this battle represents a total pool of experience of 520 in the AD&D 1e game to be divided by 4 characters, needing approximately 1,500 - 2,000 XP for a new level. This encounter is 0.086666 of the next level.
Even without increasing the Encounter CR to CR +2, the power of munchkin makes the encounter worth a full 56% of next level requirement.
AD&D 1e = 0.086666 of next experience level v3.5 = 56% and, as Arcona correctly points out the game designers felt this was not enough. With a blistering speed of level up like that, is it any wonder the concept of D&D as a story game has been lost? I think not.
The role-play today with the new guy was very rewarding to the table. I enjoyed some popcorn. And the climax battle was nothing less than amazing. Only one dead from a group of 6 but two barely standing. I thought they were done for as I was rolling well enough to make my heart stop with each throw. So a good game like that, I will give them 56% of the next level. But, in my estimation of a story game, this is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Jun 2, 2013 1:10:20 GMT -8
Why does level matter in a story game? They could be level 20 in a story game with no difference than level 1.
Also, if you are going by DnD 1st edition you then are forgetting the extra XP each class gets for high stats (a totally random rule). So if you have a fighter in your group that has 16 strength they get more xp (and same applies for other classes depending on primary stat).
Whats even more interesting is that loot also offers XP in 1st edition. So if the enemies had treasure or were protecting treasure (or even if the trasure was indipendent but there) they would get even more XP! A loot of 500 gold would be another 500 XP! (+10% just because someone has high dex/strength/wisdom etc).
And the final blow comes from using your abilities. Cant remember if it was 1st or 2nd edition of AD&D but PCs also got xp for doing class stuff. So a rogue would get the normal XP for killing and finding gold but he would gain extra XP per gold found/stolen (which lead to the idea of a party rogue robbing his fellow comrades but then buying them stuff...). A wizard would gain X experience points per spell cast and the same for a cleric healing or casting beneficial spells. A fighter would also gain some XP times the Hit Die of enemies he killed...
So yea, maybe the XP from kills was not as much but there was a LONG list of random nonsensical stuff giving additional XP to players.
Lastly, if you compare a 1st edition small monster (like goblin, kobold, xvar etc.) with the 3.5 equivalents you will see that in 3.5 they actually are a threat while in 1st they were a push over stepping stone to be slaughtered by the hundreds!
Edit: You make some mention of the power of the munchkin. What does that mean?
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jun 2, 2013 4:01:27 GMT -8
That's so messed up, Arcona, that I am tilting windmills here.... so I will write until I am bored knowing others can pick up the torch.
The arbitrary +10% to characters with a high ability score in the primary class-related ability is not so arbitrary from the point of view of playing the character role within the group. And 3D6 in a row suggests the difficulty whereas the +10% to XP due to class ability score suggests how precious that character is. Yes, you could have a cleric or a magic user or a thief with 9 in the primary ability... and let's say that is the high roll in your character generation because it makes sense to put the high roll in the primary stat. Right?
So yes, 11 Kobolds and their pets (giant weasels). The weasels have no use for treasure. These Kobolds,,, number appearing 40 - 400. So, lets say this is not a lair just a break away group. (Treasure J, O, Q: 3-24 copper pieces; 1-3 silver pieces 20% chance and 1-4 more copper 25%; and 1-4 gems 50% worth between 10 to 50 gp maybe. If I were to do it wrong or feel particularly Monty Haulish, I could drop 1000 gp value stones but really, more for dragon hoards and not for dogmen. But YMMV. 1 Gp realised (taken from the place of finding to the established base of the players and converted to GP) = 1 Xp. Let's be generous.
33 Silver = 3.3 GP = 3.3 XP 4 + 24 Copper = 28 Copper = 1 Silver (20=1) = 0 GP = 0 XP. Now I am not going to guess the gems so poorly guarded by pushovers. But let's say I wanted to award 56% of the XP required for the next level to each of the players and lets say the party aggregate is 1,700 for the next level as a target. This will give me the value of the Gems.
0.56 of 1700 XP = 952 GP value (less the 3 XP above and the 520 in the pool to be divided by 4 survivors). 952 - 133 = minimum 4 gems of 819 GP value each guarded by these pushovers. Oh, and they have to be lying around in the open to ensure the players find them, to sell them for gold, to gain the XP.
If anyone has randomly rolled ability scores (read: randomly been assigned their character class/race to play) with 16 or better in a class primary ability, I could gift them 10% according to the suggestions in the book. In fact, I could just assign XP according to "story chapters" and not fret the math, which would be entirely ok with Gygax, one Dungeon Master equal to another.
As regards the awarding of XP... page 86 DMG. (E)xcellent, (S)tandard (F)air (P)oor is a rating of the role play. The rating affects the value of the XP award. So there is a more to the GP = XP and even the XP for monster kills valuation. "Role" is defined here as performing the duties of the class rather than being a fighter that runs to the rear because he wanted to be a magic user but was pushed into "fighter school" because he comes from a long line of fighters and did not want to disappoint the family but he is really a cowardly "narcoleptic sniper." E = 100% XP value. S = 75% XP value Fair = 50% XP value and Poor = 24% XP value.
So, I think that's a workable explanation. Of course, one Dm equal to another (**CENSORED**) means you are free to play the game as you wish it and that is equally valid. But the above is according to the suggestions in the book.
Whereas the rule in v3.5 is definitely targetted to a more munchkin audience. Those would be the players that would have a heart attack if they looked behind my curtain.
Since I play player knowledge = character knowledge, that being my system, I am not sure how to talk to a 20th level player's character who knows nothing about his world. That would make him pretty useless (or dead) in a political game unless I spoon feed the player/character information. My system is not roll play so there's no DC for that. Again, one DM equal to another means your mileage may vary.
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 11, 2013 1:59:00 GMT -8
Post by Arcona on Jun 11, 2013 1:59:00 GMT -8
Ok, so I was at a conference last week and didnt get a chance to respond.
Now I dont want to go in a long long post just to argue but there is so much wrong here I cant help myself.
I am referring to the part about rating player performance as Excellent, Bad etc.
Without wanting to offend you this is so pretentious. Good job pigeonholing your players. Along with your other post in the blue book thread how do you reconcile those two opinions?
On one hand you tell us that your players are reverting to saying 'ah you use magic via music, you are a bard' which according to you is obviously bad because they are using mechanics to decide what class someone is but at the same time you say how they advance is dependent on fitting specific criteria set in a book!
So yea, I am sorry but I dont mind (I rather enjoy) not conventional roles in the party. And yes, if my player wants to play a coward fighter that really wanted to be a Wizard but wasnt smart enough then I will let him play that character and award XP given how well he does it. I wont tell him 'nop, you are roleplaying BAD because you didnt do enough damage!'
Given your other posts (about RPGs being about freedom and being able to play what you want unrestrained by rules and skill sets) I find it very difficult to understand how you can say the above!!!!
In any case, your initial quip was that in 3.X the PCs level very easily while in AD&D they levelled slowly hence you had more time to teach them the world. I disagree because as I said, what encounters you pitch against the players is up to you and also because in 1st edition you had a boat load of other things that gave XP even if the combat itself gave less.
As for not learning the world... well, thats your fault then... not the systems fault.
The encounter you put your PCs against is extremely deadly... not just mild or tough, but more akin to a run away situation. Your world might be alive and all but as you say all your players are new and inexperienced its up to you to show them this step by step. Sure in your mind an experienced group would have one look at the situation and FLEE knowing their capabilities and the capabilities of the giant weasels (that can kill most 1st level PCs in 1 blow... even fighters). But new players dont know that! They dont know how easy it is to die and what is the extent of their abilities!
I still insist that I dont see the issue with having players start at a higher level so they have a bit more survivability and things to do. Just because you are level 4 doesnt mean you know everything (but it does mean you wont die when a cat scratches you) and level is no restraint for getting to be part of a story. You as the DM have to find ways to make the players involved in the story and in your plot and this cant be just 1 way cause PCs are notorious for not following the rails you set...
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
XP V3.5
Jun 11, 2013 19:00:56 GMT -8
Post by maxinstuff on Jun 11, 2013 19:00:56 GMT -8
I don't really have anything of value to add to this discussion, but I just want to say - DAMN the XP scale and calculations here are complicated.
In the game I am running (not D&D 3.5) the XP scale is much smaller numbers (max level is at like 1200 XP), and you get between 0 and 4 XP per encounter. 2 is 'normal', 1 for easier, 3 and 4 are for particularly challenging ones. This is all determined based on how challenged the characters were, not to do with any numbers in the monsters stat block.
Why do games use such huge numbers with all that math...... Surely it works out the same when you chop all the zeros off. Is it supposed to be like final fantasy where your ePeen grows an inch every time you do 9999 damage??
|
|
kevinr
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 158
|
XP V3.5
Jun 11, 2013 19:23:18 GMT -8
Post by kevinr on Jun 11, 2013 19:23:18 GMT -8
There is an interesting post Here on the number of encounters to level a 1e character to a 4e character and they work out to about 10 per level. From what I have read 3.5/pathfinder usually averages 12-16 a level. I have not played pathfinder beyond the beginner box and a one shot or two so I can not confirm that with personal knowledge.
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 12, 2013 1:08:21 GMT -8
Post by Arcona on Jun 12, 2013 1:08:21 GMT -8
Generally DnD (3.5) assumes you might have multiple encounters per day (assuming Dungeron Crawling or using random encounter rules). Thus a level appropriate encounter is mechanically assumed that it will take 1/3rd of a party's resources. This is an encounter that is challenging but not difficult.
This means a party can have 3 such encounters a day before their resources (Hit points, spells etc) are depleted. This depletion might require 1-2 days of rest to replenish (especially at lower levels when even a fully rested cleric wont be able to bring the party back up to full health).
All this is just guidelines! Very often I will throw my players in tough situations (with appropriate rewards for surviving) and similarly from time to time they get to push through waves of weaker foes.
Off course I agree with Maxinstuff that all this is very complex and BATTLE DRIVEN.
Personally I prefer the Storyteller system. Battles and fighting giving no reward other than the pleasure of vanquishing your foes, surviving another night and perhaps access to your opponents resources (or the protection of your own). Experience is given in a very slow and steady manner and doesnt involve combat at all (no XP just because your pack brought down an Elder!).
Still, DnD is DnD and has been since the 70s.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jun 12, 2013 4:42:41 GMT -8
I've resisted but I've got to kick the hornets nest . . . Yeah complicated math going there but maybe I missed it but there was a vital calculation for AD&D 1e missing - and it throw all that lively comparative math in confusion again. 1e didn't use the term CR BUT it did use total Hitdice to rate a challenge and modify the experience awarded. If the party has >10x total HD of encounter then Xp should be correspondingly reduced and vice versa To be honest I'm not going to read the math above again because the math underlying each editions xp system was so different as to invalidate direct numerical comparison. 2e shifted the emphasis away from kill + treasure to story + tasks + encounter resolution (usually kill). Conceptually the xp calculation is different and not all math depends on numbers to see that it's so different as to make formulaic comparisons redundant. All that I'd really comparable is rate of progression . . . But then you have to figure in the different power differentials between levels for each edition eg: epic level 1e is about 14th 2e it creeped up a little and by 3.x it's 20th Aaron
|
|
|
XP V3.5
Jun 13, 2013 20:19:57 GMT -8
Post by jazzisblues on Jun 13, 2013 20:19:57 GMT -8
I don't really have anything of value to add to this discussion, but I just want to say - DAMN the XP scale and calculations here are complicated. In the game I am running (not D&D 3.5) the XP scale is much smaller numbers (max level is at like 1200 XP), and you get between 0 and 4 XP per encounter. 2 is 'normal', 1 for easier, 3 and 4 are for particularly challenging ones. This is all determined based on how challenged the characters were, not to do with any numbers in the monsters stat block. Why do games use such huge numbers with all that math...... Surely it works out the same when you chop all the zeros off. Is it supposed to be like final fantasy where your ePeen grows an inch every time you do 9999 damage?? And that right there, and not wanting to keep up with the bookkeeping, is why I don't bother with xp at all. I decide on a pace I want the characters to advance and when the time is right tell them to advance (level up for you d20 types). I don't mind math, quite the contrary I like math what I don't like is ridiculous book keeping. Just my 2 krup ... you know the rest ... JiB
|
|