That discussion died down the OOC thread but I for one am interested in a faster advancement rate.
There is 30 levels in 4th! I don't want to be retiring before my characters.
Off the top of my mind, I'd suggest simply increasing the total XP (time and monsters) by a certain %. 50% or 100% for example.
For treasure, I suggest a simple guideline; Use the GP calculation we already did for Time gold and apply them to total XP instead.
It looks like that:
Quote:
1st level characters gain 83 xp and 63gp per month of adventuring.
2nd level characters gain 104 xp and 89 gp per month for adventuring.
3rd level characters gain 125 xp and 127 gp per month for adventuring.
....
etc.
Since 12 months are worth 1 level, you can tell a level 1 PC should earn about 756 gp on his way to level 2.
In other words, a level 1 PC should earn roughly 0.75 gp / XP. So if he he earns 700 XP in his first adventure, he should get very roughly 525gp of reward.
With that kind of guideline, no matter what kind of XP advancement rate we consider, gold keeps pace.
A level 2 should earn roughly 0.85 gp / XP while a level 3 should earn approximately 1gp/1Xp and so on.
Give or take as much as 25%, this shouldn't be a straight jacket! It's just a guideline so that Judges (or Players for that matter) can point out that certain PCs will be falling behind the curve if nothing is done.
I'm not sure I followed that. I would say: right now both time gold and XP are calibrated to advance 1 level in 12 months. If we want that to be faster, just double them and you get 1 level in 6 months (or multiply both by 1.5 and you get 1 level in 9 months). Since time gold is already a fraction of the total gold for a level, there's no need to recalibrate it with respect to XP: just make sure they're the same fraction of the total.
My issue with this is that this means encounters are worth even less compared to time XP. I would prefer to double encounter XP instead. Or perhaps multiply both encounter and time XP by 1.5, to keep them advancing at the same rate.
I'd like to increase the XP as well. I too think it would be best to multiply encounter and time XP by 1.5 or 2, though I'm leaning towards 1.5. Double the XP is ... really really fast. Judging by L4W's current rate, double the XP would mean only two or three fights per level.
As for the treasure side, to be honest, I'm tempted to propose the treasure system LEB is using. It seems a lot easier to keep track of than what we currently have. Plus, with a treasure system like that we can fiddle with XP however we want and treasure can be left alone.
How about doubling time XP while increasing Encounter XP by 50%?
In a normal game, encounter XP already represents a larger part of total XP but in one where the DM disappears or where the pace is very slow, double Time XP will help compensate a little.
I.E. At this point in Zombie in crooks, Encounter + quest XP accounts for 623 XP while Time XP is only 189 (I calculate to the day... 69 days of adventure)
In the LEB model, basically you get two treasure rewards per level. One is always the same - 1/5 the gp value of an item of level n, where n is the current level of the character.
The other reward is one of 5 parcels. The five parcels are an item of level n+4, an item of level n+3, item of level n+2, item of level n+1, and gold equivalent to the cost of an item of level n. Over the course of each half-tier (levels 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 21-25, 26-30) you get each parcel once and only once.
The system is described in greater detail here. (Not to mention more clearly than I'm capable of )
I kind of like the LEB system, but not having used it since the start makes it a bit harder to use. It requires everyone who is level 2 to indicate what parcels they received and then you will likely find that some have had none and maybe some have had too much. But hey, it's workable and the long term benefit are worth it.
So how about this proposal:
1 : We multiply Encounter XP by 1.5
2 : We double Time XP
3 : We Adopt LEB Treasure system
I'd kind of prefer to just double encounter XP and quest XP. I've already started handing out much beefier quest awards than the DMG recommends. I really kind of dislike having time XP play such a large part in progress.
I'd rather see the time XP and encounter XP upped by the same amount myself. That way it doesn't get unbalanced from too much of either. I would leave the treasure alone as it is already linked to the time XP.
I'm definitely up for increased encounter XP, but I would also prefer to bump time XP up some, too. Otherwise, people stuck in slow games fall behind more than they already do.
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
I dunno. It certainly sucks to be stuck in a slow game, but I don't like the idea of giving more XP for NOT adventuring... I don't think time XP should ever become more important, proportionally, than it is now.
Maybe we can propose some other remedy if people get stuck in a slow game? (Like a one-time XP reward if your DM disappears for a certain amount of time?)
I dunno. It certainly sucks to be stuck in a slow game, but I don't like the idea of giving more XP for NOT adventuring... I don't think time XP should ever become more important, proportionally, than it is now.
Maybe we can propose some other remedy if people get stuck in a slow game? (Like a one-time XP reward if your DM disappears for a certain amount of time?)
Different games have different paces; time XP seeks to address some of this difference equally. Its not that you are not on adventure, its just that (1) others don't post as much in your game, (2) others post faster in the other game, (3) DM had a baby, etc, etc. Incarnation is on adventure, its just there have been fewer encounters than the MMC faced. So he is the lowest level character of the first batch.
Time XP should answer once question: How often do we want people to level up regardless of the rate of encounters. Every 10 months? Every 2 (probably not). LEB uses 10 months (10 RP = 1 level, 1 RP/mo).
__________________ stonegod -- LEB judge and spawn of Khyber since 2005 (Blog)
One other thing to think about, assuming some form of this proposal passes, maybe we'd want to dial it back when a character hits paragon or so?
Or maybe not... but my sense is that people feel like they've had enough of a chance to experience lower level play, in many cases with multiple characters, and they're anxious to move on. But then once they do get to higher level play, they might want to slow back down again to enjoy it.
(this could be in the category of "worry about it when we get to it".)
One other thing to think about, assuming some form of this proposal passes, maybe we'd want to dial it back when a character hits paragon or so?
Or maybe not... but my sense is that people feel like they've had enough of a chance to experience lower level play, in many cases with multiple characters, and they're anxious to move on. But then once they do get to higher level play, they might want to slow back down again to enjoy it.
(this could be in the category of "worry about it when we get to it".)
Personally, I wouldn't worry about slowing it down again just because a new tier is reached. We have 30 levels to play with and maybe another 4-5 years to do it before another edition could come out (Just speculating here, not trying to start a flame-war). Just looking at LEW starting to waste away with a few characters near or at double digit levels out of 20 possible saddens me some. After one year of playing, we only have a couple characters at 4th level. So we only gained 3 levels in a year for those that used DM credits to boost their PC's. So even if we had 5 more years of playing on here, that is only 15 more levels for a total of 18. Or for those DM's that boosted, they may be up to 24th level if the rate stayed constant.
So I'm of the opinion not to worry about ratcheting it back down later unless some big unforeseen problem arises. I'd love to think that we may be able to have some epic level play in a couple years and maybe even some people maxing out at 30th in a few! Bring it on! I just don't want to see an imbalance between time XP and encounter XP develop.
I also want to throw my hat in and agree. I also don't mind trying more than 1 (or 2) PC's during that time. The only problem I see is say in 2 years from now, I'd probably imagine close to 50% of the players wouldn't be around. Not being rude, but it's the nature of PBP. So then the higher level adventuring pool greatly diminishes and you really hope you're able to get in an addy at that point.
At least that's what I'm foreseeing. I hope I'm wrong and most people are still around then and we still have the problem of too many adventures
All right, this is like politics. Attach too many items to the bill, and nothing gets passed!
Consider this :
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proposal
Double XP for Monster, Quest and Skill challenge.
There, that's it. Forget time XP one way or another. Time XP will get its own proposal in due time if someone wants to do it. It will be debated there.
)
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
