D&D 4th Edition PROPOSAL: Slight Change to Retiring Rules in Charter




+ Log in or register to post
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Gallant (Lvl 3)

    CrimsonFlameWielder's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    26035 Moulton Parkway #140, Laguna Hills, CA 92653
    Posts
    936

    Ignore CrimsonFlameWielder

    PROPOSAL: Slight Change to Retiring Rules in Charter

    Hey all,

    I'd like to propose a slight change to the rules as the are currently shown in the Charter in regards to Retiring Characters.

    As it currently stands, the reading of the charter rules states that if you retire a character, option A will allow you to create a new character at the same level as the retiring character.

    However, as that is only allowing a new character of the same level, and not at the same XP, this leads to situations where either massive amounts of XP can and will be lost in the process, or, as is the strange case with my character, Vyrna, I would actually end up with MORE XP if I chose option B (which is to take half of the XP and store it) and then applied it to my new character. Vyrna currently has 2055 XP.

    If I choose option A, then my new character would be shunted down to 1000 XP (the starting amount for a level 2 character). But if I choose option B, I would be able to store 1027 xp...which is actually more. Broken? I think so. If not broken, then certainly not the intention of these rules, I think.

    My proposal is to allow XP to remain constant when using option A, since character character creation is highly moderated anyway, and chances of abuse are slim to none because of the approval system.

    This proposal would not need to change option B, as it is still a viable option, should you want the XP to go somewhere else, and would still help to prevent multi-character XP caching.

    What say you, oh Judges of color-worded power?

 

  • #2
    Yes
    My PBP characters: http://tinyurl.com/yy9skz2

  • #3
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    covaithe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    4,971

    Ignore covaithe
    I think YES. When we put that in originally, the idea was that there should be a (small) penalty for retiring, to prevent people from abusing it. But that just doesn't seem to be a problem here. If it turns into one, we can revisit this later, but for the moment I don't feel the need for a penalty.
    My games

    Check out Living 4th Edition, a community-run 4e D&D living world open to all. Now open for character and adventure submissions!

  • #4
    Registered User
    Waghalter (Lvl 7)

    Mewness's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Alameda
    Posts
    1,897

    Ignore Mewness
    Actually, as someone who's been hit fairly severely by the retirement penalty several times, I think it should be kept. The fact that you end up with slightly more XP in a corner case isn't an example of brokenness. (If option B is actually better in this instance, go ahead and use it.) "Broken" would be somehow ending up with more than you started with.
    Papolstaanas (babbling kobold); Pharodeys (living statue); Scarmiglione (singing kenku)

  • #5
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    covaithe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    4,971

    Ignore covaithe
    Quote Originally Posted by Mewness View Post
    Actually, as someone who's been hit fairly severely by the retirement penalty several times, I think it should be kept.
    Can you expand on this, Mewness?
    My games

    Check out Living 4th Edition, a community-run 4e D&D living world open to all. Now open for character and adventure submissions!

  • #6
    Registered User
    Scout (Lvl 6)

    Dekana's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Nagoya, Japan
    Posts
    2,070

    Ignore Dekana
    I'm with Mewness. I like that there's at least some sort of penalty for retirement.
    close the world, .txEn eht nepo

  • #7
    Registered User
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)



    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Malaysia, Kampar
    Posts
    614

    Ignore treex
    Then apply a static deduction to exp. I don't mind a tiny penalty. Losing several thousand exp on the other hand is preposterous.

    The problem that I can see is that the older members would be dissatisfied for what they've lost so far in the past. I can't think of any solution to refund lost exp that doesn't involve tons of backtracking, and might also spawn false reports.

    EDIT: Oh, and I still prefer keeping the same XP amount. People can play around with new ideas easier.
    Emsy (Deva Bard 1) Kruor (Warforged Vampire 3) Themes (Genasi Scout 1)

  • #8
    If there is a penalty for retirement I think a set amount is a better idea, like 1 or 2 time months. With the current system the amount of xp you "lose" varies wildly depending on how close you are to the next level, so the amount it penalizes the player varies a lot as well.
    My PBP characters: http://tinyurl.com/yy9skz2

  • #9
    I prefer your new character having the same amount of XP as then there are no math edge cases to deal with. The annoyance of building a new template for your character on the wiki and trying to get it approved seems like enough of a penalty to me.

    @Mewness , if I understand you correctly, your argument is "it sucked for me, so it wouldn't be fair if it didn't suck for everyone else?" I might be way off base on how I read that, but that seems like the best reason to change a rule rather than keep it.

    And YES by the way.

  • #10
    Registered User
    Scout (Lvl 6)

    Dekana's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Nagoya, Japan
    Posts
    2,070

    Ignore Dekana
    I like the penalty because I think it's better for the community to have some continuity in characters.

    If we're going to get rid of the retirement penalty entirely, we might as well get rid of the death penalty also. There's no reason not to just make a new character if your PC dies.
    close the world, .txEn eht nepo

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Proposal: change the rules for character approval
      By covaithe in forum Living 4th Edition
      Replies: 48
      Last Post: Tuesday, 13th December, 2011, 06:33 PM
    2. Slight change to combat round.
      By BeholderBurger in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 13
      Last Post: Monday, 14th June, 2004, 09:42 AM
    3. Slight change to combat round.
      By BeholderBurger in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Monday, 7th June, 2004, 07:29 AM
    4. A slight change to maximise spell
      By Stalker0 in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 7
      Last Post: Friday, 6th February, 2004, 07:48 AM
    5. Slight change to Knockdown
      By SableWyvern in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 5
      Last Post: Monday, 3rd June, 2002, 05:43 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •