The major problem that I see with this approach is that many GMs have decoupled xps from the game in one manner or another. As an example, I've run games where I don't bother giving out xp at all, and instead just level the entire party when the time seems right. So tying game balance to xp gains removes the ability of the DM to be able to control the campaign's pacing.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
The Quadratic Fighter - rebuilding the class (PEACH)
- Thread starter harpy
- Start date
The major problem that I see with this approach is that many GMs have decoupled xps from the game in one manner or another. As an example, I've run games where I don't bother giving out xp at all, and instead just level the entire party when the time seems right. So tying game balance to xp gains removes the ability of the DM to be able to control the campaign's pacing.
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
The main problem I see is that it truth of this statement is assumed rather than demonstrated:
Even if it is true that the power curve between the classes is unbalanced, another question remains: Is this bug or a feature?
Scott DeWar
Prof. Emeritus-Supernatural Events/Countermeasure
I like just multiplying the number in the group times the amout needed = the amt needed for the group to level up. when the total equals that, every one levels up. I use the trailblazer method of encounters so it is all easy!
I'm kind of confused by this. Does it need to be demonstrated? I do it and with years of reading forums I can attest to seeing others post who say they forgo the xp system. It doesn't seem to be a rare or uncommon notion as far as I can tell.
If you entrench character advancement into the game balance then it really defines the game in many ways, rather than having it be an independent dial for the DM to adjust to fit the campaign. It might have been fine back in the old days when the system was still young and people didn't know any better, but modern gaming has vetted out many more layers to how a game is organized and played.
If it is a feature I haven't read anything that has pushed that view over all of these years. The only thing I've read has been complaints. If there is a compelling argument to be made I'd love to hear it.
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
I wasn't clear. I'm not disputing your point about XP. I'm questioning the accuracy of the claim about "the unbalance power curves of the classed in pathfinder...."
I've never bought the "wizards do so much more damage than fighters; therefore, the classes are unbalanced" arguments. Wizards do more damage less often. Fighters do less damage more often. That's balance.
The problem isn't the classes. It's the play-style. Too many DMs let PCs get away with the 15-minute adventuring day, which means the wizard (for example) gets to always operate at peak to near-peak strength. In this situation, sure, the fighter (and just about everyone else) gets hosed on the comparative power scale.
Don't let the wizard walk into an encounter or two, nuke his way to supremacy, and then rest to recover all of his spells. Then watch the paradigm shift.
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
The fighter is not burdened by resource management.
It has neither a quadratically increasing power curve, nor a quadratically decreasing power curve as resources diminish. His power curve is linear, but it is consistent.
It's easy to grasp. Some players don't want 50 different things to choose from on their turn. They don't even want 50 different things on their character sheet.
A great many players simply aren't bothered in the slightest by "power curves" because they don't grade their fun on a curve. The fighter's fun is not diminished by the fact that the wizard is more powerful on the top end. This one really isn't that hard to comprehend: The fighter gets off on rolling a natural 20 and doing a crit for 50+ damage. That does not suddenly get less fun because the wizard can cast wish.
You should read some different forums and play with some casual players.
Scott DeWar
Prof. Emeritus-Supernatural Events/Countermeasure
I haave been in games where the wizard runs out of spells before the day is over, and then there were wandering monsters through the night! (first and second ed games, mind you)
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
I've run 3.5 and Pathfinder games like that. The key is to realize to what extent I as the DM control the pace of the game, and then use that key as appropriate for the current story.
IOW, no one gets to rest and recover if I don't let them.
TheAuldGrump
First Post
My players are all too familiar with this observation.
Though, to be honest, I have never seen much of the fifteen minute adventuring day - and once or twice I have had to tell the party to break and rest, as they are pushing for the fifteen hour adventuring day.... They are generally of the opinion that my bad guys will be up to something if they are not stopped, and the sooner they are foiled the better.
The Auld Grump
Yeah. My meaning was along the lines of "If you are set on changing the fighter, this is what should be changed". Basically, if you need change, don't give more power, give more options.
I just kind of tossed that in there as an example. Those would have been every odd level (1st, 3rd, 5th, etc). You can make it quadratic if you want, but as long as it's getter bigger increases each time, it's giving a non-linear set of options.
While the Wizard has a lot of bookkeeping during the game to optimize, the Fighter needs a lot of bookkeeping and research before making his choices to optimize.
In my experience, Fighter's are not that user friendly, for the simple fact that once they've made their decision, they are stuck with it... even if they find out their decision was a poor one, or that the game changes drastically enough at the higher levels to make what used to be a good choice into a poor one.
Giving the Fighter more options like this would actually make things easier for new players, as they'd have more room for error (instead of picking 10 feats and be stuck with it, they get 40 and can use the ones that are working for the situation).
True, it's a bit more bookkeeping, I can't deny that. However at 12th level, deciding which tree will be useful for the day shouldn't be tough (am I fighting mages? flying creatures? should I specialize in ranged or melee?).. they are pretty easy questions compared to the wizard.
It moves agonizing over what will be useful at the beginning of character creation, and then getting stuck with that, for better or worse... to humming over which tree will get the most use today, and if you were wrong, well you can change it again with a day's rest.
That's the key factor...
Similar Threads
