3rd Edition too quick? too powerful?

[Steverooo]

CRs

If the players know the CRs/ELs of all the things they're encountering, them make up more of your own. Then they can't know....

 

[Lord Pendragon]

First is experience. You level to fast.

Someone already mentioned this, but WoTC designed the xp chart so that the average campaign will take you from levels 1-20. I like that. I always look forward to high level play, but in 2ed you never got there. So if your campaign is a standard one that lasts about 1 year, I'd stick with the standard xp (and in relation to that, level 8 after 6 months is just fine.) However, if you play with a steady group that plays the same campaign over several years, then I'd definitely cut xp, or you'll wind up level 40 by the time the game is over. Either that, or you can simply plan to play each group of PCs for about a year, then retire them and create new ones. That might be fun too.

Second is the amount of wealth. Since the system is balanced based on GP values of eq per level, you are required to give certain averages of treasure per encounter to keep players up to snuff. Economics used to be reasonable to me, but now it's not atypical to find a group of kobolds or gobins with HUNDREDS of gold coins, based on the ECL. If these humanoids are so rich, why don't they become businessmen and landowners, instead of 'cannon fodder'?

I'd imagine the kobolds stockpile the gold that they take from the bodies of low-level adventurers dumb enough to invade their lair. It simply piles up and as the kobolds don't need it, it accumulates over years. Personally, wealth doesn't bother me. I give NPCs/critters whatever I deem appropriate, then every once in a while I examine how the party is doing and (if necessary) add in an NPC stash or critter nest that happens to have a particularly generous amount of loot. I never bother with the MM's suggested treasure, though I do believe in the PC Wealth table.

Third, and related to the second, is the sheer amount of magic items in a game. It used to seem that anything beyond a +2 sword was a major find, but now everyone has magic, and tons of it.

I agree with you here. What bothers me is that a 20th-level PC who has to take a bath is leaving hundreds of thousands of gp worth of gear lying around the bathhouse. If I were a D&D PC, I'd hire a wizard to research the spell Insta-clean and have it put into a bracer, usable once a day! But it's an integral part of the system, so I don't mess with it.

Lastly, I find people expect the equal to the party level CR a thing of law. Players complain that it is unfair to throw harder monsters at them, even though a balanced CR consumes only 20% of a party's resources

I haven't had this problem. My players usually know that I only eyeball CRs, so even the ones that are supposed to be balanced may not be...quite. And not all of them are even supposed to be.

and toning down things for a 'low magic, realistic approach' will take MAJOR retooling to be balanced.

If you want the PCs to be low-magic, then yes it will require work. If you want the world to be low-magic, it's easier. My world is low magic. I don't disallow any classes, or restrict spellcasting. But people with the potential to do such things are rare (even if the PCs happen to be such people). The talent for sorcery, or the faith to be a spellcasting cleric, are very unusual. Even if the PCs happen to be such people, that doesn't mean the world need be filled with them, right?

 

[S'mon]

I agree with your criticisms, however I'd point out that the system actually supports a lower-magic lower-power approach: if you give out eg 1/10 standard xp and 1/10 standard gp per encounter, the system will remain in balance as the PCs level up. Problems only arise if you want to eg give full xp but 1/10 gp, the system doesn't handle that well as many characters will be underequipped and underpowered for their level, making some fights much tougher and requiring CRs to be tweaked also.

If you do reduce XP awards, I'd say it's important to reflect this in the level distribution of NPCs also - if it takes huge effort to reach 5th level, make that NPC General 5th level rather than 15th. That way there's no reason the players should feel cheated that it takes them a long time to level, if NPCs are seen to labour under the same rules.

 

[Fenes 2]

PCs are only underequipped in a low-treasure world if you use lots of monsters. Since I use lots of classed humans and humanoids, I don't have a problem with underequipped PCs even though I am stingy with magic items.

 

[Gnarlo]

I actually like the rapid levelling a little bit more than I thought I would, as my last group played via email and it gave them a feeling of accomplishment to actually accheive a level a bit more often than it normally would have. I think if we had played over a table I would have had to tone the exp awards back a bit though.

I found the rapid levelling in terms of game time unrealistic as well in my experience, since then I have made good use of adding in downtime for meditation, research, learning new skills and spells, etc. to stretch out the times between adventures in order to keep from answering the question "Why doesn't every peasant in the game level up to epic heights within a month?" Of course, my campaign is set in the Forgotten Realms, and sometimes the quickness of levelling can be a useful excuse as to why so many high level NPCs are running around to begin with

/em gnarlo

 

[Buttercup]

I fully know if i don't like it i can stop playing it. And i also know that i can change what i don't like. Since i don't have time to come up with my own game system, i'm 'stuck' with 3rd ed, which isn't so bad, i know the system like the back of my hand. So my second option is to change things, which i find hard to do. I'm the type to fully consider any change to the rules, and toning down things for a 'low magic, realistic approach' will take MAJOR retooling to be balanced. Mainly I'm wondering if people have the same problems taht i do, or even if they consider it a problem. Also what has been people's experience with toned down campaigns?

I generally agree with your concerns, but in my experience it has been easy to fix. I award half the amount of experience recommended, and less than half the treasure. We've been playing this campaign since August (with a 2 month break over the holidays) and we started last night's session with them leveling up their characters--to level 4. They've got between 1000 and 2000 in gold & equipment each. At this point, they all have masterwork weapons, and the tank has masterwork armor. They haven't seen a single magic weapon in use or for sale, nor have they seen a magic shop, though there are plenty of apothocaries and a few alchemists. Most of the rewards they have been given are more in the line of friendship and future help, such as the minotaur race who gave them tokens that proclaim them as friends who can be trusted.

The game has been balanced just fine so far, but I think the party is getting to the point that they will need some magic weapons. Since one of the tasks they could choose to undertake involves working with the church of Valor & Justice, I plan on having the church lend them some appropriate weapons. If they complete the task and make nice, maybe the high priest will let them keep those weapons.

Anyway, these changes have been simple. Just look at the official XP award, and cut it in half. Same with treasure.

 

[Psion]

Lastly, I find people expect the equal to the party level CR a thing of law. Players complain that it is unfair to throw harder monsters at them,

Show them the chart in the DMG that shows a typical percentage breakdown of encounter ELs. Hint: it's not all just EL = Party Level.

And i also know that i can change what i don't like.

Not only this, the DMG provides specific suggestions for doing so.

So my second option is to change things, which i find hard to do.

Given the above, I don't think it is hard at all. Simply scale down experience and treasure.

 

[francisca]

navriin-

I simply don't have those problems. The current group. after 7 sessions, are 2nd level. Part of that is because we are mostly 1E grognards or Vampire players taking our first steps into 3E, and we don't play often enough. Therefore, we end up spending a lot of time fumbling through the mechanics. I'm sure it will get better as time goes on.

The other part is, I don't throw lots of easy encounters at my group. They end up running to fight another day fully 2/3 of the time. (They are low-level, after all.) The homebrew I run is tough: there aren't loads of magic items lying around, the trolls in the forest don't ignore the PCs because they are low-level, other adventuring parties in the area view them as rivals.

So to me, the amount of magic, experience, and treasure are setting/flavor issues, not mechanics. My players are enjoying this type of game. Other groups I've been in wouldn't like this at all. They *want* all of the loot they can get, and expect to get loads of magic and tangle with tough encounters.

The one thing I have had trouble with as a DM is remembering that the NPCs and monsters get feats and skills too. That was the biggest change for me, the bookkeeping of all that stuff. But, I'm not complaining, as I'm getting better at it, and we are having a blast.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I'm in agreement with most of the other posters on this thread.

In all honesty, I got really bored with the slow advancement in 2e. "You have saved the kingdom, rescued the princess and killed the evil wizard!" "So, do we level then...?" "Ah, no." "Great. Where's the next kingdom?" The 3e quicker advancement is much better, but I think it makes a little more sense if you schedule some downtime for the players every now and again.

Treasure, well money is more important to humans than anyone else. What use is a bunch of gold discs to kobolds? Can't make anything out of gold, don't meet anyone that uses it (humans don't often trade with kobolds, right?). So why shouldn't they have gold?

Oh, and a word of warning over making the game "low-magic". It actually makes the spellcasters more powerful, not less. Think about it. In a high magic world, Greater Magic Weapon is more or less useless, since all decent fighters have magic weapons. However, in a low magic world, it's very powerful, since no fighters have magic weapons and it makes a greater difference.

The problem of planning characters to aim for certains PrC's is a difficult one. I myself prefer to ask the DM about PrC's, and if he says yes to it then I start to aim towards it. Never take for granted that a PrC exists in any campaign world. Also, make sure there is a RP clause attached to most of them, eg tracking down a weapons master to learn from him, actually going through the initiation rites of a mages guild etc etc. And I'm firmly against allowing PC's to start with levels in PrC's (although that's a new thought, so apologies to randomling re: my two monks). Oh, and just to add a little more oil on the fire here, I think that once you start a PrC, you should finish it. Don't much about with Templar3/Hospitaller3 nonsense....

 

[Zappo]

In D&D (any edition) characters advance through the acquirement of magical items as much as they do through experience. 3E's CR/EL system is based on the assumption that at a given level, the PCs will have a given wealth. So, if you want to change the gain rate and keep the balance untouched, you can do it but you have to make sure that as you slow the experience you slow the treasure as well.

You don't have to do that, but if you don't you might have some slight failures in the CR system, such as PCs being a bit above or below their CR due to excessive or reduced wealth. An experienced DM, however, has no trouble with this.