Abilities in exchange for Experience points: Good or Bad Idea.

[kenjib]

"Access" isn't really applicable, as it is controlled by the DM. DM fiat doesn't really have any place in a discussion about what characters can do with their own resources. "Access" is arbitrary and relies completely upon the whim of the guy with the screen.

I didn't mean access vis-a-vis the DM. I meant the access that various classes have or don't have via the rules in the Player's Handbook. DM fiat has nothing to do with it in this case, unless the DM limits item creation in some way -- in which case the discussion is irrelevant because we are no longer talking about item creation as written.

Well, in your post, you're assuming that the XP reward system from the DMG is the one being used. Unfortunately, its fault when characters in a party are not of the same level. If the FRCS XP reward system is used, the item creating wizard will catch up to the rest of the party much faster. The "XP-feedback loop" is much smaller.

Why shouldn't I assume that the core rules are being used instead of a variant specific to one campaign setting? Regardless though, yes, the dynamics change with different systems. Let's take a look at the FRCS system.

The FRCS system doesn't help to ameliorate the problem that occurs when everyone can buy powers. Since everyone is the same level (but overpowered relative to that level) the differences with the FRCS system don't solve anything.

The FRCS system does greatly reduce the penalty for magic item creation though, because the wizard gets the extra accelleration in order to catch up with the rest of the group in an asymptotic fashion, so the cost he spent on item becomes less significant in the long run. XP cost becomes a more temporary inconvenience for the wizard that eventually starts to smooth out, whereas the item created can provide permanent benefit (unless it is an expendable item). Once he approaches the level of his compatriots, the feedback loop takes effect because they have gained extra power (in form of magic items) with no cost. In essence -- once again spending that XP gave them the ability to acquire XP at a faster rate.

Looking at it this way, I'd say that the FRCS system takes the item creation rules and simply increases the XP-feedback loop problem (though since it's only one character it's not to the same extent that occurs if everyone does it with XP trade for powerups). It has other benefits which are outside the scope of this discussion though -- so I'm not saying that I outright oppose using that system for calculating XP. That's the dynamic I see there, though.

Also, when a wizard's gear, that he creates himself, only counts against him at half value (creation cost instead of market price), being 5 levels behind isn't so bad when you're armed to the teeth. Sure, there are drawbacks, but it isn't so simple.

Typically, some of those items will be spread amongst the various party members rather than hoarded by that one character, no? Not only this, but having a bunch of magic items with the low level spells effects you can enchant can only help you so much when facing CRs way out of your league -- especially where saves and SR are concerned. If you are five levels below EL you are unlikely to penetrate SR.

It's worse if everyone in the party can buy powers for XP, though, because when that occurs you no longer have any mechanism for gauging appropriate challenges nor assigning appropriate XP rewards. With the core rules XP system, at least the average party level is not as heavily effected by the introduction of only one hard-to-evaluate-for-EL character.

 

[Crothian]

It's worse if everyone in the party can buy powers for XP, though, because when that occurs you no longer have any mechanism for gauging appropriate challenges nor assigning appropriate XP rewards. With the core rules XP system, at least the average party level is not as heavily effected by the introduction of only one hard-to-evaluate-for-EL character.

Don't DM's have to reevalute encounters for characters anyway? Sometimes people have low attributes that mean they are weaker then the average X level character, or high ones making them more powerful. Occasionally someone will roll terrible hp for 4 or so levels in a row making their HP total well below what it needs to be. Not all 5th level characters are remotely equal. So, I don;t think spending XP for abilities changes this in any way. The DM's job is not an easy one. They need to know the abilities of the PCs and be able to challenge them no matter what rules the PCs lives fall under, and what options the PCs have avalible. Granted, not all DMs can do this so they do limit options and not allow certain rules that they are unable to coop with.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I really like the idea of spending xp for certain things, and one of the early house rules which I introduced was the ability to spend xps to gain skill ranks... for two reasons.

1) if someone spends several weeks on board ship, they can learn some profession(sailor), if they move to a new country they can learn a smattering of the local language (without having to wait for the next level up, which could be quite some while away)

2) it becomes easier for characters to acquire a diverse range of skills at low ranks.

Interestingly, nobody has taken advantage of this yet! Nobody wants to give up their hard-earned experience and some of the fears of people in the house rules boards when I first talked about the idea haven't materialised in my campaign. That isn't to say that it would work for everyone, naturally. Just that it doesn't automatically fail.

Frankly I put it in exactly the same category as the manufacture of magic items - in fact I would have loved to see the idea of "spending" xps used more generally throughout the game.

Cheers

 

[DonAdam]

I really dislike characters buying abilities for XP.

Gold piece level limits are the way to balance character abilities, because every gold piece spent on something is one that can be spent on something else.

For XP, this only affects the character in increments, which, as has been pointed out, become increasingly larger, low-level XP for power abilities almost free.

The core rules provide a mechanic for balancing new powers with the GP level limits. All the XP for power mechanics I've seen merely betray a basic misunderstanding of the mathematics of the game, in the same way that feats that increase crit multiplier do.

What I have not heard is one good reason why I should use XP instead of those.

 

[kreynolds]

I didn't mean access vis-a-vis the DM. I meant the access that various classes have or don't have via the rules in the Player's Handbook.

Then I still don't know what "access" you're referring to.

Why shouldn't I assume that the core rules are being used instead of a variant specific to one campaign setting?

Don't assume, if you can help it (everyone does it though, to some degree at least). Assumptions defeat the purpose of a discussion.

But to answer your question more directly, I don't assume the core rules are being used for XP rewards for one reason...they suck.

Seriously, they're flawed, and if the designers themselves felt it necessary to revamp it in another book, that says something in and of itself.

The FRCS system doesn't help to ameliorate the problem that occurs when everyone can buy powers.

If by "problem" you mean the upward-curve in power and flat-line of character level, I never said it did.

Since everyone is the same level (but overpowered relative to that level) the differences with the FRCS system don't solve anything.

I agree, but I never argued that. In fact, I supported that in my second post by saying that I prefer to use ECL mods.

In essence -- once again spending that XP gave them the ability to acquire XP at a faster rate.

If he doesn't get killed, of course, which is quite likely that he will. If he does manage to survive, however, he won't be any more powerful than he was before. His gear is meant to count at half cost if he makes it, and he's still limited by wealth. If he gives any of that gear to his fellows, it counts against them in full, and they're still limited by wealth. The system as designed takes this into account, and while they may accumulate a whole lot of gear, its your job, the DM, to make sure they don't accumulate too much. Its either that, or you adjust the world around them. Either work.

Looking at it this way, I'd say that the FRCS system takes the item creation rules and simply increases the XP-feedback loop problem (though since it's only one character it's not to the same extent that occurs if everyone does it with XP trade for powerups).

I don't see the problem. If the spellcaster makes his own stuff, the rules say he can have twice as much stuff. In other words, he is supposed to have a lot of stuff if he makes it himself. And if he does make it all himself, then adventuring can get really really dangerous. Anyways, I'm not seeing the breakdown that you're seeing.

Typically, some of those items will be spread amongst the various party members rather than hoarded by that one character, no?

Typically? I'd say no, but the question is irrelevant anyway. The typical spellcasters I've seen have been wizards, and when the spell research costs are enforced, they need every bit of gold they can get. Selling magic items makes money. Giving them away doesn't. Besides, whether or not the character feels obligated to make items for themselves or their friends is entirely dependent upon the character/player in question. The point is that the item creation has a choice as to whether or not he gives his stuff to his friends, and the system is designed to accomodate that.

It's worse if everyone in the party can buy powers for XP, though, because when that occurs you no longer have any mechanism for gauging appropriate challenges nor assigning appropriate XP rewards.

ECL. Works for me.

With the core rules XP system, at least the average party level is not as heavily effected by the introduction of only one hard-to-evaluate-for-EL character.

Perhaps, but the core XP system screws lower level characters. Its as simple as that. Its a matter of preference which one is used. I use the FRCS. You use the DMG. Now that we have established that, we need not go any further with it.

However, I would like to point out that characters don't have Encounter Level ratings unless they're the encounter. If you meant ECL, then I still disagree with your statement. I'm trying to understand your point of view, but aside from tracking power levels (to which there is a definitive solution), I don't see a problem.

 

[kreynolds]

...one of the early house rules which I introduced was the ability to spend xps to gain skill ranks...

Dude, I sooo want to see that! Can I? Can I? Can I?

 

[kreynolds]

What I have not heard is one good reason why I should use XP instead of those.

Read Savage Species. It has over 200 pages of reasons.

 

[kenjib]

I agree, but I never argued that. In fact, I supported that in my second post by saying that I prefer to use ECL mods.

Yeah, it would help these mechanics if they came with an ECL system to counterbalance. As it is for now you just have to eyeball it. I misread that the first time as "EL". Sorry about that!

What's your system for applying ECL to a character based on the abilities he buys?

Read Savage Species. It has over 200 pages of reasons.

Every page of the book is used to describe a system for spending XP to gain abilities independent of levelling, prestige classes, and feats? I thought it converted monsters to level progressions, along with a slew of new prestige classes, feats, equipment, and other goodies?

 

[kreynolds]

Yeah, it would help these mechanics if they came with an ECL system to counterbalance. As it is for now you just have to eyeball it.

Well, both Savage Species and Soldarin have amazing guidelines to help you eyeball it, so most of the mechanics are there.

I misread that the first time as "EL". Sorry about that!

No problem.

What's your system for applying ECL to a character based on the abilities he buys?

I've been testing two different methods, and both involve the concept of prestige races. With one, you spend XP and gain special abilities in +1 ECL chunks. In the other, you "purchase" levels in the prestige race, much like you gain levels in a regular class. When you gain a level in a class normally, you don't spend XP, but at the same time, you do. The only XP available for you to spend, in any system, is the XP you have between levels. All of the XP you have from previous levels is already "spent" anyway, so, you spend XP either way.

Every page of the book is used to describe a system for spending XP to gain abilities independent of levelling, prestige classes, and feats?

No. There are more than 200 pages.

I thought it converted monsters to level progressions, along with a slew of new prestige classes, feats, equipment, and other goodies?

It does, but it does so using level adjustments and ECL. The concept of both level adjustments and ECL is not limited to Savage Species. It's been around since the DMG and the FRCS. Its a very versatile concept.

 

[Hardhead]

Just to throw in my two cents, I'm against it for the same reason others have mentioned.


- Z a c h