Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Absolute XP
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8244768" data-attributes="member: 70468"><p>There are mitigating factors in my campaign (see below). The intent wasn’t to justify it as a good practice so much as to indicate experience with the rule. I agree with <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/absolute-xp.679357/post-8244725" target="_blank">your subsequent post</a> that it’s not a good idea in the general case to have a significant gap. My practice historically has been to have new characters start with enough XP to reach the lowest level in the party (so 0 XP in PF2 but at a level higher than 1st), which results in a small gap (a level or so). I didn’t want new characters to leapfrog existing ones (especially since they got to pick their starting treasure).</p><p></p><p>My sandbox campaign is an exception to my usual practice, and that’s for thematic reasons. The PCs are members of an expedition, so there is a pool of extant characters to pick from when creating a new one, but we don’t create all of those up front. It would be tedious to create 40 characters all at once, and it preclude using options that weren’t available at the time (e.g., the expedition’s majordomo is a summoner). The idea was that players should eventually want to bring other characters along to boost them up (and increase the expedition’s base). While most players had multiple characters, they never mixed the groups. We’ll see how things go in OSE, but that’s probably a failed experiment.</p><p></p><p>As for that new character, there are a couple of things that allowed her to contribute. The first is we were using Proficiency Without Level. While you’re still fragile, everyone is operating on a similar scale. A higher level creature isn’t impossible to hit, and it doesn’t automatically crit you. That’s one of the things I had in mind when I wrote, “their ability to contribute may be limited depending on the size of the level gap.” She could hit things and make skill checks. If we were doing core proficiency, it would have sucked for her.</p><p></p><p>The other one is that I don’t run combat as an arena sport. My campaign leans much more towards combat as war, and dungeons are designed naturalistically. This campaign in particular is also exploration-driven rather than story-driven. When the new character joined, the PCs were exploring a megadungeon. There are multiple paths through the dungeon, so the party can avoid fights if it wants (e.g., they always avoided the passage with kruthiks). I also leaned pretty heavily on accomplishment XP when I ran PF2, so the party got rewarded for doing things rather than just fighting monsters (and I was looking to reduce XP from combat further and add XP for finding treasure [excluding magic items]).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kenada, post: 8244768, member: 70468"] There are mitigating factors in my campaign (see below). The intent wasn’t to justify it as a good practice so much as to indicate experience with the rule. I agree with [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/absolute-xp.679357/post-8244725']your subsequent post[/URL] that it’s not a good idea in the general case to have a significant gap. My practice historically has been to have new characters start with enough XP to reach the lowest level in the party (so 0 XP in PF2 but at a level higher than 1st), which results in a small gap (a level or so). I didn’t want new characters to leapfrog existing ones (especially since they got to pick their starting treasure). My sandbox campaign is an exception to my usual practice, and that’s for thematic reasons. The PCs are members of an expedition, so there is a pool of extant characters to pick from when creating a new one, but we don’t create all of those up front. It would be tedious to create 40 characters all at once, and it preclude using options that weren’t available at the time (e.g., the expedition’s majordomo is a summoner). The idea was that players should eventually want to bring other characters along to boost them up (and increase the expedition’s base). While most players had multiple characters, they never mixed the groups. We’ll see how things go in OSE, but that’s probably a failed experiment. As for that new character, there are a couple of things that allowed her to contribute. The first is we were using Proficiency Without Level. While you’re still fragile, everyone is operating on a similar scale. A higher level creature isn’t impossible to hit, and it doesn’t automatically crit you. That’s one of the things I had in mind when I wrote, “their ability to contribute may be limited depending on the size of the level gap.” She could hit things and make skill checks. If we were doing core proficiency, it would have sucked for her. The other one is that I don’t run combat as an arena sport. My campaign leans much more towards combat as war, and dungeons are designed naturalistically. This campaign in particular is also exploration-driven rather than story-driven. When the new character joined, the PCs were exploring a megadungeon. There are multiple paths through the dungeon, so the party can avoid fights if it wants (e.g., they always avoided the passage with kruthiks). I also leaned pretty heavily on accomplishment XP when I ran PF2, so the party got rewarded for doing things rather than just fighting monsters (and I was looking to reduce XP from combat further and add XP for finding treasure [excluding magic items]). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Absolute XP
Top