Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tom B1" data-source="post: 8455942" data-attributes="member: 6879023">When I was running Stargate SG-21 (a D20 based off Spycraft), I figured out all the curves used for the various levels so the characters could multi-class better. It was a bit of a calculational effort for a time, but once I was done, it was straightforward in use. I get the notion that the less elegant parts can be sorted by the DM ahead of time and baked into something easily used by the players. One of my issues with E6 was that you grow fast-ish, then you just cap out and used feats which were the major downfall (over the long term) in 3.x series games. The difference between optimized feat trees and a more eclectic collection of feat choices was huge at higher levels. And building higher level NPCs using player rules meant the GM had to know all the different feat trees and the ways to get to certain abilities which made a high level NPC party hard to build (slow) and a bit overwhelming in play (slowed the game). I though perhaps it would be more interesting way to do it would be to take some of the idea of E6 and stretch it over 10-12 levels.Character Advancement<table style='width: 100%'><tr><th>Experience Points</th><th>Revised Level</th><th>Original Level</th></tr><tr><td>0</td><td>0.5</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>300</td><td>1.0</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>900</td><td>1.5</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>2,700</td><td>2.0</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>6,500</td><td>2.5</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>14,000</td><td>3.0</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>23,000</td><td>3.5</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>34,000</td><td>4.0</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>48,000</td><td>4.5</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>64,000</td><td>5.0</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>85,000</td><td>5.5</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>100,000</td><td>6.0</td><td>12</td></tr></table><table style='width: 100%'><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>I feel like doing this would let the characters do more adventures before capping out while still preserving the final capped level. Obviously I'd have to figure out the best way to split a level's gains across two levels. But like your approach, the work gets done by the GM then the players just have a different progression chart. I might want to tamper with the particular progression of XP to encourage a reasonably quick progression to 1.5 or 2.0 and then a stead progression between 2.0 to 4.0 or 4.5 and then make the last 3-4 levels the long play zone. What are the benefits of this approach: 1. You stretch the length of the campaign without going too far into the heroic fantasy tier. 2. You still get to give players rewards (albeit more modestly) fairly regularly. I'd also do what some folks have done and make particular higher level spells or abilities you want in the game to be allowed as Rituals or (in the case of spells at least) enabled by 'cooperative casting' (a way to let multiple casters share in a higher level cast). I'm not certain it is 'better' than what you've suggested (could be worse in play I suppose) but it appeals to my sense of a more even progression and I'm not too font of handing out feats period, let along a whack of them at the highest level. In my sense of splitting things up: The half level would probably gain: Half the HDSome of the spells or spell pointsHave to look at class power gains, prof bonus, new profficiencies, etc. and figure out how to split them out. I've always wanted characters to gain more non-combat skills, so that might be something I increment as I've always liked more non-combat focus (exploration, social interaction, and other pillars that D&D has inherently - expansion/growth being an example). Spells would stay in discrete levels but the spell progression might change a bit to make this work across a stretched number of levels.</blockquote>

Verification