Calculating XP drives me crazy

RangerWickett said:
I personally think 3 for 1 is too steep, since it means spellcasters just won't use action points, and they'll rely on other PCs to get them out of a jam, because in your system a mage's action points are effectively worth more than a non-spellcaster's.

I think that's a feature, not a bug. Most of the time, those XP-draining spells are FOR the other players. Res, True Res, Wish, Miracle....look at the uses of those spells in game, and in PC's game in particular. Often, they go to the greater good....under this system, teamwork is encouraged, and the spellcaster doesn't have to bear the brunt of the xp weight for casting said spells. Many DMs allow other PCs to pay the xp cost for a Res or even some crafting options...this just formalizes that relationship.

One of the stated reasons for the change in xp calculation in 3.5 (and one I agree with) was that crafters and raised/resurrected characters could very quickly fall behind the rest of the party and never catch back up. I like that this system encourages group participation. One reason my players never did a lot of intra-party crafting was the prohibitive cost to the spellcasters; it was easier to buy the Boots of Striding than it was to have the cleric or wizard craft them. This system makes it a valid choice...the opportunity cost is relatively high, but that's the payoff for group participation. Does it mean the fighter will think twice before sacrificing his AP? Sure. Does it mean that he and other party members can't just be used as XP-batteries for the crafters? Yes. Otherwise, you might have a late-level training scenario where one or more characters suddenly fuel a crafting bonanza.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Piratecat said:
Okay, what did I miss?

One last point that I think has been made elsewhere, but which I haven't seen in this thread: Charisma. Action Points are a great place to add in a bonus for everyone's favorite dump stat.

Possible uses (pick ONE please):
- You gain a bonus to any one die roll equal to Cha + 1d6
- Every level, you gain 3 + Cha + 1/2 level AP. 3 + Cha are treated specially.

Addendum:
- When you return from the dead, you permanently lose one point of Cha.

Cheers, -- N
 

Hey PC...

Have you ever thought of adapting the death rules from Skull & Bones?

Even if you don't use the random number of lives, using assorted permanent disabilities or disfigurements as a penalty for being brought back from the dead might work in this instance.

Another option would be to prematurely age the character by a certain number of years, whenever he's brought back from the dead. Aging in this manner counts toward the physical penalties for age category, but not for the mental bonuses.
 


Nifft, I think I'll divorce AP from charisma. In a campaign where two paladins have absolutely stunning charismas, and charisma already gets a bigger workout than it does in most campaigns, that just seems safer to me.

On a previous note, one of the things I like with the 3:1 ratio is that encourages every concerned member in the group to donate some AP to the cause -- but by no means is it a no-brainer, as it would be with a 1:1 ratio. If six people donate 3 AP each, that's an extra 6000 xp, or enough to create an item worth 150,000 gp. . . before the actual crafter donates any. We're playing at a character level where no one in the group is going to start with less than 15 APs. Donating a handful of APs to help out the casters doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

If I reduced it to 2:1 or 1:1, I'd have major concerns about opportunity costs. Under normal rules, every decision to cast wish or miracle is a big deal. Under a system where you have a "free" experience pool, it suddenly becomes a no-brainer. In fact, the main reason to even use APs as part of this system is to provide an opportunity cost, to make an xp-spending decision a little more difficult.

Think about it. Currently no one can help share xp with an item or a spell. Even at a 3:1 ratio, it's an advantage over right now.

And ultimately, I'm hoping to provide more cool stuff for the non-spellcasters to do. That's the same goal that the high-lvl fighter feats in the new PHBII have. If I make it really easy for the non-spellcasters to donate APs to spellcasters, to my mind it minimizes the importance and uniqueness of the non-spellcasters in the group.

Abraxas said:
Do lower level characters catch up to higher level characters?
Excellent point. The problem of unequal-level PCs is mitigated by the new death rules, but not entirely removed.

In a new campaign, the only time someone would be of lower level is if they start at lower level. Really, the best answer to this is probably for the DM to decide that they'd level sooner than other people. I think that since people will no longer lose levels for death or magic item construction, I'm better off just handling this on a case by case basis.
 
Last edited:

Piratecat said:
On a previous note, one of the things I like with the 3:1 ratio is that encourages every concerned member in the group to donate some AP to the cause -- but by no means is it a no-brainer, as it would be with a 1:1 ratio. If six people donate 3 AP each, that's an extra 6000 xp, or enough to create an item worth 150,000 gp. . . before the actual crafter donates any. We're playing at a character level where no one in the group is going to start with less than 15 APs. Donating a handful of APs to help out the casters doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

If I reduced it to 2:1 or 1:1, I'd have major concerns about opportunity costs. Under normal rules, every decision to cast wish or miracle is a big deal. Under a system where you have a "free" experience pool, it suddenly becomes a no-brainer. In fact, the main reason to even use APs as part of this system is to provide an opportunity cost, to make an xp-spending decision a little more difficult.

Think about it. Currently no one can help share xp with an item or a spell. Even at a 3:1 ratio, it's an advantage over right now.

And ultimately, I'm hoping to provide more cool stuff for the non-spellcasters to do. That's the same goal that the high-lvl fighter feats in the new PHBII have. If I make it really easy for the non-spellcasters to donate APs to spellcasters, to my mind it minimizes the importance and uniqueness of the non-spellcasters in the group.

If you're worried about there being too much XP to toss around for Wishes, why not have each AP be worth 250 or 333 XP, instead of 1000? With the system you're proposing you've still got the problem that spellcasters have to spend their AP to use class abilities, whereas other classes get to use AP to do things beyond their class abilities. Because spellcasters get so much greater a benefit from using their AP as XP (as compared to non-spellcasters), I predict that your spellcasting PCs won't be using action points to do 'action.'

Your fighters will be doing Final Fantasy Advent Children wuxia moves, and will be critting and making saves like real heroes, but your mages will be hoarding AP, afraid of wasting potentially THOUSANDS of XP worth of magic item creation.

You've basically created a double standard.
 

RangerWickett said:
You've basically created a double standard.
And to think that the campaign's OFFICIAL double standard is "Piratecat hates paladins!"

The difficult choice for spellcasters is deliberate, and I'm totally okay with that. I want it to be more difficult for spellcasters to decide when to spend an AP.

But they'll still have some available no matter what. That's why 5 AP are unable to be exchanged; no one has the option of turning in all their AP for XP. When the spellcasters really need it, they'll have access to an Action Point (at least five times). I feel this is a much better solution than making all AP available and reducing the amount each is worth.

Reducing the amount each AP is worth doesn't work for the values I want to achieve, unfortunately -- or if it does, I'm missing it. My goal is to make available a maximum XP pool of 1/2 lvl * 1000 xp. This is half the amount of xp that it would normally take that person to go up a level. Since this matches the AP forumla of 5 AP + 1/2/lvl, I'm left with the very simple formula of 1 AP = 1000 xp. Muck around with that, and the elegance of the formula goes all to hell.

Example: It normally takes 20,000 xp to go from 20th to 21th level. A 20th lvl PC gets 15 AP, 10 of which they can turn into an XP pool. Turning in all 10 of these APs would get that spellcaster 10,000 in their XP pool... exactly half of the XP that they would normally need to level up. Tah dah! Exactly what I'm shooting for.

This scales just about right; at 20th lvl it's enough for two wishes, or it's enough to make 250,000 gp worth of magic items (not that a given person in my game tends to have that much available cash, mind you.) I neither want the amount of available XP to be less than this, nor do I want to make it possible for the spellcaster to trade in ALL their AP for xp. Reduce the amount that each AP is worth, and you have a mess on your hands.

You're pretty sure that I'll have a double standard, but I think that if there is one it will be self-imposed. It's totally up to the spellcaster what they spend their APs on. If they think a wish or a temporary feat is most useful, they'll use it for that. If they think that crafting an item is most useful, they'll spend it on that. And if they really need to cast a wish but lack the APs? Well, then, other members of the party can help (albeit at a less efficient rate.)

Only playtesting will say whether or not I'm totally misguided, but this system seems to me as if it will work pretty well. I'll report back once (if) we implement it. And keep pointing out stuff I missed! I'm far from opposed to making changes, I just am not sure I agree with RW on this point.
 
Last edited:

Hey, just thought of something. What do I do for important NPCs such as cohorts?

I'm thinking 5 AP every level: enough to save their butt in times of crisis or pull the fat out of the fryer when really needed, not enough to be cooler than the hero. A player decides when a cohort uses their Action Points, not the DM, and the player is responsible for tracking them.
 
Last edited:

RangerWickett said:
If you're worried about there being too much XP to toss around for Wishes, why not have each AP be worth 250 or 333 XP, instead of 1000? W

Well, speaking for me, remember than 3 AP get's me 1000 versus 1 AP for the wizard is easier for me to remember than fractional numbers. "Let's Go Shopping!"

RangerWickett said:
Your fighters will be doing Final Fantasy Advent Children wuxia moves, and will be critting and making saves like real heroes, but your mages will be hoarding AP, afraid of wasting potentially THOUSANDS of XP worth of magic item creation.

You've basically created a double standard.

I think you're assuming a lot of crafting aforethought that I don't think will be taking place. In general, most crafting will take place during the training weeks. Enforcing some AP being only usable for actions and not xp helps promote that...but I expect crafting is more of an afterthought for the Defenders than a tangible goal. Action Points are a resource like anything else, and I expect if the opportunity comes to finish off the White King with a judicious use of an AP or two, or keeping the AP for crafting...the former will win, every time.

Remember, this system doesn't have to be balanced for everybody, necessarily, just for PC's game. That means you can be somewhat less fearful of munckiny results, and confident that the system can be reworked if problems arise.

Piratecat said:
Hey, just thought of something. What do I do for important NPCs such as cohorts?

For guys like Ioun...they change when you want them to. Period. For cohorts, you can stick to the rules you've been using, have them level when they're PC does or just level them at your choice. Personally, I'd say that a cohort has no action points of his own, but could borrow from his dependent-PCs pool. Otherwise, the Leadership feat becomes too powerful.
 

Piratecat said:
Hey, just thought of something. What do I do for important NPCs such as cohorts?

I'm thinking 5 AP every level: enough to save their butt in times of crisis or pull the fat out of the fryer when really needed, not enough to be cooler than the hero. A player decides when a cohort uses their Action Points, not the DM, and the player is responsible for tracking them.
If you're going to use them, that would be the way I'd do it, although I kind of think that, if cohorts had action points, they'd be PCs. That might be a little bit harsh, though, even if it's a way to really separate the PCs from their retainers and sidekicks.

Nick
 

Remove ads

Top