Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nonlethal Force" data-source="post: 3402311" data-attributes="member: 35788">No, you're right here.&nbsp; That's how I do it.&nbsp; I guess I was too quick to jump up and defend math that I overstated my example.&nbsp; So ... 300 XP divided by 4 = 75 XP.&nbsp; [I used 4 because it would be an average party.&nbsp; If you are using 7, it becomes even more minute]&nbsp; That's a big difference, although still not insignificant.Also a valid point.&nbsp; As I think consistancy throughout the campaign is more significant that the actual method.&nbsp; Personally, if a druid is worth Y XP and his animal companion is worth Z XP then I dont think it is difficult to do (Y-Z)/(# of players).&nbsp; But, to each their own.&nbsp; So long as whichever method the DM chooses I think it is most important to be consistant.&nbsp; I appreciate the apology, and reciprocate if necessary.&nbsp; And, I am in full agreement with your assessment of 2e.&nbsp; All that really needs to be said in support of an arguement against the mathematical complexity of 2e is THAC0.&nbsp; Sometimes I felt that I needed calculus to make sure I did THAC0 correctly!I don't want to return to 2e.&nbsp; In fact, I like the ease of 3.x.&nbsp; However, I also enjoy that in some cases the streamlined nature of 3.x means that I can add complexity where I as a DM feel I want to add it.&nbsp; But, I fully respect a DM who says &quot;I'd rather follow the K.I.S.S. rule&quot; so long as they are consistant!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nonlethal Force, post: 3402311, member: 35788"] No, you're right here. That's how I do it. I guess I was too quick to jump up and defend math that I overstated my example. So ... 300 XP divided by 4 = 75 XP. [I used 4 because it would be an average party. If you are using 7, it becomes even more minute] That's a big difference, although still not insignificant. Also a valid point. As I think consistancy throughout the campaign is more significant that the actual method. Personally, if a druid is worth Y XP and his animal companion is worth Z XP then I dont think it is difficult to do (Y-Z)/(# of players). But, to each their own. So long as whichever method the DM chooses I think it is most important to be consistant. I appreciate the apology, and reciprocate if necessary. And, I am in full agreement with your assessment of 2e. All that really needs to be said in support of an arguement against the mathematical complexity of 2e is THAC0. Sometimes I felt that I needed calculus to make sure I did THAC0 correctly! I don't want to return to 2e. In fact, I like the ease of 3.x. However, I also enjoy that in some cases the streamlined nature of 3.x means that I can add complexity where I as a DM feel I want to add it. But, I fully respect a DM who says "I'd rather follow the K.I.S.S. rule" so long as they are consistant! [/QUOTE]

Verification