Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lorehead" data-source="post: 2884752" data-attributes="member: 40086">I'll start you off: how does this new system handle the XP cost of spells and crafted items?  And how does this solve the problem I pointed out?  Increasing the gap between the XP cost of low levels and the XP cost of higher levels makes the situation worse, not better.  It makes the cost of one or two gestalt levels trivial even faster.Even if you bring back more of the essential traits of AD&D multi-classing (double XP cost for each new level, can't turn multi-classing off, can't add new classes later), you'd exhume and reanimate its original flaws while adding new ones.  For example, half XP in each class combined with double XP for the next level works out to being one level behind in both classes at any given time.  That was overpowered then, and it's overpowered now.  You'd also create new problems that AD&D didn't have, because it limited the possible combinations of race and class, imposed level limits to supposedly balance these characters at the high end, and used kits instead of prestige classes to customize characters (with the few options that resembled prestige classes limited to dual-classing humans).If you're just going to put the characters a fixed number of levels behind, don't muck with the XP table unless you've thought through the consequences.  Assign a LA.  Drop any idea of "splitting XP" between two or more classes.  This idea does not work, and will never work short of cutting out every subsystem that refers to XP and replacing it with something new.By the way, here was <a href="http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2814586&postcount=11" target="_blank">my attempt</a> to tweak the system.</blockquote>

Verification