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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3216249" data-attributes="member: 141">Thing is, if total wealth is cubic, then the amount your wealth changes each level is quadratic.  If your total wealth is quadratic, then the amount your wealth changes each level is linear.  If your wealth is linear, then the change each level is constant.  If your wealth is constant, your wealth doesn't change at all from one level to the next. In none of these cases could you use the same model for both total wealth and the wealth earned in the course of going up a level.If you want to use the same model for wealth and leveling up wealth, it has to be an exponential function; your wealth would double ever "x" levels, where x would be determined by us. I think such a system would break very quickly, though; I wouldn't recommend it.I like the cubic wealth system, too; better than the ELH system, at least.  And while I don't want to follow it rigidly, I'd like wide discrepancies to have an explanation.  For instance, you might want equipment to play less of a role as you go up in levels, and feats to be correspondingly stronger.  And so you make feats proportionate to the cube of the level (a fraction of total wealth, as you have it).That would be fine; I was balking at it because if a level's worth of (cubic) wealth was two feats, and two feats were a level's worth of wealth, then the relation should be quadratic, not cubic.  But adjust the expectation, and that's fine.Do you *want* feats to be proportionately more important than items the higher you go?  If so, then we should use the fraction of total wealth formula; no matter what formula we use, a feat should be the equivalent of a magic item worth some fraction of total wealth (1/20 for a SU ability, 1/40 for an EX ability).Then the question arises of how powerful a high level feat should be. Cubic wealth with proportionate feats might be too steep.  If so, then the level^2 x 2000 model would be worth re-examining.The cubic wealth formula won't segue into UK's system until level 100; as far as I'm concerned, that's as good as "never".  I won't let that stand in the way of balancing our system properly.Oh, but if you want the balance between feats and items to remain the same, then we have to use a quadratic method of estimating feats if we use a cubic wealth model.  There's no way we can keep the proportion the same if we keep the degree the same.</blockquote>

Verification