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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GuardianLurker" data-source="post: 758516" data-attributes="member: 786">Xeriar, Seasong:Thanks muchly. I'm going to be twiddling lots of bits tonight I'm sure. (*Muwhaha* - tremble in fear little bits!)As for Cr-based/age-based enhancement:I think that's the best idea so far, although I think the curve there isn't quite so steep.Maybe a rate of 1 level/2 years for levels 1-3, 1-2 levels/3 years for 4-9, and then a sudden drop off as the common CRs (<1-3) start dropping off the XP chart, followed by  an increasing decline.Also, I like the age-based stuff (in concept, since I haven't looked at it yet), but I worry at the divisions - the default age categories seem *way* to broad, and 5 year chunks just semi-arbitrary.Also, something to keep in mind that if you want "wacked-out elves" (and similar long-lifers), instead of varying the years-per-age-stripe (which is what Xeriar seems to imply), you just keep it constant.The problem is, without some form of "relative period" adjustment, no matter what advancement basis is used - CR, XPs/year, or whatever - the long-lived races (elves, dwarves, dragons, etc) will have *incredible* level maxes. And see the recent "who rules the world" thread for the problems that implies.And now for the comments and queries:Seasong - one of the issues this is trying to address is having the *need* to limit top city sizes; to provide the tools that allow the GM to see "if you want top city size X, you need _this_ kind of base (in magic and pop), and you'll get Y level adventurers."One of the things I think we all need to avoid is the unstated assumptions, we're working with - like Xeriar's whacked elves, some will want that, so while we can include it (or not), we need to be prepared to defend/state why we did, and understand how it changes things when we do the other. Even just something as simple as changing the "base ratio" can give wildly different scenarios.Also, I looked at the Census data, and at first glance, it seems to imply a slightly different grouping; in particular, instead of single cities, there seem to be "clusters". You have the top-most city, then 1-2 a significant fraction (75-80% of top) below it, then 2-3 the next step down, and so on.Ultimately, the goal is to produce something very like a "Society Builders' Handbook" maybe even with tools, suitable for use in building societies for any campaign, not just psuedo-medieval-european ones. Heck , if we do it right, we might even be able to sell it to a publisher (or maybe not). Though if we intend to go that route, we 'll have to leave the boards soon.</blockquote>

Verification