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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anubis" data-source="post: 409571" data-attributes="member: 2358">You use one broken system to justify another broken system? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek!    :o"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" />  Your system is(ECL^4)*5correct?Well . . .(115^4)*5 = 874,503,125So now you're the one advocating the use of Rule 0 and DM Discretion where a system should be in place?Look, you can't just Rule 0 the matter or force DM Discretion, not in this case.  Allow me to explain . . .The treasure per encounter is extrapolated directly from the wealth tables.  As such, that means that treasure found by characters will make up the greatest portion of that character's wealth.  You seem to assume that ALL items made by higher level characters would be created by the party spellcaster when, in fact, most items will have been found through adventuring.  Of course a character with 800,000,000 wealth didn't create most of his items!  No, he FOUND those items on adventures.THAT is the premise behind the wealth calculations.  Indeed, many items will be created, but MOST will be found.  That is why characters are allowed to spend the wealth as per the guidelines in the ELH.  That's why there is a limit of no items worth more than 25% of wealth, and only three worth more than 10%.  It's because characters FIND most items.  That also means that a DM simply can't say "you can't have that" if that item is well within the wealth guidelines set forth in ALL the rules that have been released thus far.Allow me to correct myself.  "The character could easily defeat any deity found in Deities & Demigods."So then why do you not take that into consideration when dealing with wealth?  Okay, how about this, under your system:ECL 320 = CR 60 = Wealth 52,428,800,000ECL 351 = CR 60 = Wealth 75,892,432,010You think the ECL 320 would be able to put up a challenge against the ECL 351, despite the 20 BILLION in wealth difference?  Gimme a break!  The ECL 351 would stomp the ECL 320 into oblivion!My point is that NO non-arithmatic formula could possibly work at these levels. He sure could find one, though, especially if he were Level 320!  Sure it does.  Think about it.  You're basically saying that characters are unable to own items worth more than around 10,000,000 simply because such items take YEARS to make.  If a character with 50,000,000,000 wealth isn't allowed to own any item worth more than 100,000,000, why bother having that much wealth?No, instead they FIND these powerful items as part of treasure.  Everything else is a moot point and not part of the rules, nor does it go along with the word or the spirit of those rules.It's an arithmatic formula or bust, plain and simple.  I think I've shown this time and time again.  Fine, but using your formula, a character with ECL 100 will still crush a Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon WITHOUT A PROBLEM.  Likely without even a scratch.  Test it, you'll see.Limit the items, and wealth is worthless.  Why would you just leave billions lying around unused?  You can't spend it on anything good and items take too long to create.  I'm telling you, with wealth, it is MOSTLY items FOUND, not created or bought.I know, you're gonna talk about the intangibles such as favors and being friends with deities and owning empires and the such.  I'm sorry, but most PERSONAL *wealth* should not and does not cover these things.  Yeah, SOME wealth will be allocated like that, but not most.  Most is in the magical items, simple.I intend my wealth formula to calculate wealth in terms of possessions like magical items and such ONLY, not the intangibles that are nigh impossible to put a value on.Okay, I have a question.  Why does it matter if the two systems are compatible when one is meant to wholly REPLACE the other?  The two systems are similar, yes, but not meant to be used together.  The new system replaces the old system 100%, in terms and everything else.ROTFLMAO<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Simple but ENTIRELY inaccurate.  You say limit the items, which goes against the spirit of the rules of getting better items as you gain levels.  I say limit the wealth so that those gains are controlled.  I think it is obvious which method is better.As for your formula equating to the WotC formula . . . Well . . . If the WotC formula was at all accurate, this wouldn't even be an issue!  Fact is, just as WotC's ECL/CR formula were utterly inaccurate at higher levels, so too are their ideas of wealth!  You just argued with your own point there, man.Don't use a broken system to justify yours.  ECL/CR had to be changed, and wealth has to be changed along with it, plain and simple.  Limiting items just hurts the game itself.  Besides, how would you limit the items?  More and more expensive items NEVER cost less money or less time to create, so the limit on item prices would be totally stagnant!  I'm sorry, but that simply doesn't work.You try it out in a game, you will see that I am right on this issue.  You may be the man with the plan when it comes to ECL (we'll see), but I've already shown that the arithmatic formula for wealth works better than any other.</blockquote>

Verification