Is this a legal method of converting gp to xp

[Kae'Yoss]

KaeYoss:
Well i never said i'm a good character. My method is merely a way for you to maintain non-evil status in character.

You will have problems even to stay neutral if you kill innocent beings, only to gain power.

As for the gaming experience statement, be aware that it was to simply state that i am not new to this as some of the posters seem to imply.

As for not learning all those years perhaps you as a "oh great wise and holy teacher" will tell me what i have not learnt. Do not imply insults and i will refrain from doing so else it works both ways

You wanted to tell that you weren't new to the game. OK. If a guy who just started to play RPG has some Diablo notions, it's OK, since he must be made known to the way RPG works. If you still want to pull such tricks after tens of years of gaming, you simply haven't learned. It's no insult, it's reality.
And if you just do that to find loopholes, state it at once. People could imply that you said it only because they flamed you for it (my brother does that all the time).

Who is to judge what is considered correct or incorrect way of playing? You? WotC? Note that the rules give structure but do not force you to play in a certain style. That in effect is the attractiveness of RPGs, the unformed potential

I fail to see the potential of buying xp with gp via senseless methods.

As for a group that does not mind, mine does not. Most likely everyone will come with with a variant suitable for their own classes. If it proves to be an unassailable position ruleswise then the DM will come up with a house rule, we discuss/modify it as a group and implement it.

I'm _very_ happy that I don't have to play in that party. I like to be a power game from time to time, sometimes even bordering to munchkinism, but gp for xp is even beyond me.

My DM is not dumb, far from it, neither am i an idiot when i DM. However neither of us pulls silly stuff like having a paragon horse appear in a unnescapable confined space. Now the god of horses idea would be usable.

Fight fire with fire is what I say. And someone who suggests buying animals to kill them in order to gain will better _never_ use the word silly.

It's widely-used method of cutting outrageous players down to size to confront them with something strong when they think they face something weak. It will teach them that they can use metagame tactics - but the DM can as well, and he can always go one step beyond...

Again like i said, what is considered evil is not in another society. Tell me who or what defines what is evil, think about it.

There are universal truths (or whatever you call them): Killing helpless (or near-helpless) creatures just to gain personal power is always evil (it might be OK in a society, but that society will certainly be evil)

As for the DM following common sense, he has no problem with that. The rules do matter though as it is the structure of the game. Simply putting the onus of solving everything to the DM merely causes more problems to crop up (as well as being too tiring), which is why house rules are discussed by the entire group and implemented. The hard part of this is that 3e rules are integrated so all follow up effects must be thought out (this is where having a rules knowledgable group is useful)

He has no problem with you killing horses to gain XP? OMG! A meta-game encouraging DM. On second thought, I do want to play in your campaign. My character will carry a bucket of worms with him, and will have whirlwind attack and great cleave.....

 

[Rel]

By my reading of the rules, there is nothing illegal about what you propose, Luis Fagoo. If you think that would be fun, have a blast.

If you are asking, "How would your group react to this tactic?", my answer is that no player in our group would tolerate another player doing this and no GM in our group would tolerate a player doing this.

As a GM, if a player did this, I'd let them get to about the 4th horse (while the other players stared on in horror and amazement) which would turn out to be Legendary.

And if this whole thing is a troll, I'm not sweating it. You've wasted a lot more of your time on it than I have mine.

 

[Luis Figoo]

You will have problems even to stay neutral if you kill innocent beings, only to gain power.

Unlikely, unless your alignment play is a one way trip only: Good->Evil. That would lead to illogical worlds

You wanted to tell that you weren't new to the game. OK. If a guy who just started to play RPG has some Diablo notions, it's OK, since he must be made known to the way RPG works. If you still want to pull such tricks after tens of years of gaming, you simply haven't learned. It's no insult, it's reality.
And if you just do that to find loopholes, state it at once. People could imply that you said it only because they flamed you for it (my brother does that all the time).

Heh, why should i bother stating anything? I have asked a relevant rules question in a forum called D&D rules. Think about it

Using yourself as a guideline for how other people should behave will always lead to disappoinment, you'll understand that someday. Btw, what is it i haven't learnt?

I fail to see the potential of buying xp with gp via senseless methods.

Well it may be senseless to you, but look at my original question. Is there anything blocking this ruleswise? The logical assumption would then be that the rules are flawed somewhere.

Sticking a patch with the words "Its metagaming. Its the DM's job to shut this situation down" does nothing to change the fact the rules are still flawed somewhere

Perfection may not exist but neither shoiuld one give up searching for it

It's widely-used method of cutting outrageous players down to size to confront them with something strong when they think they face something weak. It will teach them that they can use metagame tactics - but the DM can as well, and he can always go one step beyond...

Yeah but think about it. Seriously. D&D is a group game, there are 3 ways to change
i) DM
ii) Player
iii) The rules

i) and ii) will destroy the group dynamic (the first refers to the DM vs players position you proposed). iii) will create even ground, gues which one my group chose

There are universal truths (or whatever you call them): Killing helpless (or near-helpless) creatures just to gain personal power is always evil (it might be OK in a society, but that society will certainly be evil)

Well i would be great if you could make a list of your universal truths and post it for discussion in a philosphical forum. You would be surprised

He has no problem with you killing horses to gain XP? OMG! A meta-game encouraging DM. On second thought, I do want to play in your campaign. My character will carry a bucket of worms with him, and will have whirlwind attack and great cleave.....

Hmm, either you fail to understand my posts or you have ignored points that do not fit your answer. I have repeatedly said that my DM will find a way (if possible ruleswise) to block this.

You could try a WWA/GC combo (been there done that long time ago) in our game. Off the top of my head, heres a few more you could try
Silly Simulacrum with Empower
Fabricate for cheap gold
Plane jumping for endless spells for casters
Armored constructs

I think those were the latest tried

 

[Luis Figoo]

By my reading of the rules, there is nothing illegal about what you propose, Luis Fagoo. If you think that would be fun, have a blast.

If you are asking, "How would your group react to this tactic?", my answer is that no player in our group would tolerate another player doing this and no GM in our group would tolerate a player doing this.

As a GM, if a player did this, I'd let them get to about the 4th horse (while the other players stared on in horror and amazement) which would turn out to be Legendary.

And if this whole thing is a troll, I'm not sweating it. You've wasted a lot more of your time on it than I have mine.

its Figoo, thanks

As you have pointed out, if this was a troll post i would have been stupid to have posted so much.

If i truly wanted a troll post, i would have said "My paladin killed some baby kobolds, is it evil?". Would have been much more effective too

 

[hammymchamham]

Why don't you use your GP to buy orphans or beggars, and then slay them? I bet they'd cost less than a horse, and they might have a few levels (if they are adult beggars). Sure, that might be evil, but then you could have a soft spot for animals (dogs, cats, horses), and protect them. Buy them, and release them into the wild. Releasing them would be good right? You could even have a soft spot for Orcs and protect them from adventurers trying to kill them. You could even have a soft spot for any of the creatures that inhabit your world, and protect them from evil adventurers, thats good right? But of course, you hate orphans and beggars for some reason (maybe an orphan killed your parents, or a beggar robed your family), so go pay the 10 gold for an orphan and kill the orphan. The protection of other beings will offset the evil act of killing orphans and beggars... Plus you'll get more XP per GP

 

[mikebr99]

This has got to THE most useless threat I've ever seen!

Please let it fade into obscurity...

Go to the Wizards messageboards with the other pre-teens, and leave this board to the adults... with real questions and real problems to deal with... geez!

 

[Caliban]

Hmm, either you fail to understand my posts or you have ignored points that do not fit your answer. I have repeatedly said that my DM will find a way (if possible ruleswise) to block this.

What I'm failing to understand is this: Why is it even necessary for your DM to address this issue?

Would you or the other players really try this if your DM doesn't stop it?

If you wouldn't, then this is a pointless discussion.

If you would, then I pity your DM and hope he can find some mature players in the near future.

 

[Luis Figoo]

Why don't you use your GP to buy orphans or beggars, and then slay them? I bet they'd cost less than a horse, and they might have a few levels (if they are adult beggars). Sure, that might be evil, but then you could have a soft spot for animals (dogs, cats, horses), and protect them. Buy them, and release them into the wild. Releasing them would be good right? You could even have a soft spot for Orcs and protect them from adventurers trying to kill them. You could even have a soft spot for any of the creatures that inhabit your world, and protect them from evil adventurers, thats good right? But of course, you hate orphans and beggars for some reason (maybe an orphan killed your parents, or a beggar robed your family), so go pay the 10 gold for an orphan and kill the orphan. The protection of other beings will offset the evil act of killing orphans and beggars... Plus you'll get more XP per GP

Actually this is faulty in a number of places
Finding an adult begger who is CR 2 (taking into account reduced CR due to lack of equipment) is more difficult than finding horses.

Killing sentient beings would require much more good deeds done for animals to reduce the deficit unless your DM is one who places all life as equal.

Fighting off the local law enforcers for killing people might be more trouble than its worth

Purchase of orphans and beggers is much harder to establish than simply buying animals

Answer your question?

 

[hammymchamham]

Actually this is faulty in a number of places
Finding an adult begger who is CR 2 (taking into account reduced CR due to lack of equipment) is more difficult than finding horses.

Killing sentient beings would require much more good deeds done for animals to reduce the deficit unless your DM is one who places all life as equal.

Fighting off the local law enforcers for killing people might be more trouble than its worth

Purchase of orphans and beggers is much harder to establish than simply buying animals

Answer your question?

So your world is populated by millions of horses and 3 beggers? And if the local law enforcers come... more to kill. I mean, in that case its self defense. So you spend maybe 10 gold for a few orphans or begars, kill them and get the XP... then when the law comes, you kill them and get more XP. You could go from major city to major city, go the the orphanage and spend 100 gold for 25 kids, lead them out of the city away from the city and kill them. Get your XP. Then go stalk some NPC adventurers who are going to go orc hunting. Since you're the protector of Orcs, its good. Kill the PCs.

Of course, you could always take a level in Paladin, go around detecting evil on all the orphans and beggars, find the orphans and beggars that are evil, and only kill them.

 

[Luis Figoo]

What I'm failing to understand is this: Why is it even necessary for your DM to address this issue?

Do you truly have players that would try this if your DM doesn't stop them?

If you don't, then this is a pointless discussion.

If you do, why are you even playing with them?

The idea here is to have a fixed system as close as fool proof as possible. Part of it lies in the group history. After discovering the many problems of Marvel Superheroes RPG, 3 of the members tried creating one from scratch. The project halted after some time when it was shown to have a number of structral faults.

When 3e came along, it was discussed on getting it fixed based on the premise that an existing structure would be easier to fix than creating one that is foolproof from scratch

As for the players, yes they would definately try it, simply because it could be done and to see how the DM would handle it. Both the DM and i are fine with this and do enjoy the process of discovery and fixing (in between the plots that occur in game).

Any real thorny problems without a rule based answer is talked about out and ironed out after the game session so as not to disrupt the plot flow. The house rule is then implemented next session and the idea tried to see if the fix holds

I posted my idea to see if there was any rule that i missed out in considering