Is this legal?

[Cheiromancer]

Hi Sage!

My reference for the system (cleverly named after myself, *and* after the greek letters that look like X and P, *and* which also give the initial sounds for "Challenge Rating") is in this thread. I'm talking about adventure designers including supplemental information to help calculate xp.

...there are three different systems of dividing xp.

1. xp is divided equally. Everyone gets the same xp. (3.0 method)
2. xp is divided based on levels:
. . . 2a. Higher level characters get more xp. Everyone levels at the same rate. (Grim Tales method)
. . . 2b. Lower level characters get more xp. Lower level characters advance much faster. (3.5 method)

Each method requires a different method of calculation, and I think people get confused about what they are supposed to do. In fact, I'm a little hazy. Let's see...

Chi = add up the squares of the monsters CRs, and multiply by 300
Rho = add up the squares of the players CRs.

In a pre-published adventure, you need to print Chi for each encounter. At the beginning you have to lead the DM through the steps of calculating one of three quantities:

Method 1. Total party level
Method 2a. Rho.
Method 2b. number of characters.

These quantities might change during the course of the adventure. Then for each encounter the DM has to choose a method:

Method 1. Divide Chi by the total party level. That's how much xp each person gets.

Method 2a. Divide Chi by Rho. Each character multiplies the result by their level; that's how much xp that character gets.

Method 2b. Divide Chi by the number of characters. Each character divides the result by their level; that's how much xp that character gets.

As a recipe it is not that hard, but I could see people getting their methods mixed up...

p.s. I appreciate the love, Wulf!

[edit]BTW, the CRs are according to UK's system, which for many monsters is about 1.5 times as large as the official WotC CRs. That's an added wrinkle that can be accounted for by changing the 300 to some other value. 150 might work well.[/edit]

 

[Altalazar]

Well, thanks, but in Mark's defense, it's not trivial-- and as I said in my first post, Sage needs to pay attention to those previous comments as well.

You should not be copying (or even referencing) ANYTHING from any WOTC hardcopy book-- no tables, no charts, no text, etc. and I think I've been consistent about not trivializing that-- while at the same time answering the question asked.

I'm speaking of trivial in the legal sense, given the circumstances, as I described above. For example, if you had a contract with someone to build them a 10 million dollar skyscraper, and the agreement included the requirement for a specific five dollar doorknocker on the front door, and through an honest mistake, you got the wrong doorknocker - technically, you'd be in breach of the contract, but legally, it is so trivial that the building owner could not use it as the basis of rescinding the contract - if he tried to do that in court, he'd be thrown out of court and perhaps even given sanctions. The proper response is just to ask you to fix the doorknocker, not to try to end the contract.

This was a situation of a misunderstanding resulting in some extra fine print on the legal page that was honestly thought to be needed - text that was likely hardly read by anyone who uses the site and was not part of the 'useful' part of the site. I think some here have a misconception about the way contract law works, which is understandable if you've not had several good classes on contract law.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

[edit]BTW, the CRs are according to UK's system, which for many monsters is about 1.5 times as large as the official WotC CRs. That's an added wrinkle that can be accounted for by changing the 300 to some other value. 150 might work well.[/edit]

Nope, won't make any difference. Don't confuse the newbs!

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

So since you bandy it about a lot online, is the Chi-Rho XP system somehow OGC?

Just a question ... to be honest, I use the GT spreadsheets I bought in my own design work. Guesstulating CRs for new creatures and suchnot.

--fje

 

[Zoatebix]

Yes - definately OGC.

Maybe we should slap a license on the level dependant awards thread, since that's the original "published" source...

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

And everyone knows that intent matters more than anything else in a court of law...

DEFENDANT: But, your honor, I didnt INTEND to download that MP3, it was an accident!
JUDGE: Oh, well, then! CASE DISMISSED SIR!!!

:ROLLEYES:

Note: IANAL

There are two parts required to prove guilt:
1. Demonstrate that the defendant actually performed the illegal act
2. Demonstrate that the defendant intended to perform the illegal act
note: it is not necessary to demonstrate that the defendant intended to break the law, only that he intended to perform an act prohibited by law

#2 is the reason why a plea of insanity can prove innocence. An insane person is not considered competent enough to form criminal intent, and so cannot break the law. There are often signs in stores saying "you break it, you bought it." These are usually not supported by law, because if the breakage is accidental, you have not committed vandalism since you did not intend to break the object. However, civil damages could still be sought for the value of the item, assuming a judge could be convinced that the accident could have been avoided if the defendant had been more careful...less negligent, in other words.

edit:
There is an encounter calculator at d20srd.org. Comments?

 

[Altalazar]

Note: IANAL

There are two parts required to prove guilt:
1. Demonstrate that the defendant actually performed the illegal act
2. Demonstrate that the defendant intended to perform the illegal act
note: it is not necessary to demonstrate that the defendant intended to break the law, only that he intended to perform an act prohibited by law

#2 is the reason why a plea of insanity can prove innocence. An insane person is not considered competent enough to form criminal intent, and so cannot break the law. There are often signs in stores saying "you break it, you bought it." These are usually not supported by law, because if the breakage is accidental, you have not committed vandalism since you did not intend to break the object. However, civil damages could still be sought for the value of the item, assuming a judge could be convinced that the accident could have been avoided if the defendant had been more careful...less negligent, in other words.

edit:
There is an encounter calculator at d20srd.org. Comments?

Yes. And I think the original poster you responded to confused the concept of proof with an element of a crime. Just because you might disbelieve a defendant's testimony about his intent doesn't mean that you don't have to prove intent to convict. More to the point, if the testimony is believed by the jury, no matter how unlikely it sounds, then the element of intent is not proven and therefore there can be no conviction on that crime. That's a common trip up they use on law school exams - giving fact patterns that sound unlikely, but are nonetheless factual, and then watching students fail as they 'don't believe the facts' and thus get the answer wrong on the law.

 

[Dingleberry]

Not all crimes require the same level of intent, and some crimes require no intent. Similarly, not all civil causes of action require the same level of intent, and some require no intent. It all depends on the crime/cause of action, which can vary significantly by jurisdiction and applicable law.

 

[Tuzenbach]

One of the suggestions for my site (link below) has been to include a (java script) XP calculator.

So this is to all you legal geniuses out there. Would such a thing be legal seing as the XP tables are not OGC? Note that the amount experience required to reach a level would not be there.

I appreciate your help.

What?! Not OGC?

Well, just add 1 to every figure that you have and at the end, put an equation that shows how to get the "real" value (i.e., "you must subtract 1 from all the values above.....")

 

[Psionicist]

You can use these numbers however the hell you want. They are triangular numbers (times 1000) and they have been known for several thousand years.

Edit: Sorry about the hostile tone, I've had a _really_ bad day today.