Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anubis" data-source="post: 1656862" data-attributes="member: 2358">The reason yours doesn't work is simple: it breaks the 13-1/3 encounters rule.  That is the core of D&D experience, and is pretty much the one point that simple can't be changed under any circumstance for any reason.  Break that and the entire system breaks down.In all honesty, your reasoning for the 1/1/1/20 may sound good on the surface, but since it flubs up the math on so many levels and breaks the 13-1/3 rule, it's not usable.  The D&D system's core is designed around a balanced party.  It does not take into account whether one person does more or not, nor should it.  To demonstrate that point, simply use a CR 20 golem (for the example, it doesn't matter which golem, but let's assume stone golem for simplicity) and then replace one of those Level 1 characters with a Level 20 wizard who has no spells memorized that can do anything whatsoever to it (a safe assumption considering the spells that effect it as they are rarely used and there are better spells to memorize, as the wizard IMC has shown; my wizard IMC has never once memorized the spells that can work on a stone golem).  It's now 1/1/20/20, yet one character is most likely STILL doing ALL the work (the Level 20 wizard can't do a damn thing to a stone golem if we're assuming a normal wizard; most wizards don't do much of anything in melee combat nor do they carry adamantine weapons, so he's able to do about as much damage as a Level 1 fighter could in reality).  So the same problem persists, yet even your formula gives less XP.  Hell, an even better example is any colossus from the ELH; spellcasters can't really touch them in any way, shape, or form due to their extensive impassable antimagic field.As you can see, trying to show flaws by using an inherently flawed argument (that people should gain XP based on how much they do) simply doesn't work.  The key of the system is that lower level characters learn more from particular encounters regardless of how much they do.  That's why the whole party gets XP from traps defeated (instead of just the rogue) and it's how wizard's gain probably 75% of their XP at low levels (before they can do much of anything).  More than anything, that particular aspect you're criticizing is one of the balancing factors of the game.You can't balance things using extreme examples.  Going outside what would ever happen in the game distorts the reality of the situation.  No DM with any amount of competence will EVER form a 1/1/1/20 party for any reason save for small storyline purposes, and those would be storyline-driven and thus inapplicable in a system discussion because that is as rare as the Tarrasque.[On a personal note, I most likely wouldn't even count the Level 1 characters in such a fight, but YMMV.]</blockquote>

Verification