Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 8483411" data-attributes="member: 5889">I want to check a few scenarios between my system and the "true math" of the journey rules, just to see if I'm getting reasonable numbers with my approximations.Scenario 1: Migration on Standard Terrain50 people with no proficiency on standard Tier 0 land. Technically the rules assume migration, so this actually the "standard" as far as the base numbers.Real Math: -600 supply per monthSystem: -350 (terrain) - 150 (migration) = -500. +/- 50 supplyThe system is a bit more forgiving at the moment.Scenario 2: Scenario 1 on Tier 1 landA simple increase in the land tier (aka DC 10 -> 12 hunt checks)Real Math: -750System: -350 (terrain) - 150 (migration) - 150 (Tier 1) = -650. +/- 50 supplyStill a little forgiving, but I am modeling the decree of change perfectly.Scenario 3: Scenario 1 with Survival ProficiencyAdd in a +2 to hunt checks for proficiencyReal Math: -450System: -350 (terrain) - 150 (migration) + 150 (Prof) = -350. +/- 50 supplyAgain perfect change, just a little too forgiving.Scenario 4: Migration on "Good Terrain"So now we look at terrain where I would have advantage on hunt checks.Real Math: -157.5System: 0 (Terrain) - 150 (migration) = -150. +/- 50 supplyPretty much spot on!Scenario 5: Tier 2 Good TerrainReal Math: -487.5System: 0 (Terrain) - 150 (migration) - 300 (tier) = -450. +/- 50 supply.Looking really good, just slightly more forgiving than the base.Scenario 6: SnaresSnare = 2 supply per day (assuming 16 hours of use) * 30 days = 60 supply.System: 50 supplyI think this is pretty reasonable. 60 supply would require the snares to be in nigh constant use. Over the course of the month, I think a bit of maintenance and downtime would be expected. So this seems a good approximation.Scenario 7: Druid Spellcasting and SupplyUsing Create/Destroy Water or Create Food and Water, we have the following notes:1st - 1 = 30 per month2nd - 2 = 60 per month3rd - 3 = 90 per month4+ - 3 + 2 per spell level above 3rd                                                                                                                                         <table style='width: 100%'><tr><td>Druid</td><td>Standard</td><td>System</td><td>Difference</td></tr><tr><td>1 </td><td>60 </td><td>50 </td><td>10 </td></tr><tr><td>2 </td><td>90 </td><td>100 </td><td>-10 </td></tr><tr><td>3 </td><td>240 </td><td>150 </td><td>90 </td></tr><tr><td>4 </td><td>300 </td><td>200 </td><td>100 </td></tr><tr><td>5 </td><td>480 </td><td>500 </td><td>-20 </td></tr><tr><td>6 </td><td>570 </td><td>600 </td><td>-30 </td></tr><tr><td>7 </td><td>720 </td><td>700 </td><td>20 </td></tr><tr><td>8 </td><td>870 </td><td>800 </td><td>70 </td></tr><tr><td>9 </td><td>1230 </td><td>900 </td><td>330 </td></tr><tr><td>10 </td><td>1440 </td><td>1000 </td><td>440 </td></tr><tr><td>11 </td><td>1710 </td><td>1100 </td><td>610 </td></tr><tr><td>12 </td><td>1710 </td><td>1200 </td><td>510 </td></tr><tr><td>13 </td><td>2040 </td><td>1300 </td><td>740 </td></tr><tr><td>14 </td><td>2040 </td><td>1400 </td><td>640 </td></tr><tr><td>15 </td><td>2430 </td><td>1500 </td><td>930 </td></tr><tr><td>16 </td><td>2430 </td><td>1600 </td><td>830 </td></tr><tr><td>17 </td><td>2880 </td><td>1700 </td><td>1180 </td></tr><tr><td>18 </td><td>3090 </td><td>1800 </td><td>1290 </td></tr><tr><td>19 </td><td>3360 </td><td>1900 </td><td>1460 </td></tr><tr><td>20 </td><td>3690 </td><td>2000 </td><td>1690 </td></tr></table>So it looks like the system does decently well until about 8th level, then the higher level slots just really start pushing that up. Though realistically once a druid is at 9th level it can basically completely compensate for a group's supply needs. I might just put in a clause that says "at 9th level, a druid can completely take over a group's supply needs"Conclusion: So in general I'm pretty happy with the results, it looks like my system (though a simplification) is still in the ballpark as compared to directly rolling all of the hunt checks. I might reduce the feast impact and make the bad result worse to bring my numbers a little closer to the actual, I'll have to think about it.</blockquote>

Verification