mongoose books balanced?

[d20Dwarf]

I tend to agree with Psion and others here that Feat chains are the way to go.

Using XP as a controlling device doesn't work very well, at least not in the "pay X to get Y" variant. It works ok for "one shot" things like creating magic items or casting powerful spells. It doesn't work at all for "permanent purchases" like Fighting Styles or (IMHO, and just as an example) the bonus Familiar abilities from Spells & Spellcraft.

In my own design work I very early threw XP costs out as a balancing mechanism. I might be tempted to reconsider XP as a balancing force if the cost was ongoing, as in the case of the %XP penalty for "abnormal" multiclassing. But I haven't really bothered to crunch the numbers on it yet simply because I prefer to balance with Feats and Skills.

XP defines character level, character level defines Feats and Skills, Feats and Skills define character abilities. I think XP is "too far removed" from character abilities to be an effective balancing factor.


Wulf

Wulf,

You may not like XP as a balancing tool, but the d20 System is rife with examples. I was thinking of magic items when I conceived of the system. True, it takes a feat to then be able to create as many magic items as you like. It takes no feat to join a school, but the abilities are hardly up to par with magic items. If you had all 10 levels in a school you MIGHT be CR+1, but then you are at least CR 18 anyway and these minor abilities are only going to be a drop in the bucket.

In the core rules I can:

Spend 160 XP to gain a semi-permanent +20 to a skill.
Spend 2000 XP to gain a semi-permanent +5 deflection bonus to AC.
Spend 1200 XP to gain a semi-permanent SR rating of 15!

Guess what, none of these raises my CR a bit. (responding to kenjib)

Gaining levels is essentially trading XP for abilities, BAB, base saves, and special abilities. The XP chart for gaining school abilities mirrors this progression.

Gaining permanent spell-like abilities requires the expenditure of XP, but does not raise your CR.

XP *is* the balancing mechanism in 3e, that's why there is now a standard progression chart, which differs from past editions. XP totals are tied into your effectiveness by showing us what kind of creatures you can fight and what level of challenges you can overcome.

This is an interesting discussion and I'd like to hear more about why you think XP is not used to balance character ability in the d20 System.

 

[Napftor]

In the core rules I can:

Spend 160 XP to gain a semi-permanent +20 to a skill.
Spend 2000 XP to gain a semi-permanent +5 deflection bonus to AC.
Spend 1200 XP to gain a semi-permanent SR rating of 15!

Guess what, none of these raises my CR a bit. (responding to kenjib)

Really? And why is that? Perhaps not the first two, but certainly the SR would.

 

[d20Dwarf]

The examples I was giving were for crafting a magic item, which doesn't raise your CR.

 

[kenjib]

This is an interesting discussion and I'd like to hear more about why you think XP is not used to balance character ability in the d20 System.

To be honest, I come from a distorted perspective so perhaps my argument is a bit unfair. I actually don't like the expenditure of XP for creating magic items or casting spells either. I think it's a really silly meta-game mechanic.

Oops, sorry. I can't make a potion of cure light wounds right now because I just gained a level. Let me go kill a few orcs and then I can make one for you.

I would have just made item creation cost the list gp value of items in the DMG, but then this only works if items aren't usually available for sale. This works well because a player can hunt the black market and maybe get the odd random item here and there, win random items adventuring, or get exactly what they want by paying full price. There's no need for XP to enter the equation. I'm not sure what I'd do about spells like wish though. Perhaps very expensive material components is sufficient.

See? I've actually got a bunch of assumptions behind my argument so yeah, it's not really fair in the context of standard D&D. I'd have to think about it a bit more to have a more core-compliant opinion.

Are there any guidelines for using these abilities with NPCs though? With magic items the risk reward-ratio is preserved because the increased difficulty of the encounter (with no CR raise) is compensated by the fact that after the encounter the party can often acquire the magic item for their own use. No such luck with innate abilities. The DMG also has pretty extensive guidelines for keeping quantities of magic items balanced in both the PC party and among NPCs and how this relates to CR. The CR of an encounter already takes the standard magic item quantity into account for both NPCs and PCs.

It just kinda seems like a cobbled on rules addition that's not too well integrated when they could have just used a mechanic that is already well integrated into the system (feats or PRCs) to achieve roughly the same effect.

 

[Astragoth]

Hey people thx for the many usefull rplies... it's nice to see that several of the old dogs noticed the thread and found it worthwile to respond.

Voadam: thanx for the direct fedback.. I'll try to get my hands on it.

Crothian and Hong convinced me to give the quitessal fighter a try.. we'll see.. First I'll drop by at Maldur's place hopefully and plunder his D&D collection..

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

In the core rules I can:

Spend 160 XP to gain a semi-permanent +20 to a skill.
Spend 2000 XP to gain a semi-permanent +5 deflection bonus to AC.
Spend 1200 XP to gain a semi-permanent SR rating of 15!

All of the above are already limited by caster level, spell-list access, and available magic item slots (two rings, one pair of boots, etc.).

Item Creation is further balanced as a perk of membership to spellcasting classes.

And they require a feat, as we said before.

There's nothing in the core rules that allows the straight expenditure of XP to gain abilities.

Guess what, none of these raises my CR a bit.

No, but as I said above, the number of magic items available to an NPC (or PC) that is consistent with the CR system HAS been spelled out. Guidelines exist.

Gaining levels is essentially trading XP for abilities, BAB, base saves, and special abilities. The XP chart for gaining school abilities mirrors this progression.

Not on a piece-meal basis, no it is not. That's a gross oversimplification. D&D is specifically not a classless system where you can buy abilities a la carte. Monte (or Sean, can't recall) covered the thinking behind this some time ago.

You don't trade XP for abilities. Your XP simply defines your level: Look at XP, cross-reference chart. That's the end of XP's involvement in the equation.

XP *is* the balancing mechanism in 3e, that's why there is now a standard progression chart, which differs from past editions.

It is far more accurate to say that class and level are the balancing mechanism. Each class comes with a PACKAGE of abilities. You don't get to cherry pick. You don't buy hit dice with xp, you don't buy BAB, you don't buy skills, you don't buy feats.

Now, I'm not saying it's not possible to do that, but I trust Monte and the original design team more than I trust Mongoose, FFG, or even myself. You could make a system where you spend XP a la carte, and you could balance the whole thing-- but you can't take an XP/buy system out of context and throw it into a carefully balanced class/level system and expect it to work.

This is an interesting discussion and I'd like to hear more about why you think XP is not used to balance character ability in the d20 System.

I have a little exercise I like to do when I design called, "Extrapolate to Absurdity."

When you simply subtract XP without any accounting of where it has gone, and then take this process and extrapolate to absurdity, you can end up with an infinite amount of XP. Meet my 10th level wizard who has spent 1000 xp... My 10th level wizard who has spent 100,000 xp... My 10th level wizard who has spent one billion XP!

You can't do that with feats. You can't "spend" XP to gain a feat. If you are 10th level, based on your race and class, you have a FINITE number of feats. You can't break this limiting, balancing factor. You can't.

(I mention feats because they are the most digestible way of defining a class ability, but it holds for BAB, skills, etc.)

Yes, I know that in my above example, we could potentially extrapolate to absurdity with magic items as well. That is precisely why the DM needs to reference DMG p. 43 for PC's, and p.47 for NPCs. Item creation and XP expenditure is an exception to the rule; it's been taken into account and guidelines are provided. By following the rules given there I know that any given PC/NPC of a given class and level will be CR balanced in the d20 system.

By the way, I hope you don't think I was attacking S&S, there's lots to love in there-- I just don't care for XP expenditure as a balancing mechanism.

Wulf

 

[d20Dwarf]

I don't think you were attacking it, it's a fun discussion.

You make some good points, and I was oversimplifying things a bit to make my point.

I don't think straight XP buys are a good way to go in an open-ended way either. I'm not doling out things like BAB, base saves, etc. with the schools either. Minor maneuvers, flavorful effects, small and focused skill bonuses. These things are not going to imbalance the game, especially from the players' perspective. If someone wants to spend 30-40,000 XP just to learn 10 techniques from 2 different schools, they are going to be in for a world of hurt traveling with their buddies who are 2-3 levels ahead of them.

As far as NPCs go, the DM controls them anyway. It would be fairly simple to suggest an experience cap on schools that integrated with the magic item restrictions in the DMG. I would think the DM has better control over his own NPCs than to have to do that, though.

Many people talk of using feats and PrCs to define a character's abilities, but I say feh! Yes, they are integral to the system, but dammit I don't think they are all you can do to define character abilities. If this is the case, how can you defend any PrC that grants a sorcerer full spellcasting abilities at each level PLUS extra abilities? Certainly then class and level are not balanced against each other. There are more examples of this.

I simply don't think everything needs a specific catch-all balancing mechanism. Obviously if I create things that are patently unbalanced, then DMs will simply not use them and people will lose confidence in my books. I refuse, however, to limit myself to the point where creativity and DM judgment are rendered irrelevant, and my ideas are rendered stale.

I will leave that to people that have to protect the core rules to the point of becoming boring. (No, I'm not referring to anyone taking part in this discussion ).

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

I simply don't think everything needs a specific catch-all balancing mechanism. Obviously if I create things that are patently unbalanced, then DMs will simply not use them and people will lose confidence in my books. I refuse, however, to limit myself to the point where creativity and DM judgment are rendered irrelevant, and my ideas are rendered stale.

I agree with you.

I put some mythical powers/feats/abilities/whatever in the Quintessential Monk.

They too have XP costs.

I'm a firm believer in DMs and players having enough self control to put their own limits on things. A DM who gives NPCs scads of "phantom XP" to spend on fighting maneuvers is a DM who already has serious issues.

Personally, I like writing things that tweak the boundries or run parallel to the rules. I don't deliberately make new mechanics simply to be contrary, but I think that a change up now and again keeps the game fresh.

I like creating strange effects that don't have an explanation set down in stone. For example: in my manuscript for Stormhaven, there is an NPC who's physical features changed at Dawn, Noon, and Dusk. There wasn't a game mechanic explanation for this; it simply happens, and was included as an interesting character hook.

In other words, I like to use the "core" rules when I can, but I'm not adverse to looking beyond them.

I think that there's a bit too much dependence on codifying everything in D20, to the point that some of the spark of the game is dulled by the need to lock down everything into a "correct way to do it".

Patrick Y.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I *really* don't see how XP costs are any real different from Prestige Classes...

"Look, at (X) amount of XP, I can afford this cool new ability!"

Perhaps I'm dense, but I don't get it. Why call it an XP cost, when it's really just an ability at a certain amount of XP....a Prestige Class, just without BAB or saves or hit dice.

...which, in the long run, may make you crappier than if you chose a PrC...

So fudgeabbodit.

XP costs are just about = Prestige Classes. Why the heck would we need a "new system" that did that?

 

[Fenes 2]

Don't forget that in some campaigns (like mine) balance is solely achieved through the DM. No matter what the rules say, if the DM deems it overpowered, then it will be banned, if the DM deems it balanced then it is allowed.
(We do not use XP in our campaign, just level the whole party from time to time, so balancing through XP does not work for us anyway, but in exchange the DM has a lot more control over the power level in a campaign.)