mongoose books balanced?

[2WS-Steve]

Just a reply to Wil here...

While I agree that levels aren't the only resource that go into making a character I think it's dangerous to rely too heavily on XP as a way to balance out other benefits. The core rules use gold for that.

For example, it costs 1440 xp to generate a +6 enhancement bonus to a stat. Even doubling that to account for no gold cost allows a 10th level character to sacrifice a bit less than their 11th level to get a +6 to three attributes and +18 in stats is definitely worth more than a fighter level and possibly even more than the 11th wizard level. The XP sacrifice gets even less significant as you go up further in level.

By using XP as the cost you also fiddle with the CR system since you can have a 10th level character who's as tough as a 12th level character and this gets you into a spiral where the players can consistently defeat higher CR creatures and get better rewards than they would if their character level actually reflected their power level. You can get around this problem by including guidleines for how to award XP to characters who've spent a large amount of XP on special abilities but so far I haven't seen that included in books that use XP for special bennies.

I think the real alternative resource is gold since D&D characters are built on XP (personal training) and GP (magical power). One thing I liked about Four Colors to Fantasy is that Nat 20 used this approach as well for special powers (at least as an alternative).

Even the wizard doesn't eliminate gp cost when crafting items, just reduces it, and this just means that they can sacrifice personal growth for slightly faster magical growth.

If you are going with a pure XP cost for the benefits it can be difficult to assign a balanced cost to the benefit. I figure a character level is roughly equal to +6 to +8 in stat bonuses. So let's say you have an ability that provides something roughly equivalent to a +2 stat bonus; how then do you figure the XP cost? If you go one fourth of a level is that one fourth of 5th level (1000 xp) or one fourth of 13th level (3000 xp)? You can just take some sort of average and that probably will work for the majority of players but the special ability grows more and more appealing as the character gets to higher and higher levels until your 20th level characters scarf up all the special XP cost powers they can.

Perhaps that far enough outside the standard range of play that it's not too important to worry about but frankly I'd rather just go with a gold, or some kind of surrogate, for the cost. The surrogate idea appeals to me the most since it doesn't feel like you're always spending tuition money to get the special training but I won't blather on about all the different types of surrogates one might use for gp.

 

[Geoff Watson]

I suggest using the magic item gold piece cost divided by 2.5 for XP cost.

Divide by 5 (the 5:1 ratio for GP:XP is mentioned in the PHB and DMG when hiring NPCs for casting spells with an XP cost).

Divide that by 2 since the permanent bonus doesn't take up an item slot.

There are other advantages (can't be stolen) and disadvantages (can't sell it, or loan it to an ally).

Geoff.

 

[Black Omega]

The Rokugan samurai book had something similar.
At least for the styles in the samurai book you had to pay experience points to access. You also had to go through a Kata before you could take advantage of a particular style. I'm not sure if it is balanced but at least it is not a freebie like the QF styles are.

So far it has seemed pretty balanced. The Kata require a certain lead in time before hand and have a limited duration. So, if you know you are going to be in a fight at least ten minutes+ from then and less then two hours, they are good. You can only have one going at a time though, and each has drawbacks to go with the benefits.

 

[Psion]

Wil wrote:
I simply don't think everything needs a specific catch-all balancing mechanism.

Everything doesn't. As I already mentioned, there are already items within the system that use straight-up XP. But the rub is this: the system more strongly relies on class and level as the fulcrum of balance than XP. You start adding too many abilities in terms of XP, level starts to lose its effectiveness as a gauge of character power.

Further, it's more than just a matter of whether you can do it this way. I think it is a matter of whether you should. I think fighting styles can be well represented by prestige classes and feat chains. Take AEG's Swashbuckling Adventures as an example. Further, I think the things associated with a class -- like skills and save bonuses -- would be logical outgrowths of one's specialized martial training.

So I'll grant you that is sounds as if PotS is more balanced than the fighting styles in TQF (jury is still out... book due in Wednesday.) But even if it is, the fundamental question is: is there a good reason that I should NOT use the existing tools to create fighting styles? Is there any advantage that outweights the disadvantages that come with skirting around the system provided and supported methods?

I refuse, however, to limit myself to the point where creativity and DM judgment are rendered irrelevant, and my ideas are rendered stale.

DM judgement rendered irrelevant? Heh. First off, I might point out that the judgement of some GMs is not all that good. Second, in a way I think packaging your ideas in an unfamiliar format makes it more difficult to use their judgement than if it were a PrC or feat chain, because they will not be familiar with the pitfalls of using your fighting styles as compared to evaluating classes and feats, which they may already have some familiarity with. They may be capable of such a judgement call, but you may be burdening them with some analysis.

Expecting some competance of a GM is probably fair. But expecting all GMs to spot trouble spots on sight without burdening them with analysis might be too much to ask, especially considering GMs typically have enough tasks to worry about.

Not that I am railing. I'm just saying there are other factors to consider.

 

[hong]

I think the real alternative resource is gold since D&D characters are built on XP (personal training) and GP (magical power). One thing I liked about Four Colors to Fantasy is that Nat 20 used this approach as well for special powers (at least as an alternative).

Using gp as a resource with which to buy super powers (and that's what magic is in a fantasy game) has its own problems, though. And it's not like these problems are unknown.

- The loot-the-bodies mentality
- Mercenary atmosphere in general
- The commoditisation of magic, aka "magic shops"

I don't have any problem with killing monsters and taking their treaure (does anyone have a cite for that quote, BTW? I know it's Ryan Dancey, but I can't remember where it's from), but a bit less emphasis on taking their treasure wouldn't go astray.

It shouldn't be beyond the ingenuity of humankind to come up with a system whereby everybody, not just spellcasters, can trade XP for super powers. Placing reasonable costs on imbuing items would be a start.

 

[Psion]

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

Then might I suggest that you really don't understand the underpinnings of the 3e game... or at least one of its main strengths.

One thing that always bugged me about a la carte systems is that the players never really had to worry about making sense when they make their characters. As a result, many players obsess on the skills or abilities that they think would be cool/powerful/effective. And I am not talking about min/maxers here... most players are vulnerable to this syndrome. As a result, often such characters just plough all their points into one or a few abilities that they feel like specializing in.

In D&D, you can't do that. Rightly so, I think. If you gain levels as a fighter, you pick up a few skill points, too. You can't just plough those points into some more BAB with your sword. This is how it should be. No character with realistic experiences is JUST going to pick up skills in their sword... or spells, or what have you... they are going to learn other things along the way. This factor is one that has kept me at arms length form pure-point systems and kept me enjoying D&D over the years.

 

[Psion]

2WS-Stever wrote:
For example, it costs 1440 xp to generate a +6 enhancement bonus to a stat. Even doubling that to account for no gold cost allows a 10th level character to sacrifice a bit less than their 11th level to get a +6 to three attributes and +18 in stats is definitely worth more than a fighter level and possibly even more than the 11th wizard level.

Doubling it? Huh?

Base cost of an enhancement bonus is bonus squared x 1000. Ergo 36,000

1440 is the xp cost, but basically, the 1/25 is not a straight conversion... it is a 20% surcharge in addition to the gold cost based on the conversion rate of 1 xp:5gp. (Outlined in the DMG).

So if you want to know what the XP equivalent cost of this item is, you divide the total cost by 5 and add 20%, not double it. The XP equivalent cost is 8640 xp, which is MORE than double. It is 6x.

Edit:
But really, that is market cost PLUS xp cost, and nobody ever pays both. But magic items cost characters the GP equivalent of 5x the base xp cost (if they don't have the item creation feat) or 3.5x the base cost (if they do). In either case, the effective cost is MORE than double.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

[points to Psion]

What he said. I confess to writing my reply after just returning home from a week-long business trip.

[points to 2WS]

And what he said, too.


Wulf

 

[Ristamar]

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.

It could be argued that this has more to to with the fact that sorcerers suXX0r rather than arguing the base system is flawed. Now I'm not saying the sorcerer is a weak class, but you're pretty much a moron if you play a sorcerer and don't end up taking a prestige class.

In actuality, it probably comes down to the fact that d20 publishers (WotC included) don't adhere to the suggested guidelines set forth in regard to prestige class creation. There are far too many prestige classes that are essentially 'plus' versions of regular classes, offering more and more power instead of providing a defining focus. I believe there should be some high powered Pr. classes, but they should be few and far between and have steep qualification requirements. Unfortunately, a large bulk of the Pr. classes out there offer significant boosts in power without much in the way of sacrifice, making classes like the sorcerer look relatively weak.

BTW, Wil, LTNS.... good to see ya again.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If this is the case, how can you defend any PrC that grants a sorcerer full spellcasting abilities at each level PLUS extra abilities?

Heh... I'll pull this quote, too.

Generally speaking, I don't defend that. I'm currently in the process of writing up lots and lots of prestige classes for the Heroes of High Favor line of books, so I've given it a lot of consideration. My view on this is skewed a bit as the PrC's I am working on are essentially multi-class hybrids: taking a bit from two classes and merging them into a PrC. This process is a little different than just making a prestige class "from scratch" because I have two core classes to balance against. I won't say it's easy but it is easier.

Anyhow, I don't think that prestige classes should be more powerful than a base class-- generally speaking. However, you do have to consider the pre-requisites of a PrC as a "cost" of sorts. Skill rank pre-reqs are often quite high, giving the player very little freedom to spread his skills out where he wants them. Same goes for feats, especially when the PrC requires "less than optimal" feats (skill focus, endurance, toughness, etc.)

Giving up those skill points and feats is the cost of entry, the balancing factor behind most prestige classes.

Even so, I don't tend to look at that cost as a balancing factor against the abilities of the PrC. In my mind, those pre-reqs are the "cost of customization." Psion touched on that a bit (more eloquently than I did, as well) in that any class is a "package deal." PrC's allow the player to carve out some of the useless fat from his core class (this is subjective, of course, from player to player) and specialize a bit.

When it comes down to actually balancing the abilities of the class, I balance the usual: hit die, skill points, spell progression, granted powers, etc. I always try to take a little to give a little, and tend to err on the side of "underpowered." Again, this is due to my philosophy on the cost of customization.


Wulf