Party Level or XP?

[The Sigil]

I was kicking around an idea on the House Rules boards here:

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=323467

and it brought up a question in my mind. Not sure if this should go to House Rules, Rules, or General Discussion, so if it's in the wrong place, I'll ask the moderators to move it.

Is the "Average Party Level" system a bit off? Shouldn't we really be using "Total XP gained?" We have lots of supplements out there that suggest that PCs ought to be able to "buy" extra abilities - with an XP cost. Such a character would be more powerful than a character of the same level who had not bought the ability - yet the system doesn't account for that. Not only does it exist in supplements, though - it exists in the Core Rules themselves. The system doesn't contain a "fudge factor" for the 12th-level wizard who spends all the XP that would have gone towards 13th and 14th levels crafting staffs. He has a ton of staffs, and is clearly therefore more powerful than your "standard" 12th-level wizard (his power level should be equal to a 14th level wizard). Yet he gains "extra XP" for being "seen" as 12th level (i.e., defeating a CR12 monster gains him more XP if he's 12th level than if he's 14th).

This makes me think that we should use "total XP gained" to determine a party's effective level and completely ignore the character's actual level. XP values for ECL's ought to be "lumped in" as though they were XP. An interesting thought... I'm putting this in "General Discussion" because I'm not quite sure if it belongs in House Rules (as it isn't a rule per se, but a discussion of the system itself) and I'm not quite sure if it belongs in Rules (since we are not excatly discussing a rule - or even a lack of rule or interpretation of a rule or lack thereof).

Am I off my nut here, or am I correct to perceive that the 3e system is slightly flawed in that it uses Character Level to determine Character power in the ratio used to determine XP awarded (Character Power:Challenge Rating) rather than using XP to determine Character Power?

This even spills in to how much treasure a character has. A character who has earned the XP of a 14th level character should have earned the gold of a 14th level character even if his XP expenditures keep him at 12th level. We have seen that "naked adventurers" are at a disadvantage, while "over-rich characters" are at an advantage. The 12th-level character who spent the XP that would have taken him to 13th and 14th levels is clearly more powerful than the 12th-level character who got just enough XP to make it to 12th level - he should have more money and will have more special abilities (XP-bought and either intrinsic or contained in magic items). Why then, do we treat his "Character Power" in determining XP the same? Thoughts?

--The Sigil

 

[Garmorn]

For items, the answer is no. Items made or aquired should be compared to the wealth level to determine the "financial level" of the character. This is because the power if items is rated by their cost to a large extent and can be easly controled by the DM. The DM can raise or lower treasure values in response to the monatry wealth of the characters. Another point is a character that spends a level worth of EX on expendable items like potions and scrolls. He no longer has those power ups so is not a powerfull as his total EX earn would indicate.

Now if you are using rule that alowe your characters to buy feats, special ablities or other pemenate stuff that does not have a monetary value then the answer is maybe. The question becomes how much can they spend in comparison to their total? If it is less then 10% I doudt it is worth the extra effort. If more then you are going to have to make a judgement call as to when it is enought to realy be worth the extra book keeping.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I was kicking around an idea on the House Rules boards here:

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=323467

and it brought up a question in my mind.

Is the "Average Party Level" system a bit off? Shouldn't we really be using "Total XP gained?" We have lots of supplements out there that suggest that PCs ought to be able to "buy" extra abilities - with an XP cost.

The system doesn't contain a "fudge factor" for the 12th-level wizard who spends all the XP that would have gone towards 13th and 14th levels crafting staffs.

While in general I agree with you, don't forget that crafting magic items also costs time and money, both of which are controlled by the DM. Money especially; the system is still balanced if you award appropriate amounts of gold. The wizard in question can't break the system unless you give the party too much gold.

From time to time the DM should simply look at the average GP value of all the party's items, and if it's too much, scale back the amount of treasure he's handing out. In no time the CR vs. Average Level vs. Actual Power situation should sort itself out.


Wulf

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Thoughts?

I always build adventures on the average level of the party. If someone is below that because they spent xp on items or above that because they did extra xp projects, then good for them.

I have yet to see see that big of a difference caused by either case. They are always within a level of each other- two at most. That is not a huge problem for planning encounters.

FD