see said:Only change I'd make to your suggestion is to use 480 as the replacement for 400 instead of 240. Doesn't do anything substantive; just leaves the numbers looking more like the 400-base numbers while keeping all the useful mathematical properties of 240.
Well, if Wulf is really mad, that might be his next step?!Pinotage said:Very nice, Wulf! Makes it easier for mixed CR encounters rather than having to resort to some electronic EL calculator. Unfortunately won't solve, nor was intended to, the fact that many CRs are just wrong to begin with.
Pinotage
IuztheEvil said:Its funny, I think I was so focused on the trees I had created, that I did not notice for the forest they made.. if you get my drift.
PS: Still thinking about the 240 bit.. the one thing I dislike is the some of the numbers you end up with for level totals. It was a number I was playing around with early on... perhaps I should reconsider. Hmmm.
Mustrum_Ridcully said:Well, if Wulf is really mad, that might be his next step?!
Wulf Ratbane said:If you use the 240 base, the XP advancement chart looks more like the 3e chart (at least in the early levels). I consider that a plus, YMMV.
Wulf Ratbane said:I also like to keep the XP totals lower and more manageable, if possible. (If I could lower the baseline even further to avoid XP totals in the millions, I would.)
see said:Yeah, MMDV. 400/480 looks more like 1e/2e tables.
Wulf Ratbane said:The Encounter Budget has nothing to do with treasure or magic items. I don't know what you're doing, but stop.![]()

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.