Permanecy o Permanecy

[TheGogmagog]

So. is my perception screwed (which if so I can accept) or does it just feel a bit odd since things have changed so much in the new editions(which I can accept with a bit of explanation)?

Let me know

ThePublic

It seems you have it. 3.5 Permanancy lost some oomph, exp comes more constantly (2e gamesI recall really slowed down around level 8 to level 12) 3.5 you keep on trucking. This does make the exp donation relatively smaller but characters are loathe to do that when you can buy/make an item that serves the purpose.

I'd suggest leaving it as is, and see if it ever becomes a problem. There are a lot of great5th level spells, I cant say I have seen it taken in the 3 or 4 games that went that high. I would actually suggest that for just about everything, even if things 'feel' wrong leave try them as they are before changing it. Other tip is have the player re-read every spell as they cast it (which you might already be doing).

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

He's telling you, obliquely, that a lot of a PC's power resides in how effectively he can turn gold ("points") into magic items ("powerups").

The system is based around PCs having a certain amount of gold / points at each level.

For instance, certain monsters have a rating which says that they are resonable challenges for a group of 4 5th-level PCs (as a way to help you plan "What should my PCs be fighting if I don't want to steamroll them?"). When it says "5th-level PCs," it means "5th-level PCs with an appropriate amount of stuff."

It assumes things like PC warrior-types having a +1 weapon on hand, or the group having some wands and potions, etc.

Thus, if you decide to run a low-treasure kind of game, keep in mind that the suggestions for how tough a monster is will be off (it's much harder to kill monsters with Damage Reduction 10 / Magic when you don't have a magic sword, for instance).

He's pretty much got it right for how wealth works in 3e, it's factored into the assumptions of what PCs will be able to face by way of magic items. Same with Permanency it lost some oomph with the edition change.

When I moved on from 2e to 3e I wasn't dancing in joy at some of the changes or assumptions either. There are a couple of ways to handle it, I've moved away from the standard model for pretty much the same reason. Now instead of permanency or placing lots of magic items I roll the relevent abilities directly into the characters themselves. At each new level a character gets a pool of bonus xp equal to the wealth by level guideline divided by 15, any unused points roll up to the next level. These can then be used solely to apply inherent magical effects to the character with the cost guidelines for creating magical items, the effects are non-dispellable they suppress like items. So instead of applying permanency the player uses these bonus XP to gain an inherent spell effect. It also means you can save true magical objects for legacy items, the barbarian doesn't have a flaming sword the inherent abilities from bonus XP means that he can apply a flaming bonus to any applicable attack regardless of whether it's with a sword or an ale tankard.

 

[ThePublic]

So the fact that i have already let the PCs know that they are receiving 1stEd XP (since I find the fact of leveling every 5 or so level even encounters distasteful at best- how do they ever figure out the flavor and personality of their PC if they are too busy leveling up and picking stat bonuses and feats and never getting a chance to actually play at a level to figure, connive or scheme what their characters would do in that tight spot) really throws a monkey wrench in the 3.5 works.

Maybe I should just play it old skool on perm and raise it's level to the higher value?

Waddaya think?

 

[frankthedm]

Maybe I should just play it old skool on perm and raise it's level to the higher value?

Waddaya think?

You want Castles and Crusades.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Hey that makes a bit more sense screw, thanks (can you reference the source better so I can work the dynamic in house?)

Assuming you meant me

Elements of Magic: Revised is a point-buy spell system compatable with D20. Very nice, altho the intial learning curve is a bit steep.

Regarding leveling and XP, it should be every 14 level-equivilent encounters by the book, but I usually cut the XP awards down to 65% after 3rd level.. gets everyone out of the danger zone of the early levels then allows for character builds.

Something I learned walking into 3.x .. try to resist changing the rules cause they look weird to your 1e vision, most of the rules actually work alright as written.

 

[green slime]

First Hey everyone, thanks for the board.

but down to biz....

Being an old 1st Ed DM thrust into 3.5, I got one question that pertains to the world of all these wonderous spells.

Permanecy. Since it has been lowered in level for the new editions, it feels lke it would be an area of massive abuse- even with the XP costs. I do see that the old list of what can be perm'd is the same from 1st, but then there is the issue of other spells...

So, here it is- a call to GM's everywhere. How do you put a cap on it, what dynamic do you use to make it a standard rule not to be lawyered at every want of the PCs?

Holler out folks,

Lets see what ThePublic can get.

Well, I don't actually recall it being lowered, has it really?

Anyhow to the issue at hand: XP cost.

IMX, players aren't too keen to actually utilize permanency as written, because it isn't very permanent at all. Targetted Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel Magic tend to rip through the spell defenses of PC's with incredible frequency. As such, players will not spend XP in order to create a "permanent" affect which only lasts until the next encounter with a spellcaster.

IMC, I allow spells made permanent to regenerate their auras after 1d4 days. Still, I don't see any abuse.

Another consideration is that the XP cost of gaining 11th+ levels is reduced when compared to 1e: The 1e wizard required 100,000 xp+ (I can't for the life of me remember what the exact number was, the number 300,000 seems to be rattling around in my soft skull). So the opportunity cost for adding a permanent spell was far lower than for today's 3e wizard.

Add in the XP cost for item creation, and suddenly, it isn't so cheap any more.

 

[green slime]

So the fact that i have already let the PCs know that they are receiving 1stEd XP (since I find the fact of leveling every 5 or so level even encounters distasteful at best- how do they ever figure out the flavor and personality of their PC if they are too busy leveling up and picking stat bonuses and feats and never getting a chance to actually play at a level to figure, connive or scheme what their characters would do in that tight spot) really throws a monkey wrench in the 3.5 works.

Maybe I should just play it old skool on perm and raise it's level to the higher value?

Waddaya think?

On the first issue you raise here, I'm in agreeance. My opinion is the DnD 3.x rushes through advancement too far, too fast, especially for newbies.

The problem is that the game is full of complex dynamics with regards to spells and their effects. There isn't enough time given at each level for the casual newbie gamer to adjust to the capabilities of a given level, before they are levelling again, and they eventually become completely lost. Selecting spells for day, for instance can become... tedious and torturous. This isn't really a problem for most diehards, grognards, fanatics, and book-huggers.

As to what you should do to combat this: slow down the advancement rate. Just inform your players that you are going to dish out XP at a slower than normal rate 50%-80%, according to your tastes.