Previewing the new XP system

[lichmaster]

Advancement pace and variant XP calc

Hi Morrus,

great job so far!

Maybe I didn't get it right, but it seems to me that xp calculation and skills/tricks costs make for a very (very) quick advancement. Maybe you meant it, but this is what I noticed:
If a single character manages to kill a single Goblin (100 xp, should be moderately simple) he'll be immediately able to pick knockdown or disarm. And so on...
So the first suggestion I'd make is to increase these costs by a factor of at least 10, or to specify better what advancement pace you have in mind.

Second thing: I like having a precise mathematical formula to compute accurately XP values, CRs, ELs and so on.
I think that the current rule (sum of best 3 scores, squared) is interesting and philosophically correct (derived scores are computed from basic ones, so no need to include them), but leaving out all other values is not totally fair: a monster with all 4 is actually more difficult to defeat than a monster with 3 scores to 4 and the others to 2... With a "well rounded" enemy you'll have a hard time in finding and exploiting it's weaknesses!
Also, as I mentioned early, this XP calc system gives too many XP IMHO.

So I'm proposing this alternative but equally system: sum the square of the number of dice you are rolling for each attribute.
EG, for a Goblin scavenger (2 dice to str, 3 to agi and so on) you'll get 2^2+3^2+2^2+2^2+2^2+2^2=29 XP
a Goblin fighter will be 41

With this kind of system, the costs for the combat trick can be reduced to 5 times the values you suggested (500 for disarm and so on)

What do you think?

As an extension I'm working on including also their combat tricks and skills, because they also play an important role, but I don't know when and if I'll manage to get something working

I'll open a new thread for combat actions, with another suggestion

Keep up with the great work!

EDIT: for all other "non flat" costs (skills, traditions), what about having a geometric progression? Something like new level squared x a constant factor like 500

 

[Sniperfox47]

Maybe I didn't get it right, but it seems to me that xp calculation and skills/tricks costs make for a very (very) quick advancement. Maybe you meant it, but this is what I noticed:
If a single character manages to kill a single Goblin (100 xp, should be moderately simple) he'll be immediately able to pick knockdown or disarm. And so on...
So the first suggestion I'd make is to increase these costs by a factor of at least 10, or to specify better what advancement pace you have in mind.

I think you misunderstand the XP cost of tricks. Morrus can correct me if I'm wrong, but its my understanding the XP cost for tricks isn't intended to be a "cost" per-se. Its instead there mainly to make players "shop" for tricks so that they know what tricks they'll be using and encourage them to actually use them more. The "cost" side of things is handled by the prerequisites and the dice cost.

Second thing: I like having a precise mathematical formula to compute accurately XP values, CRs, ELs and so on.
I think that the current rule (sum of best 3 scores, squared) is interesting and philosophically correct (derived scores are computed from basic ones, so no need to include them), but leaving out all other values is not totally fair: a monster with all 4 is actually more difficult to defeat than a monster with 3 scores to 4 and the others to 2... With a "well rounded" enemy you'll have a hard time in finding and exploiting it's weaknesses!

This is absolutely true, but basing it equally off all attributes as you did in your formula isn't fair either, since not all attributes add in equally. It would also run into issues in campaigns that use extended attributes, since the attribute list isn't bounded. I don't mind the current formula, but if I was going to redo it I'd probably factor in next three highest stats at 1/2 or 1/4 value.

EDIT: for all other "non flat" costs (skills, traditions), what about having a geometric progression? Something like new level squared x a constant factor like 500

The issue with that is getting traditions to high levels already gets prohibitively expensive quickly. Realistically, even now, there's no point in getting a single tradition above rank 2 or 3. Its cheaper and more efficient to just take a bunch of low ranks, than one high rank. A geometric progression would just compound this issue.

 

[lichmaster]

I think you misunderstand the XP cost of tricks. Morrus can correct me if I'm wrong, but its my understanding the XP cost for tricks isn't intended to be a "cost" per-se. Its instead there mainly to make players "shop" for tricks so that they know what tricks they'll be using and encourage them to actually use them more. The "cost" side of things is handled by the prerequisites and the dice cost.

Ok, I see now. However, since at character creation I can pick one free trick plus either aim or feint, if for instance I'm creating a soldier with 5 str (highly likely) I can get feint, and deadly strike, and then at the first goblin I kill I can get knockback...

This is absolutely true, but basing it equally off all attributes as you did in your formula isn't fair either, since not all attributes add in equally. It would also run into issues in campaigns that use extended attributes, since the attribute list isn't bounded. I don't mind the current formula, but if I was going to redo it I'd probably factor in next three highest stats at 1/2 or 1/4 value.

It's true, not all attributes add in equally, and this is also a factor that should be considered in the standard formula: what about a manipulative enemy with high CHA, INT and MAG that that don't count for any of the derived stats?
For extended attributes that could also be worse, I think we should consider only standard stats here.
Factoring 1/2 or 1/4 for the next ones is a thing I also did consider, but I thought It wasn't nice to include fractional values in this system
What about some kind of rounded average of the others as a fourth all encompassing attribute?

The issue with that is getting traditions to high levels already gets prohibitively expensive quickly. Realistically, even now, there's no point in getting a single tradition above rank 2 or 3. Its cheaper and more efficient to just take a bunch of low ranks, than one high rank. A geometric progression would just compound this issue.

Well, XP values of enemies also grow geometrically with their "level", and you don't get xp only for killing monsters, right?
I see your point, however... maybe high level traditions should have really "must have" features..

 

[Sniperfox47]

and then at the first goblin I kill I can get knockback...

Assuming, of course, you kill that goblin in single combat, then yes.

It's true, not all attributes add in equally, and this is also a factor that should be considered in the standard formula: what about a manipulative enemy with high CHA, INT and MAG that that don't count for any of the derived stats?

What does "these stats have derived stats!" Have to do with anything? Every ability of your character is a stat derived from something, and each of them good in different areas. If you're fighting a manipulator you wouldn't expect to fight it in single combat, so its health wouldn't be nearly as important as its dominance.

Well, XP values of enemies also grow geometrically with their "level", and you don't get xp only for killing monsters, right?
I see your point, however... maybe high level traditions should have really "must have" features..

Yeah, but enemy level and tradition rank are largely independent. You're going to need a heck of a lot more than 14 tradition ranks in various traditions before you can take on an ice dragon (a level 14 monster)...

If they gave you higher rewards for higher ranks then I could see it, but as it stands you'd spend ridiculous amounts of XP by rank 5 when you could gain *far* more from multitraditioning... Even right now its more beneficial to heavily multi tradition (Eg. mage I, Loremaster I, Druid I, Cleric I) than it is to specialize (mage II, firemage II)...

 

[lichmaster]

Assuming, of course, you kill that goblin in single combat, then yes.

Rather likely, I'd say, for a soldier vs a lone standard goblin

What does "these stats have derived stats!" Have to do with anything? Every ability of your character is a stat derived from something, and each of them good in different areas. If you're fighting a manipulator you wouldn't expect to fight it in single combat, so its health wouldn't be nearly as important as its dominance.

It was simply a coherent follow up of your observation (not all stats "weight" the same). I agree with you that you don't confront a manipulative enemy hand to hand, but if you actually manage to corner him and he has no escape you'll have an easy time killing him (and I think XP rewards for actual combat are to be used only in rather standard combat). Instead, if you can outsmart him or kill him in an indirect way, the reward can be calculated both as the standard rule (you beat him on his ground, so CHA INT and MAG are a meaningful factor) or set by the master as narrative XP reward (I'd go for this one)

Yeah, but enemy level and tradition rank are largely independent. You're going to need a heck of a lot more than 14 tradition ranks in various traditions before you can take on an ice dragon (a level 14 monster)...

If they gave you higher rewards for higher ranks then I could see it, but as it stands you'd spend ridiculous amounts of XP by rank 5 when you could gain *far* more from multitraditioning... Even right now its more beneficial to heavily multi tradition (Eg. mage I, Loremaster I, Druid I, Cleric I) than it is to specialize (mage II, firemage II)...

Sure, sure! What I meant is that it's more likely to fight dragons and demons at high "level" than to fight goblins and orcs, thus the reward you get from fighting monster already scales quadratically...
As for the cost of traditions, multitraditioning etc I'll have to ponder more

 

[Khaalis]

as it stands you'd spend ridiculous amounts of XP by rank 5 when you could gain *far* more from multitraditioning... Even right now its more beneficial to heavily multi tradition (Eg. mage I, Loremaster I, Druid I, Cleric I) than it is to specialize (mage II, firemage II)...

I just had to point out that I think this is still a major flaw that needs to be addressed. I think there should be more, not less, incentive to follow your already chosen Traditions than to just start heaping on 1 rank in many more Traditions.

 

[Morrus]

Hi Morrus,

great job so far!

Maybe I didn't get it right, but it seems to me that xp calculation and skills/tricks costs make for a very (very) quick advancement. Maybe you meant it, but this is what I noticed:
If a single character manages to kill a single Goblin (100 xp, should be moderately simple) he'll be immediately able to pick knockdown or disarm. And so on...
So the first suggestion I'd make is to increase these costs by a factor of at least 10, or to specify better what advancement pace you have in mind.

Players can start picking up small upgrades after their first session, yep. That's intentional. It's much more granular than a level-based system.

Second thing: I like having a precise mathematical formula to compute accurately XP values, CRs, ELs and so on.

Heh. We had one. It was too complex. I think it's still in the N.E.W. document, actually, if you're interested.

I think that the current rule (sum of best 3 scores, squared) is interesting and philosophically correct (derived scores are computed from basic ones, so no need to include them), but leaving out all other values is not totally fair: a monster with all 4 is actually more difficult to defeat than a monster with 3 scores to 4 and the others to 2... With a "well rounded" enemy you'll have a hard time in finding and exploiting it's weaknesses!

I have to disagree there. XP should reflect what the critter is going to do, and critters aren't likely to do things they aren't good at. And if they *do* start using non-optimal attributes, then that probably qualifies for an XP reduction not an increase - the creature isn't acting at its best potential. It would be an usual monster that utilized all of its attributes. Honestly, you could almost just hinge it off the one highest. Something is going to have an area of core competency - hitting things hard, being fast and hard to hit, using powerful magic, using psionics, using scientific or lore stuff (not yet in there). They won't be doing all those things at the same time, and certainy not the things they aren't good at. Giving an ogre XP for having 3 INT or something is really just free XP for something the ogre will never benefit from. Giving him XP for having high STR, though, and that makes sense. XP for an evil necromancer's STR makes no sense when he never engages in melee combat because he's a ... well, a necromancer with high MAGIC and INT and stuff and makes zombies.

I see your point, however... maybe high level traditions should have really "must have" features..

You're correct; any issues with incentive to advance traditions lies in the tradition design and the desirability of the abilities gained. That is absolutely something that could be looked more closely at.

 

[GlassEye]

I just had to point out that I think this is still a major flaw that needs to be addressed. I think there should be more, not less, incentive to follow your already chosen Traditions than to just start heaping on 1 rank in many more Traditions.

I agree with those who think advancement needs a serious examination. As an example let's look at two characters built with opposing strategies (I'll use magic traditions since I've messed around with those more). #1 went Wizard's Apprentice then Mage I-IV. #2 went WizApprentice then Mage I-II, Firemage I, Necromancer I. Advance both to Tier 2 which give 5,000 xp, IIRC. #1 takes Mage V, spending all his xp, and gains 4 attribute pts (MAG +1), 1 skill, 1 spell list, & 1 special power. #2 spends his 5,000 xp on a new spell list, Firemage II, & Necromancer II. He gains 11 attribute pts. (MAG +4), 2 skills, 3 spell lists total, & 2 special powers plus the greater increase to the MAG attribute means he ends up with more MP and can cast higher MP spells. Significant difference in ability.

Either the higher grade powers need a large boost or the cost to take a tradition grade should be a flat cost.

 

[Khaalis]

I'll try to spend some time in looking at the specific numbers. While I like the concept of the XP system, I think the numbers need some review. Regardless of whether or not you increase the special abilities in any give. Tradition, the fact remains that in almost all cases picking up a. Ew tradition at level 1 is more beneficial than advancing a given tradition. Also as pointed out by GlassEye, I think that some if the stats bonuses need to be looked at. As is with the case of the casters, there is a definite problem when a Wizard Apprrentice/Mage 5 has lower magic than a Wizard Apprentice/Mage 2/Firemage2/necromancer 2 - for the same XP expenditure. IMHO, the Mage 5 should be more "powerful" but less diverse. Either the traditions really need to offer a Lot more per tier or the whole balance needs to be reviewed. I would also suggest that for traditions like the magical ones that relly on a specific central stat (MAG in this case), be balanced against each other. As again in the case above, I feel it doesn't sit well that the WA/Mage 5 vs the WA/Mage 2/Fire 2/Necro 2 ends up with a whole lot less MAG (not to mention everything else).

 

[Morrus]

The Mage is more diverse but less powerful, not more powerful but less diverse. The tradition concept is the opposite. A Mage 5, therefore, should be a diverse magic-user with less raw power than a specialized firemage or necromancer.

I'm definitely going to ensure that later grades are worth their cost. You're right in that serial multi classing should not be the default best option.