Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="vsper" data-source="post: 334077" data-attributes="member: 7036">SKR's porblemShortly after 3e came out a bunch of us sat down and began to play. We wanted to test the system, and see its merits and its flaws. CR’s were one of the problems. I believe it stems from the problem there are too many variable in the problem to work well. Its not that I see CR’s as being incorrect, but being a poor choice to base the encounter, as a lone criteria. The GM must weigh in all of the PC’s special abilities and the monsters special abilities. For example, a Fire using monster might b a challenge if the party has little protection from fire, but easy for one heavily protected. In the end I eyeball it, and custom make each encounter for the party.I tend to run long campaigns and have found the experience and treasure to be a problem. I believe Monte Cook once said the game mechanic was to have the party increase in level every three or four game sessions based on a six month campaign. Since I run multi year campaign I have to look differently at XP. I&nbsp; generally want them to go up every (1+level) game sessions. What I did was modified the first edition xp chart, lowering the rate at which the xp increases and then divide by the character level. Its kind of complicated, but gives them better xp for creatures with special abilities. They of coarse then get a good chunk of xp from role playing.The problem with slowing down progression in this manner is that the standard treasure drop is too much. By level 7 you could have PC’s with way too much gear and money. So this too needs to be lowered. When you factor in these two changes it runs pretty well</blockquote>

[QUOTE="vsper, post: 334077, member: 7036"] [b]SKR's porblem[/b] Shortly after 3e came out a bunch of us sat down and began to play. We wanted to test the system, and see its merits and its flaws. CR’s were one of the problems. I believe it stems from the problem there are too many variable in the problem to work well. Its not that I see CR’s as being incorrect, but being a poor choice to base the encounter, as a lone criteria. The GM must weigh in all of the PC’s special abilities and the monsters special abilities. For example, a Fire using monster might b a challenge if the party has little protection from fire, but easy for one heavily protected. In the end I eyeball it, and custom make each encounter for the party. I tend to run long campaigns and have found the experience and treasure to be a problem. I believe Monte Cook once said the game mechanic was to have the party increase in level every three or four game sessions based on a six month campaign. Since I run multi year campaign I have to look differently at XP. I generally want them to go up every (1+level) game sessions. What I did was modified the first edition xp chart, lowering the rate at which the xp increases and then divide by the character level. Its kind of complicated, but gives them better xp for creatures with special abilities. They of coarse then get a good chunk of xp from role playing. The problem with slowing down progression in this manner is that the standard treasure drop is too much. By level 7 you could have PC’s with way too much gear and money. So this too needs to be lowered. When you factor in these two changes it runs pretty well [/QUOTE]

Verification