Subtle Brilliance...
- Thread starter Old One
- Start date
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
BryonD said:
Unfortunately, yes. This time, we're hoping the DNS update, server transfer, and all will be taken care of before the holiday weekend is over.
Wulf
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Email should be working now.
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
XP awards different from IH!?
Wulf,
Did you intend for the XP system in Grim Tales to be different from Upper Krust's?
The reason I ask is that the two systems diverge sharply when party size is not equal to 4. In Grim Tales doubling the size of the party does not change the total amount of xp awarded; in the IH appendix it will halve the total xp awarded. This is true both in version 4 and version 5 of the IH appendices.
See, in the IH doubling a party will double the CR and double the number of combatants. This will increase the party EL by +4 for the increase in CR, and decrease the party EL by -2 for the increase in numbers (tables 2-1 and 2-5 in v4, or tables 2-1 and 2-2 in v5). A net increase of +2, which means the difference between the encounter level and the party level drops by +2, which means the *total* xp awarded is halved. (See table 2-8 in v4, or note that party size is counted twice in v5; once in table 2-2, and again in table 2-5).
In the GT system doubling the party size increases the EL of the party by +4 for the increase in CR (table 14-1), decreases it by -2 for the increase in numbers (table 14-2), and so makes the EL difference change by -2. According to table 14-4 that will halve the individual experience point award. But since there are twice as many individuals, the total xp awarded has not changed.
I know I was under the impression that the GT system was the same as Upper Krust's. I just wondered if you had intended to change it, or not.
Wulf,
Did you intend for the XP system in Grim Tales to be different from Upper Krust's?
The reason I ask is that the two systems diverge sharply when party size is not equal to 4. In Grim Tales doubling the size of the party does not change the total amount of xp awarded; in the IH appendix it will halve the total xp awarded. This is true both in version 4 and version 5 of the IH appendices.
See, in the IH doubling a party will double the CR and double the number of combatants. This will increase the party EL by +4 for the increase in CR, and decrease the party EL by -2 for the increase in numbers (tables 2-1 and 2-5 in v4, or tables 2-1 and 2-2 in v5). A net increase of +2, which means the difference between the encounter level and the party level drops by +2, which means the *total* xp awarded is halved. (See table 2-8 in v4, or note that party size is counted twice in v5; once in table 2-2, and again in table 2-5).
In the GT system doubling the party size increases the EL of the party by +4 for the increase in CR (table 14-1), decreases it by -2 for the increase in numbers (table 14-2), and so makes the EL difference change by -2. According to table 14-4 that will halve the individual experience point award. But since there are twice as many individuals, the total xp awarded has not changed.
I know I was under the impression that the GT system was the same as Upper Krust's. I just wondered if you had intended to change it, or not.
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Cheiromancer said:
Bear with me. I'm hopped up on painkillers after a rough day at the dentist...
The XP in Grim Tales is based on the difficulty of the encounter. If you double the party size-- or indeed if you do anything to the party including adding a bit of CR here and there or a henchman, familiar, companion, etc.-- the overall difficulty of the encounter will go down, and XP will be reduced accordingly.
The real advantage to the GT system (over the SRD) is its ability to track for subtle increases in Party CR/EL that make encounters too easy, and to keep XP in line.
I can answer this the quick way or the in-depth way. The quick way is simple: Simply changing the party size shouldn't change the XP award for a given encounter. (Notice I said size, and not composition. We'll get to that...)
Now the in-depth explanation, an example using real numbers.
CASE ONE
Party of four 4th level characters. Total CR = 16, EL = 13.
The encounter (we don't care what it is composed of) is Moderate (EL 9).
The XP award for a Moderate encounter is 75 XP per character level. Each character earns 300 XP (75 x 4th).
The total XP awarded across the party is 1200 XP.
You'll also note that it will require 13 1/3 of these encounters for each character to level up.
CASE TWO
Party of eight 4th level characters. Total CR = 32, EL = 15. (We could have answered this intuitively with the knowledge that doubling the number of opponents increases EL by +2).
The same encounter, of course, EL 9. Except that now it's no longer Moderate, it's Easy. (EL 15 vs. EL 9)
The XP award for this is 37.5 XP per character level. Each character earns 150 XP, and the total amount of XP awarded across the party is 1200 XP.
Now let me try to anticipate what may be giving you some concerns. Notice that in the two cases above, the encounter has the same relative threat to each individual character-- you're doubling the number of characters, but as far as any given party member is concerned, this encounter is equally difficult.
But let's look at another case: tougher characters.
CASE THREE
Four 8th level characters.
Total CR = 32, EL = 17.
Now the same encounter has gone from Moderate (Case 1) to Easy (Case 2) to Very Easy (Case 3).
A Very Easy encounter is worth 18.75 XP per character level. Now, each character receives 150 XP. The total XP awarded across the party is only 600 XP.
---
In every case (1-2-3) you should find these awards in line with the XP table in the DMG.
I certainly hope that answers your question. Other than, "When's my next Percocet?" that's the most thinking I've done all day...
Wulf
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
My sympathies to you with your dental work!
But the question compares Grim Tales to Upper Krust's work in the Immortal's Handbook Appendix, and has nothing really to do with the DMG. It doesn't matter really if you are using version 4 or version 5 of the IH appendix, but I'll calculate the results in parallel (v4 uses a slightly different terminology than v5. v5 is closer to Grim Tales, but the PDF of v5 is not widely available).
In "Case One" you get exactly the same xp award with GT as you would with the IH system:
In "Case Two" you get *twice* the amount of xp from GT that you would with the IH system:
I'm wondering if the change was intentional (if not, is errata required?)- or am I radically misinterpreting both versions of UK's system?
But the question compares Grim Tales to Upper Krust's work in the Immortal's Handbook Appendix, and has nothing really to do with the DMG. It doesn't matter really if you are using version 4 or version 5 of the IH appendix, but I'll calculate the results in parallel (v4 uses a slightly different terminology than v5. v5 is closer to Grim Tales, but the PDF of v5 is not widely available).
In "Case One" you get exactly the same xp award with GT as you would with the IH system:
In v4 you calculate PEL by taking the average party level (4) converting to EL (9) and modifying by table 2-5; for a party of 4-5 the modifier is 0. The EL difference is 0, so the total xp award is 300 x party level, or 1200 xp.
In v5 Upper Crust discards the notion of PEL, and calculates the EL of the party the same way you would a group. Total CR = 16, EL = 13. It's a moderate encounter (EL -4) so by table 2-5 everybody gets 75 xp per level. 1200 xp total.
In v5 Upper Crust discards the notion of PEL, and calculates the EL of the party the same way you would a group. Total CR = 16, EL = 13. It's a moderate encounter (EL -4) so by table 2-5 everybody gets 75 xp per level. 1200 xp total.
In "Case Two" you get *twice* the amount of xp from GT that you would with the IH system:
In v4 the PEL comes out to be 11. So an EL 9 encounter is easy (-2) and the total xp is party level x 150. So a total xp award of 600 xp.
In v5 the total CR = 32, EL = 15. An EL 9 encounter is easy (-6) and the xp award per person is given by Table 2-5 to be 18.75 xp per level. Each of the 8 people get 75 xp (4*18.75) and the total xp awarded is 600 xp.
So for an 8 person party you are giving twice as much xp as Upper Krust does. 1200 xp for an encounter that the Immortals Handbook appendix says is worth only 600 xp.In v5 the total CR = 32, EL = 15. An EL 9 encounter is easy (-6) and the xp award per person is given by Table 2-5 to be 18.75 xp per level. Each of the 8 people get 75 xp (4*18.75) and the total xp awarded is 600 xp.
I'm wondering if the change was intentional (if not, is errata required?)- or am I radically misinterpreting both versions of UK's system?
Last edited:
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
/snip
Let's try answering the question with a series of statements.
1) The XP system in UK's work was my contribution; any errors belong to me.
2) The chart in v.5 is incorrect. It incorrectly adjusts for party size twice. I could explain this in greater detail, but take my word for it. Subsequent emails between myself and UK straightened this out.
3) The goal of any XP system should be to mirror the core design that 13 1/3 Moderate encounters awards XP sufficient to gain 1 level.
Wulf
Let's try answering the question with a series of statements.
1) The XP system in UK's work was my contribution; any errors belong to me.
2) The chart in v.5 is incorrect. It incorrectly adjusts for party size twice. I could explain this in greater detail, but take my word for it. Subsequent emails between myself and UK straightened this out.
3) The goal of any XP system should be to mirror the core design that 13 1/3 Moderate encounters awards XP sufficient to gain 1 level.
Wulf
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Bumped for Cheiromancer.
Hope I answered your question. Again, to reiterate, the XP table you are looking at in UK's v.4 or v.5 was created by me and added by UK, and it was in error-- of course, neither he nor I realized it until after v.5 was "published."
There are other errors in v.5-- not all of them mine!-- that UK corrects in v.6. I don't think he's published v.6, not even provided one to me.
I know for certain that he and I diverged in other areas, so when you see his final Immortal's Handbook product, I would expect to see other differences between his handling of the subject and mine. (Most of these divergences would actually be in Chapter 13, however, not in the EL/XP system-- handling of SR and other minutiae of CR calculations that shouldn't have much of an effect on the final CR...)
Wulf
Hope I answered your question. Again, to reiterate, the XP table you are looking at in UK's v.4 or v.5 was created by me and added by UK, and it was in error-- of course, neither he nor I realized it until after v.5 was "published."
There are other errors in v.5-- not all of them mine!-- that UK corrects in v.6. I don't think he's published v.6, not even provided one to me.
I know for certain that he and I diverged in other areas, so when you see his final Immortal's Handbook product, I would expect to see other differences between his handling of the subject and mine. (Most of these divergences would actually be in Chapter 13, however, not in the EL/XP system-- handling of SR and other minutiae of CR calculations that shouldn't have much of an effect on the final CR...)
Wulf
A couple of questions dealing with spellcasting
I was wondering if there was a way for a spellcaster to arrive at a point where he does not take ability damage. I have currently gotten into the Midnight Campaign Setting, which uses a low magic type ruleset. The spellcaster in that game gets a small amount of bonus spell energy (Level + Modifier), that he can tap before he has to use his Con.
I also really like the idea that I can take advanced classes and plug them in. I also intend to bring in the classes from Blood and Fists.
Thanks for any info
I was wondering if there was a way for a spellcaster to arrive at a point where he does not take ability damage. I have currently gotten into the Midnight Campaign Setting, which uses a low magic type ruleset. The spellcaster in that game gets a small amount of bonus spell energy (Level + Modifier), that he can tap before he has to use his Con.
I also really like the idea that I can take advanced classes and plug them in. I also intend to bring in the classes from Blood and Fists.
Thanks for any info
Wulf Ratbane
Adventurer
Sargon said:
It's a stylistic preference, but I don't recommend any guaranteed way to avoid ability damage. If you wanted to insure it, just let your players take levels of some spellcasting class, and use it exactly as written. (All classes are compatible with Grim Tales.)
But it's possible, even just within the rules in Grim Tales:
Take the Magical Adept talent to gain spell burn resistance equal to your primary attribute modifier (example, Int 18 = +4 modifier = 4 spell burn resistance).
Take the Master Arcane Flow talent (if necessary) to change the spell burn die from d6 to d4.
Take the Spell Preparation feat to allow you to re-roll your spell burn when you cast a prepared spell.
When you cast a prepared spell, you'll roll 1d4 for each spell level. Unless you roll a 1 on any die, your spell burn resistance will soak up any other result you roll. If you roll really poorly, you can choose to re-roll (all of the dice, not individually) thanks to your Spell Preparation feat.
Obviously, your odds of casting "no burn" spells are better for low-level spells than high-level spells-- which is as it should be.
A 1st level spell will be burn-free 94% of the time. I beg the statisticians among us to check my math here, but I think the odds break down something like this:
1st = 0.94
2nd = 0.81
3rd = 0.67
4th = 0.53
5th = 0.42
6th = 0.32
7th = 0.25
8th = 0.19
9th = 0.14
The odds of a burn-free initial roll is (3/4 ^ L) where L is spell level.
Add to this the odds of burn-free second roll (that is, the odds that you'll roll a 1, followed by a re-roll with no 1s).
If you could somehow get your primary attribute up to 22, for a +6 spell mod and 6 points of spell resistance, you can leave the spell burn die at d6, and it gets even scarier:
1st = 0.97
2nd = 0.91
3rd = 0.82
4th = 0.73
5th = 0.64
6th = 0.56
7th = 0.48
8th = 0.41
9th = 0.35
And these are all just the odds of taking 0 spell burn. If you're willing to settle for a point or two here and there...
Anyhow, you get the idea... If you're lucky you can conceivably throw spells around all day.
Wulf
Similar Threads
