Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3764169" data-attributes="member: 141">I think everyone who has played or DMed a campaign has a "feel" about what particular levels are like.  If you get the right numbers for them, then perhaps you can identify what causes the change in feel.  The relative power of character classes changes changes too much; the increase in power from level to level is too much/not enough; stuff like that.  Then if you want to preserve a particular feel, you can try to ensure that the relevant numbers stay within a particular range.For instance, suppose from 4th to 5th level the power of characters changes by 25%, and that feels about right.  But from 5th to 6th it is 33%, and that seems a little high.  From 6th to 7th is 40%, and that is definitely too fast.  From 7th to 8th is 45%, and it's starting to get unfun.  Etc.. Then we have something to fiddle with.  Stretch the progression so the old level 8 is now level 9, or something.But to do this you need to know more about the 3e than to say that it is unsatisfactory.  I'm just making those numbers up - but if they were right, then it would indicate that an exponential progression is OK, but that the current system is steeper than e^kx. More like e^k(x^2) or something.  But I'm just making numbers up.Another example: Suppose you wonder what the 4E fighter is going to be like.  How do you preserve his relative power without iterative attacks?  What if he is without statboosters?  Or without enhancement bonuses to attack, damage and AC?  (I.e. suppose the "big six" are gone).  Then it's kinda helpful to have some numbers to work with.  How powerful is a 14th level fighter, and can you build a plausible 30 level progression that ends up in that power.  Or 20 level progression - my suspicion is that the game will end up around 18-20th level in terms of power, and so the old 14th will be around level 20.This is a different point, and maybe I should post it separately.  Nah, I hate doubleposting.  I'll tie it in with my earlier remarks somehow.Two different progressions can end up in quite different power levels, depending on the initial choices.  See my OgreN and OrcN progressions for a counter-intuitive example.  The power level depends very sensitively on the boosts available to AC and attack bonuses; it ends up that the exponential extrapolation of a high AC monster ends up a lot weaker than a low AC monster.  Well, it is counter-intuitive to me, at least. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Anyway, once we decide on what the best power curve would be (and I think this requires diagnosing a little more precisely what is wrong with the current power curve), there are still details to be worked out.  I'd be happy to talk about that, but I think we still need a diagnosis.  Which brings me back to my earlier remarks. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification