[UA] Weird Alternate XP System Stuff

[James McMurray]

And of course, the party rogue is no longer forced (or at least strongly encouraged) to steal a large chunk of the loot if he wants to stay even in XP witht he rest of the group.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Let's get back to the old 1st and 2nd XP system using the fighter table as reference for all level. Oh and let's add every gp found give 1 XP.

I actually really enjoyed the 2nd edition XP system where player were getting XP accordingly to their class. Wizard was gaining more casting spell (combat or not), thief using their skill. It was also rewardind smart player more than now. It was much less combat oriented. The current system forces combat or agressive interaction otherwise nobody goes up.

And under the old system, I would deliberately only ever cast 'cure critical wounds' to heal the party, because it gave proportionately more XP for the same amount of healing.

Not to mention the amount of completely worthless spellcasting I could do that would net me levels.

 

[DarkMaster]

And under the old system, I would deliberately only ever cast 'cure critical wounds' to heal the party, because it gave proportionately more XP for the same amount of healing.

Not to mention the amount of completely worthless spellcasting I could do that would net me levels.

OK,OK, I admit that it was not perfect but he had some advantages over the current system. I guess the game is now more oriented towards the group than a single individual, making lawful good player easier to play.

James as for the rogue it was called a thief back then and he was expected to steal, must admit that it limited creativity. But the old system was also pushing the different player to have different agenda during an adventure. the thief wanted gold, the fighter wanted to kill, and so on. Again that can cause some interesting situation but I must admit that after a few campaign it could become repetitive. There was also a great pressure on the DM (myself) to remember all those cases.

I just brough that back because this UA system strongly reminds me of the old 1st edition system without the gold pieces.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

And of course, the party rogue is no longer forced (or at least strongly encouraged) to steal a large chunk of the loot if he wants to stay even in XP witht he rest of the group.

Damn. There goes both a good excuse for stealing from your friends ("Hey, I need to get XP, too!") and yet a nother excuse to force "thief" character into the "nicks everything that isn't nailed down, and it better be a strong nail" cliché (damn, how I hated that about 2e. As soon as you wanted to pay a resourceful scout, you had to go for thief, which meant that every idiot player had a nice excuse to hate your character. "Oh, look, he's a thief. I don't trust him!)

 

[DarkMaster]

Damn. There goes both a good excuse for stealing from your friends ("Hey, I need to get XP, too!") and yet a nother excuse to force "thief" character into the "nicks everything that isn't nailed down, and it better be a strong nail" cliché (damn, how I hated that about 2e. As soon as you wanted to pay a resourceful scout, you had to go for thief, which meant that every idiot player had a nice excuse to hate your character. "Oh, look, he's a thief. I don't trust him!)

Well I think there was some kits that could adapt your thief character to look like a scout. Also as a DM I remember modifying some of the table to prevent abuses. In that time the PC had less freedom over the motivation of their character but I still feel that the current system limits you in terms of training. Why would a wizard would waste his time studying fundamental magic at the university when he can just bash monster and improves his magic skill. The study as they are in the RAW will give him 0XP maybe a few new spell depend on the DM and the type of research, also I have a hard time with creating magic object and spending XP. the only explanation is game balance. I am pretty sure that if I spend three months making a painting I will endup a better painter not a worse one.

The other day I wanted to create a wizard guild master that never adventured but learned from spending countless hours in the labs and library. Obviously the progression should be slower but there should be some kind of progression.

 

[James McMurray]

Don't forget, combat isn't the only way to earn XP in the D&D world. Overcoming any challenge works, so long as its actually a challenge. CR usually applies to combat, but not always. What CR is a 50-page doctorate on the interactions between Magic, Psionics, and this strange yellow fungus some adventurers found outside the Temple of Lolth in the Underdark.

It might not be something people use a lot in the game, because we're almost all out there playing evil-slaying heroes or good-slaying villains. But its is already accounted for in the rules.

 

[Darkness]

I haven't done the math, but if you use you version vs. the new version for an ECL 20 party killing a CR 9 creature, do you get the same percentages?

A level 20 party isn't supposed to get xp for CR 9 creatures under the old system so I'm not sure this example is a good basis for comparison. If you used a level 15 party instead, the result might be more helpful. Just a thought, though.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Well I think there was some kits that could adapt your thief character to look like a scout. Also as a DM I remember modifying some of the table to prevent abuses. In that time the PC had less freedom over the motivation of their character but I still feel that the current system limits you in terms of training.

But I don't want to need kits for that.

Player: "Hey, I want to play a scoutish kind of character, with the "thief" class as base, but I don't want to steal, is that OK?"
DM: "Sure, here, take this book here and pick a kit an..."
P: "But I don't want a kit, the base class is good enough for me, has all the abilities and that kit-thing is too complicated."
DM: "Well, then I fear you have to bump into all people you meet and rob them blind."
P: "But I don't want that."
DM: "Well, you can still play. You'll be several levels behind (while if you play that thief right, you will have more levels than the others), that's all.

 

[James McMurray]

A level 20 party isn't supposed to get xp for CR 9 creatures under the old system so I'm not sure this example is a good basis for comparison. If you used a level 15 party instead, the result might be more helpful. Just a thought, though.

Right, but that's pretty much the only reason to use the UA XP system (that and its less math-intensive for the DM). evildm's proposed system uses the original system to calculate the XP values. Under the new system a CR 9 critter would give a 20th level character a much larger percentage of their XP needed to reach next level.

CR 1: 75 under new system (0.0075% of the amount for next level)
75 under old system (0.375% of the amount for next level)
CR 2: 150 under new system (0.015% of the amount for next level)
150 under old system (0.75% of the amount for next level)
CR 3: 225 under new system (0.0225% of the amount for next level)
225 under old system (1.125% of the amount for next level)

Under evildm's system, a 20th level party can gain a level by wiping out 266 CR 1 creatures (two tribes of CR 1/2 humanoids). The UA system requires the party to wipe out 13,333 CR 1 creatures to gain that level (100 tribes of CR 1/2 creatures).

The first could be done in an afternoon. Depending on the world, the second one might not even be possible.