Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 1270127" data-attributes="member: 94">Hey UK... My time has been fairly tight here, I haven't had a chance to really dissect the document. But I will say this, even on the first read through, I noticed some things that just need an editor. (I consider that a different issue than comments on the system, but just as important). So-- proofread. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I wish you'd figure out the formula behind the core treasure allocations and give me that. Some of us don't play those high-powered epic games, you know. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Something in me tells me that it is better to tie treasure to EL. There is a difference between CR8 (a group of 12 orcs, EL7) and CR8 (a single creature, EL13). Under a system that awards treasure based on CR, both encounters grant the same reward, when they are clearly not equal risks.Now, looking at your table, it seems it is already exponential-- meaning, you can't just add up all the CRs and get the same result.Not sure what I am trying to say here. I guess my instinct (based on the way that group EL is determined) is that the CR-to-Treasure chart could work the same way. It doesn't, though, so I'd either add some very clear instructions and multiple group examples, or I would adjust the table to work on EL.As a GM I'd prefer to award treasure, like XP, based on EL-- especially since there are "situational modifiers" to EL, you may want to consider those when the PCs get their reward.Wulf</blockquote>

Verification