Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="David Argall" data-source="post: 614078" data-attributes="member: 4481">more pointsXP-Encounter XP should be based only on the monster, not on the PC.&nbsp; You bring in Billy the Kid, you get $10,000 reward.&nbsp; That does not change whether you are a kid armed with a squirt gun or Superman.&nbsp; The idea low levels deserve more is just wrong.&nbsp; After all, they are more likely to level from the same XP anyway.&nbsp; &nbsp; Less drastic, base XP on total party level, not average level.&nbsp; When we talk about 4 PC of about the same level, it makes no difference, but the more we change from that, the worse things become.&nbsp; I was in a large party of about 4 10th levels and 10 1st facing a CR in the low teens.&nbsp; Essentially we wimps sorta held their cloaks and it was all over in a couple of rounds and we were all 3rd level for about zero effort.&nbsp; That we deserved something for being in danger is clear enough, but a system that gives a larger reward for a more dangerous party is clearly wrong.&nbsp; &nbsp; XP in general should have higher requirements at higher levels.&nbsp; While doubling at every level would make it about impossible for anyone to ever cast a 9th level spell, it at least would prevent the campaign from graduating when the party is reaching godkill levels.&nbsp; &nbsp; Alignment - gotta keep it.&nbsp; We need that excuse to go around killing monsters.&nbsp;&nbsp; Cleric-A common refrain is &quot;We gotta have a cleric.&quot;&nbsp; As long as such a useful class remains one the players have to be drafted into playing, it's a class that needs strengthening, not weakening.&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm not too aware of the 3e class distribuiton, so we may have enough clerics not to need to bribe them with more goodies, but if you sit down at the table and have to persuade somebody to do the dull healing, you don't want to weaken the class.&nbsp; &nbsp; Heavy armor should be more useful.&nbsp; As noted, if you have decent dex, you are almost as well off without it as with it, and this stuff was hughly successful on the battlefield.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="David Argall, post: 614078, member: 4481"] [b]more points[/b] XP-Encounter XP should be based only on the monster, not on the PC. You bring in Billy the Kid, you get $10,000 reward. That does not change whether you are a kid armed with a squirt gun or Superman. The idea low levels deserve more is just wrong. After all, they are more likely to level from the same XP anyway. Less drastic, base XP on total party level, not average level. When we talk about 4 PC of about the same level, it makes no difference, but the more we change from that, the worse things become. I was in a large party of about 4 10th levels and 10 1st facing a CR in the low teens. Essentially we wimps sorta held their cloaks and it was all over in a couple of rounds and we were all 3rd level for about zero effort. That we deserved something for being in danger is clear enough, but a system that gives a larger reward for a more dangerous party is clearly wrong. XP in general should have higher requirements at higher levels. While doubling at every level would make it about impossible for anyone to ever cast a 9th level spell, it at least would prevent the campaign from graduating when the party is reaching godkill levels. Alignment - gotta keep it. We need that excuse to go around killing monsters. Cleric-A common refrain is "We gotta have a cleric." As long as such a useful class remains one the players have to be drafted into playing, it's a class that needs strengthening, not weakening. I'm not too aware of the 3e class distribuiton, so we may have enough clerics not to need to bribe them with more goodies, but if you sit down at the table and have to persuade somebody to do the dull healing, you don't want to weaken the class. Heavy armor should be more useful. As noted, if you have decent dex, you are almost as well off without it as with it, and this stuff was hughly successful on the battlefield. [/QUOTE]

Verification