Where do you draw the line for ECLs?

[Kwalish Kid]

Such hostility!

I think the problem here is that people assume that I'm taking an extreme position. I'm afraid that I'm not like many of the posters here--I'm not saying that there are no balance issues, I'm just saying that there are other ways to deal with them, and balancing everyone is not the only way to do that.

Funny that the example given above is of a +5 longsword. People often think too much in terms of flat bonuses to standard weapons. This is video-game thinking. I'm trying to engage another type of gaming here. The more extreme ECL races often come with restrictions of size or type that can prevent them from using many items. Careful use of class restrictions alone can prevent a PC from attaining the most powerful magical items.

In my current game, the lowest level characters are level 8, while the highest are level 11. They are fairly novice players, and while they like the cool toys and powers that their characters can have, and they like the power that their characters can achieve, they still enjoy the story that they are going through. Now I do run a game that focuses more on problem solving than fighting. (This prevents me from using many of the recent WOTC adventures, unfortunately.)

Does the DM have to do more work with a party that is not game balanced? Yes. It can be worth it, however.

Note that letting players play characters that will be openly hostile to other PCs is usually a recipe for disaster in many ways, and is a completely different issue.

 

[The Traveler]

they'll plop either a banhammer on you so fast it'll make your head spin

Are you banned at Nutkinland? Is anyone you know?

 

[Vuron]

Psion, you chide me for using FRCS rules when ECLs are FRCS rules themselves?

Honestly I don't see any real big problem with different characters recieving different XP awards. The rules for doing this while not neccesarily delineated in the core rules is really not that difficult to accomplish. Let's give some examples:

Party Composition:
1st Lvl Human Fighter (ECL 1)
1st Lvl Aasimar Cleric (ECL 2)
1st Lvl Drow Mage (ECL 3)
1st Lvl Snirfneblin Rogue (ECL 4)

Let's say the fresh party goes out and kills a pair of Ogres (EL 4) the award for the Human, Aasimar and Drow are 1,350 XP and 1200 for the snirfneblin. With this award the human fighter becomes 2nd lvl while the remainder of the characters remain 1st level.

They go out the next day and manage to defeat a 2nd lvl drow cleric who is out to get the outcast mage. This is also an EL 4 encounter and like before the Human, Aasimar and Drow all get 1,350 XP while the Snirfneblin gets 1200 XP.

Later on they defeat 4 Orcs and 1 Ogre also a EL4 encounter.

After these three encounters (probably tougher than neccesary to delineate the system quickly) The Human, Aasimar, and Drow have all gained 4050 XP, while the snirfneblin has gained 3600 XP. This places the Human at 4,050 XP thus a 3rd lvl fighter. The Aasimar has a total of 5,050 XP thus is a 2nd lvl Cleric, the Drow has 7,050 XP and is a lvl 2 Mage, the snirfneblin has 9,600 XP and is still a lvl 1 Thief.

At this point in time the Human and Aasimar are ECL 3, while the Drow is ECL 4. So effectively the supposed gap in power has done alot of shrinking and this will likely completely disappear within one or two levels. By the time the human is 5th lvl he is probably outstripping the other characters in raw power.

Honestly I see absolutely no problem in this the higher ECL characters are in effect taking out a loan of XP that they have to pay back. So in return for a handful of kewl powers they are forced to sit and wait why the humans grow to match if not surpass them. And you have a problem with this?

 

[Vuron]

Hehe forgot to divide XP but just assume the 3 encounters used were replicated 4 times thus removing the need to generate encounters ad infinitum. The fundamental point is obvious despite procedural problems on my part

 

[Humanophile]

Kwalish Kid, I'm sorry if I came off as hostile. I just get that way when people take the "good roleplaying makes this not overpowered" approach. It's still overpowered, it's just that in the hands of properly qualified players, it doesn't become dominating. But the rules as written, as well as rules as used by most players, should assume a worst case scenario, simply because if they don't the ruck and run of players will abuse them while the groups who don't care about balance can throw them to the wind.

That doesn't change the fact that the tone of your post, that people who do stick to such an outdated concept such as "balance" as a default setting are somehow not as capable or qualified, and that if you have a good idea you should be allowed to run with it no matter what. I've seen good games run with a clear power imbalance (granted, not in D&D, but I don't think that's necessarily impossible), I just think that the whole group has to agree that one of them will be more powerful, and play it that way. It's not that it can't be pulled off, just that it's harder, and that you need to do a lot of extra work making sure everyone has something to do and that nobody's toes are stepped on, and it's not exactly wise to assume that a default game will bend over backwards to do this.

 

[reapersaurus]

Are you banned at Nutkinland? Is anyone you know?

At the risk of continuing a discussion about NL....
No. to both.
currently.
I understood there were quite a few that were banned (including yourself at one point?)
But since I learned the term of 'banhammer' from reading NL's talk about their moderators, I presumed it to be a relatively common practice/fear/phenomenon.

I really don't understand why Kwalish is acting so civil over here.
Why aren't you cussing out ENBoarders for being their normal, ignorant, tail-chasing selves like you usually do?
Kwalish said:

These people are not interested in thinking about the "problems" of the ECL ratings in regards to their campaign, they are only interested in spouting off their own crap.

 

[Psion]

Psion, you chide me for using FRCS rules when ECLs are FRCS rules themselves?

I wasn't exactly cussing you out for that. I was cussing you out for the tired "balance is mythical" snipe, I was just pointing out that its not fair to assume everyone has or uses FRCS's XP system.

That said, ECL are not equivalent. The ECL rules are in MotP, in OA, in the last dragon... they are fairly widespread by comparison. It is quite probable, for example, that someone who only uses the core rules and won't touch anything FR will have the ECL rules.

Honestly I don't see any real big problem with different characters recieving different XP awards.

Nor do I. It's just not as automatic as you seem to take it.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Well point taken, Humanophile. I certainly don't want anyone to feel bad because they care about game balance. I seriously railroad my players anyway (though they don't always realize this), so any imbalance in my game is usually caused by me. It's something that DMs should be free to play with.

***

In regards to reapersaurus. I don't like reapersaurus. I am certain he makes points simply for his own gratification. He has done the readers of this thread and I a disservice in quoting me completely out of context. The quote that he made reference to was regarding another post completely. This post was on another, albeit similar, topic, and took place some time before this thread had even begun. People on this thread have certainly shown a willingness to address a problem with a number of possible solutions.

Frankly, I am glad to see such a blatant act of chicanery from reapersaurus: it further stenghtens my poor opinion of him.

 

[reapersaurus]

In regards to reapersaurus. I don't like reapersaurus.

As said in the Nick Burns the Computer Guy SNL sketch: "I don't like that guy"