XP by class

[Oni]

This is something that just came to me last night as I was trying to go to sleep. I've heard some people say that they prefer the xp system in second edition where each class had their own rate of advancement, however this has proven hard to implement in 3e because of the way that they multiclassing system works. I struck me that there is another way of doing it. Each class uses the same xp table, but you assign each of them a percentage xp earned. For example (using arbitrary numbers, I haven't actually worked this out by class) a figher would get 100%, a rogue might get 110% and a wizard might earn 80%. The last class you chose to take a level in dictates which percentage you use. For instance a first level wizard earns 80% of all xp given, when they advance to second level they decide to take a level of rogue, now they start gaining 110% of all xp earned. If you wanted to make the learning curve for each class different as it goes up you could have the percentage change for each class depending on how many levels of a given class they have. For example a wizard might earn 80% of all xp given until 6th level there that number changes to 85%, and then 90% at 11th level. It would have the benefit of making things a little more organic in that not everyone would advance at almost exactly the same time. So what do you think? And if you like, what percentages might you assign to the various classes?

 

[Crothian]

I think you'd need to strengthen certain classes, so taking an XP hit won't hurt them too much. Personally, I'm not crazy about this idea. Why do you think it's needed?

 

[Oni]

Well I don't really think it's needed but I have heard some people complain about the unified xp table, prefering an advancement unique to each class. I just happened to have this idea and thought I might post it since it seemed like a reasonable solution to the above complaint.

 

[Oni]

Another thought it might be an interesting way to balance prestige classes that you don't give up much to join. For example would you be so eager to become an Incantatrix if they only earned 60% xp (after all that might not be unreasonable with all the extra abilities they learn).

 

[the Jester]

Well, I'm not too fond of the idea... a couple of things to consider before implementing this system:

First, you have to decide which classes are "better" than others. I think that the core classes are very well-balanced in 3e, and if a pc isn't happy with their abilities they prolly aren't playing the class too efficiently. I've seen or played efficient members of every core class in 3e (yes, even bards, rangers, rogues, or whatever you think got the shaft).

Now consider this scenario: Bob's pc dies in a 10th-level party. He decides his new character will be a 9th-level wizard/1st-level rogue, and that his most recent level was rogue... so now he gets the xp bonus for rogue without having suffered the penalty for those 9 levels of wizard. Also, the "10th level party" prolly has a significant level split- the rogue and bard are 11th or 12th and the wizard and sorcerer are 9th.

I think you have more room with the poorly-designed, overpowered, easy to enter prestige class stuff, but I prefer to fix those by banning them or changing them to suit my campaign. And again, you have the problem I pointed out above: the pc who takes some levels of incantatrix and then switches to rogue so he'll catch up on xp.

There comes the problem of balancing encounters for parties with widely divergent levels, too... something I've dealt with since early on in the 3e days (I start new pcs at two levels lower than the party average unless there's a huge divergence between the lowest and highest levels).

Personally, I think you're better off modifying any "problem classes" instead of tampering with part of the core system. However, if you try this out I'd be curious to hear how it goes!

 

[theoremtank]

I'm all for thinking up house rules just for the fun of it, however I believe the move to the standardized XP progression of 3E from that of 2E was an improvement. Having different progression rates for different classes introduces needless complexity in my opinion, that doesn't necessarily enhance the fun of the game in any way. It just adds more time to looking up more information in tables, whereas the current system has one simple formula depending on your character class [ 500*n*(n-1) ,where n equals your desired level].

 

[hong]

I don't think the classes are really that far out-of-whack as to justify different advancement rates. However, if you think certain classes are more powerful than others, perhaps a better fix would be to take some of those classes' abilities away, rather than tinkering with the XP progression.

 

[dvvega]

Actually the disparate experience gain from previous editions was silly ... why? Well take a look at the Rogue and Druid. Both the fastest experience gaining classes in 2nd Edition.

The number of Rogue/Druids I saw turn up was phenomenal.

The other thing to note is that in 2nd edition, there were no feats, or "special abilities". So a fighter was faster (although barely) to advance than say a Paladin.

With the classes being farely equal, the same XP is logical.

 

[Oni]

Hurm.... looks like we can chalk this up as one of my less than brilliant ideas.

 

[dvvega]

Don't be so hard on yourself ... I went through the thought of differing XP at the start. It was the whole "okay why did they change things" phase.

It would work if you removed abilities from classes. For example ... Rogues and their Evasion ability. It's possibly one of the more powerful abilities in the game for low-mid level characters. This in itself would keep me from dropping their XP requirement (or in your idea upping their gain rate).

Remove that ability and your system would hold water.