Pathfinder 2E XP for Gold

[CapnZapp]

Hello again.

To counter the issue of "hey, I found a really neat sword. Let's sell it to level up much quicker" I first considered clumsy store credit or new currency.

A much better solution is to increase the xp requirements (and the loot rewards). At first I considered doubling them. This makes each gold (gained from selling the item) half as valuable (since you need twice as much xp to level up).

Nothing really changes. Except buying stuff (instead of xp) becomes more interesting, and selling stuff (for xp) becomes less so.

You still gain a level for defeating (and looting) exactly the same number of foes as before (and as in the core rulebook system), so nothing changes in that regard.

In the end, I settled for going half the way: Increasing them by 50%. I hope that's a useful compromise.

This yields the following XP requirements and monster loot tables. None of the "four-man default" nonsense. These tables are for EACH adventurer and EACH monster.

level 1 -
level 2: 15 XP
level 3: 45
level 4: 90
level 5: 165
level 6: 285
level 7: 480
level 8: 750
level 9: 1125
level 10: 1650
level 11: 2400
level 12: 3450
level 13: 4950
level 14: 7200
level 15: 10650
level 16: 15000
level 17: 22500
level 18: 34500
level 19: 52500
level 20: 82500

Reminder: don't reset your XP to zero each time you level up. In order to go from level 12 to 13, say, you need 1500 gold. You start level 12 at 3450 XP, and you need 1500 XP to reach 4950 XP.

monster level -1: 0,75 gold (75 cp)
monster level 0: 1,5 gold (15 sp)
monster level 1: 3 gp
monster level 2: 6 gp
monster level 3: 9 gp
monster level 4: 15 gp
monster level 5: 24 gp
monster level 6: 39 gp
monster level 7: 54 gp
monster level 8: 75 gp
monster level 9: 105 gp
monster level 10: 150 gp
monster level 11: 210 gp
monster level 12: 300 gp
monster level 13: 450 gp
monster level 14: 690 gp
monster level 15: 870 gp
monster level 16: 1500 gp
monster level 17: 2400 gp
monster level 18: 3600 gp
monster level 19: 6000 gp
monster level 20: 10500 gp

So just to make a quick check, let's say you and your three friends (all level 17) battle an endless stream of level 17 monsters.

Each one drops 2400 gold, which is 600 gp per hero. After defeating twenty of these (two at a time if you like) you each have 12000 XP if you buy nothing but xp. You start level 17 at 22500 XP and thus end up at 34500 XP, which is EXACTLY what you need to level up.

So the system does not change the speed of leveling, assuming you're content with the item drops the adventure provides.

Link to corresponding thread over at the Paizo forums:
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42n8e?XP-for-Gold

 

[amethal]

Do you get XP for selling items looted from the bodies of your dead comrades? (Assume, for the sake of argument, that they died during the adventure; I'm not suggesting you killed them yourself ...)

 

[CapnZapp]

(Assume, for the sake of argument, that they died during the adventure; I'm not suggesting you killed them yourself ...)

Assume, for the sake of argument, that I believe you and you aren't ;-)

 

[CapnZapp]

Do you get XP for selling items looted from the bodies of your dead comrades?

It is an interesting question.

How do the xp for gold grognards handle it?

You would think the idea of "Olaf died - wohoo, now I get to level up!" goes counter to the "ethos" of the variant.

You could always say the survivors need to bring back the loot to the dead character's successor, to help brining that new adventurer up to level.

That is, even if you run a "hardcore" game, if you start off new recruits at level one, the rest of the team will probably want to give all their loot to the greenhorn until she's in their own level range.

 

[CapnZapp]

With more character creation experience, a question:

Could it be that xp for gold is fundamentally incompatible with the default proficiency calculation in Pathfinder 2?

That is, including level in the calculation.

One assumption (behind handing out gp instead of xp) is that choosing between XP and items is a rational and interesting choice.

But if level-up always grants you +1 to "everything" that always trumps an item giving +1 to something specific.

Sure, you level up soon after, but won't levels always trump items?

Contrast to 5E, where you're effectively experiencing the "no level to proficiency" variant discussed several places. (Also, promised to be in the 2020 splatbook Advanced Player's Guide)

Do you need to implement this variant so that players don't just sell all loot, and run around "equipment-less"..?

Leveling up will always remain attractive. The question is at which point a magical sword (etc) becomes equally or more attractive...?

I guess you can express this as a ratio between gold and xp requirements. If keeping the sword means not getting 100 gold, say, that itself means nothing. You need to know if 100 gold buys you half a level or just 1% of one.

If you need 200 xp to level up, then maybe the prospect of selling the sword gains the upper hand. But if you need 10000 xp, then keeping the sword becomes a no-brainer.

 

[CapnZapp]

Rediscovered this thread, and though to share. Last fall I ran a low-level sandbox campaign using "xp for gold" (set in Sandpoint, btw). I though it worked wonderfully myself, encouraging players to roleplay desperate mercenary people, and - much more to the point - empathizing with the NPCs that live violent short lives.

That is, my players certainly do not need any help in playing murder hobos. But I think many of us can use a little help understanding why a NPC would essentially throw away his or her life. That is, supplying "because the minority that survives the first few levels gets to enjoy a stupendously privileged existence" as an answer.

However, if you were to ask my players instead of me they would likely say they didn't like the variant, and likely because of the "choose between xp and gear" aspect. It turns out the default Pathfinder 2 rule of adding level to proficiency trumps almost every magic item, with the possible exception of Striking runes. Pathfinder 2 simply doesn't have nearly as cool and powerful items as 5th Edition. At the same time, 5th Edition works pretty much like the GMG variant "proficiency without level".

So. While "regular" gold for XP probably works well in 5E, it doesn't work much at all in PF2.

I believe the way to proceed is simply to skip the idea you have to choose between gear and experience. In fact, I think Pathfinder 2 is hopelessly broken in how nearly every other magic item pales in comparison to Striking runes. I really would have liked a GMG variant that bakes the fundamental runes into character progression without messing with other items. (The automatic bonus progression rule removes ALL magic item item bonuses, not just the few types that are so very clearly superior to the rest). In fact, I think I'll try this out:

Every character gets "Devastating Attacks"* for free. Nothing else changes. A character would still love to find a Major Striking weapon, as long as he finds it at level 17 or 18. (I could reduce loot to match, but I probably can't be bothered.)​

*) Devastating Attacks: At 4th level, your weapon and unarmed Strikes, as well as spells with an attack roll, gain one extra damage die. This increases to two at 12th level and to three at 19th level. It is not cumulative with Striking runes (obviously).​

The next time I'll run a sandbox with gold for xp I'll likely try this:

Each gold you find, loot or steal (etc) also gives you 1 XP. The gold you keep, and you can spend it on magic swords, healing potions or whatever. (You still can spend it on a luxurious lifestyle. But you don't have to.)

The XP you need to spend in order to level up. Like before, the default assumption is that you spend it carousing (="letting out steam" between your life-or-death adventures), but you're entirely free to spend your time volunteering at your church or helping to build an orphanage instead, or whatever. Since this isn't physical money, think of it as you expending your time and effort, rather than merely purchasing entertainment or services.

Like before, I refrain from putting definite time restrictions on this spending-downtime-to-level-up activity. The needs of the story comes first. One time you have weeks of free time before the next quest. Another time, you might return to the village late, and have to get up early to continue adventuring. I'll allow leveling up in both cases.

Since your XP still ultimately comes from "liberating" gold, rather than defeating monsters, the core aspect of xp for gold remains; where it is equally viable to sneak past or trick the monster than it is to kill it.

Last campaign I wasn't interested in allowing the Rogue to pick pockets to gain a bit of gold. This time I think I've realized it won't disrupt the campaign much (or at all). Turned out all the players wanted all PCs to level up at the same speed; my worry Thievery would turn out to be a ticket to individual fast leveling never materialized.

 

[kenada]

The way I do XP is pretty heavily inspired by Dungeon World, which which has evolved into a system where players nominate accomplishments during the session, and they get XP based on consensus whether they’re minor, moderate, or major accomplishments. That initially included combat and treasure, but I switched to using PF2’s system for handling combat XP when we converted from 5e, and I want to do something similar for treasure now.

So far, everything I’ve been doing is a little bit (very) ad hoc and unfortunately inconsistent. I’ve been experimenting with using the “Treasure by Encounter” table in the GMG to try to derive appropriate encounter values for the treasure. For example, if a 3rd level party finds 150 gp worth of treasure during the session, then I’d award XP as if they’d overcome a moderate encounter and an extreme encounter. However, that would give 200 XP, which feels like way too much just for finding treasure. I wonder if I should divide the total by 5 like how simple hazards are handled compared to complex ones.

The issue I have with just giving out 1 XP per gp found is that PCs are likely to find more treasure as they level up, and then things would get silly. I could go more old-school and limit the XP in some way (such as by not awarding it for magic treasure or only for treasure donated or spent in town), but that feels like it would delay the reward too much in a sandbox game where the PCs could be away from town for several sessions.

 

[dave2008]

Every character gets "Devastating Attacks"* for free. Nothing else changes. A character would still love to find a Major Striking weapon, as long as he finds it at level 17 or 18. (I could reduce loot to match, but I probably can't be bothered.)

*) Devastating Attacks: At 4th level, your weapon and unarmed Strikes, as well as spells with an attack roll, gain one extra damage die. This increases to two at 12th level and to three at 19th level. It is not cumulative with Striking runes (obviously).​

That seems like a good option. If I ever get to run PF2e I think I would have to use something like this as I don't like to hand out lots of magic items and you can't really purchase them in most of my games either.

 

[CapnZapp]

I don't like to hand out lots of magic items and you can't really purchase them in most of my games either.

That sounds like the 5E way of doing things.

PF2 is clearly doing it the way 3E did:
Everything has a price - and that price is clearly based on utility. Official adventures are teeming with magic items, begging the question "but where do they all come from". And the answer is - equally clearly - because they're crafted. And then they enter the market - they're bought and sold as commodities.

(Of course the complete Automatic Bonus Progression variant of the GMG will fix this for you. Together with the Proficiency Without Level variant the game transforms into something much more 5E-like. I'm singling out the Striking runes out of the full ABP variant here)

 

[CapnZapp]

The issue I have with just giving out 1 XP per gp found is that PCs are likely to find more treasure as they level up, and then things would get silly.

I would advise against changing the exchange rate as you level up. Instead abandon the idea you always need 1000 XP to level up regardless of level, just as I did.