High-level characters and XP progression

Vicar In A Tutu · Post by **Vicar In A Tutu** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 2:55 pm

Hi, I'm thinking of running Return to the Tomb of Horrors as my first C&C campaign. I noticed something when I prepared for the first session (the campaign itself won't starting until a month or so). The campaign is balanced for characters of levels thirteen to sixteen (2nd edition AD&D). Say I give a baseline XP of 1.5 million (letting the fighter advanced to 14th level). With 1.5 million, the party's thief would be level 20. If the party had a paladin, the paladin would only be level 12! I'm concerned because Return to the tomb of horrors has a lot of save or die spells and effects. The difference between the level bonus of the paladin and the thief at 1.5 million XP is +8! And as the campaign progresses, the thief will quickly become level 21 (or is there a level cap at 20th level)? Is the uneven progression unbalanced at higher levels? What do you think?

mudpyr8 · Post by **mudpyr8** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:21 pm

I wouldn't give them all equal XP. Old school not everyone got XP for monsters and such, so Thieves needed less to advance because of it. The party levels should be about equal with the "cheaper" classes being maybe +1 level.

Then consider how much XP you are going to allow them to buy magic items with.
_________________
Legendsmiths presents: Narosia * Sea of Tears, a complete fantasy setting for HERO System

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:49 pm

This is an intersting question. I always wanted to see what the Trolls were planning with higher levels PCs, for the exact reasons you mention VIAT.

If you arerunning Tomb of Horrors as a one shot adventure, that won;t sprawl out into a full-blown campaign I would consdier giving everybody equal XP, plus XP/GP value for magic items.

A 12th level Paladin is certainly more qualified to survive such a place when compared to a 12th level Rogue. In this example, I think the Rogue would almost certainly need to be of higher level.

.........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Maliki · Post by **Maliki** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:58 pm

I never realized the difference was that great, but still I agree with Omote, give them all the same XP and let them deal with it.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

Bahamut · Post by **Bahamut** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:09 pm

Omote wrote:
If you arerunning Tomb of Horrors as a one shot adventure, that won;t sprawl out into a full-blown campaign I would consdier giving everybody equal XP, plus XP/GP value for magic items.

Heh...Tomb of Horrors tends to turn into a one shot adventure, since most runs end in a TPK anyway

Vicar In A Tutu · Post by **Vicar In A Tutu** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:33 am

Quote:
I wouldn't give them all equal XP. Old school not everyone got XP for monsters and such, so Thieves needed less to advance because of it. The party levels should be about equal with the "cheaper" classes being maybe +1 level.

I agree that the less XP-intensive classes should be 1 or maybe 2 levels higher than the rest of the party, but the rules clearly state that this is not the case. Sure, I know the drill about the rules being my servant, not my master, but when I feel the need to house-rule the official rules, the official rules essentially becomes my master by "forcing" me to rewrite it. I'm pretty sure the thief-player will feel shafted if I ignore the rules and give him just 2 levels more than the paladin, when the scenario states that he should be 8 levels higher.

Quote:
A 12th level Paladin is certainly more qualified to survive such a place when compared to a 12th level Rogue. In this example, I think the Rogue would almost certainly need to be of higher level.

Sure, the rogue should be higher level, but again: 8 levels higher! The rogue will breeze through save or die spells, while the paladin will likely perish (assuming the rogue has Charisma as a Prime Attribute, but considering the prevalence of save or die effects, the player in question will most likely choose Charisma as a Prime).

What I don't understand, is why the paladin needs 300,000 XP to advance above level 12 while the thief only needs 125,000 XP. Yes, I agree that the paladin should have a higher XP total than the rogue, but the difference seems somewhat exaggerated. This is why I started working to give the classes a uniform EEP progression, but I would rather not have to do that, since I hate the extra work. I think the thing to do, is to tweak the number of XP some of the classes need to advance above level 12. This keeps the game from breaking down at higher levels.

Scurvy_Platypus · Post by **Scurvy_Platypus** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:10 pm

Serleran has something called Classless Characters on his site:
http://cncplayer.net/serleran/

There's also a bit called Class Deconstruction Fighter/Wizard. I don't think it will be as helpful for your purposes, but maybe it will.

On the Dragonsfoot site, in the OD&DITIES magazines, # 7. There's an article called Basic D&D Custom Class Template.
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/

Lastly, there's an article kicking called Building the Perfect Class. It was submitted to be printed in OD&DITIES but I don't know if it ever was. You can find it here:
http://www.tridrpg.org/characters/newclass.php

None of these are going to give you the same XP progression if you try and rebuild the C&C classes under them. So far, we haven't been told what the actual formula was for building the original classes. However, since your goal is to figure out some sort of uniform XP progression, any of the above should be of help to you.

I think another problem might be simply the combat focus. D&D and AD&D both started shifting away from combat (at least with mundane stuff) and more towards political/planar type games. Not saying that you didn't have combat, but simply that it wasn't _usually_ the primary focus of the game.

On the other hand, why does everyone have to be "equal"? If it's really a concern and you just have to have everyone around the same level, just pick the level their characters are starting at, and give 'em a whatever sized pool of resources for magic stuff. Sure, if people look at their character sheets and compare the XP that each one needed to "reach" the level it's going to be uneven. So what. It's the easiest solution with no real work required on your part.

Old school gaming (which C&C seems to have been built to emulate) cared about balance and equality in a different fashion. Instead of trying to make everyone have equal power at all the same levels, you simply made sure those that had more power took longer to progress. It's a style thing. But it should be too hard to change the style if that's what you're after.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:19 pm

XP progressions are based on several things, all of which are dependent on what the class gets, how often they get them, and their relevant power, compared equally to each other, so that a d12 HD type is "more expensive" than getting a d4, and usability of all armors is "worth more" than being restricted to none. In every case (well, maybe not every,) the amount to progress to a new level is double that of the former level, unless a new ability is gained, where the "difference" is the assumed cost for gaining the new ability. So, what does this mean? It means, compared to what a rogue gets, starting at level one, the Paladin is a lot worse off (XP progression is lower.) So, continuining the "rule" outward, unless the rogue gained something insanely powerful, the XP progressions will always be divergent.

The same thing, in a less obvious way perhaps, happened in all non-d20 versions of D&D.

Classes should not have a single XP chart because the classes are not "equal." Different design for the classless system, obviously.

Oh, and as for the formulas for class development... Davis is supposed to be putting them in The Adventurer's Backpack, with some, maybe, in the CKG. I'd do more of the breakdowns, but I'd rather have the official and totally accurate ones and not my guesstimated assumptions.

BeZurKur · Post by **BeZurKur** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:29 pm

serleran wrote:
Classes should not have a single XP chart because the classes are not "equal." Different design for the classless system, obviously.

Okay, but they could have been designed equal. I realize I'm asking you to speculate, but what could have possibly been gained by designing them unbalanced per level? While most of us accept it (including me) it still does not make sense.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:39 pm

Quote:
but what could have possibly been gained by designing them unbalanced per level?

First: they are not unbalanced. They don't gain levels at the same time... but that doesn't mean they're "flawed."

Second: C&C has a lot to do with archetypes, in that spellcasters, eventually, get to be insanely powerful, much more so than any other class, when they can use one spell, and kill thirty NPCs at once. There is inherent "unbalance" simply from what is trying to be designed, so the counter for that is to "unbalance" it the opposite direction, by allowing those that don't get all the super-hot "powers" to advance quicker. Strengthing the position of archetypes, where those who are primarily "skill-based" (rogue and assassin, especially) have a much easier time improving their limited abilities than someone who has to learn new and more powerful things, every single time they level up. In some ways, this is somewhat realistic, but far from being an attempt to simulate reality.

Third: They were designed with "internal balance," as opposed to d20 "external balance" which fails miserably at it. How many arguments have sprung up over the "broken power" of the 3E druid's wildshape? How many complain that the cleric class is overpowered because it is virtually every class through Domain allocation? How many complain the bard class is absolutely useless on its own, and only serves a limited purpose in a party? The only complaint I've seen about C&C is the barbarian is weak (I disagree, though I see their side,) and people want the fighter to have more abilities. Oh, and my fiancee complains that her monk needs a lot of XP, but she also doesn't remember she's got almost twice as many as everyone else.

"Balance" is subjective, but I think the handling C&C provides works.

Now, as to what is gained by having various XP charts:

Quite a lot, actually.

Archetypes are reinforced. Progression for the classes that become extremely powerful (wizard, especially) are stymied somewhat, allowing the system to work around itself (remember the argument that high-powered casters are uber in C&C because of the SIEGE save mechanic? Well, if those catsers are always lower level, because they don't preogress as quickly, the SIEGE system counterbalances and gives the faster guys a chance.) Players feel they have actually earned a level, after many fights, and lots of adventuring, rather than the d20 rule of 13.3 encounters, 25% of resources used per encounter, encouraging both random events, storytelling awards, and all manner of other CK-specific features like XP for treasure. And I'm sure there are more, but those are the ones I can think of immediately.

BeZurKur · Post by **BeZurKur** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:26 pm

Okay that make sense, especially the counterbalance to the saves vs spells. This is something I hope the CKG addresses and explains. I can at least see an argument for the counterside, although I'm going to have to think about it some more -- and more importantly, play it some more -- to decide if the internal balance is better than external. Thanks, Serleran.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:32 pm

No problem. I think that once Davis releases the XP creation system that was used to determine the charts, a lot of stuff will "click" and make sense. I've done my best on the fighter and wizard deconstruction (well, I didn't try hard on the wizard spell part, so I'm sure its wrong), but I do know the fighter side was almost exactly right, so I think I've got some idea how it all works. Doesn't mean I do, though. Wouldn't want to be in Davis' brain.... scary.

JRR · Post by **JRR** » Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:40 pm

Balance, shmalance. If I was playing and someone mentioned ToH, I don't think I'd bitch because the guy to my left was GOOD. They will NEED a high level thief.
_________________
You face 99 beserkers, 99 beserkers, 99 beserkers, and 99 beserkers.

Will your stalwart band choose to Fight, Advance, or Run?

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:18 am

The thief is so much higher in level because their BtH SUCKS! Their HP's are MEDIOCRE! Paladins, on the other hand, RAWK! Not as much as the straight fighter, but their other abilities aren't exactly whimpy, and can be downright useful. So thieves rock at saves, but the Paladin will rock pretty equally at everything, plus have some serious healing abilities, etc...

I guess people really need to learn to look at the numbers to see why the difference in xp progression works. I did a lot of hing level playing in 1E and 2E. The radical difference in xp charts were very justified. A high level wizard type is darn near god-like. A cleric isn't horribly far behind. Fighters and thieves are the least god-like of the lot at high levels.

Try out the xp charts as is. If you don't like how it balances stuff you can always change it whenever you want.

james_austintx · Post by **james_austintx** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:41 am

You could have a 3 chart system.

One chart for Thief types, one for casters, and one for warriors. Or any combination you want.
_________________
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

Vicar In A Tutu · Post by **Vicar In A Tutu** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:15 pm

Thanks for the input, guys. I've decided to implement the following house-rule:
All the classes need 300,000 XP to advance each level beyond 12th level. EXCEPTIONS: The druid and the illusionist need 325,000 XP, the cleric and the wizard need 350,000 XP.

This may not be a perfect patch (it certainly gives some classes more love than others), but its easy and simple. I'm giving the spellcasting classes a higher XP number than the others because the spellcasters become extremely powerful at high-levels (especially so with the cleric and the wizard). With the new house-rule, a wizard with 2 million XP is level 15 while a thief with the same amount is level 18.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:21 pm

I understand the differences and reasonings behind most of the classes and EPP progression.

The one that has me scratching my head is the bard compared to the fighter... Theoretically, I'm sure it's sound.

However a bard has the same HD and only one BtH behind the fighter throughout hit career. Ok... so the Bard doesn't get specialization like the fighter does at first level and I conceed that... this is a big thing. Yet the bard does get the skill like abilities he does and the fascinate abilitiy is pretty awesome -- especially as he advances. For Fighters, combat dominance ability is potentially cool but at the point the where it becomes really useful, I just don't see myself throwing a bunch of 1 HD of d6 or less creatures at hiim as much as I used to.

I digress but I guess I feel that the Bard should have a slightly higher EPP requirement (though still lower than the fighters).

You're quite right though... when the official rules do come out... I'm sure that some of these questions will sort themselves out.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:23 pm

Vicar In A Tutu wrote:
Thanks for the input, guys. I've decided to implement the following house-rule:
All the classes need 300,000 XP to advance each level beyond 12th level. EXCEPTIONS: The druid and the illusionist need 325,000 XP, the cleric and the wizard need 350,000 XP.

This may not be a perfect patch (it certainly gives some classes more love than others), but its easy and simple. I'm giving the spellcasting classes a higher XP number than the others because the spellcasters become extremely powerful at high-levels (especially so with the cleric and the wizard). With the new house-rule, a wizard with 2 million XP is level 15 while a thief with the same amount is level 18.

I like it... until something more official comes out, it seems sound.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Nelzie · Post by **Nelzie** » Sun Aug 20, 2006 12:43 am

Scurvy_Platypus wrote:
On the Dragonsfoot site, in the OD&DITIES magazines, # 7. There's an article called Basic D&D Custom Class Template.
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/

I really liked OD&DITIES, it's really to bad that they aren't still being produced (At least the last time I looked), I really wanted to expand upon the introductory adventure that I got included in #12 and continue the theme of introducing this hobby to newcomers. Maybe, I'll just finish it up one of these days anyway.