for Serleran: XP assignment for monster creation (redux)

[rabindranath72]

Hello robert,

well, the title says it all (sorry but I could not find the previous thread).

I have two questions:

1) which XP cost do you assign for 0 level spells? The example for the kobold lists only from the 1st level onward.

2) do you assign an xp penalty when a monster has an indrance? For example, immunity to cold would be a type II ability, but what if the creature had vulnerability to fire at the same time? Would you consider it the "opposite" of an ability and make it cost negative points?

That's all (for now )

Thanks,

Antonio

[serleran]

1) None. Zero-level spells have virtually no combat purpose, and therefore, do not make the monster worth more. If, however, you would like to give XP for them, I would make it half or quarter that of a 1st level spell.

2) It wouldn't really be an "opposite" per se, but would counter, so the net effect is the same as reducing XP award. In this case a creature with those two abilities would have a lower XP award than one who only had the immunity (assuming same HD and type of HD). Basically, the Type II immunity is negated by the hindrance. A similar (related) method has been explained on how to determine Type for things such as regeneration (if its under specific, rare, conditions, for example, or is at a reduced amount and time.)

[rabindranath72]

Thanks very much!

One thing I do not get, is why spells get different costs if assigned as special I, II or II, or if assigned as per the kobold entry. It is not even a matter of flexibility, since for example in the kobold entry they are said to be fixed. I would understand if they were as for normal spellcasting classes, but in this way...

Furthermore, with a fixed cost for spells, if I increase the hit die of a creature its XP value is incremented only for the hit die, not for how dangerous spells become (I assume spellcaster level=HD). Instead, by treating them with special I,II,III, one gets (correctly) automatically an increase in XP since spells become more dangerous as HD/spellcaster level increase.

[serleran]

The reason for the different methods is easy:

Two systems were being developed, and the one adopted was not the one the kobolds used. Officially, all monsters are to use the Type XP adjustment scale, though if one were inclined, any type of "shaman" creature... those who do not ordinarily gain spells but do have them (kobolds, orcs, goblins, and the like) would follow the "shaman" method.

What should happen is for someone (maybe me) to make a list of all the races that can have "shamans" and then they would all follow the "kobold scheme." Anything else would go with the Type adjustment.

The reason? Low level spellcasters are a lot more powerful and dangerous (a 1 HD critter throwing fireballs, for example) than one that has 10 HD (several factors, such as saves, items, HPs, and their own spells) so the former are awarded a flat XP amount which is always more than their base, to represent the increased difficulty and award for overcoming the challenge.

[rabindranath72]

serleran wrote:
The reason for the different methods is easy:

Two systems were being developed, and the one adopted was not the one the kobolds used. Officially, all monsters are to use the Type XP adjustment scale, though if one were inclined, any type of "shaman" creature... those who do not ordinarily gain spells but do have them (kobolds, orcs, goblins, and the like) would follow the "shaman" method.

What should happen is for someone (maybe me) to make a list of all the races that can have "shamans" and then they would all follow the "kobold scheme." Anything else would go with the Type adjustment.

The reason? Low level spellcasters are a lot more powerful and dangerous (a 1 HD critter throwing fireballs, for example) than one that has 10 HD (several factors, such as saves, items, HPs, and their own spells) so the former are awarded a flat XP amount which is always more than their base, to represent the increased difficulty and award for overcoming the challenge.

But a 1HD critter throwing a fireball would throw it as a first level caster, or not? So the danger it poses is relative, since you are effectively decoupling spell level from class level.

I am surely missing something in your explanation!

Cheers,

Antonio

[serleran]

No, shamans cast as the minimum level needed for the highest level spell they have, but function as 1 HD creatures for all other purposes, so a kobold with fireball deals 5d6 damage with it (and at a 5 difficulty), but gets a +1 to hit and Prime saves. I just looked and see that wasn't put in M&T. This is why they are worth so much... they are very, very dangerous.

[rabindranath72]

Oh, NOW it makes sense! Thanks again!