New Rules Question....

[jonathan1971]

How does the new exp. rule affect current adventures?  What I mean is that 34 pts in attributes is now a pretty significant number as compared to 32.  How can we equate characters built and advanced using current rules to old modules so they don't end up wiping at the first monster encounter.  

[platimus]

I'm not sure I understand the question. If the adventure was written for 34 point characters, 34 points is 34 points. It doesn't matter how much XP they paid to get to 34 points. They've got 34 points.

[mister frau blucher]

Hey, jonathan1971,

The increase in XP needed to get to the next attribute point is a separate issue from the point total the adventures have been written for. The point total for any given adventure is still the same; Ebon Rebirth is still intended for beginning, 32 point characters.

The impact will be that characters will not improve attributes as quickly during an adventure as they would have have in the older adventures, and they will improve quicker than the rules allowed for after being tweaked last year. Having played through ER and ROC with the new rules, it does not change things greatly, except to make taking a skill level more attractive than waiting to raise an attribute.

Hope this answers your question!

Bret

[jonathan1971]

If a 34 pt char. with sword+4 is the same as a 34 char with sword+2 why would I even bother advancing sword when the points would be better spent on upping the toons dex? I like the idea of advancing skills but I'm not sure how to equate that power with the current point suggestions of adventures.

[mister frau blucher]

Hey, Jonathan,

A 34 point character with sword+4 is certainly not the same as a 34 point dude with sword+2.

I think this is arising from our labeling adventures as "for xx point characters" without mentioning skill levels in that text? I've wondered about how this might be perceived before, but this is actually the first time I recall it coming up.

In the introductory paragraphs to each adventure, it is explained that your xx point character also gets x number of skills (usually with half of those being weapon skills). So the outside packaging "for xx characters" is a shorthand reference, rather than a precise measurement.

There is a general expectation of how many skill levels a character would have by a certain point: for beginning 32 point characters, it is 4 skill levels; 34 might be 5; 36 point guys may have 6 or 7 skill levels. But this can vary greatly, particularly if you are playing several adventures together in a campaign. Not all characters, in the same party much less from table to table, will advance along the same template.

So the "for xx point characters" is a reference to the general difficulty level of the adventure, and the general power level of the characters it is written for. Do you think the outside packaging should also specify "plus x skill levels?" I'm not sure that would be better.

Back to how the change in xp affects the adventures, it makes them slightly more difficult, for the reason that increasing attributes during an adventure costs five more xp (or, from the rules change in 2018 that went too far, it costs much less). The general upshot of this is being able to play a campaign of our adventures strung together, and advancing at a more reasonable rate.

I hope I understand your concerns, and that this addresses them!

Bret

[jonathan1971]

"I think this is arising from our labeling adventures as "for xx point characters" without mentioning skill levels in that text? I've wondered about how this might be perceived before, but this is actually the first time I recall it coming up."

Bret...you nailed it.

I'm not sure what the best answer is. If I'm the only that has brought it up, well my problem has been fixed. Maybe a pinned forum topic or addendem to the rules, without adding page space, would help others in the future.

[platimus]

Jan 1, 2021 10:32:53 GMT -5 jonathan1971 said:

If a 34 pt char. with sword+4 is the same as a 34 char with sword+2 why would I even bother advancing sword when the points would be better spent on upping the toons dex? I like the idea of advancing skills but I'm not sure how to equate that power with the current point suggestions of adventures.

Ha! If you think like that now that it costs [current DX+6] XP to increase your DX...imagine how it was BEFORE when it only cost [current DX+1]!!!

I pointed this out a lot when I was new. Here is the basic answer I'm formulated from the responses I received...

If it costs you less to raise a stat (ST, DX, IQ) than it does to raise a skill, it's a no-brainer. Raise the stat. But it's up to you.

If the costs are roughly the same, it's up to you. 

If raising the skill is much cheaper, no-brainer. But again, it's always up to you. Maybe there are specific circumstances or personal reasons behind your decision.

Note that the new XP rule (as I've gleaned from this board; haven't actually looked at the rules yet), it costs [current STAT + 6] XP to raise a STAT. More often than not, this makes it more attractive for non-wizards to raise skills instead. However, raising STATs will more often than not be cheaper than raising skills for Wizards. This is where I see a potential problem.

Even before the XP change, wizards are highly motivated to spend XP on STATs (specifically IQ). This creates a problem for some when the wizard is detecting/disarming traps and finding loot better than the "thief".

[platimus]

Jan 2, 2021 13:24:06 GMT -5 jonathan1971 said:

"I think this is arising from our labeling adventures as "for xx point characters" without mentioning skill levels in that text? I've wondered about how this might be perceived before, but this is actually the first time I recall it coming up."

Bret...you nailed it.

I'm not sure what the best answer is. If I'm the only that has brought it up, well my problem has been fixed. Maybe a pinned forum topic or addendem to the rules, without adding page space, would help others in the future.

I brought this up when I was new. Basically got the same answer that the skill levels weren't really significant enough. And perhaps they weren't under the old XP rules. So I bought into that answer. Eventually.

However, I have always maintained and given posted nudges that better "labeling" is needed. Drop the "for xx point characters" bit. Replace with "for nnn XP characters". Done.

[platimus]

In regards to the XP rules, there are 2 different paths. I have no preference for either path but I really think one of these paths should be embarked upon.

Path A - Flat costs
Raising STATs costs 20XP; skills 10XP or 20XP for wizards; spells costs 20XP or 10XP for wizards.

Advantage: Simple. Easy to explain and comprehend. Disadvantage: Perhaps too costly to raise STATs for starting characters.

Path B - Sliding costs
STATs - Raising a STAT costs an amount equal to your highest STAT (+ N) XP
Skills - Raising a skill costs your current level in that skill (+ P) XP
Spells - XP cost to acquire a spell equals the spell's IQ for wizards. Non-wizards double that.

Note that (+ N) and (+ P) are different arbitrary numbers. I make no claim about what is the best +N or +P. A +N of 0 to 5 seems appropriate ATM. +P would need to be at least +10.

EXAMPLE
Ruhrg the Dwarf (ST13 DX12 IQ8);Ax+2, Climbing+1

Raising Ruhrg's IQ should cost at least 13XP (his highest stat is ST13).
Raising Ruhrg's Ax skill should cost 12XP. Raising Climbing should cost 11XP.
Raising Ruhrg's Polearms skill (current level 0) would cost 10XP.

Advantage: Very well-balanced and scalable. Disadvantage: Slightly complicated and harder to explain.

In tandem with changing XP costs, it MIGHT require giving just a tiny bit more XP in adventures. Easy. PLOTWORDS now give 2 or 3 or whatever XP.

EDIT: Ok, I lied. I lean toward Path B - Sliding Costs. However, there may be a compromise somewhere between Path A and B that would work well. Perhaps...

Path C (for Compromise)
Raising a STAT costs an XP amount equal to your highest STAT.
Raising skills costs 10XP or 20XP for wizards; spells cost 20XP or 10XP for wizards.

OR

Just stick with the current rule of [STAT + 6] XP to raise STAT
It's pretty good!

[mister frau blucher]

Jan 5, 2021 12:49:53 GMT -5 platimus said:

Jan 2, 2021 13:24:06 GMT -5 jonathan1971 said:

"I think this is arising from our labeling adventures as "for xx point characters" without mentioning skill levels in that text? I've wondered about how this might be perceived before, but this is actually the first time I recall it coming up."

Bret...you nailed it.

I'm not sure what the best answer is. If I'm the only that has brought it up, well my problem has been fixed. Maybe a pinned forum topic or addendem to the rules, without adding page space, would help others in the future.

I brought this up when I was new. Basically got the same answer that the skill levels weren't really significant enough. And perhaps they weren't under the old XP rules. So I bought into that answer. Eventually.

However, I have always maintained and given posted nudges that better "labeling" is needed. Drop the "for xx point characters" bit. Replace with "for nnn XP characters". Done.

I don't recall ever saying skills weren't significant. Certainly be interested in reading that, if you can find it.

The problem with xx experience points is that it lacks an obvious point of reference if you are new to the system. Point total is shorthand, yeah, but more relatable, I think. But, not for everyone, so we could do better here.

[mister frau blucher]

Jan 2, 2021 13:24:06 GMT -5 jonathan1971 said:

"I think this is arising from our labeling adventures as "for xx point characters" without mentioning skill levels in that text? I've wondered about how this might be perceived before, but this is actually the first time I recall it coming up."

Bret...you nailed it.

I'm not sure what the best answer is. If I'm the only that has brought it up, well my problem has been fixed. Maybe a pinned forum topic or addendem to the rules, without adding page space, would help others in the future.

Even if you were the only one, it would still merit re-examination. The idea of the pinned forum topic is a great idea. I'll have that done later this week. We'll think/talk about other ways to make it clearer.

[platimus]

Jan 5, 2021 21:14:10 GMT -5 mister frau blucher said:

Jan 5, 2021 12:49:53 GMT -5 platimus said:

I brought this up when I was new. Basically got the same answer that the skill levels weren't really significant enough. And perhaps they weren't under the old XP rules. So I bought into that answer. Eventually.

However, I have always maintained and given posted nudges that better "labeling" is needed. Drop the "for xx point characters" bit. Replace with "for nnn XP characters". Done.

I don't recall ever saying skills weren't significant. Certainly be interested in reading that, if you can find it.

The problem with xx experience points is that it lacks an obvious point of reference if you are new to the system. Point total is shorthand, yeah, but more relatable, I think. But, not for everyone, so we could do better here.

Of course skills are significant! But it sort of implies they aren't by not referencing them in the "for xx point characters". Skills are even more significant with the new XP rule. I don't see how "xx experience point characters" is any more opaque than "xx point characters" if you are new to the system. Heck, I remember when I was new and I had to ask what "for xx point characters" meant! Labeling by experience points is, like, such the obvious thing to do...it blows my mind that you guys didn't start doing it years ago.

EDIT: Ok, it took me a few minutes but I think I see where you're coming from on how "xx point chars" is more relatable or "obvious if you are new to the system". It's obvious if you are NOT new to the system. It's obvious if you are familiar with TFT. I had absolutely no prior experience with TFT before DCG, so I had to ask what it meant. But I think anyone from any system will automatically have a good notion of what "for xx XP characters" means. Is there any role-playing system that doesn't use XP? LOL

The problem with xx experience points is that it lacks an obvious point of reference if you are new to the system.

That sentence literally made my jaw drop in disbelief, by the way

[mister frau blucher]

Plat,

Not sure why your jaw dropped at that sentence. "36 point characters" seems to be more relatable than "80 xp characters." Not just with the TFT reference, but also for those who have never applied 80 xp to a character to see what they would look like. Again, it seems to me to be more clearly articulate the basic power level of the adventure to those both new and familiar to the system. If you are new to the system, neither will mean much more than the other.

You seem to disagree, vigorously.

Again, it is just shorthand for the outside of the package. But once you open up the adventure and read the intro, it is crystal clear how many skills you get, and it follows a general pattern from adventure to adventure.

[mister frau blucher]

OK, I've got a sticky thread for this topic at the top of this forum. Let me know if it needs more clarification.

[platimus]

Jan 6, 2021 9:48:00 GMT -5 mister frau blucher said:

Plat,

Not sure why your jaw dropped at that sentence. "36 point characters" seems to be more relatable than "80 xp characters." Not just with the TFT reference, but also for those who have never applied 80 xp to a character to see what they would look like. Again, it seems to me to be more clearly articulate the basic power level of the adventure to those both new and familiar to the system. If you are new to the system, neither will mean much more than the other.

You seem to disagree, vigorously.

Again, it is just shorthand for the outside of the package. But once you open up the adventure and read the intro, it is crystal clear how many skills you get, and it follows a general pattern from adventure to adventure.

Hey, whatever works...works! You may not understand my point of view here. So I will clarify as best I can.

"Character sheets" would have a field for "XP earned" and for "XP spent". "XP earned" would be a total, lifetime sum of all XP earned. When you spend XP, you add that to the "XP spent" field...but you do NOT subtract it from "XP earned". If you need to know how much XP you have left to spend, you can compare these 2 fields.

So, a 34 point character with 7 points of skills would have a "XP earned" somewhere around 60. A label of "for 34-35 point characters" would become something like "for 60-100XP characters".

New characters would keep track of "XP earned" and "XP spent" from the start. For existing characters, you'd have to do some calculating/fudging to initially fill in these fields. Then keep tallying going forward.

Again, whatever works, works. I don't care too much what labels you guys use. I was just blown away by your opinion of XP. I think it just stems from the TFT roots.

NOTE
The conversion formula I used above (for 34 character) may not be best but here it is:
((Current PointTotal - 32)*15) + ((Current SkillLevels - 4)*10)

For converting adventure labels, I'd subtract 32 from each "point" and multiply by 30. So "for 34-35 point characters" becomes "for 60-90XP characters". But to give some wiggle room at each end of the spectrum, I'd subtract 10 from the low number and add 10 to the high number, giving "for 50-100XP characters".