Age versus Level Advancement and modified Multi-Classing [Archive] - Wizards Community

Age versus Level Advancement and modified Multi-Classing [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Wulffolk
03-19-04, 04:40 PM I have been considering this topic for quite some time while planning a new chronicle. Why should a character be able to attain mastery of his chosen Class in short periods of game time? Why can Elves and Dwarves do nothing greater with their centuries of life than a Human can accomplish in a few short years?

My first solution was to limit the amount of XP earned based on the time that had passed. A character can only learn so much during a specific amount of time.

A maximum of 1,000xp/month of game-time can be earned, assuming that the character does enough to earn that much experience. Perhaps as much as 1,250xp/month for truly exceptional Role-Playing.

That works out to 12,000xp/year, not counting rewards for good RP. This allows for a character to advance from 1st-5th level in their first year, 5th-7th level after 2 years, 7th-9th in 3 years, 9th-10th in 4 years, 11th by 5y, 12th by 6y, 13th by 7y, 14th by 8y, 15th by 9y, 16th by 10y, 17th by 12y, 18th by 13y, 19th by 15y, and 20th level after 16 years.

This time table is the fastest that a character can possibly advance, assuming that he is doing the maximum learning possible EVERY single month for 16 CONSECUTIVE years.

Advancement that rapid would be an amazing feat in itself, without even mentioning the deeds accomplished along the way. I intend to make allowances for considerable down-time along the way. Levelling will only be achieved during down-time, which should not be a problem since it is not possible for a character to earn enough XP during a single story to advance more than one level at a time.

The need for down-time and durations necessary to train will make it unlikely that any PC will hit 20th level in less than 30 years of game time. That works out fairly well for Humans, Halflings and Half-Orcs. They should max out just before age starts to force them into a more peaceful lifestyle.

The problem in this formula occurs when considering the longer-lived races in the game. What is 16 or 30 years to an Elf? Dwarves and even Half-Elves are just as unlikely to be phased by a few short decades.

Why aren't all Elves and Dwarves masters of their profession when compared to others races, considering their greatly increased lifespan? The main reason is "relativity". Elves and Dwarves feel the flow of time less accutely than their Human counterparts and therefore do not rush to their goals. They take their time in all matters, especially the Elves. Patience and longevity are the keys to Dwarves and Elves. Dwarves will not leave their homes unless there is a damn good reason, and Elves will not risk potential centuries of life for anything not of absolute importance.

My difficulty has been in reflecting the slower pace of the Elves and Dwarves in relation to Humans and Orcs, without unfairly crippling them with XP penalties. I considered longer periods of down-time for Elves and Dwarves, but that would just break up the group as the Humans and Halflings either went on with their lives while the Elves and Dwarves settled back to their slower pace, or the Humans would end up wasting most of their life waiting on their elder companions.

My current solution is a considerable change in the current Multi-Class system, but one that I feel makes sense. In my game world Class Levels do NOT stack the way they normally would. A character's Equivalent Level is based on his TOTAL XP, but that XP can be used to advance levels in seperate classes independently.

It never made sense to me that a Wizard of great power (Wizard 16) would have to spend as much much time and effort learning the basic skills of a Rogue, or the simple prayers of a Cleric, as he would spend learning to cast 9th level Arcane spells. What should be more difficult ... Rogue1, Cleric1, or Wizard 17?

For example, a PC with 3,000xp is considered a 3rd Level character, just as he normally would be. However, that PC could be (Fighter3 for 3,000xp) or a (Fighter2 for 1,000xp/Rogue2 for 1,000xp/Wizard2 for 1,000xp), etc...

It would seem that Multi-Classing would be over-powered in this system, except that NOTHING stacks. HP's, BAB, Saving Throws, and all other variables are based on the highest stat available to any ONE class, rather than adding all the classes together. The Fighter3 would have 3d10 HP, +3BAB and the Fighter's Fortitude saves. The Fighter2/Rogue2/Wizard2 would have just 2d10 HP and +2BAB, but he would also have a +1d6 Sneak Attack and Arcane Spellcasting, and he would use the Rogue's Reflex save and the Wizard's Will save now as well as the Fighter's Fortitude save.

The F2/R2/W2 may still seem stronger than a F3, and that may be true at lower levels, but the gap widens as the Equivalent level goes up. A character with 45,000xp could be either a Fighter10 or a Fighter7/Rogue7. The F/R would lose 3d10 HP, +3BAB and 2 Feats, while gaining +4d6 Sneak Attack and the other Rogue class features. His saves would go from +7 Fortitude/+3 Reflex/+3 Will to +5 Fortitude/+5 Reflex/ +2 Will. That F7/R7 would still be facing the same monsters and other challenges as the F10, he would just have to do so more tactfully.

When a character finally earns the 190,000xp necessary for 20th level after 15-30 years that character could either be a straight Fighter20, or a F14/R14, or some other combination of classes.

Acquiring additional classes requires appropriate role-playing opportunities and training during downtime. This allows the DM a measure of control over how many Classes a character knows and what they are. No PC should be allowed to take a level of Wizard without first finding a master that is willing to take them as an apprentice. You don't think that Rogue has the right attitude to add Ranger to his resume? Then don't make the training available to him. He would first have to find a Ranger and convince him of his ability to fill the role, and his commitment to perform the Rangers' duties. Classes are not just kewl sk1llz and f34ts for the player to collect, they are societal roles or organized guilds of one kind or another.

A PC cannot just add 1st level classes without cost or penalty. The XP penalty for being Multi-Class still applies, though without regard for balanced levels. Favored Classes do not count towards an XP penalty, but all other classes beyond the first non-favored class apply a cumulative 20% XP penalty.

Through this form of Multi-Classing a Human or other short-lived character could hope to master one Class, be skilled in 2 Classes, or to have limited knowledge of 3 or more Classes in his lifetime. On the other hand, a Dwarf or an Elf could potentially master 2 or even 3 classes over the course of centuries, though progress would become EXCEEDINGLY slow due to the high Equivalent Level involved in earning 380,000 (27th Level) or 670,000xp (36th Level), especially when the XP penalty is taken into account.

The XP penalty technically limits the number of Multi-Classes to 6 at the MAX with -80%xp (Favored Class, 1st non-favored Class, and 4 more Classes at -20%xp each), though the effectiveness of having more than 3 Classes would be greatly hindered by the XP penalty. Prestige Classes would count against the number of classes and the resulting XP penalty. It should be a rare thing for any character to ever have more than one Prestige Class anyways.

The end result is that Elves and Dwarves could become frighteningly powerful should they survive many centuries of constant adventuring. However, their slow and steady natures make it an unlikely possibility that one would EVER reach the technical limits of this system. Most Elves or Dwarves would likely dabble in multiple classes through their long lives, thus slowing their advancement and reflecting their more patient natures. This suits my chronicle just fine, where any mere 30 year old Human arrogant enough to think himself the equal of an 800 year old Elf Lady or a 350 Year old Dwarf Lord would deserve the rude awakening he is sure to experience should he press his luck. Demi-Humans once again are the ones best suited to Multi-Classing, and Humans are best suited to specializing in one Class.

NPC's would be the only characters likely to earn enough XP through the course of their lives to achieve this level of power, and the end result would be very similar in power to the Gestalt Character option offered in Unearthed Arcana. Arch-nemesis NPC's could now prove much more challenging, even for a powerful group. Imagine the fear or respect in your players' eyes when the Drow they have just crossed is both a master Wizard and a skilled Rogue that has learned the secrets of a Shadow Dancer, or the Dwarven king sitting on that throne is a High Cleric of Moradin and a grizzled veteran Fighter that has earned great renown as a Dwarven Defender.

Some may claim that this Multi-Classing system breaks the game, unbalancing things dramatically towards races of greater longevity. On the other hand, I believe this system reflects the drastic differences and potential that should be realized based on the diversity in the lifespans of the various races.

Players might assume that the longer-lived races SEEM to have a significant advantage over the "lesser" races. This is a false assumption, based on the great POTENTIAL overshadowing the realistic equality between PC's. All characters are still limited by the maximum Experience that they can earn during the same period of time, therefore an Elf and a Human adventuring together will both still need 15-30 years of full-time adventuring to earn 20th level. The only advantage to be had by the Elf would be if the chronicle were to tell a story that required 50 or more years of game-time to complete.

Anybody with enough free time to play through that many adventures would still need to play in a consistant gaming group for many real-time years without getting bored with their character. In the unlikely event that this would ever happen the DM could encourage that player to retire the character to NPC status and give something else a try for a while.

I would not deny that this could be abused by Mini-Maxxers, Power-Gamers or Munchkins. Keeping those kinds of players in check is the responsibility of the DM. My goal was not to maintain game balance, but to create a logical system of advancement in my chronicle.There is no system that can be written that cannot be abused by a selfish player if the DM does not guide the game firmly and fairly.

Thank you for reading this far. I look forward to any feedback you may have to offer on this subject. I have not yet started this chronicle, and I am still considering refinements to this system and a few other things, so your insights are greatly appreciated.
His Magesty
03-22-04, 04:10 AM I like your exp limit per time, though it might need a boost at some intervals (10th level, say. Epic will almost certainly need one, although I don't like to use them).

Your multiclassing system is, as it seems that you noticed yourself, unbalanced in its current form. Anyway, it isn't important enough to me to put the effort into balancing and playtesting. I think multiclassing is fine as it is, even if your raw power is somewhat lower. It provides versatility and flavor. If used correctly, of course.

And you'll probably get a fine argument against the statement that a system cannot be completly balanced..

Oh, and I think that the best way to explain the fact that longer lived races don't overshadow the others is by firstly shortening their lives, and secondly accomodating their society to represent the 'patience' - for example, dwarves might be required to give birth when they get to maturity, give their children to the elders, that would raise them, and stay at home to support their families financially throught the family bussiness and take care of the sick and old of their family before they start their own careers at 35-40.
KAR 120 C
03-22-04, 01:08 PM If yu want to run a campaign with a lot of downtime, you could just go for a far more abstract system. The one I've been considering myself boils down to...

Most people reach level 1 by about 16. After that day to day experience adds anotehr level in your chosen class about every 5 years. If you make dedicated study, this could drop to evey 3 years, and if you're ding something truly itense, it could go as low as every 1 year.

Of course, some people like earning XP.
Wulffolk
05-07-04, 05:27 PM This is just a shameless *Bump* to see if anybody new might have an opinion on this subject.

I was hoping for a little more feedback than I originally received, and not too many people search very deeply into the older posts.
Kaihne
05-07-04, 05:37 PM hm...

I like the idea of Kar 120 C... with a few adjustments...

Let your players decide, what they do with their off-time.

If the fighter says, he tends to his families farm, give him a +1 to any profession/farmer checks for every year and later let him trade those in for a xp bonus (after all, if you're "off-the-job" you tend to get worse in it and the more practice you have, the better)... Just an idea though.

Wizards are another matter. Give them a bonus spell every year or so, beyond those normally available to him, to represent his studies.

I believe giving xp or lvls for off-time should be the province of NPCs, not players (they have to earn their lvls, not downtime to grow upp ;) )
Wulffolk
05-12-04, 09:42 AM KAR 120 C and Kaihne,

I am not sure how, but you both seem to have the impression that this post was about awarding XP for downtime.

I never mention awarding XP for downtime, only that downtime is the time when characters that have earned enough XP to advance a level would do so, through training or studying or whatever was called for. Planning downtime into my game just allows the characters the chance to advance levels, and is just a by-product of this training. XP is still earned the normal ways, through adventuring and role-playing.

The post is about limiting the maximum XP possible over certain periods of time to create a more realistic progression in levels relative to the aging of the character, as well as a change to the way Multi-Classing is handled to better reflect the difference between shorter-lived and longer-lived races.
Sulaco
05-12-04, 10:16 AM Originally posted by Wulffolk
This is just a shameless *Bump* to see if anybody new might have an opinion on this subject.

I was hoping for a little more feedback than I originally received, and not too many people search very deeply into the older posts.

Why not post it to Regdar's Repository?
MrkGrismer
05-13-04, 03:57 PM You should read the first edition rules, that is basically how multiclassing worked then (as far as the not-stacking). Also originally characters had to spend a certain amount of time training for their next level (I believe it was 1 wk/lv to be gained, so 10 weeks of training to get 10th level). Admittedly I don't know any DMs that used the training time rules.

I would also recommend picking up a copy of Harnmaster (Columbia Games) if you want to see some very interesting/realistic experience rules.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Wulffolk 03-19-04, 04:40 PM	I have been considering this topic for quite some time while planning a new chronicle. Why should a character be able to attain mastery of his chosen Class in short periods of game time? Why can Elves and Dwarves do nothing greater with their centuries of life than a Human can accomplish in a few short years? My first solution was to limit the amount of XP earned based on the time that had passed. A character can only learn so much during a specific amount of time. A maximum of 1,000xp/month of game-time can be earned, assuming that the character does enough to earn that much experience. Perhaps as much as 1,250xp/month for truly exceptional Role-Playing. That works out to 12,000xp/year, not counting rewards for good RP. This allows for a character to advance from 1st-5th level in their first year, 5th-7th level after 2 years, 7th-9th in 3 years, 9th-10th in 4 years, 11th by 5y, 12th by 6y, 13th by 7y, 14th by 8y, 15th by 9y, 16th by 10y, 17th by 12y, 18th by 13y, 19th by 15y, and 20th level after 16 years. This time table is the fastest that a character can possibly advance, assuming that he is doing the maximum learning possible EVERY single month for 16 CONSECUTIVE years. Advancement that rapid would be an amazing feat in itself, without even mentioning the deeds accomplished along the way. I intend to make allowances for considerable down-time along the way. Levelling will only be achieved during down-time, which should not be a problem since it is not possible for a character to earn enough XP during a single story to advance more than one level at a time. The need for down-time and durations necessary to train will make it unlikely that any PC will hit 20th level in less than 30 years of game time. That works out fairly well for Humans, Halflings and Half-Orcs. They should max out just before age starts to force them into a more peaceful lifestyle. The problem in this formula occurs when considering the longer-lived races in the game. What is 16 or 30 years to an Elf? Dwarves and even Half-Elves are just as unlikely to be phased by a few short decades. Why aren't all Elves and Dwarves masters of their profession when compared to others races, considering their greatly increased lifespan? The main reason is "relativity". Elves and Dwarves feel the flow of time less accutely than their Human counterparts and therefore do not rush to their goals. They take their time in all matters, especially the Elves. Patience and longevity are the keys to Dwarves and Elves. Dwarves will not leave their homes unless there is a damn good reason, and Elves will not risk potential centuries of life for anything not of absolute importance. My difficulty has been in reflecting the slower pace of the Elves and Dwarves in relation to Humans and Orcs, without unfairly crippling them with XP penalties. I considered longer periods of down-time for Elves and Dwarves, but that would just break up the group as the Humans and Halflings either went on with their lives while the Elves and Dwarves settled back to their slower pace, or the Humans would end up wasting most of their life waiting on their elder companions. My current solution is a considerable change in the current Multi-Class system, but one that I feel makes sense. In my game world Class Levels do NOT stack the way they normally would. A character's Equivalent Level is based on his TOTAL XP, but that XP can be used to advance levels in seperate classes independently. It never made sense to me that a Wizard of great power (Wizard 16) would have to spend as much much time and effort learning the basic skills of a Rogue, or the simple prayers of a Cleric, as he would spend learning to cast 9th level Arcane spells. What should be more difficult ... Rogue1, Cleric1, or Wizard 17? For example, a PC with 3,000xp is considered a 3rd Level character, just as he normally would be. However, that PC could be (Fighter3 for 3,000xp) or a (Fighter2 for 1,000xp/Rogue2 for 1,000xp/Wizard2 for 1,000xp), etc... It would seem that Multi-Classing would be over-powered in this system, except that NOTHING stacks. HP's, BAB, Saving Throws, and all other variables are based on the highest stat available to any ONE class, rather than adding all the classes together. The Fighter3 would have 3d10 HP, +3BAB and the Fighter's Fortitude saves. The Fighter2/Rogue2/Wizard2 would have just 2d10 HP and +2BAB, but he would also have a +1d6 Sneak Attack and Arcane Spellcasting, and he would use the Rogue's Reflex save and the Wizard's Will save now as well as the Fighter's Fortitude save. The F2/R2/W2 may still seem stronger than a F3, and that may be true at lower levels, but the gap widens as the Equivalent level goes up. A character with 45,000xp could be either a Fighter10 or a Fighter7/Rogue7. The F/R would lose 3d10 HP, +3BAB and 2 Feats, while gaining +4d6 Sneak Attack and the other Rogue class features. His saves would go from +7 Fortitude/+3 Reflex/+3 Will to +5 Fortitude/+5 Reflex/ +2 Will. That F7/R7 would still be facing the same monsters and other challenges as the F10, he would just have to do so more tactfully. When a character finally earns the 190,000xp necessary for 20th level after 15-30 years that character could either be a straight Fighter20, or a F14/R14, or some other combination of classes. Acquiring additional classes requires appropriate role-playing opportunities and training during downtime. This allows the DM a measure of control over how many Classes a character knows and what they are. No PC should be allowed to take a level of Wizard without first finding a master that is willing to take them as an apprentice. You don't think that Rogue has the right attitude to add Ranger to his resume? Then don't make the training available to him. He would first have to find a Ranger and convince him of his ability to fill the role, and his commitment to perform the Rangers' duties. Classes are not just kewl sk1llz and f34ts for the player to collect, they are societal roles or organized guilds of one kind or another. A PC cannot just add 1st level classes without cost or penalty. The XP penalty for being Multi-Class still applies, though without regard for balanced levels. Favored Classes do not count towards an XP penalty, but all other classes beyond the first non-favored class apply a cumulative 20% XP penalty. Through this form of Multi-Classing a Human or other short-lived character could hope to master one Class, be skilled in 2 Classes, or to have limited knowledge of 3 or more Classes in his lifetime. On the other hand, a Dwarf or an Elf could potentially master 2 or even 3 classes over the course of centuries, though progress would become EXCEEDINGLY slow due to the high Equivalent Level involved in earning 380,000 (27th Level) or 670,000xp (36th Level), especially when the XP penalty is taken into account. The XP penalty technically limits the number of Multi-Classes to 6 at the MAX with -80%xp (Favored Class, 1st non-favored Class, and 4 more Classes at -20%xp each), though the effectiveness of having more than 3 Classes would be greatly hindered by the XP penalty. Prestige Classes would count against the number of classes and the resulting XP penalty. It should be a rare thing for any character to ever have more than one Prestige Class anyways. The end result is that Elves and Dwarves could become frighteningly powerful should they survive many centuries of constant adventuring. However, their slow and steady natures make it an unlikely possibility that one would EVER reach the technical limits of this system. Most Elves or Dwarves would likely dabble in multiple classes through their long lives, thus slowing their advancement and reflecting their more patient natures. This suits my chronicle just fine, where any mere 30 year old Human arrogant enough to think himself the equal of an 800 year old Elf Lady or a 350 Year old Dwarf Lord would deserve the rude awakening he is sure to experience should he press his luck. Demi-Humans once again are the ones best suited to Multi-Classing, and Humans are best suited to specializing in one Class. NPC's would be the only characters likely to earn enough XP through the course of their lives to achieve this level of power, and the end result would be very similar in power to the Gestalt Character option offered in Unearthed Arcana. Arch-nemesis NPC's could now prove much more challenging, even for a powerful group. Imagine the fear or respect in your players' eyes when the Drow they have just crossed is both a master Wizard and a skilled Rogue that has learned the secrets of a Shadow Dancer, or the Dwarven king sitting on that throne is a High Cleric of Moradin and a grizzled veteran Fighter that has earned great renown as a Dwarven Defender. Some may claim that this Multi-Classing system breaks the game, unbalancing things dramatically towards races of greater longevity. On the other hand, I believe this system reflects the drastic differences and potential that should be realized based on the diversity in the lifespans of the various races. Players might assume that the longer-lived races SEEM to have a significant advantage over the "lesser" races. This is a false assumption, based on the great POTENTIAL overshadowing the realistic equality between PC's. All characters are still limited by the maximum Experience that they can earn during the same period of time, therefore an Elf and a Human adventuring together will both still need 15-30 years of full-time adventuring to earn 20th level. The only advantage to be had by the Elf would be if the chronicle were to tell a story that required 50 or more years of game-time to complete. Anybody with enough free time to play through that many adventures would still need to play in a consistant gaming group for many real-time years without getting bored with their character. In the unlikely event that this would ever happen the DM could encourage that player to retire the character to NPC status and give something else a try for a while. I would not deny that this could be abused by Mini-Maxxers, Power-Gamers or Munchkins. Keeping those kinds of players in check is the responsibility of the DM. My goal was not to maintain game balance, but to create a logical system of advancement in my chronicle.There is no system that can be written that cannot be abused by a selfish player if the DM does not guide the game firmly and fairly. Thank you for reading this far. I look forward to any feedback you may have to offer on this subject. I have not yet started this chronicle, and I am still considering refinements to this system and a few other things, so your insights are greatly appreciated.
His Magesty 03-22-04, 04:10 AM	I like your exp limit per time, though it might need a boost at some intervals (10th level, say. Epic will almost certainly need one, although I don't like to use them). Your multiclassing system is, as it seems that you noticed yourself, unbalanced in its current form. Anyway, it isn't important enough to me to put the effort into balancing and playtesting. I think multiclassing is fine as it is, even if your raw power is somewhat lower. It provides versatility and flavor. If used correctly, of course. And you'll probably get a fine argument against the statement that a system cannot be completly balanced.. Oh, and I think that the best way to explain the fact that longer lived races don't overshadow the others is by firstly shortening their lives, and secondly accomodating their society to represent the 'patience' - for example, dwarves might be required to give birth when they get to maturity, give their children to the elders, that would raise them, and stay at home to support their families financially throught the family bussiness and take care of the sick and old of their family before they start their own careers at 35-40.
KAR 120 C 03-22-04, 01:08 PM	If yu want to run a campaign with a lot of downtime, you could just go for a far more abstract system. The one I've been considering myself boils down to... Most people reach level 1 by about 16. After that day to day experience adds anotehr level in your chosen class about every 5 years. If you make dedicated study, this could drop to evey 3 years, and if you're ding something truly itense, it could go as low as every 1 year. Of course, some people like earning XP.
Wulffolk 05-07-04, 05:27 PM	This is just a shameless Bump to see if anybody new might have an opinion on this subject. I was hoping for a little more feedback than I originally received, and not too many people search very deeply into the older posts.
Kaihne 05-07-04, 05:37 PM	hm... I like the idea of Kar 120 C... with a few adjustments... Let your players decide, what they do with their off-time. If the fighter says, he tends to his families farm, give him a +1 to any profession/farmer checks for every year and later let him trade those in for a xp bonus (after all, if you're "off-the-job" you tend to get worse in it and the more practice you have, the better)... Just an idea though. Wizards are another matter. Give them a bonus spell every year or so, beyond those normally available to him, to represent his studies. I believe giving xp or lvls for off-time should be the province of NPCs, not players (they have to earn their lvls, not downtime to grow upp ;) )
Wulffolk 05-12-04, 09:42 AM	KAR 120 C and Kaihne, I am not sure how, but you both seem to have the impression that this post was about awarding XP for downtime. I never mention awarding XP for downtime, only that downtime is the time when characters that have earned enough XP to advance a level would do so, through training or studying or whatever was called for. Planning downtime into my game just allows the characters the chance to advance levels, and is just a by-product of this training. XP is still earned the normal ways, through adventuring and role-playing. The post is about limiting the maximum XP possible over certain periods of time to create a more realistic progression in levels relative to the aging of the character, as well as a change to the way Multi-Classing is handled to better reflect the difference between shorter-lived and longer-lived races.
Sulaco 05-12-04, 10:16 AM	Originally posted by Wulffolk This is just a shameless Bump to see if anybody new might have an opinion on this subject. I was hoping for a little more feedback than I originally received, and not too many people search very deeply into the older posts. Why not post it to Regdar's Repository?
MrkGrismer 05-13-04, 03:57 PM	You should read the first edition rules, that is basically how multiclassing worked then (as far as the not-stacking). Also originally characters had to spend a certain amount of time training for their next level (I believe it was 1 wk/lv to be gained, so 10 weeks of training to get 10th level). Admittedly I don't know any DMs that used the training time rules. I would also recommend picking up a copy of Harnmaster (Columbia Games) if you want to see some very interesting/realistic experience rules.