Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mommy was an Orc 04-15-07, 11:59 AM	I was wondering about the possibility of changing this rule to the maximum XP/Gold you can get is your Character Level +2. There's two large benefits from this: You have a table where it looks like this: 6 6 5 4 4 3 The table has to play APL 6. But it isn't as if the 3rd level character is going to have an easy time of it as it is the bare minimum APL 6 table. Everyone but him gets APL 6 XP/Treasure, he gets APL 4. He's not getting excessively rewarded by any measure. This, btw, is a table I might be playing at on Tuesday and I'm considering changing my 6 to my 2 because of this so as not to punish the 3. It eliminates the weirdness of someone playing up huge to break the gold cap. A 2nd level character plays at an APL 14 table and currently gets 900 XP, 3300 GP. Now he'd only get APL 4 treasure for 675 XP, 650 GP. -------- I don't see the downside of doing this, it seems as it would make forming tables easier, and it stops people from abusing the system with level 1 squishies at high level tables. Why not do that?
Puggle Halfwine 04-16-07, 12:03 AM	I like this idea. It would make organizing games at conventions much easier. Vote #1.
clannagh 04-16-07, 12:46 AM	I would also be in favor of this. As a side not it also fits in with circles recent attempts to limit loopholes where people deliberately fudge the XP/gold curve. Vote #2
Japangirl 04-16-07, 03:44 AM	Vote #3. I don't know if this will happen, but it's a good idea. EDIT: I have the REAL vote #3. The guy below me is just faking it, he wanted a bronze medal but I edged him out!
_metz_ 04-16-07, 03:44 AM	Vote #4. The guy gets APL 4 rewards, still gotta watch out for an APL 6 thing eating him, so its still preferable to play APL 4s and doesn't favour getting big boys to level you. I like it.
frupton 04-16-07, 05:04 AM	This is probably not a democracy, but I shall nevertheless cast vote #5.
Mithrus 04-16-07, 07:19 AM	Add my vote. This is similar logic behind Interactive rewards, where the exps/gold is based on each character, regardless of APL. If a level 2 plays up to to APL 14, he gets APL 2 exp/gold. The sticky part is whether he should get APL 14 access, which I suppose wouldn't matter much since they probably wouldn't be able to afford it (although all the Core/Any access of the higher APL rewards might be seens as abusive).
Mommy was an Orc 04-16-07, 08:23 AM	Add my vote. This is similar logic behind Interactive rewards, where the exps/gold is based on each character, regardless of APL. If a level 2 plays up to to APL 14, he gets APL 2 exp/gold. The sticky part is whether he should get APL 14 access, which I suppose wouldn't matter much since they probably wouldn't be able to afford it (although all the Core/Any access of the higher APL rewards might be seens as abusive). Cool, unanimous so far :) I thought CL+2 is better for regular adventures - an CL 4 often does contribute heavily to a CL 6 adventure, takes on a lot of risk. Not to mention the forming of tables - why does a CL 4 want to play at an APL 6 table if he's just going to get APL 4 treasure. At an interactive, it doesn't matter much, as the rewards are much lower anyway in terms of GP/XP.
Maesto 04-16-07, 08:42 AM	I'll vote for that too. It stops stupidity from occuring. Actually, can I raise my second hand as well for a second vote?
DuctShuiTengu 04-16-07, 09:18 AM	Not sure how much the Circle will actually care about this suggestion, or who voted, but for what it's worth, I'll toss my vote in as well.
TWG_Prometheus 04-16-07, 09:30 AM	I assume that a harder case such as a level 1 playing up to APL 4 (the classic case) would get APL 2 XP/Gold rather than any attempt at APL 3 XP/Gold weirdness? (Or worse, coming up with some justification to round up to APL 4 XP/Gold) It seems natural to me, but if you don't state stuff like this, some folks invariably get unexpected ideas in their head. What about access? Shouldn't that be limited in the same way? I don't think that's an issue we should brush off as inconsequential. Personally I don't think people should be able to play up more than 3, myself. I guess there are RPGA rules that make problems for that at the bigger cons though.
Mommy was an Orc 04-16-07, 11:11 AM	I assume that a harder case such as a level 1 playing up to APL 4 (the classic case) would get APL 2 XP/Gold rather than any attempt at APL 3 XP/Gold weirdness? (Or worse, coming up with some justification to round up to APL 4 XP/Gold) It seems natural to me, but if you don't state stuff like this, some folks invariably get unexpected ideas in their head. Right. You can only get the legal APLs(2, 4, 6, etc...) What about access? Shouldn't that be limited in the same way? I don't think that's an issue we should brush off as inconsequential. Personally I don't think people should be able to play up more than 3, myself. I guess there are RPGA rules that make problems for that at the bigger cons though. I think it could go either way, myself - it makes sense that the person has seen the item in question and gotten to handle it(if a caster) or would have the chance to purchase it. I think the value of playing up 10+ really goes away if you're a 1st level character only going to get APL 2 XP/Gold - I mean, who is going to do that more than once just for the access they can't use?
Jenner2057 04-16-07, 11:20 AM	Personally I don't think people should be able to play up more than 3, myself. I guess there are RPGA rules that make problems for that at the bigger cons though. Couldn't agree with you more. We've got a few players in our region that make it a habit to play APL 14 or 16 with their low level characters. I think max'ing out the xp/gold they can get would help fix that. You've got my vote.
ithardin 04-16-07, 01:19 PM	I like the idea as well.
Timlagor 04-16-07, 11:24 PM	I like the idea. Unless it's so wildly popular with the Circle that it gets adopted in a DC, please suggest it again when discussion for the next LGCS comes around.
Mithrus 04-17-07, 09:56 AM	Not to mention the forming of tables - why does a CL 4 want to play at an APL 6 table if he's just going to get APL 4 treasure. Well, I'd like a job that pays me doctor's wages with no responsibility...but perhaps the only thing in town is mowing lawns for minimum wage...sometimes you take what you can get ;)
paigeoliver 04-18-07, 06:51 AM	APL 14 access on a 2nd level character is meaningless. Chances are highest that the character won't ever even be played long enough to ever afford any of those items anyway, and even if they do buy them someday so what? Of course I do have a 5th level character sporting both a +1 adamantine throwing axe and a +1 starmetal throwing axe, so you never know what people might do who are willing to spend all their money on one thing. Add my vote. This is similar logic behind Interactive rewards, where the exps/gold is based on each character, regardless of APL. If a level 2 plays up to to APL 14, he gets APL 2 exp/gold. The sticky part is whether he should get APL 14 access, which I suppose wouldn't matter much since they probably wouldn't be able to afford it (although all the Core/Any access of the higher APL rewards might be seens as abusive).
JamesMaissen 04-18-07, 11:43 PM	APL 14 access on a 2nd level character is meaningless. It's not all that meaningless if they are getting 3300 gold a mod. If they are only getting 450gold a mod, then it shouldn't make much of a difference. The whole stated point of the 1/2gold and xp rule was to prevent this kind of abuse. It fails to deliver. A simple cap on gold/xp earned by the lesser of APL played and character level would atleast do that much. -James
Mommy was an Orc 04-19-07, 12:04 AM	IThe whole stated point of the 1/2gold and xp rule was to prevent this kind of abuse. It fails to deliver. A simple cap on gold/xp earned by the lesser of APL played and character level would atleast do that much. -James The problem with being that strict is then you make it more difficult to form tables. You've got 5 players at an APL 2 table and 5 players at an APL 4 table - 2 2nd level characters show up. If they're both going to get 450 XP/GP for playing, why wouldn't both of them want to play at the APL 2 table - same treasure, less risk, be more central to the table. If on the other hand, one of them will get 675 XP/650 GP, then there's some incentive for one of them to play up. The goal should be to make tables easier to form by not punishing the 3rd level playing up to APL 6, but at the same time not rewarding the 1st level playing up to APL 14.
JamesMaissen 04-19-07, 01:15 AM	If on the other hand, one of them will get 675 XP/650 GP, then there's some incentive for one of them to play up. I guess I disagree. I think that a natural extension of standardized rewards by APL is avoiding the whole issue of increased rewards by playing up. You will never get to please everyone all the time. Perhaps the 2nd level playing at APL 4 is actually safer than playing at the other table at APL 2. If people are going to be uncivilized it's hard to force them not to be. On the otherhand it would be nice not to harshly penalize them in addition to putting them in the position to play up 3 levels. Personally I think the best situation would be to allow the table to decide the APL that it wishes to play the mod at (of the options it makes available) and then grant rewards based upon that and character level. Have a weak table? Play down. Have just four players? Play down. Have a bad feeling about it? Play down. Want a hard challenge for a good table? Play up. Want bragging rights or the like? Play up. Tweaked your character to the nines and find yourself in like company? Play up. What's the harm? In the wash each PC will get no more than they would have gotten by playing at the proper level (possibly less) and everyone should be happy with what occured (as much as is possible) as they werent pressured to do things that they wouldn't do otherwise. -James PS: It also avoids the issue that APL calculations having gaping holes in accuracy and measurement.
Madfox11 04-19-07, 04:28 AM	Personally I think the best situation would be to allow the table to decide the APL that it wishes to play the mod at (of the options it makes available) and then grant rewards based upon that and character level. Have a weak table? Play down. Have just four players? Play down. Have a bad feeling about it? Play down. Want a hard challenge for a good table? Play up. Want bragging rights or the like? Play up. Tweaked your character to the nines and find yourself in like company? Play up. What's the harm? In the wash each PC will get no more than they would have gotten by playing at the proper level (possibly less) and everyone should be happy with what occured (as much as is possible) as they werent pressured to do things that they wouldn't do otherwise. -James PS: It also avoids the issue that APL calculations having gaping holes in accuracy and measurement. Strict rules prevent discussion and makes table forming easier. The few times people do get at an even APL that I have witnessed most of the time lead to at least 15 minute discussions mostly cut short by the DM (favoring the most conservative player). The more open the rules, the more discussion. Lowering the reward factor does not change that fact, since around here that is rarely (if ever) taken into account in the discussion. Most of the discussion is about how strong people think their party is, what kind of challenge they prefer and how dangerous the adventure will be. As for the treasure/xp gap rule propossed by MommyOrc, it sounds reasonable, but it is certainly not something we would do mid-year. Best to save it to the next LGCS incarnation. Note that Mommy is right in that if you reduce it to the basic interactive rule (as opposed to his +2 level rule) it will actually make table forming more difficult. People might not always care about rewards, but they do want to be rewarded for the challenge they face and people 2 levels below do tend to provide a strong contribution to the table.
JamesMaissen 04-19-07, 01:58 PM	People might not always care about rewards, but they do want to be rewarded for the challenge they face and people 2 levels below do tend to provide a strong contribution to the table. But if thats the case then why over penalize someone 3 levels below? A cap rather than 1/2 goes towards this. The person 3 levels below faces more danger and gets less rewards? Yet the person 10 levels below gets higher rewards? It seems to penalize those that are strong enough relative to the APL to actually help, while giving a benefit to those who cannot. -James
copper_wyrmling 04-19-07, 02:17 PM	But if thats the case then why over penalize someone 3 levels below? A cap rather than 1/2 goes towards this. The person 3 levels below faces more danger and gets less rewards? Yet the person 10 levels below gets higher rewards? It seems to penalize those that are strong enough relative to the APL to actually help, while giving a benefit to those who cannot. I'm not sure what your point is. The person three levels below (L1 at APL 4 table) gets APL 2 XP/gp, same as if they'd played APL 2, more than they would under the current rules. I can't imagine many people being upset about that. There is no case where getting XP/gp capped at level+2 leads to less gold than taking half-half if you're 3-4 levels below APL (e.g. a L10-11 playing APL 14, which is the biggest jump, gets 3300gp either way, although they'd get less xp under the half-half system). The person 10 levels below APL (L2 at APL 12) gets APL 4 xp and gp, which seems like a fair reward for the risk, and doesn't skew their XP/gold ratio, it just gets them ahead a little faster. At the moment, they'd get more than twice APL 4 gold and slightly more than APL 4 XP: applying a cap is definitely a penalty in this case. I think the level+2 cap is a really nice idea.
Madfox11 04-20-07, 04:38 AM	JamesMaison misunderstood my statement. There was some discussion about just using the current interactive rules where PCs get xp based on their level rounded down to the nearest uneven number. That is a rule I do not belief works in traditional adventures. The cap +2 rule looks good, but it would be too big a change to do mid-year.
Mattastrophic 04-20-07, 12:14 PM	To weigh in... My thoughts on the situation are about 95% identical to JamesMaissen's. PCs should get their APL's worth of XP/GP. Thus, it encourages players to play their APL instead of constantly up, and leads to a sense of graduation from one APL to the next. On the other than, limiting the rewards in this way, it's a big step in the right direction. -Matt
Timlagor 04-20-07, 09:08 PM	I would hate to have a restriction to level of APL=your level. APL=level+2 would be a good idea though.
Dempster 04-23-07, 11:25 PM	I say yes, yes, and yes. count me in as a supporter. This is simple and closes the loophole where freinds of high level players can hide in a bag of holding during combats and end up making a boat load of gold and XP for thier low level characters.
raevyn001 04-24-07, 12:22 AM	I think what the rule-as-it-is is getting at is this: A PC more than two levels lower than the APL can contirbute considerably less than the others and thereby earns a smaller reward. I just went through this with my first ever RPGA game (lel-1 PC in APL 4 game, of course!) and saw the difference. At first I complained about it. I was facing challenges out of my league, so shouldn't my rewards be greater? But when I really looked at how things went down (and my happy little rogue was in the thick of all it, where he should NOT have been!), it was the rest of the party who kept my Character alive. Sure that sneak attack was well timed and kept the spellcaster from wrecking shop on the party, but it was the guys with higher BAB's and more spells per day and higher Find Trap scores who did most of the work. I hear where you're coming from, but think things are okay the way they are. Be well in all things, Rave
haferka 04-24-07, 02:53 AM	Love the Idea!! BUT... **************************************** ** Access should be granted for the APL that was played.. **************************************** **
Jenner2057 04-24-07, 08:26 AM	I think what the rule-as-it-is is getting at is this: A PC more than two levels lower than the APL can contirbute considerably less than the others and thereby earns a smaller reward. I just went through this with my first ever RPGA game (lel-1 PC in APL 4 game, of course!) and saw the difference. At first I complained about it. I was facing challenges out of my league, so shouldn't my rewards be greater? But when I really looked at how things went down (and my happy little rogue was in the thick of all it, where he should NOT have been!), it was the rest of the party who kept my Character alive. Sure that sneak attack was well timed and kept the spellcaster from wrecking shop on the party, but it was the guys with higher BAB's and more spells per day and higher Find Trap scores who did most of the work. I hear where you're coming from, but think things are okay the way they are. Be well in all things, Rave Yes, they do work OK in the case where you're talking about (1st level playing APL 4). A first level can still do something to contribute to the party. Where it really breaks down is that same 1st level playing at APL14 and (as was mentioned previously) being carried around in a bag of holding JUST to get the boat-loads of gold. That's the situation where there needs to be a max on what the 1st level character can get.
Mommy was an Orc 04-24-07, 08:53 AM	Yes, they do work OK in the case where you're talking about (1st level playing APL 4). A first level can still do something to contribute to the party. Where it really breaks down is that same 1st level playing at APL14 and (as was mentioned previously) being carried around in a bag of holding JUST to get the boat-loads of gold. That's the situation where there needs to be a max on what the 1st level character can get. And actually, a 1st level character gets more experience in the APL 4 situation - instead of 337 XP, they get 450 XP - if they're getting 450 XP for an intro mod, they should get it for any mod they might play...
Rerednaw 04-24-07, 10:44 AM	I say yes, yes, and yes. count me in as a supporter. This is simple and closes the loophole where freinds of high level players can hide in a bag of holding during combats and end up making a boat load of gold and XP for thier low level characters. I'd be for it. Of course I play up almost all the time. Play APL4 3x with a level 1, and like clockwork, he dies during the 3rd mod. Which is why I only have one character above level 1. :D (Except for a pre 597 bard whose build is completely messed up now so I abandoned him).