Post/Author/DateTime	Post
katahn 04-09-08, 04:01 PM	Just an idle thought I had, but what if the LA for more powerful races didn't increase the character level of the character but only affected the amount of experience they earned from a particular CR encounter? So Tom the Tiefling and Edward the Elf are out adventuring and defeat an encounter with a CR appropriate to their character level (but not including any racial LAs). Edward the Elf will earn the standard amount of experience, but Tom the Tiefling will earn less due to the effect of his racial LA. Now Tom and Edward both need to earn X amount of experience to advance to their next character level, but as time progresses Edward advances in levels just a little faster than Edward does. Eventually it will reach a point where Edward's character level compared to Tom's character level comparead to the CR of the encounters they are facing will reach a steady state point where they are earning roughly equivilent experience - but that will tend to happen only once Tom is a level or two behind Edward. So far this sounds exactly like what the standard rules would call for. The LA+ character settles in at being some number of levels behind everyone else. The difference is that the default rules result in the LA+ character not only falling behind in total class levels but needing comparable amounts of experience earned to advance - a sort of doubled (and constantly increasing) penalty. My thought is this might be a slightly more elegant way of minimizing the higher level impact of having an LA1+ race without needing to resort to optional "LA buyoff" rules or overpowering LA1+ races in lower level play. I'm curious what others think of this idea.
Kursk 04-09-08, 04:34 PM	Doesn't address them being more powerful than their peers at start.
Pandapeep 04-09-08, 05:19 PM	Most +1 races aren't that much more powerful.
Kursk 04-09-08, 05:24 PM	Most +1 races aren't that much more powerful. Then eliminate the +1.
katahn 04-09-08, 11:13 PM	Then eliminate the +1. Just because a +1 race isn't "that powerful" doesn't mean that it isn't slightly better off than a +0 race. The existing system intends to cause a +X race to level more slowly than a +0 race and that's a decent tradeoff for starting off as a more powerful character, but because it is tied to a static amount of levels the cost for the LA scales up and up and up as a character levels. If the characters are level 2, being LA1 just cost the character 2,000xp (the difference between being level 1 in a class and level 2 in it). If the characters are level 10, that xp difference is now 10,000xp for just one level. On the other hand, if we say the +1 race has an advantage that gives them an edge compared to their peers adventuring it becomes fair to say that something that challenges their +0 teammates just isn't quite as challenging for them so they get less experience. But just because they get less experience it doesn't suddenly also mean it is harder (ie. takes more experience) to advance in a level. Or at least it doesn't have to mean it.
Neutronium_Dragon 04-09-08, 11:47 PM	This is another variation of the "XP Penalty" approach, and one of the developers has written a rant about why it won't work - *especially* in 3.5E, where falling behind means you start gaining *more* XP. http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/LAvsXPpenalty.html
Pandapeep 04-10-08, 01:41 AM	Then eliminate the +1. I my next game I intend to do just that.
katahn 04-10-08, 09:09 AM	This is another variation of the "XP Penalty" approach, and one of the developers has written a rant about why it won't work - *especially* in 3.5E, where falling behind means you start gaining *more* XP. http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/LAvsXPpenalty.html Yes but this XP penalty is based on your virtual level rather than a static percentage. If your ECL (Level + LA) is higher than your group you earn less experience, this is a natural consequence of more translating into things being less of a challenge. As your groupmates earn more experience they start pulling ahead of you, eventually their level will match your ECL and everyone earns identical experience. Again this is only appropriate, the challenges faced are roughly equally difficult for everyone. Now of course since your character level is lower, identical experience means you'll cross a level threshold sooner than they will. However when that happens your ECL has risen above theirs and the system self-corrects as you start earning less experience per encounter than the others until they catch up. The net effect is you stay some number of levels behind, variably based on your ECL versus their character levels, but as levels start going higher and more experience is earned, on average the number of levels in deficit will drop. Since that effect is the entire point of the optional "LA Buyoff" rule in the Unearthed Arcana and most of us would agree that while a LA is appropriate in lower levels the actual benefit starts to not be worth the cost in higher levels. So without needing a complex set of rules about when LAs can be bought off we have achieved a similar result.
runestar 04-10-08, 09:19 AM	The main reason why it will not work, as neutronium dragon pointed out, is this. XP penalties make little to no difference at low character levels when the differences between races should be the strongest. An assimar is slightly stronger than a LA+0 race (good stat bonuses, free martial weapon prof), and as per your houserule, it would allow players to have 1 at 1st lv. The drawback only comes later, but the benefits are accrued at the present. Granted, I doubt it would make enough of a difference to upset your game, but that does not mean that your concept is sound, since empirical evidence (as so graciously provided by Sean Reynolds) clearly shows otherwise.:)