New Xp System: Not a Fan

[Axly Suregrip]

interesting plans from various folks.

...or we can just say you earn another talent/spell point whenever you gain IQ.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by Axly Suregrip

interesting plans from various folks.

...or we can just say you earn another talent/spell point whenever you gain IQ.

Yes but it doesn't solve the problem with 50 point characters that are boring to play. Some way to dump XP into talents at some point is a fundamentally good idea. But yes I agree that talent should either be completely decoupled from IQ or should go hand in hand with IQ all the way. Changing the rule depending on your starting IQ is very arbitrary.

[larsdangly]

Every dissatisfaction I've heard about the new XP rules seem easily solved by just giving people more XP. You can have as many as you want, as far as I'm concerned. There is almost no number you can give a character under the new system that will make them game-breakingly invincible. I suppose that's a problem if what you want is to play a game-breakingly invincible character, but I haven't heard anyone say they wanted that.

[TippetsTX]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

Yes but it doesn't solve the problem with 50 point characters that are boring to play. Some way to dump XP into talents at some point is a fundamentally good idea. But yes I agree that talent should either be completely decoupled from IQ or should go hand in hand with IQ all the way. Changing the rule depending on your starting IQ is very arbitrary.

50-point characters create a completely different set of problems, but I'm not quite convinced that a balance of both options (talents from IQ and/or XP) can't be found. TBH, though, part of my issue with the current aquisition model is the flat cost. Adding new talents or spells never gets any harder as the character advances which, for wizards especially, seems to lead to same problem with 'sameness' that many found boring under the old rules. There are only so many spells to choose from, after all. And who wouldn't elect to purchase 8 spells instead of that 40th stat point?

[Axly Suregrip]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

Yes but it doesn't solve the problem with 50 point characters that are boring to play. Some way to dump XP into talents at some point is a fundamentally good idea. But yes I agree that talent should either be completely decoupled from IQ or should go hand in hand with IQ all the way. Changing the rule depending on your starting IQ is very arbitrary.

Hi Nils,
Sorry, but I now see my update was too short to understand.

I said this: "or we can just say you earn another talent/spell point whenever you gain IQ."

What I meant is we keep the new advancement of skills, spells and attributes through XP, but whenever you purchase an IQ point you also gain a talent point. Purchasing a talent point for 500 XP is still an option buy only makes sense for characters with some experience already.

And I also agree with Larsdangly: more XP should be given out than what they suggest.

[Axly Suregrip]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Every dissatisfaction I've heard about the new XP rules seem easily solved by just giving people more XP. You can have as many as you want, as far as I'm concerned. There is almost no number you can give a character under the new system that will make them game-breakingly invincible. I suppose that's a problem if what you want is to play a game-breakingly invincible character, but I haven't heard anyone say they wanted that.

I agree with you completely. The speed of advancement is too slow. It stagnates the game.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

Every dissatisfaction I've heard about the new XP rules seem easily solved by just giving people more XP. You can have as many as you want, as far as I'm concerned. There is almost no number you can give a character under the new system that will make them game-breakingly invincible. I suppose that's a problem if what you want is to play a game-breakingly invincible character, but I haven't heard anyone say they wanted that.

"Just giving people more XP"???

Enough to learn to, say, swim and ride a horse? That's a very minimal example, and involves 1000 XP. So you're just going to rapidly give people 1000 XP? Well, the ones who started with the IQ to just start with the talents they wanted will be that much XP ahead of the others. So like 36-37 point characters, while the ones who forgot they needed to know a basic talent or two will be 32-point characters, and all they got for their 1000 XP was making up for a mistake of not realizing how slanted the talent learning costs are.

And if that weren't enough of a problem, handing out lots more XP means that the early development game, where players need to actually face many foes that are challenging and survive them with skill (i.e. one of the most exciting, challenging, and interesting parts of the game) will be rushed through as XP is showered on the PCs.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

There are four problems with the XP system, don't mix them up it is confusing, at least to me.

Problem 1.
The steep exponential XP curve stagnates the game. And a flat XP rate creates 50 pointers that are boring. And now that we have a flat XP gain, instead of an exponential one like in the old version, it mixes up things again. If you give out twice as much XP, you just make 43 instead of 44 the "impossible point". But if you just give more XP you halve the time at the early levels. And if you suggest giving less in the beginning and more at the end, it just shows that the exponential XP curve is too steep and should be flatter.

Problem 2.
A flat cost of some stuff, combined with an exponential cost of attributes. This gives the effect that at some point you switch from the attribute gains and go for other stuff instead. This is intended, but I would personally prefer both systems being exponential or both being flat. One example would be to set the extra talents and extra spell cost at 100,200,300, etc. I see no roleplaying reason why people should first gain X number of attributes, and then stop and get talents instead. The logical way would be to take a few attributes, a few talents, maybe a few more attributes and then talents again, etc.

Problem 3.
Starting IQ gives bonus talents, but XP bought IQ do not. This is just bonkers. It would be like saying that Starting ST gives you Hit points, but if you increase ST with XP you can only wield heavier weapons, but have to buy extra HP with 500 XP per point. Not logical and very strange. The only roleplaying reason I can see is that SJ doesn't want characters to get a lot smarter with XP, they should be smart or dumb from the start and more or less stay that way. And XP should only give more talents, but not from the start. So you start smart or dumb and don't improve much, then you gain physical attributes and after that, you buy only talents. At least that is what the rules encourage. Some people might find that realistic, I don't. I think you learn talents as well as get better overall or should be able to choose freely as a player without feeling like you are inefficient and doing it the wrong way.

Problem 4.
The level of progression. Some say it is too slow, some too fast. This is a personal preference and the rulebook suggests a span of 25-100 and extra for cool stuff. I have no opinion on this, it is up to each campaign and each group of players. My general suggestion would be; for short or deadly campaigns a quicker progression, for long ones a slower progression. Just giving out more or giving out less XP doesn't solve problem 1-3 at all.

[larsdangly]

There is nothing that will force people to spend those points on swimming or riding or whatever instead of stats. In practice, virtually all players invest their first ~1000-2000 XP in stats before they begin putting any toward talents, spells, staff power and minor wishes. So, the outcome of the situation you describe is that players who don't start with certain talents still won't have them after a month or two of play, while they focus on their stats, but will consider getting them afterwards. So what? If they thought those talents were so important they could have taken them on character creation. If they didn't, then they can deal with the consequences of their decision for a few adventures. I don't understand why that is a problem. It's just a choice.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

There is nothing that will force people to spend those points on swimming or riding or whatever instead of stats. In practice, virtually all players invest their first ~1000-2000 XP in stats before they begin putting any toward talents, spells, staff power and minor wishes. So, the outcome of the situation you describe is that players who don't start with certain talents still won't have them after a month or two of play, while they focus on their stats, but will consider getting them afterwards. So what? If they thought those talents were so important they could have taken them on character creation. If they didn't, then they can deal with the consequences of their decision for a few adventures. I don't understand why that is a problem. It's just a choice.

Wait, what? It only takes a month or two to earn 1000-2000 XP??? So your PCs generally (survive and) zoom up to 37-38 points in that time?

As I wrote in my previous post, to me that is throwing out one of the best parts of the game - the part where the PCs are still just above-average people gaining experience and getting more powerful but aren't yet notably superior to most people in the world, and they're having to earn it with deadly tactical problems. To me, getting to 36+ points is a major accomplishment, and one that even experienced players may often fail due to circumstances and misfortune and/or mistakes, and the 36-point and under characters need to work in functional ways, and also should make since for NPCs since the population averages 30 points and 32 is "above average".

But even if I accept the premise of a game where players think 32-36 points is something to speed through in two months, and discount the many issues with that, you still have at least three issues:

1) yes, you ought to plan all the talents you're going to need at creation, since you'll be penalized for learning stuff before 37-38 points

2) there's no self-consistent way for people who aren't getting piles of XP to learn any talents - there's no self-consistent non-house-ruled/forced way to see what it takes to learn a talent other than enough XP to become a superior person by raising attributes.

3) the experience of 1) and 2) imply that few people learn any talents before 36 total points, but everyone somehow starts with a bunch of talents? How did they learn those?

Probably more I'm not thinking of.

But really, I think you must just have some very different ideas than I do, so maybe it's pointless to keep trying to explain the issues I perceive. It's just hard for me to see others pointing out and asking about the same issues I perceive as important and very valuable to address, and then see you posting that there is no problem (which seems to happen pretty regularly), without replying about it.