XP is not a river. [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 01:03 PM

Yes, I know. I hear it constantly. The phrase "LA buyoff" as if it were a free power boost...the idea that being a level behind is really no big deal.

Look at the original post (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872242/Experience_is_a_River), shall we? Great stuff. Lots of claims. Even a bunch of numbers he didn't bother to justify or put in tables. Methodology is important.

Yes, there is a certain element of catching up...but it is exceptionally minor.

Let us consider the example of something who has LA 2. This is not excessive, and represents the optimal amount of LA buyoff in a 20 level build.

Per UA (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/reducingLevelAdjustments.htm), you will buy off these levels at 6 and again at 9. Note that these are CLASS levels, not class level + LA. This is explicit in the rules, and also included in the example text. So, your party will be at level 8 when you buy off the first level.

Your party: (level 8)
You: (level 6/LA 1)

Note that, by this time, being two levels of class features behind already kind of sucks. You get into PrCs slower, you get feats and stat boosts slower...even with the boosts provided by your LA'd template/race, you are probably already fighting to stay even. You almost certainly have lower hp than normal for someone of your class. And that's if you chose wisely. Some LA options are just painful.

Let's assume they're slaying bog standard CR 8 encounters. CR14+ won't grant you any xp...but frankly, they'll probably also obliterate you. In fact, any challenging fights are more likely to kill you than your teammates at this point, and a raise dead will set you another level back. If that happens...stop here, the rest of the math is mostly irrelevant, you're already failing to keep up, and probably falling ever further behind as you grow increasingly squishy.

So, a CR 8 encounter grants them 600 xp each.
It grants you 787.5 xp each.
You're catching up, right?

Well, sort of. See, you only are catching up until you level. Then, you're the same level they are, so you gain xp at the same rate. So, you make back about 25%* of the xp differential fairly rapidly(a level), but then spend proportionately less time making up xp, and thus, never really catch entirely back up.

*A naive estimate would be 30%, but each level has more xp required than the last, so you will level faster than the party...not because you're catching up in xp, but simply because each level takes more of it. While this lowers the penalty of unequal xp, it does not actually fix it. However, it does cut into time when you can catch up on xp. So, a couple levels after buyoff, you're really not making any appreciable headway on the XP debt.

Worse, the above is a mathmatically perfect scenario, in which all xp awards are given solely for encounters, every encounter is the optimal level for you to gain maximum extra xp and it forms a lovely, consistent function. Realistically, encounters are all over the place in terms of CR, and the differential between levels varies strongly. Consider the example of the CR 13 boss fight. In addition to it being highly risky to you, the xp gains are as follows:

Party: 3600
You: 4200

That 600 extra xp only represents an extra 16.6% for you. That's about half what you were getting with the CR 8 fight. So, it's a great fight in overall xp, but a bad fight for catching up with the party.

Worse, story awards and other ad-hoc awards(both of which are also in the DMG, and frequently used in conjunction with normal xp progression) make no such provisions, and will likely not help you catch up with the party at all.

Honestly, merely buying off 2 LA means that at party level 10, you're slightly over a full level behind the party, and by party level 13, you can expect to still have over half the xp debt you had at level 10. You will probably continue to lag a full session or more of xp behind the party until level 15+, well after the benefits of most LA +2 options have long since ceased to be of any help at all.

Binks

2012-02-22, 01:29 PM

Yes, I know. I hear it constantly. The phrase "LA buyoff" as if it were a free power boost...the idea that being a level behind is really no big deal.

Look at the original post, shall we? Great stuff. Lots of claims. Even a bunch of numbers he didn't bother to justify or put in tables. Methodology is important.
Which is why you're following it up with a lot of claims and a bunch of number you're not bothering to justify or put in tables?

represents the optimal amount of LA buyoff in a 20 level build.
Opinion. I personally think an LA buyoff of 0 is optimal. There are people out there who think an LA buyoff of 1 or 3 are optimal. What makes your randomly pulled number right and the rest of us wrong?

Note that, by this time, being two levels of class features behind already kind of sucks. You get into PrCs slower, you get feats and stat boosts slower...even with the boosts provided by your LA'd template/race, you are probably already fighting to stay even. You almost certainly have lower hp than normal for someone of your class. And that's if you chose wisely. Some LA options are just painful.
1. Who says you want a PrC?
2. Stat boosts are not that great. Half they time they do nothing for you (even->odd) and the other half they're +1s to a bunch of things. Whee. You can do better with items (which the original post does by selling off xp)
3. Who says you have lower hp than normal? Monster race + Wizard = higher hp than a normal wizard of your level. In fact any race + any class = higher hp than a normal person of your class level, the only question is whether your class hp is > your race hp, which is not such an easily answered question.
4. Some classes are just painful too...that doesn't make uses classes bad. Saying that some LA options are painful is just ridiculous, you're talking about a TO concept and saying that picking poorly is bad? Really? Because this is TO. Anyone doing this already knows what LA options are bad and which ones are good.

Let's assume they're slaying bog standard CR 8 encounters. CR14+ won't grant you any xp...but frankly, they'll probably also obliterate you. In fact, any challenging fights are more likely to kill you than your teammates at this point, and a raise dead will set you another level back. If that happens...stop here, the rest of the math is mostly irrelevant, you're already failing to keep up, and probably falling ever further behind as you grow increasingly squishy.
You're assuming. Who says a challenging encounter is more likely to slay you than your teammates? What if you're playing a caster who stays in the back of the party? Or an archer? Or you have a great tank? Or a great healer? Justify that claim please.

Well, sort of. See, you only are catching up until you level. Then, you're the same level they are, so you gain xp at the same rate. So, you make back about 25%* of the xp differential fairly rapidly(a level), but then spend proportionately less time making up xp, and thus, never really catch entirely back up.
And here's the part that makes me wonder if you even read the original post. If you'll note, the original post uses a PC who is always 1 level behind due to spending XP on items. Ignoring that part of the original claim means you're fighting a strawman here.

*A naive estimate would be 30%, but each level has more xp required than the last, so you will level faster than the party...not because you're catching up in xp, but simply because each level takes more of it. While this lowers the penalty of unequal xp, it does not actually fix it. However, it does cut into time when you can catch up on xp. So, a couple levels after buyoff, you're really not making any appreciable headway on the XP debt.
Prove it. You've pulled 2 numbers out of nowhere with no justification for them. Prove that you only make up 25% of the difference per level. Interesting note, the original post showed (mathematically) that you earn about 35% more xp than everyone else in the party by level 20. You're saying it's 10% less without any math...who would you believe?

Honestly, merely buying off 2 LA means that at party level 10, you're slightly over a full level behind the party, and by party level 13, you can expect to still have over half the xp debt you had at level 10. You will probably continue to lag a full session or more of xp behind the party until level 15+, well after the benefits of most LA +2 options have long since ceased to be of any help at all.
You've ignored 90% of the original post. Go read it again. The fact that you're a level behind is made up for by the fact that you have LA bonuses at no cost and more $$$ than is normal for your level due to selling xp.

As a sidenote, I don't consider buying off LA to be worth it in most games. But you've done nothing here to disprove that it could be worth it.

Suddo

2012-02-22, 01:40 PM

I don't think that 1 level makes you worthless in combat. A caster can still be awesome, and usually has a plus to his main stat thus increasing his DCs to that of a level above him; A fighter type will probably have a +Str and/or +Con giving him back that lost BAB and some extra HP; A skillmonkey would have +Int to make up for the lose of skill points. Though the lose of a level sucks I wouldn't call it the biggest lose in the world.

Edit: And this is just based off the stats. If you get some good abilities then you could be even better.

gkathellar

2012-02-22, 01:40 PM

I see the "XP is a river" point used more with regards to the costs of Necropolitan, XP-cost spells and item crafting - where it is, in fact, a river because the XP costs are much smaller and the differences will be made up very quickly.

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 01:49 PM

Which is why you're following it up with a lot of claims and a bunch of number you're not bothering to justify or put in tables?

I explained where my numbers were from. He lumped a massive grid of numbers with no explanation of them whatsoever into the middle of his text.

Opinion. I personally think an LA buyoff of 0 is optimal. There are people out there who think an LA buyoff of 1 or 3 are optimal. What makes your randomly pulled number right and the rest of us wrong?

No LA is best, obviously, but speaking strictly, there is no such thing as a LA 0 buyoff. Your options start at 1 and increase from there.

2 gets you the most xp regained over 20 party levels. This is because a 3+ level buyoff means you cannot actually buy off your third level until it's too late to earn it back.

1. Who says you want a PrC?

The classes that least need PrCs are those that gain notable class features, like druid. LA is particularly bad for such classes.

2. Stat boosts are not that great. Half they time they do nothing for you (even->odd) and the other half they're +1s to a bunch of things. Whee. You can do better with items (which the original post does by selling off xp)

Honestly, stat boosts are one of the main things LA gives you, so you can't really disregard the value of stats without negating one of the primary reasons for taking LA to begin with. Stats do have some value, but if the benefit of LA is marginal, things like slower stat and feat gain are things you should consider.

3. Who says you have lower hp than normal? Monster race + Wizard = higher hp than a normal wizard of your level. In fact any race + any class = higher hp than a normal person of your class level, the only question is whether your class hp is > your race hp, which is not such an easily answered question.

LA does not give any hp. RHD are a separate thing entirely. Losing total HD is definitely a bad thing, and will usually result in lower hp overall.

4. Some classes are just painful too...that doesn't make uses classes bad. Saying that some LA options are painful is just ridiculous, you're talking about a TO concept and saying that picking poorly is bad? Really? Because this is TO. Anyone doing this already knows what LA options are bad and which ones are good.

It is not merely that some LA options are bad. It's that almost all LA options are bad. Even with LA buyoff, the vast majority are terrible. Sometimes, LA buyoff is treated as a panacea to such things, but it's effect is overrated.

You're assuming. Who says a challenging encounter is more likely to slay you than your teammates? What if you're playing a caster who stays in the back of the party? Or an archer? Or you have a great tank? Or a great healer? Justify that claim please.

LA does not make you play smarter or less aggressive. A caster in the back of the party with LA is still generally more likely to die than a caster in the back of the party without LA.

And here's the part that makes me wonder if you even read the original post. If you'll note, the original post uses a PC who is always 1 level behind due to spending XP on items. Ignoring that part of the original claim means you're fighting a strawman here.

LA buyoff is routinely used to justify the XP is a river concept. It is also explicitly mentioned in the original thread.

Prove it. You've pulled 2 numbers out of nowhere with no justification for them. Prove that you only make up 25% of the difference per level. Interesting note, the original post showed (mathematically) that you earn about 35% more xp than everyone else in the party by level 20. You're saying it's 10% less without any math...who would you believe?

You clearly did not read where I explained where that 25% came from. Also, the 35% you are comparing to is a different number entirely. They are not equivalents.

Long story short, being a level behind earns you about 30% more xp for a fight that's in the optimal xp range. Certain xp ranges(such as if you are level 1, and the party is level 2), provide no benefit whatsoever, and many ranges provide numbers somewhere in between. A nice mix of encounters is normal, and recommended per the DMG. You cannot reasonably assume that every encounter lands in the sweet spot for you.

If you doubt this, pop open the DMG's xp chart, and calculate the percentage difference for being one level behind.

You've ignored 90% of the original post. Go read it again. The fact that you're a level behind is made up for by the fact that you have LA bonuses at no cost and more $$$ than is normal for your level due to selling xp.

And? Oh dear, that doesn't work well at all. He also does not include the opportunity cost of taking crafting feats, and assumes that he can sell crafted magical items at full retail price without overhead.

This is...not RAW. Not at all. Half price is RAW. Crafting for yourself is situationally nice, but does not mesh well with his claimed strategy, as it is reliant on having adequate gold for crafting at any given time, as well as the other required resources(like spells known). In addition, the items you most need may not line up well with the specific amount of xp you are required to spend at every level.

gbprime

2012-02-22, 02:00 PM

The important thing is not how much XP it takes for this or that, it's character effectiveness.

You want your PC to "be all it can be" by about halfway or 2/3 through the campaign. What's the point of becoming a badass if the game ends right after you do? You want time to enjoy being that awesome dude (or dudette, if that's even a word :smalltongue: ).

If you're paying off level adjustment AFTER you have everything you want in your character build, that's perfectly fine. But if paying down that LA delays you in achieving your character's sweet-spot, then you want to avoid that.

Suddo

2012-02-22, 02:06 PM

I explained where my numbers were from. He lumped a massive grid of numbers with no explanation of them whatsoever into the middle of his text.

Yeah I would love to know about that chart too from someone who understands it.

Gavinfoxx

2012-02-22, 02:13 PM

The point of XP is a river is *specifically* to always stay a level under everyone else, and use the bonus XP on miscellaneous stuff... and not generally to take a level adjustment...

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 02:27 PM

The important thing is not how much XP it takes for this or that, it's character effectiveness.

This is in fact rather major. I feel like rather a lot of build advice treats the level 20 build as rather more important than it needs to be, when most games have a rather long trek to get there, and if they do, end shortly thereafter.

That said, LA pre-buyoff mostly ignores the entire concept of XP being a river. If its worth it without buyoff, great. Still will be with it.

But if the goal is "free LA!" and you spend the first 15 levels behind in class features as a result....it isn't free.

Godskook

2012-02-22, 03:16 PM

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 03:27 PM

If you had actually read the post well enough, you'd see that the available xp for this concept is ~95k. You're using examples that only utilize 3k-15k. Basically, your numbers aren't big enough to understand the concept.

For instance, take Bob the Artificer. At every level-up, he spends time crafting, such that he's always a full level behind the party. From level 3(since the tables don't include any adjustments for lower levels). He sells his goods at market cost, and is thus making 12.5 gold per xp* he 'earns' this way.

Oh, I did read. There's the problem. You are not guaranteed to be able to sell goods at market cost. You sell goods at half that. 75% of that, with the right feat.

So, one of his basic assumptions is so deeply flawed that it basically breaks everything.

To make the math easy, we'll say character creation is at level 3, so everyone has 3k xp. Then, when the party reaches level 4, Bob refuses to level, and instead craft. He continues until the party reaches level 5, at which point he levels to 4 in tandem. Over this process so far, he has spent 4537.5 xp on crafting, earning 56718.75 gold in the process of selling it all. Of this amount, 537.5xp(6718.75 gold) is strictly from choosing to start the process at level 3 instead of 4. With these supplies, he has more than doubled the party's wealth(compared to WBL), and instead of just having a magic weapon, the party is well studded with wonderous items such as rings of protection, +2 con items, etc.

So basically, would you rather be level 5 with 9k per person, or be level 4 in a party of level 5s with 23179 per person?

This assumes that, in this period, he has the gold, resources and time to craft all that xp away without impacting adventuring time. Also, it assumes he can sell all of this at full market price without making any investments to do so.

These assumptions are wildly unrealistic. Given these same assumptions, I can start an indefinite money machine abusing standard crafting rules. Hell, mine has a lower cost, so it even works without breaking RAW on sold items.

Zaranthan

2012-02-22, 03:44 PM

It's a strong point. To put numbers down, 95,000 XP produces 2,375,000 gp worth of magic items, given the appropriate feats, spells, and enough time.

Time. Hm. At 1,000 gp per day, that's 2,375 days spent in a workshop. Six and a half YEARS. When did I start playing Recettear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recettear:_An_Item_Shop%27s_Tale)?

Mystify

2012-02-22, 03:47 PM

Mystify

2012-02-22, 04:04 PM

gbprime

2012-02-22, 04:14 PM

Or takes two more sessions to level up and is still behind thanks to the next XP poor sessions. Works both ways.

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 04:22 PM

You are ignoring all the cases where a slight xp lag means everyone levels up a session earlier, then you have an entire session of xp getting multiplied to catch you up, which can actually net you MORE xp. I've seen it happen many times in my games. The wizard, after spending xp on crafting, manages to miss the level up, and catapults himself ahead during the xp-rich session next time.

By RAW, you get xp on a per encounter basis, not a per session basis. Therefore, this "catapulting ahead" should not be a thing. If you have an entire session of xp getting multiplied, it's because you're that far behind, and in that case, you make up some ground, but you're still well behind.

gbprime

2012-02-22, 04:36 PM

By RAW, you get xp on a per encounter basis, not a per session basis. Therefore, this "catapulting ahead" should not be a thing. If you have an entire session of xp getting multiplied, it's because you're that far behind, and in that case, you make up some ground, but you're still well behind.

Well that's the difference between RAW and practicality there. Sure, by RAW you might gain enough XP to level up halfway through the game session, but few groups are going to want to stop play for one PC to level up in the middle of the evening. Likewise, most GM's (in my experience) don't have XP handy after each encounter, they hand it out after the game and before the following session (or at the very beginning of the next session).

So yes, you would get the entire session of higher XP regardless of how far you're behind.

Or do other gaming groups hand out the XP after every encounter or scene?

Tyndmyr

2012-02-22, 04:43 PM

Well that's the difference between RAW and practicality there. Sure, by RAW you might gain enough XP to level up halfway through the game session, but few groups are going to want to stop play for one PC to level up in the middle of the evening. Likewise, most GM's (in my experience) don't have XP handy after each encounter, they hand it out after the game and before the following session (or at the very beginning of the next session).

So yes, you would get the entire session of higher XP regardless of how far you're behind.

Or do other gaming groups hand out the XP after every encounter or scene?

Honestly, it varies substantially depending on group. Some groups go through encounters sufficiently slowly that the difference between encounter and session is academic. I've also seen 24 hr marathon gaming sessions.

I've also seen "everybody levels up every three sessions" and "everyone gets the same xp for an objective"(actually a variant from UA, IIRC). XP is a river is predicated on RAW, so I use RAW to disprove it, but not every game actually runs by RAW.

Of the three games I'm currently in....
1. Isn't D&D, but everyone progresses at their own pace, and may not be at all equal.
2. One is D&D, and is "everyone in the party gets the same xp".
3. One is D&D, and uses strict RAW for assigning xp post encounters...but also includes XP awards for things like "taking risks" and "roleplaying your char well" at the end of each session.

ericgrau

2012-02-22, 04:49 PM

When you're behind on levels you gain xp faster until in only 3 4 levels per LA bought off you aren't behind at all and the LA is effectively gone. At worst you're behind a partial level from being at the same level but lower xp so that part of the time you're behind 1 level and the rest of the time you're fully caught up. But you're never more than 1 level behind no matter how much LA you bought off. And unless your DM gives out partial bonus xp for being close to leveling up (doubtful) you can actually catch up to your allies or even jump ahead of them in xp next time you get extra xp while barely behind a level.

So while it takes 3 4 levels to get really close to catching up and a little longer to fully catch up or even pass your allies LA buyoff does lead to 100% free LA in the end.

If you don't get extra xp for being behind then like LA buyoff that's another house rule that merely counters the LA buyoff variant that the DM had to allow in the first place. Why he bothers with one and not the other, I dunno seems wonky to me.

EDIT: I figured it out at level 8 and someone 1 level behind gets precisely 25% more xp on average. Half the CRs are about 17% more and the other half about 31% more.

Mystify

2012-02-22, 05:23 PM

Binks

2012-02-22, 05:30 PM

No LA is best, obviously, but speaking strictly, there is no such thing as a LA 0 buyoff. Your options start at 1 and increase from there.

2 gets you the most xp regained over 20 party levels. This is because a 3+ level buyoff means you cannot actually buy off your third level until it's too late to earn it back.
Nitpick. I meant not having any LA. And that's a good explanation for why you consider 2 to be optimal. It's still your opinion, but it's at least a defended opinion.

Honestly, stat boosts are one of the main things LA gives you, so you can't really disregard the value of stats without negating one of the primary reasons for taking LA to begin with. Stats do have some value, but if the benefit of LA is marginal, things like slower stat and feat gain are things you should consider.
Are you saying that getting the +1/+1 stat boost 1 level earlier is worth exactly the same as the +2 or more to at least 1 stat you generally get with LA? Because it's not. I mean, if I told you your PC could have +2 to an important stat at level 1 but it meant not getting your level 8 stat buff until level 9 would you care?

LA does not give any hp. RHD are a separate thing entirely. Losing total HD is definitely a bad thing, and will usually result in lower hp overall.
Yeah, realized that about 10 seconds after I walked away from the computer. My bad.

It is not merely that some LA options are bad. It's that almost all LA options are bad. Even with LA buyoff, the vast majority are terrible. Sometimes, LA buyoff is treated as a panacea to such things, but it's effect is overrated.
Alright, so what you're saying at that the LA options are near-universally bad. Now then, how does that support your argument that XP is not a river? It's like someone arguing that Melee classes can be good and you coming back with the argument that all monks are bad. Possibly true (though there are some LA+2s that are worth it IMHO) but it doesn't refute the original idea, which was that gaining a significant chunk of extra xp over 19 levels was worth being a level behind.

LA does not make you play smarter or less aggressive. A caster in the back of the party with LA is still generally more likely to die than a caster in the back of the party without LA.
Meh. How often does a wizard at the back of the party really care about having at most 8 or so more HP? It's certainly there, but it's not really all that relevant. The other parts of losing a level are far more important than a few hp.

You clearly did not read where I explained where that 25% came from. Also, the 35% you are comparing to is a different number entirely. They are not equivalents.

Long story short, being a level behind earns you about 30% more xp for a fight that's in the optimal xp range. Certain xp ranges(such as if you are level 1, and the party is level 2), provide no benefit whatsoever, and many ranges provide numbers somewhere in between. A nice mix of encounters is normal, and recommended per the DMG. You cannot reasonably assume that every encounter lands in the sweet spot for you.

If you doubt this, pop open the DMG's xp chart, and calculate the percentage difference for being one level behind.
Oh I read where you explain it. Let me quote:
"A naive estimate would be 30%, but each level has more xp required than the last, so you will level faster than the party...However, it does cut into time when you can catch up on xp"
Now that's different than what you're arguing here. Here you seem to be saying that the reason it's 25% is because you're not always hitting the sweet spot for encounters. Before you were arguing that it's 25% because you level up to the same level as the party for a bit of that time. Those are two very different explanations for the same figure, and while your new one is reasonable the old one is a strawman as the OP said specifically you spend xp to stay behind a level at all times.

And? Oh dear, that doesn't work well at all. He also does not include the opportunity cost of taking crafting feats, and assumes that he can sell crafted magical items at full retail price without overhead.

This is...not RAW. Not at all. Half price is RAW. Crafting for yourself is situationally nice, but does not mesh well with his claimed strategy, as it is reliant on having adequate gold for crafting at any given time, as well as the other required resources(like spells known). In addition, the items you most need may not line up well with the specific amount of xp you are required to spend at every level.
This is a good point. The OP for the first thread was selling items at full price, which is not how RAW defines it as working (though technically, as best I can tell, RAW has no rules for selling newly crafted items. It has rules for selling loot you've picked up, but that's not precisely the same thing. That's nitpicking, and nitpicking from the SRD rather than the book too, so it's not really worth arguing about). You can still gain a benefit from crafting (especially as an artificer) items for yourself and your party (to whom you can sell items at near full price by the way) but it's not as clear cut as the OP made it out to be.

Just thought I'd play a little devil's advocate here. My own opinion on the matter is that it doesn't matter, it's only used for TO and occasionally to justify LA (though I almost never see it even for that) and as such it's an intriguing theory. But if you're going to say that someone else's theory is wrong without presenting proper evidence, then I feel the need to step up. At this point I think you've presented most of the evidence you need, the fact that the OP broke RAW by selling at full price is a big strike against his argument. Then again there's still the fact you can build items to increase your effective WBL, and that there may be some LA options worth being a level behind (and being able to craft more items with extra exp).

dextercorvia

2012-02-22, 05:31 PM

Generally I agree that XP is less of a river than commonly cited, I just wanted to point out that standard procedure is to award experience at the end of each session. (DMG 18)

That tweaks the numbers a little bit to keep you a full level behind the party for XP calculations for longer.

Draz74

2012-02-22, 07:22 PM

But if the goal is "free LA!" and you spend the first 15 levels behind in class features as a result....it isn't free.

Well, duh. With the cool features you can get from LA races (good ones, not crappy things like Half-Dragon), LA Buyoff would be considered as broken as Bloodlines if it were truly free.

ericgrau

2012-02-22, 08:31 PM

Mystify

2012-02-22, 08:45 PM

The problem I've always had with that is that LA usually hurts more at low levels and less at high levels. To suddenly make it free at level 16 or so seems backwards.

I compared the stats of a couple core melee builds and half-dragon was essentially worth LA 2 for ECL 4-7, LA 3 for ECL 8-14 and LA 4 for ECL 15-20 (to match the stats of an LA 0 melee build). Obviously using abilities outside of core a level of melee is worth more and so LA gets worse. But even then I'd reduce LA across the board, not only at higher levels.
Most of the +LA races I've played are really powerful at the begining, but the LA is nearly worthless near the end. For instance, a pixie has continual greater invisibly. At level 5, that is amazing. At level 15, nobody cares, they have superior invisibility that they cast all the time, and your greater invisibility is a joke since every other enemy has permanent true seeing. Ghost starts out really useful, since even though you have low hp, nothing can hurt you. You also have a 12th level telekinesis, which below level 12 is a really powerful ability. After level 12, its underpowered, and most everything is magical and can claw you just fine. Mineral warrior gets DR 8/adamatine. At level 2, that is an amazing power, and will give you some mad survivability. You might as well be immortal as far as the hoards of kobolds are concerned. At level 15, its kinda nice, but its not that special either. I could go on.

ericgrau

2012-02-22, 08:57 PM

Mystify

2012-02-22, 09:20 PM

Most LA races I play are for the ability scores rather than those that get special abilities that become obsolete.

Even in the case of pixies and ghosts it takes a long time for foes to truly counter your ability and even then it's less than half of foes that can do it. Also note that you get unlimited quickened greater invisibility which is hard to match until very high levels and even then it's limited in duration. IIRC the mineral warrior is an especially contrived example since he has great ability scores and likewise benefits from higher levels for just about all of his other abilities besides DR. LA buyoff is great for special abilities that later become obsolete but I don't think that is the norm at all. Especially since most people who bite on LA are martial classes taking them to hit harder not so they can summon some bears 1/day.
The LA hurting less at high levels for those cases is probably more a factor of the relative flatness of high level melee characters. One property of quadratic vs. linerear is that a linear progression has a severer dropoff in percentage differnce between levels, esp if WBL is not a factor(as LA doesn't impact it). The difference between a ECL 13 and 15 is only about 15%. Between 3 and 5, the same linear offset, it is 40%. Contrast with a quadratic progression, where 3 to 5 is 40%, but 13 to 15 is 25%. The only stat that really makes a difference is Con, as that is a multiplier that can help immensely. Strenght loses out due to lower BaB, and hence less attacks, so the minor damage boost is offset by fewer attacks, and the accuracy is offset by less BaB.
Even with con you need a decent amount to make a real difference. A level 15 barbarian, woith a +4 con item on top of a 16 con, has about 172 health. If that is a level 13 barbarian with a +4 con, you end up at about the same place, 175 hp. You either need a really high con mod or a lot of levels to make up for the lost HD in terms of hp. And that is not even considering the lost feats and class abilities, just the impact of your most basic stats.
The entire premise of LA is horribly flawed. It assumes that the abilities given by a template are worth a linear offset of your level, which holds at all levels. I can't think of a single case where that is really the case. You tend to be either really strong or really weak at the minimum level, and the abilities granted tend to fade into irrelevance at higher levels, except for the ones that rebound and become stonger at higher levels. Epic levels does really odd things in regards to LA, but epic is its own bag of worms.

Acanous

2012-02-22, 09:42 PM

the biggest problem with the idea I can see (OP, not Tynd's reaction) is the crafting time involved.
How many sessions last 6 years of in game time?
Of those sessions, how many of them are you leveling from 1-6 during that period?

It requires a certain type of gaming group and a certain type of game in order to actually be effective. Otherwise you'll never make back your investment, and will be proportionally weaker because of it.

I suppose this also applies to LA, in that "Most games end around level 10". You'll be a level behind at the end of the game.

Of course, while all of this is known, the last part isn't strictly RAW, so is more of a "Felt" impact than an intended one.

ericgrau

2012-02-22, 11:05 PM

Wings of Peace

2012-02-22, 11:10 PM

Silly people. XP isn't a river, it's a goldfish swimming gayly around inside a thought-bottle.

Mystify

2012-02-22, 11:21 PM

Coidzor

2012-02-23, 12:20 AM

The point of XP is a river is *specifically* to always stay a level under everyone else, and use the bonus XP on miscellaneous stuff... and not generally to take a level adjustment...

Indeed, my understanding was that it was mostly directed at gamers with an older, AD&D-related fear of crafting or of burning XP for spells/items.

It requires a certain type of gaming group and a certain type of game in order to actually be effective. Otherwise you'll never make back your investment, and will be proportionally weaker because of it.

You have to been in a certain type of group and game in order to be able to craft in the first place.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn

2012-02-23, 12:55 AM

Zaranthan

2012-02-23, 10:03 AM

The usual...

Where to start? Optimized crafting is its own thing like optimized damage. It breaks the game too, even if the rest of the party were sticking to WBL (which they have no reason to with a crafter in the party). LA3 can be bought off and bloodlines have a balanced interpretation, but that's off topic.
This is very true. Sure YOU might not be able to spend every last XP on bigger numbers, but you can spend it on making OTHER people's numbers bigger, and that counts just as much.

XP rules are combersome like tracking class skills. All encounters should be overpowering anyways -> least xp gains for those riding the river. That is assuming you use raw. A simple Diablo 2 punishing proportionality of total party xp is a simple way to make sure
I think you cut off your post here by accident, but to take what you've got, Diablo 2 XP is actually the worst thing you can do in this situation. The XP works like that in that game because you spend a lot of time fighting alone, and groups are often on-the-fly with random strangers, so losing out on a bit of XP in one game or another isn't a big deal. In D&D, you are (most likely) playing with the same group of characters every week. If one character is a level down, and he receives LESS XP than everyone else, he'll only fall further and further behind. He can't just go off and grind the Bloody Foothills for a few hours.

Tyndmyr

2012-02-23, 11:20 AM

Lets say you are doing LA 1.
At level 4, you pay 3000xp to lose your LA. That is a fixed xp loss compared to the party, which will reduce based on the factors that catch you up.

By level 12, that is 1/4 of a level, even if you are not accounting for the return. You are the same level as everyone else, and anytime you fall behind you will catch up in a session, and that gap closes, making it even less likely you will fall behind in the future.

Note that this effect is mostly due to levels encompassing more xp. This effect is vastly larger than actual XP gains catching you up. The river effect is more like a trickle.

Also note that this is the minimal case for LA, and it still takes over half your career to be "mostly caught up".

Alright, so what you're saying at that the LA options are near-universally bad. Now then, how does that support your argument that XP is not a river? It's like someone arguing that Melee classes can be good and you coming back with the argument that all monks are bad. Possibly true (though there are some LA+2s that are worth it IMHO) but it doesn't refute the original idea, which was that gaining a significant chunk of extra xp over 19 levels was worth being a level behind.

It's because the "XP is a river" is often used to justify not-great LA options with the logic that, even if it's not a big boost, it's a free boost anyhow.

But, realistically, you're paying for it by being behind for much of your career.

Meh. How often does a wizard at the back of the party really care about having at most 8 or so more HP? It's certainly there, but it's not really all that relevant. The other parts of losing a level are far more important than a few hp.

There was a study done a while back to determine the most common death from failing a save to challenge the dominant perception that will was the most important save, and the results was that failing a reflex save and then running out of hp was the most common death to a failed save.

Certainly, I think it's reasonable to posit that death is most commonly acheived by running out of hp. Stat drains and SoDs do exist, but they do not appear to be anywhere near as frequent.

I agree that being a level behind on spells is also quite huge, but the hp loss of being behind does tend to make you more fragile. Being behind on spells only magnifies that tendancy.

Oh I read where you explain it. Let me quote:
"A naive estimate would be 30%, but each level has more xp required than the last, so you will level faster than the party...However, it does cut into time when you can catch up on xp"
Now that's different than what you're arguing here. Here you seem to be saying that the reason it's 25% is because you're not always hitting the sweet spot for encounters. Before you were arguing that it's 25% because you level up to the same level as the party for a bit of that time. Those are two very different explanations for the same figure, and while your new one is reasonable the old one is a strawman as the OP said specifically you spend xp to stay behind a level at all times.

Both explanations were given. Both reduce the actual return on xp.

OPs assumption that you can always spend xp to stay a level behind has already been shown to be invalid. You are not guaranteed to always have months of crafting time between levels.

Then again there's still the fact you can build items to increase your effective WBL

True...and this is the point of crafting feats to begin with. But, in practice, pathfinder already ditched the xp expenditure for this, and the value of crafting feats is not considered notably different. I posit that the xp is actually fairly unimportant in the scheme of things for crafting things for personal/party use.

The problem I've always had with that is that LA usually hurts more at low levels and less at high levels. To suddenly make it free at level 16 or so seems backwards.

I compared the stats of a couple core melee builds and half-dragon was essentially worth LA 2 for ECL 4-7, LA 3 for ECL 8-14 and LA 4 for ECL 15-20 (to match the stats of an LA 0 melee build). Obviously using abilities outside of core a level of melee is worth more and so LA gets worse. But even then I'd reduce LA across the board, not only at higher levels.

There are a LOT of over-LAed races, so an across the board lowering is not unreasonable.

That said, stats are not particularly more important late game, at least, not more than early game. I agree it's easier to fit a template into a long term build, but it's easier to fit ANYTHING into a long term build. I don't think it's important to LA valuation.

Note additionally that LA works very differently for melee than for casters. There are remarkably few times where LA is worth it for casters, since benefits from levels in caster classes are much less replacable by LA bennies.

the biggest problem with the idea I can see (OP, not Tynd's reaction) is the crafting time involved.
How many sessions last 6 years of in game time?
Of those sessions, how many of them are you leveling from 1-6 during that period?

Yeah, that's not a guarantee at all for D&D. In fact, I'd say it's an unusual premise, but not impossible.

However, if that much downtime is guaranteed, we run into rather a lot of ways to gain money. This is...not an area that's often explored well in D&D, but people with class levels have options with lots of downtime. Casters could straight up sell spells cast, for instance.

Crafting does require a certain amount of downtime...but it's a lot easier to scribe the odd scroll at day's end than to guarantee months of item creation time at once. And there are much better ways to break magical crafting than slightly mitigating the xp cost.

Mystify

2012-02-23, 11:38 AM

Note that this effect is mostly due to levels encompassing more xp. This effect is vastly larger than actual XP gains catching you up. The river effect is more like a trickle.

Also note that this is the minimal case for LA, and it still takes over half your career to be "mostly caught up".

You are mostly caught up without accounting for the extra xp you gain from being behind a level. I would be highly surprised if the 3000 xp was not completely absorbed well within that timespan. Yo u are converting a -1 LA to a -x xp, which due to its nature shrinks in size even without extra xp from levels you are behind. Its a minor hump on the road to power at most, and you can easily end up ahead.

It's because the "XP is a river" is often used to justify not-great LA options with the logic that, even if it's not a big boost, it's a free boost anyhow.

But, realistically, you're paying for it by being behind for much of your career.

It depends on what your career is. If your career is 12-20, then it is free. If your career is 5-9, then the cost is quite relevant. And for a lot of people, the low-level power is not as important as the end goal. Many mechanics do that. Prestige classes require you to get feats you may not be interested in, and get no real benefit from till you take several levels in the prestige class. Those lost feats are a persistent cost. That doesn't really balance out the end power

You are likely less behind than another character who died and was resurrected.

Tytalus

2012-02-23, 01:19 PM

A great tpoic, but unfortunately the OP doesn't really look at the math and instead presents (false) assertions as facts, such as this:

So, you make back about 25%* of the xp differential fairly rapidly(a level), but then spend proportionately less time making up xp, and thus, never really catch entirely back up.

The bolded section is wrong. Each new level, the XP-penalized character catches up more. While it's true that he doesn't gain extra XP once he levels up, too, the gap does eventually close.

What gets overlooked is that even a single level of XP bonus helps. Especially since the difference to regular XP grows with levels.

---

Here's a concrete example.

Assume an LA+1 character, who buys off his LA at ECL 4. He continues to adventure with his party, who have 3,000 XP more than him.

Assuming futher only level-appropriate encounters (i.e., CR3 while the rest of the party is level 3), he'll be the following number of encounters "behind" a level, compared to his non-LA buddies.

Party Level Encounters behind Of Ratio
{table=head]Party Level|Encounters behind|Total Encounters that level|Ratio
4 |9 | 14 | 64%
5 |7 | 14 | 50%
6 |5 | 13 | 38%
7 |3 | 14 | 21%
8 |2 | 13 | 15%
9 |2 | 14 | 14%
10 |1 | 13 | 8%
11 |1 | 13 | 8%
[/table]

After the first encounter of level 12, he has caught up entirely. In fact, he has now more XP than his teammates (only 250 more, but still).

What does that mean? First, it means that XP is indeed a river. It means that XP penalties like that from buying off LA+1 are naturally overcome due to the way the XP system works. It means that after a few levels, the character is no longer behind. It means that after having "payed" for the LA by having a number of encounters as a slightly lower-level character, the LA is entirely gone and the PC gets the benefits of the template/race for free.

Even before buying off the LA completely, the "cost" is minimal. Just 3 levels after buying off the LA, you are only 1-3 encounters / level "behind".

Note that if stronger enconuters than level-appropriate encounters are used, the gap is closed considerably faster, as the XP bonus for being lower level grows faster than the XP/enconuter does per level.

Tyndmyr

2012-02-23, 01:29 PM

After the first encounter of level 12, he has caught up entirely. ... It means that after a few levels, the character is no longer behind.

Even assuming every bit of your math is correct(doubtful, as encounters are variable, not static), I am confused by your equivalency of 12 to "a few".

Voyager_I

2012-02-23, 02:56 PM

2 or 3 LA also become a small part of your 15 just like the abilities granted and in fact when I calculated the actually numbers (stats) I found that the appropriate LA from races chosen mainly for ability scores (str, con, dex) goes up not down with higher ECL.

This really depends on what kind of class you're playing.

For a linear class, like Fighter, going from level 19 to level 20 gets you the same thing as going form level 3 to level 4; +1 BAB, a Bonus Feat, and the rest of your usual progression. There's nothing inherently more powerful about it. You might qualify for feats you couldn't take at lower levels, but it's also entirely possible that you finished your core progression at level 10 and haven't really needed a feat for anything important since then. Losing a few levels to LA in exchange for stats or abilities that will still be useful at high levels is fairly acceptable in this case.

However, that's simply not the case with a caster. Getting a 4th level of Wizard nets you one addition 1st and 2nd level spell, respectively. While useful, it's not exactly groundbreaking. Conversely, reaching 20th level gets you an extra slot for 8th and 9th level spells. A 9th level spell slot is one of the most powerful things you can have in the game, with an 8th level spell slot not terribly far behind it. There is basically nothing an LA Race offers that can match the degree of power offered by the final level of Wizard.

This is also why the first rule of caster optimization is never to do anything that sets you behind a level of spell progression.

Coidzor

2012-02-23, 03:04 PM

Where to start? Optimized crafting is its own thing like optimized damage. It breaks the game too, even if the rest of the party were sticking to WBL (which they have no reason to with a crafter in the party). LA3 can be bought off and bloodlines have a balanced interpretation, but that's off topic.

Alright, so what about crafting that isn't benefiting from the whole gamut of options in the cost reduction handbook? Are you advocating people be punished for trying to craft at all?

XP rules are combersome like tracking class skills. All encounters should be overpowering anyways -> least xp gains for those riding the river. That is assuming you use raw. A simple Diablo 2 punishing proportionality of total party xp is a simple way to make sure

Make sure of what and to what end? You're not quite clear about where you're coming down on this.

Hyde

2012-02-23, 04:29 PM

Tyndmyr

2012-02-23, 04:42 PM

I think the real problem with the XP is a river post is when the entire party thinks it's a good idea!

That is an amusing idea...while one person being a level behind doesn't pose a great risk to the whole party, there is a notable power difference for THEM. If everyone is doing it...you're basically just taking on higher EL challenges. Not bad for xp gain, sure...if you live.

I calculated a while ago that the quickest way to rapid leveling was slightly under CR challenges, and doing a LOT of them. They're a lot less resource intensive than things higher than your CR. This is mostly because the difficulty of CR is somewhat variable, and if you end up with a fairly even match(like, say, +5-6 CR sort of difficulty)...you don't dare risk another one for the day after you win. Completely spent, you need to recover spells at a minimum. Sometimes, you burn some of the next days spells recovering(remove disease, stat damage, level drain, etc, etc), and thus, you spend two days mostly wiped out from one fight.

Being a level behind can really suck for efficiency, depending on how much of your resources you use daily, and how precious time is.

Gnaeus

2012-02-23, 05:10 PM

I calculated a while ago that the quickest way to rapid leveling was slightly under CR challenges, and doing a LOT of them. .

That is probably true... in IC time. OOC time, there is a lot of dead time exploring the door, describing the monsters, setting up the encounters, etc. YMMV, but my group finds it quicker and easier to have 1-2 over cr challenges per playing day, rather than more, weaker fights, regardless of how often our PCs rest.

Coidzor

2012-02-23, 05:14 PM

I think the real problem with the XP is a river post is when the entire party thinks it's a good idea!

"No, I'm a level behind everyone!"
"No, me!"
"I haven't gained any experience since level 5, but man do I have some cool items"
"Well, I'm still level eight!"

DM: "Well, the Balor is mighty impressed with how much stuff you've managed to accumulate by selling off all your xps, but wonders how he will arrange it in his new Hell-mansion after he roasts your underlevelled asses."

I'm sure that this will happen in some game, somewhere.

Sure, somewhere, but there are DMs who will throw Balors at 1st level parties who have just started playing.

I'd mostly be wondering what the hell kind of shenanigans they were pulling to be able to craft enough based upon the gold they were getting with low level challenges that wouldn't naturally lead them to progress at a similar albeit delayed rate to what is expected.

And considering the sweet spot of class power is between 6 and 12, what's so wrong about the entire party staying in that spot for a bit longer?

Hard to say there's really a problem when everyone's LA 1 or 2. And considering the DM has to give permission for such a thing to occur, deliberately screwing the players over is on him.

ericgrau

2012-02-23, 05:28 PM

Really? A +4 str becomes more valuable over time? +2 dex increases in value? The con score is the only one that I can see increasing in value over time.

+4 str is a flat 10% more of your attacks that hit on level 1, and a flat 10% on level 20: it doesn't change. A+10 to hit 15 is the same chance as a +1,010 to hit 1,015, even though people often think it's different. Average monster AC by CR does scale at the same rate as attack bonus btw; I have the charts. Con goes up in value. The pain of losing HP and of losing secondary attacks goes down: No one cares much about losing the -15 attack, unlike losing the -5 attack at 6. Mostly pain goes down without any of the positives getting worse so if I were to guess the appropriate LA would stay the same even into epic levels or else takes a very very long time to go up thanks to con.

Regardless of the explanation I did calculate this rather meticulously and for whatever reason core half-dragon goes up in value at high levels. The simulator assumes toe to toe full attacks with average CR appropriate monsters and bases effectiveness on damage before dying including both HP damage and failed saves vs. a guestimate on the frequency of save-based attacks. This really is an in depth analysis.

Anyway that's why I only like buyoff on mainly special ability based races and otherwise I think it's backwards on mainly ability score based races.

balistafreak

2012-02-24, 07:58 PM

Really? A +4 str becomes more valuable over time? +2 dex increases in value? The con score is the only one that I can see increasing in value over time.

The stat boosts from LA "become more valuable over time" because they're a bonus that stacks with everything; items, buffs, tomes, whathaveyou. If you've ever played DDO, which takes the Christmas Tree Effect to absurd levels (customizing your gear with special effects, stacking bonuses and powerful activated abilities is key to play at all levels), ways of acquiring more +whatevers that stack with each other are extremely valuable. You'll be wearing a +6 Strength item already, and when you find an +2 Exceptional Strength that stacks with the first, it's like Christmas.

LA stat boosts are like that +2 Exceptional Strength item.

Now, whether or not that stacking stat boost is worth being behind a level or two, that is the question.

Doug Lampert

2012-02-24, 08:54 PM

The stat boosts from LA "become more valuable over time" because they're a bonus that stacks with everything; items, buffs, tomes, whathaveyou. If you've ever played DDO, which takes the Christmas Tree Effect to absurd levels (customizing your gear with special effects, stacking bonuses and powerful activated abilities is key to play at all levels), ways of acquiring more +whatevers that stack with each other are extremely valuable. You'll be wearing a +6 Strength item already, and when you find an +2 Exceptional Strength that stacks with the first, it's like Christmas.

LA stat boosts are like that +2 Exceptional Strength item.

Now, whether or not that stacking stat boost is worth being behind a level or two, that is the question.

For a level or two you're getting more than just +2 to strength, it almost always includes a con boost too, and if it's ever worth it, it's at high levels.

At level 2 losing one level and getting +2 Str and Con means you're dropping from 19 or so HP to 13 or so for a modest bonus to damage. Which often doesn't matter, because level 1 or 2 plenty of foes go down to one hit whether you do 2d6+6 or 2d6+7.

At level 20 you're up on HP, and thanks to buy-off it's EXCEEDINGLY unlikely that you're actually down a level, but even if you are or if your DM doesn't allow buyoff, it's the same chance to hit either way and better damage and more HP for the LA character.

sonofzeal

2012-02-24, 09:05 PM

candycorn

2012-02-24, 09:29 PM

Bear in mind, encounter/story rewards are more likely to occur when levels are equal (as the player spends more than half his time at most levels, with an equal ECL to the party). When this occurs, the impact to XP difference is zero, as standard encounter XP is also equal at these levels.

Higher LA's do have a greater impact for longer, but for LA 1? It flows back to you slowly. Like a river.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn

2012-02-25, 12:48 AM

@Zaranthan I know.
and I know D2's method would actually punish those behind on xp. Are you saying the 2e never-spend-xp mentality is worse than 3e's spend-some-to-make-more?

@Coidzor no unless its a non-magic mart game.
and I simply gave a simple alternative to cancel out all of 3e's many built-in rewa

Hecuba

2012-02-25, 01:12 AM

By RAW, you get xp on a per encounter basis, not a per session basis.

This is incorrect.

[...]You need to calculate XP awards during the course of an adventure, whether it's one you wrote or one you purchased. You may wish to award experience points at the end of a session to enable players to advance their characters in level if they have enough experience points. Alternately, you may wish to give out XP awards at the begining of the game session following the one in which the characters earned it. This gives you time between sessions to use these rules and determine the experience awards.

The 3e DMG, in its equivalent section, listed encounter by encounter as an option as well. But, to my memory, the above section is the only specific guidance 3.5 provides on the subject of XP award frequency.

candycorn

2012-02-25, 02:17 AM

Here's the official:
When the party defeats monsters, you award the characters experience points (XP).It goes on to talk about alternatives, lumping it together, but When monsters are defeated is the default timing for awarding XP.

Hecuba

2012-02-25, 02:24 AM

Here's the official:It goes on to talk about alternatives, lumping it together, but When monsters are defeated is the default timing for awarding XP.

That's not how I would read that section. To my eye, the 2nd paragraph is a clarification, not an alternative.
To generalize the structure, as I understand it: "When A happens, you do B as a result. You may carry out B either at time 1 or time 2."

candycorn

2012-02-25, 02:36 AM

When the party does X, the DM gives Y. The harder X is, the better Y is. The players split up Y, and each gains power in accordance with how much Y they have.

You, as DM, need to figure out what Y to give during the adventure. You might want to do it this way. Then again, you might want to do it that way.

Note the lack of "either/or". These are not exclusive. The ultimate intent of the two paragraphs is to leave the matter totally within the hands of the DM.

In fact, almost every statement referring to awarding XP is permissive like this. "Some DM's want story awards. They need to set up a system to give XP for goal achievements and noncombat encounters."

"You could award experience for solving a puzzle"

Everything is permissive here, and that's the intent.

Either/or is restrictive. Those words are designed to limit DM choices, and everything about the XP rules text is designed to give DMs options, not limit choices.

Acanous

2012-02-25, 03:04 AM

That is probably true... in IC time. OOC time, there is a lot of dead time exploring the door, describing the monsters, setting up the encounters, etc. YMMV, but my group finds it quicker and easier to have 1-2 over cr challenges per playing day, rather than more, weaker fights, regardless of how often our PCs rest.

DM threw my lv 10 party at a Balor. It almost killed us all on it's first turn, since it won initiative. Then we all got a turn. It was dimensional anchored, entombed in a wall of stone (Except for an area around it's solar plexus), a Lyre of Building was played to make the wall invincible for 30 minutes.

We sat around hitting it with Bestow Curse and melee full round actions 'til it died. The wall soaked the emanation, although the monk almost died anyhow.
We levelled. To 11.

Edit: If I were going to throw a Balor at the party, it'd start off by killing one person, not dividing attacks to injure everyone. While it wouldn't start off with it's one wish per year, it'd probably use it after being dim. Anchored and entombed.

tyckspoon

2012-02-25, 03:29 AM

DM threw my lv 10 party at a Balor. It almost killed us all on it's first turn, since it won initiative. Then we all got a turn. It was dimensional anchored, entombed in a wall of stone (Except for an area around it's solar plexus), a Lyre of Building was played to make the wall invincible for 30 minutes.

We sat around hitting it with Bestow Curse and melee full round actions 'til it died. The wall soaked the emanation, although the monk almost died anyhow.
We levelled. To 11.

Edit: If I were going to throw a Balor at the party, it'd start off by killing one person, not dividing attacks to injure everyone. While it wouldn't start off with it's one wish per year, it'd probably use it after being dim. Anchored and entombed.

DM was softballing you. Balors can Blasphemy at will, Caster level 20. Everybody dies, no save. Also Greater Dispel Magic at will to remove any annoying debuffs you manage to land through its 28 Spell Resistance. Also Wall of Stone doesn't work that way, although I suppose if you could hold a target still you could shape the stone that way with the effects of a Lyre of Building.

There's no reasonable way a level 10 party should be able to take on a Balor. Certainly not with any tactics that allow it to take any actions.

Gavinfoxx

2012-02-25, 03:34 AM

There's no reasonable way a level 10 party should be able to take on a Balor. Certainly not with any tactics that allow it to take any actions.

Hey, there was a challenge for an E6 party to deal with a Balor, and several builds managed it...

Mystify

2012-02-25, 05:35 AM

I played an Artificer once. I intended to plateau about 1.5 level behind the party and hang out comfortably there.

...

...not so much. I ended up a bit behind, and then we'd have a big session with a bunch of XP and I'd leapfrog over the rest of the party. I wouldn't just catch up, I'd come out ahead. Since we don't level up in the middle of a session, the bonus XP from being lower level would regularly catapult me forward. I tried my darnedest to knock myself back even one full level, and never managed it. I'd simply fluctuate between half a level behind and a quarter of a level ahead. It was really strange.

XP isn't just a river, it's freaking whitewater some times.
This matches up with my experience.

The stat boosts from LA "become more valuable over time" because they're a bonus that stacks with everything; items, buffs, tomes, whathaveyou. If you've ever played DDO, which takes the Christmas Tree Effect to absurd levels (customizing your gear with special effects, stacking bonuses and powerful activated abilities is key to play at all levels), ways of acquiring more +whatevers that stack with each other are extremely valuable. You'll be wearing a +6 Strength item already, and when you find an +2 Exceptional Strength that stacks with the first, it's like Christmas.

LA stat boosts are like that +2 Exceptional Strength item.

Now, whether or not that stacking stat boost is worth being behind a level or two, that is the question.
That doesn't mean it ncreases in value over time. a+2 str at level 1 and a +2 str at level 20 are roughly equal, though if anything its less valuable at level 20. Either way its a +1 accuracy, which is nice and its value is constant, and a +1/2 damage, which is much less meaningful at level 20. +8 str at low levels can mean +6 damage per hit, and be a huge boost to your damage when you would normally do 12 points in the first place . +6 damage at level 20 is much less impressive when you are hitting for 100+ points per hit. Its less relevant.

Hey, there was a challenge for an E6 party to deal with a Balor, and several builds managed it...

Didn't they have a TON of feats?

Acanous

2012-02-25, 09:35 AM

DM was softballing you. Balors can Blasphemy at will, Caster level 20. Everybody dies, no save. Also Greater Dispel Magic at will to remove any annoying debuffs you manage to land through its 28 Spell Resistance. Also Wall of Stone doesn't work that way, although I suppose if you could hold a target still you could shape the stone that way with the effects of a Lyre of Building.

There's no reasonable way a level 10 party should be able to take on a Balor. Certainly not with any tactics that allow it to take any actions.

He didn't blasphemy, the SR was annoying, and yes Wall of Stone does work that way,(Second function in the entry, "Entomb") but the target gets a reflex save.

Also Blasphemy requires a verbal component, which, even if at will, you can't pull off with your mouth full of stone.

Not sure on Greater Dispel Magic. He might have been softballing us here. But then again he gave the thing 19500 HP. Turns out that's not an even trade. Greater Dispel>HPs.

Draz74

2012-02-25, 12:41 PM

Also Blasphemy requires a verbal component,

Not when it's a spell-like ability rather than a spell.

Zaranthan

2012-02-25, 12:43 PM

He didn't blasphemy
That's pretty much the end of the discussion. The point is that "balor" was nothing more than a big red-skinned barbarian. The first thing a Balor does is toss a Blasphemy, because it has a good chance to disable nearly anything. Not casting it is like a wizard not casting spells.

Also Blasphemy requires a verbal component, which, even if at will, you can't pull off with your mouth full of stone.
Spell-like Abilities don't have any components. As long as he can take actions, he can use them.

Not sure on Greater Dispel Magic. He might have been softballing us here. But then again he gave the thing 19500 HP. Turns out that's not an even trade. Greater Dispel>HPs.
Once again, you didn't fight a balor. You fought a balor-shaped barbarian.

@Zaranthan I know.
and I know D2's method would actually punish those behind on xp. Are you saying the 2e never-spend-xp mentality is better than 3e's spend-some-to-make-more?
Don't put words in my mouth. You still haven't fixed your post, so it still looks like you're endorsing D2's XP system.

Mystify

2012-02-25, 12:48 PM

I frequently come across claims of "We defeated a Balor at a really low level, they are wimps!", which inevitably comes down to "The DM played the balor really poorly, and didn't use its abilities properly". One person, for instance, had a 10th level caster who has set up an array of spells to specifically counter its listed strategy. But the balor is no a construct, it doesn't have to follow that strategy if its not appropriate. There were several things the Balor should have done which would have secured victory for it, and with its int score it would realize that.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn

2012-02-26, 03:22 PM

Don't put words in my mouth. You still haven't fixed your post, so it still looks like you're endorsing D2's XP system.I did now and I am. Either casters have it too easy when they spend xp and such a system would actually penalize them or they don't have it too easy and we should allow xp to be a river. But I can't repeat your position to see if I understand it because that would be putting w

Tyndmyr

2012-02-26, 03:47 PM

Hey, there was a challenge for an E6 party to deal with a Balor, and several builds managed it...

Yeah, I was in on that. I think we had over a dozen parties that managed it, and IIRC, my group could take out a coupla balors a turn for quite a while.

I believe the most common method of surviving Blasphemy was simply being evil. For an evil party(or one who really values immunities), it's not so bad. However, I would pretty much expect that having some way to deal with Blasphemy is required for anyone hoping to take on a Balor.

It's not TYPICAL, by any means, but depending on op level, sometimes parties can greatly exceed the normal reccomended CR. I've definitely had parties that considered a +6 CR fight to be pretty standard.

+4 str is a flat 10% more of your attacks that hit on level 1, and a flat 10% on level 20: it doesn't change. A+10 to hit 15 is the same chance as a +1,010 to hit 1,015, even though people often think it's different.

This is correct. A stat boost has essentially the same value, regardless of what the actual numbers are(exceptions exist when you're only hitting on 20s, etc...but these aren't really normally the sorts of stats you're buying up)

Additionally, it is also correct that D&D provides a number of ways for the DM to distribute xp. It is...somewhat inaccurate to assume that only the way most beneficial to you is used. Several provide absolutely no river effect whatsoever. In addition to all the listed variations, notable differences in house rules may affect xp....but for general advice, it's not correct to say that xp is a river as if this were always the case.

Gavinfoxx

2012-02-26, 03:50 PM

FYI, here's the link to the E6 'how to take on a balor' thread...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9078182#post9078182

Voyager_I

2012-02-26, 04:06 PM

He didn't blasphemy, the SR was annoying, and yes Wall of Stone does work that way,(Second function in the entry, "Entomb") but the target gets a reflex save.

Also Blasphemy requires a verbal component, which, even if at will, you can't pull off with your mouth full of stone.

Not sure on Greater Dispel Magic. He might have been softballing us here. But then again he gave the thing 19500 HP. Turns out that's not an even trade. Greater Dispel>HPs.

You said the Balor won initiative. It can walk into your party, cast a CL 20 Blasphemy, and kill everyone within 40 feet with no save before you even get to take any actions.

Wall of Stone only kinda works that way. Your a 10th level caster can just barely entomb a Balor (10x10x10) with a one-inch wall if you beat it's +19 reflex save, and the Lyre of Building can make it indestructible. The problem, though, is that you aren't trapping it helplessly inside a rock jacket; you're just making a stone box around it.

This means, even overlooking the Balor's ability to spam Greater Dispel Magic to get rid of Dimensional Anchor or the Lyre's protection, and assuming he can't attack through the box even though you can, he can still just drop a Blasphemy any time you try to get near him.

A real Balor would probably just use his DC 27 Dominate to make you fight for his amusement.

Basically, I'm seconding that you fought a big red Barbarian, rather than a Balor. Still, the Wall of Stone/Lyre of Building combo is pretty clever, even if it took a permissive DM.

Zaranthan

2012-02-26, 09:06 PM

I did now and I am. Either casters have it too easy when they spend xp and such a system would actually penalize them or they don't have it too easy and we should allow xp to be a river. But I can't repeat your position to see if I understand it because that would be putting w

You're right, I didn't answer your question. I'm sorry.

I believe there needs to be a third option, even if it's more complicated, because what's the difference between a character several thousand XP behind the rest of the party because he got tagged by a wight or the artificer who spent a month making belts of battle? Mechanically, in the moment, there is nothing about their XP totals that indicate which player has been unfortunate and needs a boost, and which one made a strategic decision and should not be rewarded twice.

To ignore the symptom in favor of finding the root issue, I think we need a better way to handle level loss through things such as resurrection and energy drain. That way, you can leave the crafters permanently behind on XP without turning level loss into a death sentence.

Yahzi

2012-02-27, 07:38 AM

A 9th level spell slot is one of the most powerful things you can have in the game
This.

If you compare LA to getting 9th level spells, then it is never worth it. You could have a +1 LA race that gave you +10 to all stats and it still wouldn't be worth getting 9th level spells half-a-level late.

So the real question is, how does it compare for fighters?

sonofzeal

2012-02-27, 07:49 AM

This.

If you compare LA to getting 9th level spells, then it is never worth it. You could have a +1 LA race that gave you +10 to all stats and it still wouldn't be worth getting 9th level spells half-a-level late.

So the real question is, how does it compare for fighters?
No way, I'd take that template any day. Massive pile of bonus spells, huge DCs... AC that could actually be relevant, hp that the Barbarian's jealous of, skill points out the wazzoo, big save boosts, etc... yeah, worth it. I think a lvl 8 Wizard with +10 to all stats could trounce a lvl 9 Wizard's effectiveness in actual play. A lvl 17 Wizard might beat out a lvl 16/+10, but that's about the only level the straight Wizard has a significant edge.

Mystify

2012-02-27, 08:37 AM

No way, I'd take that template any day. Massive pile of bonus spells, huge DCs... AC that could actually be relevant, hp that the Barbarian's jealous of, skill points out the wazzoo, big save boosts, etc... yeah, worth it. I think a lvl 8 Wizard with +10 to all stats could trounce a lvl 9 Wizard's effectiveness in actual play. A lvl 17 Wizard might beat out a lvl 16/+10, but that's about the only level the straight Wizard has a significant edge.

I agree. I mean, that is nearly 100 extra hp, +5 to all saves, +5 to all DCs, 5 more trained skilled, etc. That would be well worth it for a wizard. You need at least enough stat bump to be throwing higher DCs to make LA worth it for a caster. That is after you consider that they will be throwing lower level spells. That alone is not sufficient, but it is the turning point where there is an advantage to it. That template blows that out of the water.

candycorn

2012-02-27, 09:21 AM

This.

If you compare LA to getting 9th level spells, then it is never worth it. You could have a +1 LA race that gave you +10 to all stats and it still wouldn't be worth getting 9th level spells half-a-level late.

Disagree.

I'd rather have +5 DC to all my spells, +1-2 spells per day at every level, +5hp/level, +5 to all saves, and increased carrying capacity. Getting 9th level spells 1 level later? That's ok. My 8th level spells will have a save DC +4 over your 9ths. Yes, 9th's are powerful. Very powerful.

But save DC increasers are right on par with them. So are bonus spells at multiple levels.

Look at it this way. A level 16 wizard with a 40 intelligence vs a level 17 wizard with a 30 intelligence. Both are specialists.

{table]Character | Lv0 | Lv1 | Lv2 | Lv3 | Lv4 | Lv5 | Lv6 | Lv7 | Lv8 | Lv9
W16 Spells per day|5|9|9|9|8|8|7|7|5|-
W16 DC|25|26|27|28|29|30|31|32|33|-
W17 Spells per day|5|8|8|7|7|7|7|5|4|3
W17 DC|20|21|22|23|24|25|26|27|28|29[/table]
So, the lower level wizard has a bonus spell at every level from 1-8, with the exception of level 3 and 7, where it gets 2 bonus spells, and level 6, where they're tied.

Compare a DC 33 Polymorph Any Object vs a DC 29 Dominate Monster. Yeah, there are some spells out there (Shapechange, Time Stop, Gate) that don't benefit from higher DC.

But one half level later, the LA wizard has 1 more Level 9 than the no LA wizard. This isn't going into the fact that, under most CR-based XP granting methods, that LA +1 isn't going to be half a level. It'll be one encounter, by level 15+.

Your point is sound, and enough to discourage the much more expensive LA 2 and LA 3... But LA 1, with buyoff, is practically nothing. It's 3000xp, which goes to about 1000 by level 15. And by level 15, every party member is earning more than that, per encounter. You'll be, at most, 1 encounter behind.

Stat boosts, if anything, are MORE valuable to casters, because of bonus spells and increased DC. Once you reach 26 in your casting stat, every +2 to a stat is +1-2 more spells. 26 is pitifully easy to reach, also. On elite array: 15 base, +2 race (lesser planetouched, etc) +4 level gain, +6 enhancement from item. There's a 27 right there, not even getting into inherent bonuses, age modifiers, or even starting with an 18 in the primary stat.

Tyndmyr

2012-02-27, 10:54 AM

No way, I'd take that template any day. Massive pile of bonus spells, huge DCs... AC that could actually be relevant, hp that the Barbarian's jealous of, skill points out the wazzoo, big save boosts, etc... yeah, worth it. I think a lvl 8 Wizard with +10 to all stats could trounce a lvl 9 Wizard's effectiveness in actual play. A lvl 17 Wizard might beat out a lvl 16/+10, but that's about the only level the straight Wizard has a significant edge.

I admit that this template would totally be something I'd take over a 9th level spell...but actual +1 LA templates do sort of pale compared to 9th level spells, so I admit that in actual practice, I won't generally take LA on casters.

The specific example is hyperbole, but the general principle of casters wanting to avoid LA strongly is quite true.

candycorn

2012-02-27, 11:52 AM

I admit that this template would totally be something I'd take over a 9th level spell...but actual +1 LA templates do sort of pale compared to 9th level spells, so I admit that in actual practice, I won't generally take LA on casters.

The specific example is hyperbole, but the general principle of casters wanting to avoid LA strongly is quite true.

With the possible exception of LA +1, in a buyoff campaign, yes.

Venger

2012-02-27, 01:36 PM

This matches up with my experience.

That doesn't mean it ncreases in value over time. a+2 str at level 1 and a +2 str at level 20 are roughly equal, though if anything its less valuable at level 20. Either way its a +1 accuracy, which is nice and its value is constant, and a +1/2 damage, which is much less meaningful at level 20. +8 str at low levels can mean +6 damage per hit, and be a huge boost to your damage when you would normally do 12 points in the first place . +6 damage at level 20 is much less impressive when you are hitting for 100+ points per hit. Its less relevant.

Didn't they have a TON of feats?

well, yeah, all E6 characters do since after they hit 6, they get feats for "level ups" instead of levels

the party might have just been evil. blasphemy plain doesn't work in that case.

level 10 fighting a balor is pretty nasty, but the trick would be immunities. I know it's brutal in E6, but necropolitan would give immunity to its dominate ability.

while comments about not using the balor's SLAs do make sense, it kind of would've swung the other otherwise. a DM who kills a party of 10s with a balor's not proving much. the inverse, while not a representation of a balor's abilities, is still a fun story though.