Is there a problem with using a unified XP chart in C&C, ala 3e and 5e?
I know some looked on the different XP progressions as some sort of class-balancing in older editions. I'm not sure that class balance is that much of a concern anymore, especially in C&C; and I think a unified table could make multiclassing more simple.
Where/am I wrong?
Unified XP chart
-
Fiffergrund
- Lore Drake
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:00 am
- Location: Toronto, Ontario
Re: Unified XP chart
The classes are balanced for their individual XP charts. With a unified chart, you may find little bits of weirdness. I can't think of an example off the top of my head, but I know Davis calculated those charts based on class abilities and who-knows-what-else.
There's a healthy nostalgia component in there too, but the biggest reason (I think) was that spells were refactored to be much more powerful than their SRD counterparts in many cases, so slowing the wizards' roll was important.
If you use classic D&D materials and you want to convert on the fly, this might matter too.
In all, if you're willing to keep an eye on things to see how it plays out, go for it if it makes things easier to explain or manage.
There's a healthy nostalgia component in there too, but the biggest reason (I think) was that spells were refactored to be much more powerful than their SRD counterparts in many cases, so slowing the wizards' roll was important.
If you use classic D&D materials and you want to convert on the fly, this might matter too.
In all, if you're willing to keep an eye on things to see how it plays out, go for it if it makes things easier to explain or manage.
Marshal Fiffergrund, Knight-Errant of the Castle and Crusade Society
Re: Unified XP chart
A unified xp progression is absolutely wrong. Classes, like people, are not created equal. Attempts to force balance/equality cannot help but fail miserably. And I think C&C has the most elegant and simple multi-classing system out there so why mess with it?
Another option for multi-classing if you have it, is to use some of the sub-classes from the Hyperborea game. Abilities, XP charts, etc., are all built in and you could easily extract BtH from their To Hit matrix. Then you get classes like the purloiner (Thief/Cleric), warlock (Fighter/Mage) etc.
Another option for multi-classing if you have it, is to use some of the sub-classes from the Hyperborea game. Abilities, XP charts, etc., are all built in and you could easily extract BtH from their To Hit matrix. Then you get classes like the purloiner (Thief/Cleric), warlock (Fighter/Mage) etc.
Behind closed eyes, realize your sight....
Re: Unified XP chart
There is a game system, called The Arcanum, which has a method I actually like but would require some slight tweaking for a C&C-esque game.
In that game, all classes are defined as either Single-Classed or Dual-Classed. Single-classes have XP advancement 1 and Dual-Class have XP advancement 2. No character can be Dual-Classed and take on another class; if you are Single-Classed, you can take on another Single-Class and this will kick you over to the Dual-Class chart but you must make up the difference in XP, combined, for all levels.
In a sense, it is very similar to the class-and-a-half concept.
I do not think a single unified chart is also appropriate. It can be, if that was how the design was implemented from the start... but, C&C did not go that route. The fighter class is the baseline and all others are compared against it to determine "costs" for abilities, per level, and spells are very expensive.
In that game, all classes are defined as either Single-Classed or Dual-Classed. Single-classes have XP advancement 1 and Dual-Class have XP advancement 2. No character can be Dual-Classed and take on another class; if you are Single-Classed, you can take on another Single-Class and this will kick you over to the Dual-Class chart but you must make up the difference in XP, combined, for all levels.
In a sense, it is very similar to the class-and-a-half concept.
I do not think a single unified chart is also appropriate. It can be, if that was how the design was implemented from the start... but, C&C did not go that route. The fighter class is the baseline and all others are compared against it to determine "costs" for abilities, per level, and spells are very expensive.