Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Examining XPs

So, as part of my home rules, I was doing some number crunching today with XPs. As I've said before, I'm thinking of making a single XP table, much like there is in 3E. So, I sat down tonight and crunched the numbers, through 20th level. What did I find? MAN, there's some WHACKY XP requirements for levels in 2ed. For instance, clerics and druids (which are, more or less, a specialty cleric), are pretty much on a parallel until you hit 6th level. Then, things start going whacky. It suddenly becomes AWFULLY expensive to be a cleric - to the point where, by 12th level, you could have 3-12th LEVEL DRUIDS for the XP cost of 1-12th LEVEL CLERIC. However, things swing back in line pretty quick, as within 2 levels, Druids have made up that gap, and within 3 levels, you could now have 2-15th level clerics for the cost of 1-15th level druid. Plus, druids kinda get screwed once they get to Heirophant levels, where their numbers go WAY out of line. Also, thieves are cheap in every sense of the word.

I did some averages for all classes, core classes, and alternate classes (considering paladin, ranger, druid, bard, and monk and assassin from THE SCARLET BROTHERHOOD as alternate classes), and got some interesting results. It's actually CHEAPER, on average, to be a "specialty" class until 13th level. Then, the XP creep finally catches up with you. All in all, druids and thieves REALLY screw any attempts at averaging out an XP table, because druids are unnaturally cheap at early levels, and thieves are just plain cheap. You would think, if you were going to use the XP for gold rule, that thieves should maybe be MORE expensive, since they would benefit from this the most.

For instance, at 40,000 XP, you could have a 6th level fighter, paladin or ranger, well on their way to 7th level, about one and a half 6th level clerics or monks (1 cleric/monk who is a little short of 7th level, or a 6th level cleric/monk and a 5th level assistant), two 6th level druids (or a 7th level druid nearing next level), one 6th level wizard, or two 6th level thieves, bards or assassins (or one 7th level thie/bard/assassin). At 1,000,000 XP, you could have a 12th level fighter, an 11th level ranger or paladin very near to leveling up, a 12th level cleric or monk, THREE 12th LEVEL DRUIDS (or one druid halfway between 13th and 14th level), a 12th level wizard close to leveling up, or TWO 12th LEVEL THIEVES AND AN 11th LEVEL THIEF (or one thief just under 15th level). Just think... you could have 3 TIMES THE AVAILABLE SPELLS by having three 12th level druids, or THREE BACKSTABBING MACHINES by having three high level thieves. It seems a little... unfair.

For some reason, thieves and druids are WAY out of line here.

The thing I found the most is how odd it is that the XP tables start out as routinely doubling for most classes, but then at some point,it simply become adding a set amount on top of the previous level. In a way, it encourages outrageously high level characters, because when you reach the top level, it starts to plateau, instead of an even exponential increase (is it even an exponential increase? I teach English, not math).


  1. Thieves aren't "WAY out of line". We're just that much better.

  2. Well, I've often suspected as much. 8)