Why was XP cost eliminated?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 260 of 260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
shallowsoul wrote:


How about take off the blinders for a moment and actually listen. I was talking about the designers making it part of item creation rules, I'm not talking about adding in anything extra.

Okay, listening to this, I'll ask the question you never answered once more.

Why do you want the rules changed so that the rest of us have to Rule 0 the XP costs away?


shallowsoul wrote:

I think you've been playing in the Far Realm too long, most forms of logic there don't make sense and this is no different.

I never said anything about being able to close all loopholes 100% but this was a method that did work and was removed.

So for you, the game needs to be broken in order for it to do what you want it to do? I see what type of player you are.

Yeah, except for the fact that it didn't work. All it did was either completely turn people way from even bothering to craft(like some posters who said upthread they never crafted til PF) or people just found ways around the xp hit. I crafted a LOT in 3.x. I'm in a game right now where my cleric crafts all of his own wondrous items. When I burn up some xp, my group just goes out and finds some random encounters to replenish it. The xp penalty doesn't do jack squat to discourage people from abusing crafting, DM's are there to discourage abuse. People seeking loopholes and munchkinning are going to do it regardless.

Discouraging people from even bothering with the feat in the first place(in the case of those players who refused to spend xp) is pretty piss poor design. A feat should be enticing, exciting, and should make players say "Hey, this sounds cool! I want to try this!", not "Eww, really? No thanks."

The xp penalty didn't do anything positive for the game. Bad rule is bad, and by way of popular community opinion, is now gone. Good riddance.


I'm still amazed dude argued with developers who have credited work on 3e and Pathfinder and then ignored their responses. Gotta be trollin'.


shallowsoul wrote:
TOZ wrote:
However, in PF, there is no level drain and Enervation does not reduce XP.

Energy Drain

School necromancy; Level cleric 9, sorcerer/wizard 9
Saving Throw Fortitude partial; see text for enervation

[snip]

Might want to go and brush up on your rules knowledge. I never said Enervation drains XP, I said that levels, XP and Lifeforce all have a connection because some people thought it was absurd to make a connection. You level up through XP, lifeforce is drained which in game terms means you lose a level or levels. Lifeforce is associated with levels which is associated with XP.

Irony, thy soul is shallow.
shallowsoul wrote:
Might want to go and brush up on your rules knowledge.

I'm happy to aid in your brushing up. Enjoy!


Chobemaster wrote:


I'm just discussing the rules model. Obviously anyone is free to use it or not. Pointing that out isn't necessary and has no bearing on the discussion OF THE MODEL.

Depends on what you think that model is trying to achieve. Does it work for situations in which PCs come to town every one in a while and buy a few items? Yes. Most stuff within the gold piece limit is available so that PCs aren't hampered by it all the time. Does it work to simulate a complex economy in magical items? No, and it's not trying to do so.


Bill Dunn wrote:


Depends on what you think that model is trying to achieve. Does it work for situations in which PCs come to town every one in a while and buy a few items? Yes. Most stuff within the gold piece limit is available so that PCs aren't hampered by it all the time. Does it work to simulate a complex economy in magical items? No, and it's not trying to do so.

Eh, the concept of 3e/d20 is that the whole world is governed by the same principles. That the PCs were different was a flaw in 1e/2e IMO, and they reintroduced that flaw in spades in 4e. However PCs make/sell/buy magic items is the same way anyone else makes/sells/buys magic items.


shallowsoul wrote:

I just love it when someone assumes these boards represent the majority of players out there *sarcastic*.

Maybe minority on these boards but not necessarily the gaming community as a whole.

... so you come to a forum, which (as you say) is not representative of the player base, and hope to appeal to the creators and designers of the game who lend credence to the same ("non-representative") community... and then argue (rather venomously) with the very people you're trying to convince, as well as the overwhelming majority of the ("non-representative") community they listen to...

I don't know about you, but I can see a pattern here, and it's not good for your credibility. Perhaps another approach is in order.

If you look through PF, can you be a chum and find me at least one section in the PRD which directly states loss of XP or levels?


shallowsoul wrote:

I just love it when someone assumes these boards represent the majority of players out there *sarcastic*.

Maybe minority on these boards but not necessarily the gaming community as a whole.

I'd like to know what the DC is for this kind of [mental] acrobatics to not be fully aware of the irony - if not cognitive dissonance - in making these statements. To wit: what makes you think you could possibly represent some supposed majority of the gaming community as a whole on an issue such as imposing an xp penalty under any condition - especially when three different game designers (including a/the Lead) for a financially successful game company have specifically said it was ineffective if not out-right bad?

If you really feel that strongly about it, you're more than welcome to start your own game company and try to run Paizo out of business with your superior wisdom in game design. I, for one, doubt you'll get anywhere with that.

Congratulations, sir, on the success of your troll-dom.


Malignor wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:

I just love it when someone assumes these boards represent the majority of players out there *sarcastic*.

Maybe minority on these boards but not necessarily the gaming community as a whole.

... so you come to a forum, which (as you say) is not representative of the player base, and hope to appeal to the creators and designers of the game who lend credence to the same ("non-representative") community... and then argue (rather venomously) with the very people you're trying to convince, as well as the overwhelming majority of the ("non-representative") community they listen to...

I don't know about you, but I can see a pattern here, and it's not good for your credibility. Perhaps another approach is in order.

If you look through PF, can you be a chum and find me at least one section in the PRD which directly states loss of XP or levels?

Rats, ninja'd by 40 seconds!

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

4 people marked this as a favorite.

And I think we are done here.

Nothing else of any interest is being added and the discussion is wandering about, looking for fights to pick. Lets just close this one down and move on.

Thanks for the opinions folks. They have been noted.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

251 to 260 of 260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why was XP cost eliminated? All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion