David_Bross |
By Season 6 calculus will be necessary for determining one's gp earnings, and we'll be using trigonmetric ratios for calculating spell DCs.
One suggestion, fixed math wealth by character level playing the adventure essentially would have been calc, integrate your level with an appropriate GP scale function.
Iammars |
Cold Napalm wrote:I can make a note of that. In the short term, my insidious campaign of promoting basic arithmetic continues.Well calculating out of tier missed gold isn't TOO bad. Just average the high and low and subtract that. Fortunately, missing encounters is FAIRLY rare around here so it shouldn't be adding too much math.
Hey John, if your gonna be doing an OOT value for each encounter, can you add in the OOT value for each of the old scenario as well? I mean might as well to save some people some math right? ;) .
As an up and coming math teacher, I approve.
kinevon |
Cold Napalm wrote:I often wished that I had brought a calculator for my two weapon fighter. 5 swings per round = a lot of little numbers to keep ordered so that the GM didn't have to.Mistwalker wrote:Hahaha...you know what, I don't mind doing extra math. I can do it REAL quick so it doesn't slow me down one tick. That said, I have seen some GM who will get utterly bogged down by this. And I mean full on grown adults that can't do basic math without pulling a calculator.Shakes his head.
Some of the 9 year olds whom I am running through Jade Regent were...well I suppose I could say "dismayed" when they realized that they had to do math with every roll.
Even more so when my 6 year old, who also plays, demonstrated that she is better at math than some of the 9 year olds.
Keep up the good, sneaky work John.
Todd,
I created a cheat sheet for my high level archer in Excel, including the sources for all the numbers; and a chart showing attack values from basic attack through Rapid Shot/Manyshot/Dealy Aim within Point Blank Shot range.
It had its own page, back-to-back with the first page of that PC's character sheet.
Then again, I need to keep a list of attack mods for both of my Combat Maneuver fighters, so I can see what the totals should be, and explain where they all come from to the GM.
Jiggy RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 |
Irish202 |
I have a question regarding calculating out-of-tier GP with scenarios that have 3 sub-tiers (i.e. Tier 1-7 scenarios).
Specifically, here is the situation:
-Ran #2-01 Before the Dawn Part 1 with an odd level distribution of PC's (1,1,1,5,7,7). Their APL put them at 3.6, which is in Tier 3-4.
-If what I read earlier is correct that the OoT rewards is the average of the high and low subtier rewards. In this case, would that be the average between 1-2 and 6-7? If that is true, the OoT reward would be HIGHER than the tier 3-4 rewards (@ 1870 gp), which would be odd for the level 1 characters. Or would it be relative to the PC (i.e. for a level 1 it would be average between Tier 1-2 and 3-4, then between 3-4 and 6-7 for the level 7 pcs)?
Patrick Harris @ MU |
I have a question regarding calculating out-of-tier GP with scenarios that have 3 sub-tiers (i.e. Tier 1-7 scenarios).
Specifically, here is the situation:
-Ran #2-01 Before the Dawn Part 1 with an odd level distribution of PC's (1,1,1,5,7,7). Their APL put them at 3.6, which is in Tier 3-4.
** spoiler omitted **
-If what I read earlier is correct that the OoT rewards is the average of the high and low subtier rewards. In this case, would that be the average between 1-2 and 6-7? If that is true, the OoT reward would be HIGHER than the tier 3-4 rewards (@ 1870 gp), which would be odd for the level 1 characters. Or would it be relative to the PC (i.e. for a level 1 it would be average between Tier 1-2 and 3-4, then between 3-4 and 6-7 for the level 7 pcs)?
This is a question that has not been resolved--a conflict between RAW and common sense. I plan to start a thread on it some time next week, once campaign leadership recovers from their post-GenCon haze.
Mahtobedis |
Drogon wrote:That's only really algebra if you know Y & Z and are trying to solve for X. Or so I vaguely remember. It's been a long time, I forget where the dividing lines are.John Compton wrote:Cold Napalm wrote:I can make a note of that. In the short term, my insidious campaign of promoting basic arithmetic continues.Well calculating out of tier missed gold isn't TOO bad. Just average the high and low and subtract that. Fortunately, missing encounters is FAIRLY rare around here so it shouldn't be adding too much math.
Hey John, if your gonna be doing an OOT value for each encounter, can you add in the OOT value for each of the old scenario as well? I mean might as well to save some people some math right? ;) .
(X+Y)/2 = Z
.
.
.Gasp!
I've just realized how insidious this actually is. 'tisn't basic arithmetic, at all! It's algebra...
Just in case you are right I'm going to give the equation as X=2Z-Y where you have to solve for Z.
Victor Zajic |
Victor Zajic wrote:I'm pretty sure it's relative to the PCs, high and low tier refering to the subtiers that each PC is between, not to the highest and lowest tier of the scenario.That's not what RAW says. That's almost certainly the intent, but it's not what it actually says.
High and Low are relative terms, and there are multiple ways to interperate them in this context. Reading it as meaning high and low relative to the character's level is not against the rules as they are written. Note that the rules do not say "Highest" tier and "Lowest" tier.
I received out of tier rewards at the Gencon Special, after the judge clarified with the campaign staff how to do it, and I definitly didn't receive the average of tier 1-2 and 10-11. It was the average of the two tiers I was playing in between.
thejeff |
I had to review it, and have to agree. It says to average the high and low tier, so a 1st level character playing in 3-4 gets the average of 1-2 and 6-7, despite being unable to play in the 6-7 tier.
I recall a comment saying do the sane thing in one of these threads: in a 3 subtiered scenario average the 2 relevent subtiers, but I'm not digging through all the threads to find it. :)
JohnF Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West |
Victor Zajic wrote:I'm pretty sure it's relative to the PCs, high and low tier refering to the subtiers that each PC is between, not to the highest and lowest tier of the scenario.That's not what RAW says. That's almost certainly the intent, but it's not what it actually says.
RAW doesn't even always admit to the existence of scenarios with three subtiers. There's at least one other place in the Guide that talks about adventures as if there can be only two subtiers.
Patrick Harris @ MU |
I went ahead and made a thread. This just needs like a three-word clarification, so I figured there was no point in dicking around with it.
Patrick Harris @ MU |
Quote:The leadership of this campaign assumes you will use common sense in your interpretation of the rules.
Side note: Please don't accuse me of lacking common sense. I know what we're supposed to be doing. But since that stands in direct opposition to what the Guide actually says, it will save a lot of people a lot of trouble if leadership can just post a one-sentence clarification.
Mike Lindner |
Mike Lindner wrote:Quote:The leadership of this campaign assumes you will use common sense in your interpretation of the rules.In the clarification thread, I wrote:Side note: Please don't accuse me of lacking common sense. I know what we're supposed to be doing. But since that stands in direct opposition to what the Guide actually says, it will save a lot of people a lot of trouble if leadership can just post a one-sentence clarification.
I wasn't accusing you of lacking common sense. That was directed to the notion of having to ask how to calculate the out of subtier gold at all for scenarios with more than two subtiers.
If there are two ways to interpret a rule and one contradicts common sense, then choose the other interpretation. "Does it make sense to get more gold playing a level 3 character at subtier 1-2 compared to playing the same character at subtier 3-4?" No, so don't do that. Many people may not realize that common sense is actually explicitly part of the campaign principles outlined in the Guide - so I quoted it. You don't have to justify using common sense when interpreting a rule, and there shouldn't need to be clarification if common sense can answer the question.
At the table I think that 99% of the time a question like this comes up people do what makes sense without every bringing it up outside the game. There is a much higher tendency on these message boards than I think almost ever exists at the table to focus so heavily on the little details of how rules are worded to the exclusion of common sense. It can give the impression then that one should slavishly follow RAW even when it makes no sense. GMs don't want to be accused of not running by the Rules As Written, but GMs and players alike need to keep common sense in mind. NPC combat tactics are the perfect example of this. If the listed tactics make no sense given the situation, then the GM shouldn't follow them just to "run by RAW."
Patrick Harris @ MU |
If there are two ways to interpret a rule and one contradicts common sense, then choose the other interpretation.
It wasn't a rule that could be misinterpreted. Doing the obvious thing requires doing something other than what is explicitly written. The fact that it's the obvious thing doesn't mean people will be willing to accept that they should do it, since it's directly contradictory to the way the rule reads.
Todd Lower |
Todd Lower wrote:
I often wished that I had brought a calculator for my two weapon fighter. 5 swings per round = a lot of little numbers to keep ordered so that the GM didn't have to.
Todd,
I created a cheat sheet for my high level archer in Excel, including the sources for all the numbers; and a chart showing attack values from basic attack through Rapid Shot/Manyshot/Dealy Aim within Point Blank Shot range.
It had its own page, back-to-back with the first page of that PC's character sheet.
Then again, I need to keep a list of attack mods for both of my Combat Maneuver fighters, so I can see what the totals should be, and explain where they all come from to the GM.
What I was commenting on was adding (on a good set of swings) d6 + d6 + d6 + d6 + d6 + 3 X 23 + 2 X 18 + d10 + 7 (rend) plus any crits involved. (15-20 crit range)
Sliska Zafir |
"Out-of-Subtier gold: The Out-of-Subtier value was introduced in Season 5; therefore, Chronicle sheets from Seasons 0–4 do not include these wealth tables for normal or slow progression. The Out-of-Subtier gold value is the average of the high and low subtiers; for slow progression
it is half the normal Out-of-Subtier value, rounded down."
The new guide is unclear as to whether or not if one *awards* O-o-T gold to a player who plays out of Tier for Seasons 0-4. It just defines what out of Tier gold is.
If a player at my table plays a level 3 character in a Season 0-4 Tier 1-5 adventure played at 4-5, do I indeed AWARD out of tier gold?
FLite Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento |
From the Guide:
Step 5: Determine the Max Gold for the scenario based
on the PC’s advancement rate and the subtier played. Circle
the applicable value (F). If the PC’s level is not within the
subtier played (such as a 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-level character
in Subtier 4–5), circle the Out-of-Subtier gold value or
calculate the Out-of-Subtier value for Seasons 0–4 by taking
the average of both subtiers and rounding down. Write this
value beside area F and circle it. This value represents the
total gold piece value a character may receive for defeating
all enemies and finding all treasure in a scenario. If the
player is playing a non-1st-level pregenerated character, he
may choose instead to apply this Chronicle sheet to a 1stlevel
character by reducing this value to 500 gp (or 250 gp for
the slow advancement track). If the PCs failed to earn any
of the rewards listed for an encounter, deduct the amount
listed for the applicable subtier from the value circled in
area F. If the resulting value is negative, use 0 instead. Place
the result of this calculation in the shaded GP Gained field
and initial the adjacent box (Q).