| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the OP:
In my current Forgotten Realms game, I had a plan to introduce the Nether Scrolls. If you're unfamiliar with what they do, essentially they are set a 50 scrolls. Each scroll you study/read gives you a level in an arcane spell-casting class of a character's choosing.
Found the reference to four levels:
This is actually happening in my long-running 3.5 campaign right now!
We just hit 17th level, and we have access to four of these scrolls and enough time to read them, if we want.
Nobody is forced to read them, so the accusation that you're forcing someone to take levels in classes they don't want is false.
In our 4 player/8 character group, the druid, cleric/warpriest, ranger and fighter chose not to read any; the wizard and the warlock read them all, and the rogue and multi-classed bard/fighter/dragon disciple read two each, IIRC.
Folks, the OP is dealing with 50 scrolls, not 4.
Someone else is dealing with 4 scrolls and NOT having a problem./cevah
A character who has chosen not to read the scrolls would be many levels behind a character who does.
It might be worth explaining to the player who doesn't want to read the scrolls that he will level up faster than the people who do read the scrolls. He may not *catch* them, if they continue to read many scrolls, but he should keep relative pace, just from the exponential nature of XP.
|
A character who has chosen not to read the scrolls would be many levels behind a character who does.It might be worth explaining to the player who doesn't want to read the scrolls that he will level up faster than the people who do read the scrolls. He may not *catch* them, if they continue to read many scrolls, but he should keep relative pace, just from the exponential nature of XP.
Or he might just die a lot.
It might be worth explaining to the player who doesn't want to read the scrolls that he will level up faster than the people who do read the scrolls. He may not *catch* them, if they continue to read many scrolls, but he should keep relative pace, just from the exponential nature of XP.Or he might just die a lot.
Doubtful. Cohorts, while a bit more fragile than PCs, don't die very often - and they have NPC gear, at least to start. Plus this is the GM talking to him, who should be adjusting encounters for the whole party APL.
If the rest of the group aren't wizards, they aren't going to be super effective being multiclassed anyways. He'll be the one with the highest single class level.
It might be worth explaining to the player who doesn't want to read the scrolls that he will level up faster than the people who do read the scrolls. He may not *catch* them, if they continue to read many scrolls, but he should keep relative pace, just from the exponential nature of XP.Or he might just die a lot.Doubtful. Cohorts, while a bit more fragile than PCs, don't die very often - and they have NPC gear, at least to start. Plus this is the GM talking to him, who should be adjusting encounters for the whole party APL.
If the rest of the group aren't wizards, they aren't going to be super effective being multiclassed anyways. He'll be the one with the highest single class level.
Huh. In our games cohorts die on a regular basis, unless they are built specifically to stay out of harms way (which is often the case). A paladin cohort would probably be quite short-lived, at least if she also wanted to contribute somewhat rather than just standing there self-healing herself with both LoH and various spells each round.
That's why you want a decent charisma for leadership in the first place, if you want the cohorts to go adventuring with you.
And cohorts are two levels lower, not like four or more.
It might be worth explaining to the player who doesn't want to read the scrolls that he will level up faster than the people who do read the scrolls. He may not *catch* them, if they continue to read many scrolls, but he should keep relative pace, just from the exponential nature of XP.Or he might just die a lot.Doubtful. Cohorts, while a bit more fragile than PCs, don't die very often - and they have NPC gear, at least to start. Plus this is the GM talking to him, who should be adjusting encounters for the whole party APL.
If the rest of the group aren't wizards, they aren't going to be super effective being multiclassed anyways. He'll be the one with the highest single class level.
I agree that the GM should be altering the game to accomodate all the players but a very good deal of the indignation around this entire topic is related to the idea that the GM should have to alter the game in any way to accomodate all the players. Apparently, any player that doesn't like everything exactly the way the GM made it is an ungrateful jerk who is unfairly making the GM do extra work. This is where the nut cake and the legless skating analogies came from.
If it's too much work for the GM to alter the scrolls so that they would give the paladin something more useful or relevant to his character than wizard levels (the scrolls are very emphatically presented as established lore and give ONLY wizards levels) then monkeying with the encounters to make them less threatening to the characters who are many levels behind is certainly too much to ask of the GM.
Kudos to the OP for making what I believe is the best decision and not including the scrolls in his game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So here's my 2 (3?) cents:
•I'm not a fan of screwing with established more any more than absolutely necessary. The Nether Scrolls - I'd consider those "too important to screw with" for FR lore. (Lore is what makes fans of the setting - screwing with that lore screws with what people liked about playing in that world in the first place.)
•The idea that reading a Nether Scroll gives you a free level in any arcane spell casting class of your choice seems like a relic of older editions of the game. Back in 2nd Ed when everyone advanced at different rates? Whatever. In 3rd+? Probably a really bad idea.
The "official lore" surrounding these(this?) artifact(s) doesn't specify at all what they do, other than to suggest that they bestow incredible knowledge of arcane matters. I think the suggestion of Mythic Paths is a MUCH better idea than free caster class levels. However...
•I'd never, ever, let these things into my game. There's a difference between giving the PCs items to make them feel special and powerful, and giving them a free "I win" button.
I suggest people actually read the lore behind these scrolls! We're talking about something that, with an incomplete set, turned a "magically literate" community into one of the (if not THE - arguably only challenged by the Elves and the Imaskari) most powerful magical societies in the history of the setting.
Finding even one of these scrolls shouldn't happen until late levels, and it's basically the point where it's time to retire your character (as they've either accomplished so much they have nothing left to adventure for - or they're going to keep searching out more scrolls, effectively turning them into an NPC).
You don't actually get more XP for being a level lower in Pathfinder. You will level up faster, but you will always be behind.
It seems fair to note that these items were designed for a system that did behave that way and that converting them for use in pathfinder should include someway to deal with that.
If the rest of the group aren't wizards, they aren't going to be super effective being multiclassed anyways. He'll be the one with the highest single class level.I agree that the GM should be altering the game to accommodate all the players but a very good deal of the indignation around this entire topic is related to the idea that the GM should have to alter the game in any way to accommodate all the players. Apparently, any player that doesn't like everything exactly the way the GM made it is an ungrateful jerk who is unfairly making the GM do extra work. This is where the nut cake and the legless skating analogies came from.
Thank you for the summary, though I'm not really commenting on the side rant. If the GM had introduced the scrolls, he would be altering his campaign immensely. In so doing, he can make accommodations for characters not participating in the use of the scrolls.
If they *are* reading all 50 scrolls right away... then the GM is basically throwing away the entire campaign in favor of playing super-epic levels, and the players have every right to complain. But that's not how I interpreted it.
You don't actually get more XP for being a level lower in Pathfinder. You will level up faster, but you will always be behind.It seems fair to note that these items were designed for a system that did behave that way and that converting them for use in pathfinder should include someway to deal with that.
It looks like Kobold Cleaver erased his post, but [N'mind, it was from page 2] for clarity to anyone who read it, you *will* actually catch up, level-wise. The 3.5 and PF xp systems function identically, they are simply inverted. Someone lower levels in PF will catch up in level just as fast as someone in 3.5, because the xp difference will become exponentially less significant as the levels go by. The only real difference is that in 3.5 it was a bit 'blocky', so the person behind would lurch forward until they are the same level, ending up somewhere just behind or just ahead even.