|
I've been messing around trying to figure out how Jason create the XP tables but it seems like every "idea" I come up with falls apart around level 9. Is the a pattern or flow to the XP tables like there is in 3.5 or what? :)
On the fast XP chart, it takes the same amount of gaming to go from level 1-6 as it does in 3e. Then from 6-11 there's kind a pattern. There some other weird numbers games I've found in the medium chart but nothing is jumping out at me.
I'm not sure there is one. After playing a 5th level game on the slow track for 5 sessions (alpha one if it matters or has changed)and my group only gained one level. That was fine as I didn't want to boged down with too much character down time for new levels yet, I did get a lot of feed back as to what the heck was the thinking behind the xp tables. No one had an answer that really held water.
The concept is great, long time ago I came across the slow xp table for the Wilderlands PHB by Necro and adopted it as I like love level games that take a long time for my yahoo farmboys to becoming big bad heros. I think Pathfinder should really go in the direction of Wilderlands or something like keep mid-progression the same as 3.5, slow should be double xp and fast should be halfed. this keeps backwards work easy, and still adds the great concept that the game really is for the gm and players not just the desingers.
Director of Games
|
I've been messing around trying to figure out how Jason create the XP tables but it seems like every "idea" I come up with falls apart around level 9. Is the a pattern or flow to the XP tables like there is in 3.5 or what? :)
On the fast XP chart, it takes the same amount of gaming to go from level 1-6 as it does in 3e. Then from 6-11 there's kind a pattern. There some other weird numbers games I've found in the medium chart but nothing is jumping out at me.
There is indeed a pattern, but it might drive you mad if I posted it. I worked it all out into a precise formula at one point in time, to help with conversion, but when I realized I had three variables, I knew I was in trouble.
The basics is this... it all starts with the XP per encounter chart. Which is a base 400. Increase by one level and you jump up 50%. Increase by two levels and you jump 100%. This pattern repeats itself with respect to any one point.
For the XP charts, the fast one is based on roughly 13 encounters per level. The medium one bumps this up to 20 encounters, while the slow assumes 30. Each of these is the number of encounters of a level roughly equal to your average party level with a party of four. Finally, there was some rounding in the numbers to make them a bit more tidy and easy to manage.
Ta-da... Math is fun.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
There is indeed a pattern, but it might drive you mad if I posted it. I worked it all out into a precise formula at one point in time, to help with conversion, but when I realized I had three variables, I knew I was in trouble.
The basics is this... it all starts with the XP per encounter chart. Which is a base 400. Increase by one level and you jump up 50%. Increase by two levels and you jump 100%. This pattern repeats itself with respect to any one point.
For the XP charts, the fast one is based on roughly 13 encounters per level. The medium one bumps this up to 20 encounters, while the slow assumes 30. Each of these is the number of encounters of a level roughly equal to your average party level with a party of four. Finally, there was some rounding in the numbers to make them a bit more tidy and easy to manage.
Ta-da... Math is fun.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
The Far Realm is strong in this one... :oP
Always good to know the mechanic behind things. :o)
I just hope that these tables don't come around to bite us when we get up to higher levels. The margin between 3P and 3.5 starts to double between 8-11 and goes toward triple later on the fast table.
Not an issue - the level-independent XP rewards scale exponentially higher, instead of linearly higher. The fast chart is really almost identical to 3.5 in total effect.
|
|
I just hope that these tables don't come around to bite us when we get up to higher levels. The margin between 3P and 3.5 starts to double between 8-11 and goes toward triple later on the fast table.Not an issue - the level-independent XP rewards scale exponentially higher, instead of linearly higher. The fast chart is really almost identical to 3.5 in total effect.
Ah ha! I didn't compare. :)
|
|
Indeed. For those of us who are math geeks, can you actually pose the formula with variable definitions? I have a hard time visualizing word problems, but I work with Excel a lot and this would make it really handy for me.There is indeed a pattern, but it might drive you mad if I posted it. I worked it all out into a precise formula at one point in time, to help with conversion, but when I realized I had three variables, I knew I was in trouble.
The basics is this... it all starts with the XP per encounter chart. Which is a base 400. Increase by one level and you jump up 50%. Increase by two levels and you jump 100%. This pattern repeats itself with respect to any one point.
For the XP charts, the fast one is based on roughly 13 encounters per level. The medium one bumps this up to 20 encounters, while the slow assumes 30. Each of these is the number of encounters of a level roughly equal to your average party level with a party of four. Finally, there was some rounding in the numbers to make them a bit more tidy and easy to manage.
Ta-da... Math is fun.
Seconded, I use an excel based character sheet that calculates the XP required to advance to the next level automatically. If JB could give us the formulas it would make it easier for me to program that into my character sheets for PFRPG.
I found:
-3200 + 4500*(1.4185)^(K-2)
rounded to 2 significant digits (where K=level attained) to be fairly close. YMMV.
What's "K"?I found:
-3200 + 4500*(1.4185)^(K-2)
rounded to 2 significant digits (where K=level attained) to be fairly close. YMMV.
To quote myself: "where K=level attained". That is, to attain level 2, you need -3200 + 4500*(1.4185)^0 XP. It's not exact, though.
EDIT: I think another question we should ask is this - when calculating the level thresholds, are the XP awards by CR calculated separately, then the results installed into the formula? If that's the case, is the formula based on the CR or based on the previous entry in the chart? (Excel geeks unite. Klaatu barrata nikto.)
I don't understand your question. To go from 1 to 2 requires 13 CR 1 rewards (e.g. 13 x 100 xp). To go from 2 to 3 requires 13 CR 2 rewards (e.g. 13 x 150 xp -- roughly).
In general, to go from N to N+1 requires 13 CR N rewards (on the fast table).
O.K. -- after some painful dredging of memories from my undergraduate discrete math class, the formula for advancement using exactly 13 encounters per level would be:
XP required for level N = 13 * 100 * (2^floor(N/2)- 1) + 13 * 150 * (2^floor([N-1]/2) - 1)
But of course the table rounds up at each step so this formula gets less and less accurate as levels increase.
Alright, here's two ways of calculating the award for a CR. In both cases, CR 1 is hard-coded to 400.
Method One: Value for a CR is equal to the value of the prior CR times a factor.
Method Two: Value for a CR equals 400 times a factor to the CR-1 power.
The individual XP award for a CR N encounter (for a 4-5 person party, for N >= 1) is:
CR N xp = 100 * 2^((N-1)/2), if N is odd
CR N xp = 150 * 2^((N-2)/2), if N is even
There is no rounding. You can multiply by 4 if you want the total value rather than the individual value.
Not quite as simple as the WOTC table. :)If you can show me the algorithm that powered the WotC XP award table, then we can compare and I can agree or disagree.
I too am interested in a formula for level advancement. I work on PCGen and we have a number of folks quite excited about the Pathfinder RPG and are already working on data to support it.
The formula we use for the WotC table is this: ((LEVEL*LEVEL)-LEVEL)*500
This gives you the minimum XP needed to atain the level specified, replace LEVEL with the actual level, i.e. ((4*4)-4)*500=6000
I was hoping to find a similar simple formula for Pathfinder but haven't been able to figure it out yet.
The formula we use for the WotC table is this: ((LEVEL*LEVEL)-LEVEL)*500
Personally I prefer it written as: Level(Level-1)/2*1000
Since either Level or Level-1 will be even, dividing by two will always be easy and then what ever the remaining product is times 1000 (add three zeros) makes it easy to come up with the total xp needed. Of course I usually am doing it by hand without a calculator so that is why I prefer this version.
|
It all comes from a very old issue of Dragon (May 81?)...the base for achieving 2nd level was 400xp - multiplied by an assortment of character skills to ge the real EXP required.
BASE EXPERIENCE
EXP Required to achieve.........Level
0................................................1
400..............................................2
800..............................................3
1600.............................................4
3200.............................................5
6400.............................................6
12500............................................7
25000............................................8
They offered the ability to build any class/race by adding up usable weapons, armour, HD type (d3,d4,d6,d8,d10,d120), HD Topout, bonus hp after topping out, spells (to what power and from what class level), usable magic items, fly, swim, shapeshift, ect. and had example of new classes Like: Orc, Viking, Fairy...
I too am interested in a formula for level advancement. I work on PCGen and we have a number of folks quite excited about the Pathfinder RPG and are already working on data to support it.The formula we use for the WotC table is this: ((LEVEL*LEVEL)-LEVEL)*500
This gives you the minimum XP needed to atain the level specified, replace LEVEL with the actual level, i.e. ((4*4)-4)*500=6000
I was hoping to find a similar simple formula for Pathfinder but haven't been able to figure it out yet.
The formula would be reasonably simple if there wasn't rounding at each step followed by adding a number and then rounding again (so you get a rounded number based on a rounded number).
On the other hand, there's no need for a complicated Encounter Calculator to figure out the XP for an ECL X party of Y people vs. a CR Z challenge, so that's an improvement.