I have recently switched my game over from 3.5 to Pathfinder and I'm planing on converting my players XP over to Pathfinder. I am a little confused as to why it uses a different system. With this system how do players of lower level catch up? Would it hurt at all to stay with the old system?
Simplifying the XP system doesn't speed up gameplay any.
I would be please be convinced that this system was better because I like all other aspects of Pathfinder.
Also... is there synergies in Pathfinder and would it hurt to include them?
|
I'm not sure exactly what it is you're asking about the XP. I'm going on the assumption that you mean that the same level in 3.5 requires a different amount of XP than it does in PFRPG. I would work with percentages in transfering a character over. If a character is 25% of the way to level 12 in 3.5, then I'd simply adjust his XP total to be 25% of the way to level 12 in PFRPG.
You might also mean the fact that the Core Rules gives three different advancement rates: fast, medium, and slow. This just allows the GM to pace the characters level of advancement to suit his tastes/planned adventures.
Personally, next game I GM, I'm thinking of dropping XP altogether, and letting characters level based on DM fiat. Probably approximately 3 adventures to the level, although it would depend on the length of the adventures.
I have recently switched my game over from 3.5 to Pathfinder and I'm planing on converting my players XP over to Pathfinder. I am a little confused as to why it uses a different system. With this system how do players of lower level catch up? Would it hurt at all to stay with the old system?
Simplifying the XP system doesn't speed up gameplay any.
I would be please be convinced that this system was better because I like all other aspects of Pathfinder.
Also... is there synergies in Pathfinder and would it hurt to include them?
Monsters give a flat experience reward now instead of using that awful table in 3.5. The experience needed to level was changed to reflect this. Roughly your PCs should level up at the same rate as in 3.5 it is just a mechanical difference. If you wish to use the 3.5 system it should be noted all 3.5 monsters those 1 CR and are given the advanced template to reflect the difference in PC’s strength.
I am not sure what you mean by synergies?
i wondered this as well
I am not sure what you mean by synergies?
I imagine he meant skill synergies.
Zo
|
In short, the pathfinder way of doing XP just makes more sense.
For a DM it makes figuring out what to award the players SOOO much easier as well as now all you have to do is look up how much XP each creature (Or trap) is worth in either the Bestiary or the Core Rulebook. No more fussing with CR's and adjustments for "surviving the encounter" and all that other nonsense.
On the bit about synergies. No there is not and, yes I think it would hurt the system by inserting more bonuses on skills when the system is balanced around not having spillover. A lot of the skills that had synergy with others were simply rolled into one another as well.
I'm not sure exactly what it is you're asking about the XP.
In the 3.5 rules lower level characters get more experience then Higher level characters(DMG 38.) It's a little bit of a confusing system but it allows for lower level characters to catch up.
To my understanding with Pathfinder all characters get the same XP regardless of there level. As simple as this system is it doesn't allow for lower level characters to catch up.
|
|
In the 3.5 rules lower level characters get more experience then Higher level characters(DMG 38.) It's a little bit of a confusing system but it allows for lower level characters to catch up.To my understanding with Pathfinder all characters get the same XP regardless of there level. As simple as this system is it doesn't allow for lower level characters to catch up.
It is however 20 times easier to deal with on the DM side of the table and more elegantly designed.
Plus most of your players should be at about the same place XP wise regardless now that negative levels from death are removable.
And if that isn't enough ask your DM if you can get switched to the fast track for leveling until you catch up, I think that is more than fair.
In short, the pathfinder way of doing XP just makes more sense.
For a DM it makes figuring out what to award the players SOOO much easier as well as now all you have to do is look up how much XP each creature (Or trap) is worth in either the Bestiary or the Core Rulebook.
As a GM I don't need the experience system to be simple. I need gameplay to be simple.
I do agree that the synergy system is perhaps superfluous.
To my understanding with Pathfinder all characters get the same XP regardless of there level. As simple as this system is it doesn't allow for lower level characters to catch up.
You're right, but I think it's worth throwing out that I did some digging years ago (for purposes of level adjustments and buyoffs) and found that it takes something like six or seven levels to catch up a single lost level worth of XP. The only thing it was really good for was missed sessions where a player didn't earn XP one night.
|
I'm not sure exactly what it is you're asking about the XP.In the 3.5 rules lower level characters get more experience then Higher level characters(DMG 38.) It's a little bit of a confusing system but it allows for lower level characters to catch up.
To my understanding with Pathfinder all characters get the same XP regardless of there level. As simple as this system is it doesn't allow for lower level characters to catch up.
Lower level characters do eventually catch-up, level wise. Level progression slows even more in higher levels under PRPG. For example, say you have a 12th level and a 14th level character in the same party. The 12th level character will achieve 14th level after about six CR 14 encounters, while the 14th level character will only achieve 15th.
They aren't the exact level, and the 14th level character will always be ahead, but there won't be a massive gap in levels for long.
Also, under what circumstances would characters of different levels be in the same party? The only instance I can think of is level drain. However, permanent level drain is a lot harder to come by in Pathfinder than it used to be.
Edit: assuming medium XP progression.
Usually the lower-level character will catch up level-wise, even if they never catch up experience-wise. This should be the case more than half the time, unless you specifically end each session exactly when the highest-level characters have gained enough XP to reach a new level.
Also, since there is no experience cost for magic item crafting or spellcasting in PFRPG, the likeliness of characters dropping behind their party members in experience terms is less likely than it was before.
The only reason I can think of would be if someone in the group misses a play session and you continue play without his/her character, which would be fairly easily remedied by a simple single-character quest to make up the lost XP.
The Pathfinder system is much better. People (like me) used to abuse item creation and XP-based spells in order to deliberately fall behind just so we could "rubber band" ahead of everyone.
For example:
I am 1 level behind my comrades because I crafted items for myself and everyone in the party. We are all made more powerful due to the items. After a few encounters I gain enough XP to actually surpass my friends in XP so that I am now actually 1 level AHEAD of them.
Even during the times where I'm behind them, I often find that I am MORE powerful than my comrades are because of all the magic items I've crafted for myself.
In Pathfinder on the other hand, NOTHING costs XP. Not spells. Not crafting. Not familiar death. As such, the XP can afford to be static rather than variable. There is no more rubber band effect.
It simplifies the system as a whole, closes abuses, and all around makes the system better.
All of the characters who start in my campaign start off at 3rd level. I've had many players come and go.
There have been many times that players couldn't make it to a sessions.
Each player in my campaign has a different amount of experience.
I have some very good players but sadly they can't always make it to every session.
I really don't mind going through a little effort for my players.