I'm still trying to fix the wretched 3.X multiclassing system that Pathfinder uses. My last two attempts have been godawful hideous as far as balance and ease-of-use are concerned-- it's difficult to get right, and I mean no insult when I say that the original solution doesn't work.
So for my current strategy, I need to figure out the ideal XP chart progression for a single-class character so that I can adjust it for multiclass penalties. Problem is, I can't figure out whether or not the standard XP charts-- Fast, Medium, and Slow-- follow a pattern or not.
Can anyone help me figure it out? Or are these numbers just rough figures?
The progressions are very close to this (algorithm form):
- Take the target level minus one
- Half that, keep fractions
- Take 2 to the power of that
- Multiply by the level 3 experience (3,300, 5,000 or 7,500)
- Subtract the level 3 experience
In forumla form, that'd be:
L3 * 2^((X - 1)/2) - L3
Finally, round everything off to nice numbers. Of course, I don't know how they arrived at these numbers in the first place.
Also, I doubt you'll find an ideal progression. You need to lay out some assumptions before that even really makes sense.
Well, the basic assumptions I am working from:
- A multiclass character should always be at least one full level behind a single-class character.
- Characters should get more advantage from advancing more-or-less equally than from taking short dips.
- A 10/10 character should be about equivalent to a level 12 character, and a 10/10/10 should be about equivalent to a level 15 character.
I meant basic assumptions for the single class progressions. Things like a CR X challenge will give the same XP regardless of APL.
Also, when you say 10/10 should be about equal to a 12, do you mean as things currently are, or what?
No, obviously not. For instance, a 10/10 or a 2/2/10 would both only have 10 hit dice-- and the best BAB and saves from each of their respective class levels.
And I'm assuming that encounters would give XP based on APL normally, because class level would be independent of character level-- the same amount of XP would always be the same character level, regardless of what class levels that character level represented.
Honestly, it looks like you're trying to shoehorn a skill-progression type system into a level-based system.
I know you're not talking about skills or skill progressions, but you're basically wanting to allow characters to dabble in doing stuff that belongs to another class, yet advance in relatively the same manner as single-class characters (thereby avoiding the ridiculous penalties a 4 thief/4 wizard/4 fighter suffers vs a 12th single-class character).
So ... what you want is a way to increase whatever skills a player wishes each level ... which still provides advantages for concentrating on only a few, but also allows for greater variety and customization.
You want a different game ... not a fix to multi-classing. Trust me.
And, btw, I actually prefer skill-progression games to Pathfinder myself ... it's just everyone and their brother knows how to play Pathfinder.
So you want multiclassing to work more like gestalting?
Also, I don't think 10/10 = 12 and 10/10/10 = 15 can be made consistent easily.
So do you think a gestalt at level X is more equal to a single class at X + 2 or X * 1.2?
Edit: Mathematical niceness shouldn't be the deciding factor here, but if you accept that X/X is about equal to X + 2, then it works out so that you can basically buy each class with its own XP without changing anything else about any of the progressions.
At 330,000 XP on the slow track, a single-class character will hit level 12. If you split that XP evenly between two classes (165,000 XP each), you'd be just a bit past level 10 in each. If you split if three ways, you'd be just a bit short of 9 in each.
The only problem here is there's no existing price for level 1. So where would you put a X/1 character?
|
Didn't AD&D have what you're looking for? Make the XP cost of a level based off the class level, and not the character level. You can get multiple levels of a lower class for the price of one higher level.
That is why a 1st edition bard was so powerful. The XPs to buy it were so cheap compared to a few more higher levels. If you had a fixed budget of XPs to spec out a character, the bard was always a consideration.
Doubly so as the thief was so cheap compared to the other classes, but differing costs per class is a whole 'nother can of worms. I don't think bringing that back would help anyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way to get the XP values is this:
- The XP needed to get from level 1 to level 2 is picked (3000, 2000 or 1300)
- The XP to get from level 2 to level 3 is 1.5 times that
- The XP to get to the next level is twice that needed for 2 levels back
Looking at it this way, you could guess that the XP to get from 0 to 1 is half the XP to get from 2 to 3 (so 1,500 on the medium track).