Where are the rules for losing xp and negative levels? Is it in the core book? What section?
Thanks.
Ned
There are no rules for losing XP in the Pathfinder RPG. Characters never lose XP. You can, however, find the rules for negative levels in th Core Rulebook on page 562, under the heading "Energy Drain and Negative Levels", or here.
there is no way in pathfinder to lose XP, that was deliberately removed from the game. There are rules for negative levels, though they are now essentially a condition, like ability damage instead of a new state of being.
If someone draws the fool from the deck of many things they lose 10,000 xp. How would that be handled?
Thanks a bunch everyone!
Once a player hits level 7, losing 10,000 XP can never cause them to lose more than one level...
My inclination as a DM would be to
a) not give the opportunity for it to come up before then, and
b) simply reduce the player's total XP, without adjusting their level.
Essentially, it'd become XP debt that they have to pay off before continuing to advance.
At high levels, it's unlikely that this would be any different, as you're less likely to have just crossed the break point between levels. At low levels, it's still very painful -- if you pulled the Fool right after hitting level 7, the rest of your party would be nearly level 8 by the time you returned to your original XP total.
Your basically left doing that yourself. Under normal situation xp loss mostly falls under anti fun. However the deck as an artifact is oitside the normal anti fun rules :p
My suggedtion is give him 1 or 2 negative levels and change the means to remove them so the player is stuck with them a while.
If someone draws the fool from the deck of many things they lose 10,000 xp. How would that be handled?
Thanks a bunch everyone!
I believe Ultimate Campaign has rules for catching upon XP.
/cevah
If someone draws the fool from the deck of many things they lose 10,000 xp. How would that be handled?
Thanks a bunch everyone!
Do something else. Someone obviously overlooked that in the transition. If it hasn't been errata'd yet, I'm very surprised.