13 réponses à ce sujet

[SFF19]

I'm curious, do the melee classes such as Fighters and Paladins still get ****** poor experience like in the original?

[Banshe]

Every class gets the same amount of experienc points. So I believe the answer is "no".

When you kill a creature, the amount of experience you get is dependant on how many levels you have and what level (Challenge Rating actually) the creature has. If the creature's CR is higher, you get more xp and vice versa.

[Arkalezth]

And it also worked like that in the original (I guess you mean NWN1).

[Dorateen]

In AD&D, which could possibly be meant as the "original" predating 3rd Edition, didn't Thieves advance at the fastest rate, then Fighters and then Wizards? It's been a while, I would need to consult the XP charts.

I rather liked the staggered leveling, instead of all party members training at the same time.

Harumph!

[Arkalezth]

At least in Baldur's Gate games, yes, it's different. I don't remember if that's the order, but the number of levels were dependent on the class. The experience was the same, though.

[Haplose]

I vaguely remember druids being hosed by the levelling system in BG (and therefore AD&D 2).

If that is what the OP means, than no, this is no longer the case.

[dunniteowl]

Actually, I don't think the exact amount of XP progression was the same for all classes, even in BG. I could be wrong. But as I recall, AD&D 1st and 2nd edition rules (I believe BG series was AD&D 2d) had the same progression tables. Thieves (before they got all PC and whatnot) had a relatively shorter XP demand than the other classes to a point. It was like1500 for Fighters, Clerics and Rangers, then like 1800 or something for Wizards and Thieves only had like 1000 or 1200. Each successive level was double the previous. So the next level for all the other guys was like 3000, the Wizards 3600 (or something like that, I don't have my manuals handy ATM and I don't want to wake the wife...) And Thieves were 2400 or so. After a while, though, with the doubling of each level's XP required to train, it all evened out. By the time Fighters (including Ranger and Paladin) were 7th level, the Cleric would be like 5th ready to go to 6th, the Wizard would be like just turned 5th and the Thief would be like 7th or 8th by then.



Then, even later, by the time the Thief was, say, 11th, the Fighters would be 9th going on 10th, the Cleric would also be just at 9th and the wizard would be around 8th ready to go to 9th. By then their overall usefulness to the party dynamic had changed to some degree and now the wizards, thieves and clerics sort of started taking as much a front row seat in the action.



Since the edition changes, the XP levels have all become the same for each class. And they no longer simply double in progression of XP to the next level. The spell progressions have changed too, making Casters much more powerful earlier on in the gaming compared to AD&D and prior.



And with the addition of Feats and Skills that also progress, characters in general have become more powerful from the get go. I think 4th edition continues this sort of early rise to power in characters, and has also made each character more 'generic' in overall scope, but allows for a greater variety in character creation by doing so. There are so many 'powers,' feats and skills that you cannot possibly acquire them all with a single character within a class.



Yeah, back in the day, Druids got pretty short shrift of any really useful spells and abilities until they hit like 7th level, and by then they'd been eclipsed by the much more powerful Clerics and Wizards of equal level. And getting to that level? Pretty dang hard for a Druid, even compared to the other casters.



That's what I recall off the top of my head anyways.



dunniteowl

[Arkalezth]

What I meant is that if (in BG) you killed an enemy worth, let's say, 100 XP, you'd gain 100 XP no matter the class. The amount of XP required to reach a new level is what varies with the class. I think that's how it worked, I haven't played it lately.



In both NWN games, the experience required to level up is (your actual level) x 1000. So you need 1000 XP to level up from level 1 to 2, 5000 XP to level up from 5 to 6, etc.

[The Fred]

Arkalezth wrote...
In both NWN games, the experience required to level up is (your actual level) x 1000. So you need 1000 XP to level up from level 1 to 2, 5000 XP to level up from 5 to 6, etc.

IIRC, it's actually 1000 x the nth triangular number, where n is your level. So it's 1000 to go from 1 to 2, 3000 from 2 to 3, then 5000 etc. The formula is something like 1/2 x n x (n + 1), x 1000, ofc.

[The Fred]

And in BG (and 2nd Ed I guess) classes had different leveling curves, so to speak. I recall Druids actually leveled reasonably fast until something like 13th level when they suddenly underwent a huge random hike. Mages were pretty slow all the way - it was something like 1250 for thieves, 2000 for fighters, 2500 for mages just to get to L2. The rates changed as you went, though, so thieves slowed down a bit after L7-8 or something and other classes sped up.

[kamalpoe]

Arkalezth wrote...
What I meant is that if (in BG) you killed an enemy worth, let's say, 100 XP, you'd gain 100 XP no matter the class. The amount of XP required to reach a new level is what varies with the class. I think that's how it worked, I haven't played it lately. .

That is how it worked in 2nd edition, which BG1/BG2?IWD/Planescape used. classes required different amounts of xp to gain a level, but all classes got the same xp from killing a monster. So you can have two different characters with the same amount of xp but having different levels. In general, thieves gained the fastest and wizards the slowest. At high amounts of experience the difference could be several levels.

Druids used to top out at a level 15 hard cap, and there was only supposed to be a single level 15 druid in the world (because you had to not only get enough xp, you had to challenge the level 15 druid who headed the druids worldwide). This led to some crazy things like a druid needing 1.5 million xp to get from 0 to level 14, and then another 1.5 million (so a total of 3 million) to get to level 15. A level 15 druid was much much more powerful than a level 14, level 15 meant going from two spells of the highest level ls to 7, with similar jumps in other spell levels. Later 2nd edition changed this by making "epic" druid levels that you could advance to after 15, but these presumed retiring from the druid heirarchy, there could still only be one level 15 druid.

Really old school: non human races used to be level capped for most/all classes, plus they could only take certain classes. Until 3rd edition, only humans could be paladins or monks for example. Also, the non-human level caps were below level 10 for virtually all classes.

Super old school: non humans didn't have classes, your class was "elf", "dwarf" etc. And elves couldn't be raised from the dead.

Non human/demi-human rights have advanced a long ways.

[Arkalezth]

The Fred wrote...

Arkalezth wrote...
In both NWN games, the experience required to level up is (your actual level) x 1000. So you need 1000 XP to level up from level 1 to 2, 5000 XP to level up from 5 to 6, etc.

IIRC, it's actually 1000 x the nth triangular number, where n is your level. So it's 1000 to go from 1 to 2, 3000 from 2 to 3, then 5000 etc. The formula is something like 1/2 x n x (n + 1), x 1000, ofc.

I think is 1000, 2000, 3000... but I'm not gonna test it right now, maybe you're right.

Edit: I love the super old school. Poor elves. (Well, I don't exactly love it, sorry if I ofended some elf).

Modifié par Arkalezth, 21 juillet 2010 - 02:34 .

[kamalpoe]

Arkalezth wrote...

The Fred wrote...

Arkalezth wrote...
In both NWN games, the experience required to level up is (your actual level) x 1000. So you need 1000 XP to level up from level 1 to 2, 5000 XP to level up from 5 to 6, etc.

IIRC, it's actually 1000 x the nth triangular number, where n is your level. So it's 1000 to go from 1 to 2, 3000 from 2 to 3, then 5000 etc. The formula is something like 1/2 x n x (n + 1), x 1000, ofc.

I think is 1000, 2000, 3000... but I'm not gonna test it right now, maybe you're right.

Edit: I love the super old school. Poor elves. (Well, I don't exactly love it, sorry if I ofended some elf).

nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Character_progression#Character_Level_Progression_Table
1,000, 3,000, 6,000, 10k, 15k etc.

IIRC, in 3rd edition and up, killing a critter gives xp based on your level vs the critter's CR. So a level 20 pc gets the same xp for killing a CR20 critter as a level 5 pc for a CR 5 critter. It's just quest xp that goes up. In 2nd edition and prior, xp was based purely on the critter's difficulty. This made the greater basilisk of BG1 a tempting low level target since it gave lots of xp, at low levels you could gain an entire level just for killing a single one.

[Arkalezth]

kamalpoe wrote...

nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Character_progression#Character_Level_Progression_Table
1,000, 3,000, 6,000, 10k, 15k etc.

Thanks for the link, that's what I meant, 3000 XP from level 3 to 4, but 6000 total XP (3000+2000+1000).