Leveling rates/ Highest Levels currently in ALFA/PrC's

[AcadiusLost]

There are no dimrets scripts in place. Dimrets as implemented in NWN1-ALFA had quite a few significant drawbacks, and was pretty unwieldy to work with, so it was not ported over to NWN2. If necessary, we would prefer to control on the supply side, clearing spawns after they've been hit repeatedly, and then replacing them with different ones as the area repopulates, in a more IC fashion.

Combat XP does include a comparison between the highest level PC in the party, and the CR of the creature killed, so once PCs are in the level 4-5 range, they're not going to be getting much XP for kobolds/goblins anymore, while soloing or in groups. It's possible the partied groups have tended to include one or more midlevel PCs, which dries up the combat XP quickly.

Rumors of "200 xp combats" are most certainly bugs. There have been a few blueprints that had erroneous settings for CR, which could lead to an incorrectly high "challenge" modifier, I think we have addressed them all as far as I know.

[Kest]

Case in point - four of us just went through Trident Caves, got 3s for most enemies and 16 for two of the bosses. That's pretty awful.

[Hughes]

If there's one thing I'd change it's the way XP is affected by being in a party.

I don't know the numbers but it seems that, when partied with another PC of one to three levels above me, my XP award for combat suffers dramatically.

I don't think the XP for a kill should be affected at all until I start partying up with people 4+ levels above (or below) me. There are so few players on TSM that in order to survive and party up at all means taking a massive XP hit because of the current system - since there's a good chance someone's going to be at least one or two levels above or below you. It shouldn't be required someone be exactly the same level for you to party up with them.

Heck, partying up should be rewarded - if not purely by the fact that you're likely to survive better, then at least by giving out the same amount of XP you'd get by solo farming.

I suggest it work thusly:

Party levels are within 3 levels of each other - no change
Party levels are within 4+ -20% per level difference (a level 5 character in party with a level 14+ character receiving no xp at all, suffering a -100% penalty to their xp)

..or something to that effect. But my level 2 guy and someone else's level 4 guy really shouldn't be suffering major xp loss for killing something.

maybe it's just that i'm getting HIS xp award? (if he kills a goblin he gets 5, but if i kill it i get 10? so we both get 1?) or is it some version of that? it shouldn't be. if our party kills a goblin he should get 5 and i should get 10.

[Vendrin]

maybe it's just that i'm getting HIS xp award? (if he kills a goblin he gets 5, but if i kill it i get 10? so we both get 1?) or is it some version of that? it shouldn't be. if our party kills a goblin he should get 5 and i should get 10.

No, low level should not be getting more then high level since high level is doing most of the work. What should be happening is an even split. XP/Party Number= XP per individual

[White Warlock]

Hmm... i'm inclined to believe that high levels should get the brunt of the xp, otherwise it takes away from high levels who want to carry around low levels for mentoring purposes, or cannon fodder.

I'm still inclined to think xp should be equal to level. I.e., split xp by all levels, then dole them out according to how many levels.

100 xp

level 5, a level 2, and three level 1s.

Level 5 gets 50 xp
level 2 gets 20 xp
level 1s get 10xp each

[oldgrayrogue]

maybe it's just that i'm getting HIS xp award? (if he kills a goblin he gets 5, but if i kill it i get 10? so we both get 1?) or is it some version of that? it shouldn't be. if our party kills a goblin he should get 5 and i should get 10.

No, low level should not be getting more then high level since high level is doing most of the work. What should be happening is an even split. XP/Party Number= XP per individual

I always felt the reward should be comensurate with the risk. Much more risk for a low level (even partied with a higher level) to engage in combat at all IMO. But an even split would work for me.

[oldgrayrogue]

Hmm... i'm inclined to believe that high levels should get the brunt of the xp, otherwise it takes away from high levels who want to carry around low levels for mentoring purposes, or cannon fodder.

I'm still inclined to think xp should be equal to level. I.e., split xp by all levels, then dole them out according to how many levels.

100 xp

level 5, a level 2, and three level 1s.

Level 5 gets 50 xp
level 2 gets 20 xp
level 1s get 10xp each

Hmm .. If you think about that from a straight RP perspective WW wouldn't the character being "mentored" gain more experience from an encounter than the one doing the mentoring? Even if its the more experienced sword arm delivering the killing blow its the noob who is learning how to fight, the lay of the land etc, even just from observing. Teacher and student get at least equal benefit from the experience I would say, if not much more on the part of the student.

[White Warlock]

In fact, i think there should be a bit of encouragement for grouping.

An example only:

+50% xp per additional member

100 xp base

one level 1 = 100xp
two level 1s = 150 = 75xp each
three level 1s = 200 = 67xp each
four level 1s = 250 = 63xp each
five level 1s = 300 = 60xp each

etc... this would make large groups getting less xp, but only marginally less, which would encourage people to group up, as xp loss is not sufficiently high enough to override survival considerations.

[Runestaff]

Hmm... i'm inclined to believe that high levels should get the brunt of the xp, otherwise it takes away from high levels who want to carry around low levels for mentoring purposes, or cannon fodder.

I'm still inclined to think xp should be equal to level. I.e., split xp by all levels, then dole them out according to how many levels.
<snip>

Unless this was changed recently, this is in fact how things are working now. Note that this and many other ideas for group xp were discussed about a month and a half ago here:

http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpbbforum/ ... hp?t=39535

It might be worth resurrecting that thread (or at least checking it to avoid reinventing the wheel).

[Kest]

Like WW and others have suggested, give players more experience when grouping.

You want them to group, the entire point of D&D is groups, why are you punishing people for grouping.

[Mulu]

You want them to group, the entire point of D&D is groups, why are you punishing people for grouping.

Overall I would say ALFA's design is to punish people for playing. Logging in to a server when others are present is a metagaming offense.

[White Warlock]

Agreed Runestaff, these topics have been discussed recently and many times in the past. For my part as a DM, i'll be doling out xp based on the system already in place, but will provide more entertaining DMed sessions with groups, especially large groups. This, in turn, likely will translate to more xp when grouping under a WW-DMed session.

So really, alfa is still largely dependent upon DM interaction and their willingness to entertain players, as opposed to kill PCs. The extremes are monty hall (too much fat l3wt/xp) and a killer-dm session (very small chance of PC survival). ALFA has rules in place to ensure monty hall doesn't occur, but there are no rules in place to ensure killer-dming doesn't occur. Thus, all this talk about xp or l3wt revolves around lethality of the gaming session, where players feel they cannot solo without dieing, and cannot play under a DM without the same result.

The idea is to have fun, which is why i feel DMs need to try and push the limits for characters, but not blow their heads off with lichs and dragons. Keep things within their level of comparable threat. Oh sure, you can always tease with a great danger, but putting it in front of them and saying, "hack this if you can" is just plain mean.

Well, obviously tired, so signing off.

[Twin Axes]

Sorry for being a bit late with this...

I believe that it is in ALFA’s interest to help lowbies catch up with highbies, not the other way round. Sure, a high level PC will carry a heavier load of fighting and all that, but as has been pointed out, the risks are greater for a low level who tags along with him/her. And in the end, good game play is what we should strive for. Having PCs far apart in level does not contribute to good game play. If lower level pcs get a proportionally higher amount of XP, something of the inbuilt inequality between people who have the time / inclination to spend five nights a week or more in ALFA, and those who don’t, will be ironed out. Reverse the XP award tables!

[Kest]

The breakdown of my character:

RPXP: 50.
Statics: 40.
DMXP: 10.
Combat: 0.

Despite joining more DM events, the percentage of DMXP may have actually lessened. The typical reward for several hours of play is only 60XP.

[dergon darkhelm]

The highest level PCs I am aware of are lvl 6

My PC is level 5, having around 10.5k exp.

That is just shy of 1000 exp/week.

I have been ingame nearly daily since live. I would estimate at least a couple of RL hours each day on average.

I would estimate that probably 30-40% comes from RPXP, 40-50% has been combat, and around 10% DM.

I posted that about 6 weeks ago and can give an update for some perspective.

Since then I have gotten just shy of 3k exp now sitting at 13.5k and remaining at lvl 5. Highest level PC I am aware of is lvl 7.

I have been in a few DMd sessions and have probably gotten 200 -300 in DM exp (probobably on average 50xp per hour), 800-1k in combat, around 2k in RP exp. (estimates)

For me at least, DM XP seems to pretty consistently come in around 10% and RPXP and Combat, depending on how often I make the conscious choice to go out to fight stuff, spltting up the rest.

Just providing data