xp for rogues

[Mulu]

That makes a lot more sense to me than the "we are too rich, so we need more XP" suggestions...

So instead the answer is "use your wealth to kill stuff, even if it isn't IC."

[Mayhem]

Or spend it on living the high life. I mean, thats why you are stealing the stuff in the first place, right?

[Mulu]

Or spend it on living the high life. I mean, thats why you are stealing the stuff in the first place, right?

The first 1000 gp my PC got, she spent trying on dresses. In other words, she bought them, tried them on, and sold them back if she didn't like them, which was obviously a total waste of money but very IC for her.

Since then, she'd been hoarding to buy a nice tower. But she's lost everything now, so this is really a "rules for NWN2" discussion, not a "my PC needs more xp" discussion. I'm just using my PC as an example. I see an imbalance in the rates of acquisition of wealth v xp for rogues that ultimately impacts the wealth limits rule, and think it needs to be changed to allow rogues to acquire xp while they are taking all of those risks to acquire wealth. It's really a very simple concept, one that is followed by every SP rogue based mod I've ever played. Even Baldur's Gate had xp for locks if I recall correctly. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if NWN 2 goes this route in the OC.

[witch]

There you go then - avoiding having more wealth than your level allows is simply a matter of liberally using traps to kill monsters.

That makes a lot more sense to me than the "we are too rich, so we need more XP" suggestions...

Cool let put the weaponbreakage scripts back in then. so fighters have to buy a new sword now and then

*rolls eyes*

[Dorn]

a) Witch - I like weapon breakage and only play fighters. Fighters are strong enough to carry a few backups. As long as it's implemented properly so things arn't breaking every few days.

b) Mulu -in my experience rogues get far richer than other classes. Weather it be pick pocketting, thieving houses solo, stealing stuff from chests under their companions eyes etc, where the lower level fighters and others often (not always) have to wait for a party to attack things that might have loot (ie not badgers and wolves...and on most servers a wolf pelt will bring only several gold and no exp). So if we need to match exp to their wealth we may need to reduce their wealth at the same time.

c) Mulu - my point on the previous page was that those 'bad apples' as you called them are actually the majority in the instances i've seen. Look at the majority of rogues in alfa and i think you'll find most of these skills maxed along with dext and stuff. You're high charisma type is probably the minority if anything.

Just something we have to be aware of for any system which applies accross the board.

Maybe instead of standard exp for pickpocketting, BnE etc accross the whole server. There is just exp applied to certain chests/doors that are high risk.

Sometimes these chests will be empty and all that risk and expense will be for nothing and that will help balance exp and wealth sometimes, similar to a fighter spending several thousand on healing potions for a battle and finding a rusty greataxe and a garnet

[Fionn]

Well, the first thing I'd do to put the risk back in is remove the 'Take 20' from the act of disarming a trap that can blow your head off.

[AlmightyTDawg]

That makes a lot more sense to me than the "we are too rich, so we need more XP" suggestions...

Mulu's point, most simply, is that the fundamental concept of wealth being taught to DMs and ALFA in general, is that Net Worth (GP) is, within a certain range, a function of XP. That balance which existed mathematically between Tables 3-3 and Tables 5-1 of the DMG is broken by ALFA's "slow leveling" concept; while the wealth standards include outer bounds, the major lesson is education to DMs on how to systematically maintain that balance.

Under that consideration, Mulu's point is right on. At the same time, though, the standards/guidelines are flexible in a lot of ways. For example start with uncounted wealth; a fortunate rogue who climbs high can solve the problem through standing bribes, safehouses, collections, businesses, and other things. Of course this requires good DM support. The other way to look about it is that static content is intentionally left as an unknown, and DM'd content is meant to be "correcting" towards center. One can certainly argue that those who do more static content are "punished" in this sense, but no more than a player who gets a really kind DM, loots a corpse, or has any other good fortune. Plenty of other bleed valves exist for those creative enough to look, but those are the big ones.

Once you get into the idea of static content thievery, I personally start to cringe. Fionn hits on one point of it, but there's actually a lot there. I'll admit, my bias towards the way thieving should go is largely from the "Thief" series of games. Simply put, NWN's static system is poorly designed for these type of ventures. Mostly it comes from the stealth system and its every-round reroll. What you'd really want to do is have a system whereby RP choices constitute modifiers (finding the dark spot in the room, etc) and the penalty for failing a single roll isn't an auto-detection. Even in the unlikely case of being seen only on a 1 in 400 chance (19 point difference - you roll 1, opp rolls 20), over just 90 seconds of being in perception range, that constitutes a roughly 7.3% chance of failure. Change that to an 18 point difference (3 in 400), and that failure rate jumps to 20.0%. So, essentially, it's either /zero/ risk or huge risk.

Now there are things that builders can do to mess with that equation (more or less attentive guards, triggers/zones to adjust stealth values, or other things. But it's exceptionally labor intensive and definitely wouldn't be an expectation on a given server (plus it's also a playtesting nightmare). Conceptually, all "real" thieving is either low-level stuff (run of the mill break ins) or something requiring a lot more work, such as gathering information, getting plans/maps, learning about guards or guard functions, getting the head/high spot guard drunk/drugged, etc. In the former case, defining a Challenge Rating, using the recommended numbers for "value" of a thieving operation, and possibly attaching some XP associated with it, isn't out of the question. In the other, you're talking a thorough static or DM'd content.

But Mulu's basic point is that for static content specifically designed to support thieves there are things builders can do to try to put that content in "balance" much the same as the Wealth Standards and the static guidelines before them suggest. Putting in some solution to ensure it's not infinite is a must, but it's not an unsolvable task either.

[JspecWip]

I think locks as well, taking 20 would be fine in a dungeon/cave you cleared out or if you killed everyone in the house, but if some one is in the room, or even the next room a rouge doesn't have 3 hours to spend trying to pick a lock making noise as he does it.

[Mayhem]

There you go then - avoiding having more wealth than your level allows is simply a matter of liberally using traps to kill monsters.

That makes a lot more sense to me than the "we are too rich, so we need more XP" suggestions...

Cool let put the weaponbreakage scripts back in then. so fighters have to buy a new sword now and then

*rolls eyes*

I didn't see any fighters saying they needed more XP to keep their Level commensurate with their wealth.

[Mulu]

Well, the first thing I'd do to put the risk back in is remove the 'Take 20' from the act of disarming a trap that can blow your head off.

I can live with that. I suppose if you want to get sophisticated you could make it so that if you are in stealth mode you don't get a take 20, since presumably you are in a dangerous area, and if you are not in stealth mode the trap/lock makes a lot of *noise* even if you succeed, since you aren't trying to be quiet.

Sometimes these chests will be empty and all that risk and expense will be for nothing and that will help balance exp and wealth sometimes

It's a little OOC to think that someone is going to bother to trap and lock a chest, behind a locked door, that's empty (unless it's a dummy chest and they are hiding their wealth elsewhere. But, assuming there is risk involved, simply reducing the wealth gained just shafts rogues even more. It means that not only are you not earning xp, you aren't getting wealth either, at which point you're back to the "kill things and take stuff" mode of playing.

I mean, it would be extremely easy to rig ALFA in NWN2 so that there is no reason to ever play a thief. Just remove all static wealth. Make everyone a hunter. I think the thief model is a valid one for the game, and it should not lead to imbalances. It's easy enough to only code xp for locks and traps that are in dangerous places, I assume. In other words, you can't just walk down the street and pop everyone's lock for the xp, only the internal doors, chests, and traps (which are inherently dangerous) would give you xp, with the same type of dim ret that is used for combat. Cause I've played on Daggerford, and I've seen what you guys do to the wolf and white stag populations there....

[Dorn]

Hence the word 'sometimes' mulu.

As fighter characters i've often taken up to 80hps damage from battels and had about 300s golds worth of reward. That doesn't match the several thousand you spend considering the price of cure serious and critical wounds potions. SO basically you get some experience but negative wealth. It's a good balancer.

And it's TOTALLY IC for sometimes their not to be huge wealth ina chest.

Has the thief got a contact in the household that has given them information that the owner has not just sold it? OR moved it to a more secure location? or whatever.

Same as happens to a fighter sometimes when they kill everyone to find the object of their battle gone, or to find their taget has a teleport spell and runs away. ie no wealth reward for a lot of slog and risk.

I'd HATE to play this game were everything works out well.

You're alos not reading my posts in context. As i've said IMO the majority of rogues engage in battle, have maxed trapping as well as hide/MS and are on average much much richer than the other classes.

So what i was suggesting was that if you do something to match exp to wealth, then their ability to generate wealth also has to be reduced to bring them back to standards.

Cause I've played on Daggerford, and I've seen what you guys do to the wolf and white stag populations there.... Razz

I've played about 3 sessions on daggerford in 3 years. I play on TLR and LW

[Mulu]

Hence the word 'sometimes' mulu.

It does nothing to solve the problem, it just slows the accumulation of wealth while still not providing any xp. Same problem, slightly different rate.

As fighter characters i've often taken up to 80hps damage from battels and had about 300s golds worth of reward. That doesn't match the several thousand you spend considering the price of cure serious and critical wounds potions. SO basically you get some experience but negative wealth. It's a good balancer.

Assuming you bother to use the potions. You could just rest and take a break from fighting, or pay a healer, or find a friendly cleric, or multiclass to cleric.

And it's TOTALLY IC for sometimes their not to be huge wealth ina chest.

Has the thief got a contact in the household that has given them information that the owner has not just sold it? OR moved it to a more secure location? or whatever.

There are many variables that are hard to account for in a static environment. I'm sure that if thieves who are capable of popping DC 35 locks became common, people would take even more extreme measures to protect their valuables. If nothing else, the locksmithing industry would respond with an escalation of difficulty, as thieves and home security specialists engaged in an arms race. I'm operating under the assumption that highly skilled rogues are rare, that PC's in general are rare, that most people are commoners with few skills, because that is canon. But mainly, I'm just pointing out a flaw in our game balance scheme. You can shout "realism" all you want about our very unrealistic game, but at the end of the day this *is* a game and it plays best when balanced in my experience.

Realize that nothing will be changing for NWN 1, and all of my ideas for a new PC for NWN 2 are *not* rogues. Seriously, this isn't about me or my PC, this is about ALFA game balance.

Same as happens to a fighter sometimes when they kill everyone to find the object of their battle gone, or to find their taget has a teleport spell and runs away. ie no wealth reward for a lot of slog and risk.

When was the last time this happened to you? Has it *ever* happened to you in a static?

You're alos not reading my posts in context. As i've said IMO the majority of rogues engage in battle, have maxed trapping as well as hide/MS and are on average much much richer than the other classes.

Oh, I'm reading them very well. What I'm saying is that not all people who play rogues want to join the "kill things and take their stuff" crowd, even if some do.

So what i was suggesting was that if you do something to match exp to wealth, then their ability to generate wealth also has to be reduced to bring them back to standards.

The more enriching path will always be to kill things and take their stuff. Utlimately, xp is far more valuable than gp in this gameworld.

You know, yet *another* option to fix this which would be even easier would be to allow rogues to pay for training, effectively converting wealth to xp. Though then I suppose everyone would want it.

Cause I've played on Daggerford, and I've seen what you guys do to the wolf and white stag populations there.... Razz

I've played about 3 sessions on daggerford in 3 years. I play on TLR and LW

This wasn't directed at you in particular, just noting that pointing fingers at "wealthy" rogues who engage in too much burglary can easily be reciprocated.