Experience table Options

[aigleborgne]

Experience value given by NPC

Level Mage Cleric Fighter Druid Thief
1 50 100 100 75 50
2 100 200 200 150 100
3 150 300 300 225 150
4 200 400 400 300 200
5 650 500 500 375 250
6 1000 700 700 525 350
7 2000 1000 1000 1000 500
8 3000 2000 2000 2000 1000
9 5000 3600 3000 3750 1500
10 6500 4800 4000 5000 2000
11 8000 6000 5000 6250 2500
12 10000 7200 6000 7500 3000
13 12000 8400 7000 8750 3500
14 14000 9600 8000 10000 4000
15 16000 10800 9000 11250 4500
16 18000 12000 10000 12500 5000
17 20000 13200 11000 13750 5500
18 22000 14400 12000 15000 6000
19 23500 15600 13000 16250 6500
20 25000 16800 14000 17500 7000

What do you think about this table?
Quick explanations:
Under level 5, fighters are the most powerful. Priests can be less, equal or better, depending on luck with spells. Mages and thieves are definitly weak.

On a general rule, thieves are weak. Sure they can make a bastab, but that's all. So they worth fighter's xp divided by 2

After level 5, mages start to shine with level 3+ spells and their value will grow far more than other classes (in my mind, mages have always been overpowered, but that's the game eh). Mages not only have powerful offensive spells, but they also have good defensive spells, not to mention "godly" contigency and spell trigger.

Cleric are a little better than fighter at high level. They could be better if they had some protection, but it's not the case. If you let a cleric cast all his spells, he is definitly better than a fighter, but it's easy to interrupt him (sanctuary only allow defensive spells)

Druid will be on par with cleric at level 7. I think they are a little better since their high level spells are more offensive.

I have tried to scale baldur's gate experience at low level. But there was a problem with high level opponent. After level 7-9, any opponent worth a lot more. mage get level 4-5 spells, fighter start to get 4 or 5 stars in weapon, ...

I am aware that this will generally give more experience and get higher levels.
This is not a problem because:
- you can use an experience cap
- global difficulty will be far superior

Of course, you can discuss and argue about this table. If you have suggestions, tell me them

This post has been edited by aigleborgne: Dec 23 2005, 10:15 PM

[Salk]

Your table is interesting and very rational to my (unexperted) eyes.

Problem is if we want uniformity in how the same game deals with XP for player and joinable NPCs or not.

People who will want to continue playing to Baldur's Gate II will deal with another kind of experience table (the classic one).

Said that, there is also another factor to keep in mind.

This table will reward the player according to the difficulty of the encounter but does imply - indirectedly - that some classes are worth more than others.

While this doesn't directly affect gameplay, it raises some doubts about our ethical view on society.

Is it right to consider an important, famous Thief worth less experience points than a mage of the same level ? Even better: do we want to consider experience points only a parameter that certifies how "dangerous" one person is ? (Here of course monsters are not included).

So, while I welcome this new "rational" table from one side, from one other I find it a bit "destabilizing" to some extent, if you understand what I mean...

All in all I look at it very positively and it's probably best gamewise to have your own XP table when we play Enhanced Creatures than the classical one as it will best adapt to the new game difficulty.

This post has been edited by Salk: Dec 23 2005, 10:16 AM

[aigleborgne]

I know the problems that this new table coudl bring.
I'm pretty sure some people won't like it.

So it will be an optional module

In fact, many things will be optional in this mod.

[Andyr]

Is this how much XP you need to gain levels, or how much XP a creature with these levels is worth when you kill it?

[Galactygon]

Is this how much XP you need to gain levels, or how much XP a creature with these levels is worth when you kill it?

It's most likely the first one.

I don't agree with the new experience table; the status quo regarding xp tables is fine. In fact, the only changes I might make is decreasing the amount of xp needed for mages to level up upto level 5, and increasing the anount of xp needed for level up for mages after level 5.

This post has been edited by Galactygon: Dec 23 2005, 05:57 PM

[aigleborgne]

No, it's the amount of xp given my NPC.

For example, if you kill a level 9 mage, you will gain 5000xp.

[Galactygon]

Thet sounds better.

In AD&D, you gain 5% of the creature's total xp if you kill it.

For example, killing a level 40 warrior (8000000 xp) would yield you 5% of that 8000000 xp (which would be 400000 xp). A more proper example would be a level 9 mage that gives 6750 xp when killed (which is 5% of the 135000 xp required to attain level 9 for mages).

-Galactygon

This post has been edited by Galactygon: Dec 23 2005, 10:40 PM

[aigleborgne]

Thet sounds better.

In AD&D, you gain 5% of the creature's total xp if you kill it.

For example, killing a level 40 warrior (8000000 xp) would yield you 5% of that 8000000 xp (which would be 400000 xp). A more proper example would be a level 9 mage that gives 6750 xp when killed (which is 5% of the 135000 xp required to attain level 9 for mages).

-Galactygon

I knew this system of 5%

But I don't like it at low-mid level.

With that system, a level 9 fighter would worth more than a level 9 mage and a level 10 mage would worth same xp than a level 9 fighter

Should I continue ?

Low level experience tables don't work with those 5%...

[Baronius]

Logical. I agree with you, and support the XP table you posted.

[Andyr]

In 3E the classes are meant to be balanced against each other by level (so XP awards are the same) while in 2E they were meant to be balanced against each other by total number of XP (so a fighter with 100,000 XP would be as tough as a thief with 100,000 XP, even though these two creatures would be of different class levels).

I am curious: what sort of effect are the changes you are making having on the XP awards? Will it tend to lead to the player getting more or less XP for creatures, in general?

[aigleborgne]

I knew the difference in levels should mean an equal power, but even, it's not the case.

Compare, for example, a level 7 mage and a level 7 fighter.
it's 60 000 vs 64 000. Usually, the mage is more powerful.

Compare a level 40 fighter vs 31 mage, I wouldn't bet on fighter

Changes in game with my new table:
Under level 7 (and 9 for some NPC), it's so-so.
After level 7, it really depends on the NPC. Some will give more experience, some less. Globally, Higher NPC will give more (9+), except fighter (15000 for sarevok? too much!)

In the meantime, monsters have been reviewed integrally and the most powerful one will give far more experience.
But expect them to be more powerful and intelligent (Cornugon, Tanari, Demon Knight, ogre-mage, ...)

To conclude, the experience system have been included as a .2da file.
It's easy to modify it if someone find a better system

But for monsters, it's not in a 2da, too different monsters in game...