Something that's drove me nuts about the AD&D xp table is how nonsensical it is. RP "reasons" aside, it just doesn't make any sense.
Most of them work exponentially and that does make sense. Fighters need 2000 for 1, then double that for 2 (4000), double it again for 3 (8000), and continue this until level 10 when it settles on 250k per level from then on out.
Most classes seem to follow this for awhile. Then you start getting some just crazy outliers and all the sudden things that used to take the longest to level take the least amount of time, and some classes have extra XP tacked on here and there, and it's just weird.
Paladins and Rangers mostly follow it til the pattern breaks at 6->7, and then starts again from 7-9, then settles on 300k per level. Every other class hits at least 10 if not higher before the XP table hits just the same value per level. If it followed the pattern of fighters, it'd only be 288k per level beyond 9, meaning they'd hit 36 instead of just 34 by the ToB level cap.
Mages follow this rule til level 6, when suddenly it only takes 20k xp again to go from 6 to 7, then 30k to go from 7 to 8, then 45k to get to 9. "wot." Then it starts to slow way, way down again. If it followed the pattern, they'd only hit 8 by the end of BG1, but be leveling faster at 12 and beyond. End game cap would be 34 instead of 31.
Clerics follow this rule til 4 (1500, then 3000, then 6000, then 13000) but at least it's not that far off what double would be. Then you need to gain 14500 to hit the next XP level. But now all the sudden we start falling the rule again when none of the other spell casters do, needing 55000, 110000 and then again we decide to break again by needing 225000. Meanwhile, mages who were leveling up significantly slower than clerics up until this point get a weird boost in how rapid they level comparitivly and hit level 9 by the end of BG1 while Clerics are stuck at 8.
Then we have thieves, who also magically start leveling faster comparitively to "the rule" at level 7 to 8. It starts going additive rather than multiplicative. (20k xp needed, then 30k, then 40k, then 50k)
Then we have druids and honestly who knows what the hell is going on there because it doesn't seem to follow any pattern, at any point, til after the nonsensical climb from 14 to 15.
I hate it. I hate it so much. Each class at the same level is comparatively powerful to each other class at the same level, not at the same XP equivalency. (Except mages, who are comparatively weak til they hit 3rd level spells and from then on just roll over everything.)
TL;DR
Are there any modders out there insterested in modding XP tables (and in the case of druids, their spells per day tables beyond level 12) so there is some sort of leveling consistency across all classes in a way that leads them all to be equally powerful, and lets you hit level 9 with every class by the end of BG1?
Most of them work exponentially and that does make sense. Fighters need 2000 for 1, then double that for 2 (4000), double it again for 3 (8000), and continue this until level 10 when it settles on 250k per level from then on out.
Most classes seem to follow this for awhile. Then you start getting some just crazy outliers and all the sudden things that used to take the longest to level take the least amount of time, and some classes have extra XP tacked on here and there, and it's just weird.
Paladins and Rangers mostly follow it til the pattern breaks at 6->7, and then starts again from 7-9, then settles on 300k per level. Every other class hits at least 10 if not higher before the XP table hits just the same value per level. If it followed the pattern of fighters, it'd only be 288k per level beyond 9, meaning they'd hit 36 instead of just 34 by the ToB level cap.
Mages follow this rule til level 6, when suddenly it only takes 20k xp again to go from 6 to 7, then 30k to go from 7 to 8, then 45k to get to 9. "wot." Then it starts to slow way, way down again. If it followed the pattern, they'd only hit 8 by the end of BG1, but be leveling faster at 12 and beyond. End game cap would be 34 instead of 31.
Clerics follow this rule til 4 (1500, then 3000, then 6000, then 13000) but at least it's not that far off what double would be. Then you need to gain 14500 to hit the next XP level. But now all the sudden we start falling the rule again when none of the other spell casters do, needing 55000, 110000 and then again we decide to break again by needing 225000. Meanwhile, mages who were leveling up significantly slower than clerics up until this point get a weird boost in how rapid they level comparitivly and hit level 9 by the end of BG1 while Clerics are stuck at 8.
Then we have thieves, who also magically start leveling faster comparitively to "the rule" at level 7 to 8. It starts going additive rather than multiplicative. (20k xp needed, then 30k, then 40k, then 50k)
Then we have druids and honestly who knows what the hell is going on there because it doesn't seem to follow any pattern, at any point, til after the nonsensical climb from 14 to 15.
I hate it. I hate it so much. Each class at the same level is comparatively powerful to each other class at the same level, not at the same XP equivalency. (Except mages, who are comparatively weak til they hit 3rd level spells and from then on just roll over everything.)
TL;DR
Are there any modders out there insterested in modding XP tables (and in the case of druids, their spells per day tables beyond level 12) so there is some sort of leveling consistency across all classes in a way that leads them all to be equally powerful, and lets you hit level 9 with every class by the end of BG1?
_Leona_Amarga.jpg)
