PFRPG2 GM Enhancement extension

[Montis]

Three creatures of L+0 (40xp each) plus one creature of L-1 (30xp) should award 150xp regardless of how many PCs are in the party. I don't see what is wrong here. Please read Party Size on Core Rulebook, page 508.

That's not quite correct. See https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=500:

For each additional character in the party beyond the fourth, increase your XP budget by the amount shown in the Character Adjustment value for your encounter in Table 10–1: Encounter Budget. If you have fewer than four characters, use the same process in reverse: for each missing character, remove that amount of XP from your XP budget. Note that if you adjust your XP budget to account for party size, the XP awards for the encounter don’t change—you’ll always award the amount of XP listed for a group of four characters.

(emphasis mine)

So if you have 4 players and create a moderate encounter, you put in 80 XP worth of enemies. If you have 6 players, you put in 120 XP worth of enemies, but the party still only gets 80 XP. Otherwise parties with lots of players would level much faster than smaller parties despite having the same relative challenge.

[Trenloe]

Montis, Midge and Valin are correct. XP in PF2 has been simplified from a player standpoint - 1,000 XP for each level and also the total XP that is earned for an encounter is assigned to all those who participated - the XP isn't divided. Hence the XP for specific encounter threat level should be based off a party of 4 PCs. If there's more or less PCs in the party, it's suggested that the XP budget for the encounter is adjusted as needed, but the XP awarded to each PC is still the base XP budget for 4 PCs. This is required otherwise parties with more than 4 PCs would level up more quickly and parties of less than 4 PCs would level up more slowly.

So, whereas the PF2 design has made it easier from the PC standpoint (1,000 XP needed for each level) the maths has become more complex from the GM side.

[dsaraujo]

It still looks like we are all saying the same thing, that is why I asked for an example. In the example, we had 3 L+0 creatures and 1 L-1 creature. Are you saying that the XP award for that encounter is not 150XP? If not, please clarify to me as I'm having trouble here! Or provide a different example where I'm showing an incorrect amount of XP on my extension. To be crystal clear: my extension currently do not display XP budget, and only uses the party size to calculate the relative threat of the encounter.

Edit: additionally, I count XP based on adversary levels as per Adversaries and Hazards, pg 507, using table 10-8 (pg 508), not based on threat. The encounter threat (table 10-1, pg 489) is for budget, not rewards. So, if the encounter is Severe, that don't inform you how much XP the party will get. The level and count of adversaries will.

[MaxAstro]

It still looks like we are all saying the same thing, that is why I asked for an example. In the example, we had 3 L+0 creatures and 1 L-1 creature. Are you saying that the XP award for that encounter is not 150XP? If not, please clarify to me as I'm having trouble here! Or provide a different example where I'm showing an incorrect amount of XP on my extension. To be crystal clear: my extension currently do not display XP budget, and only uses the party size to calculate the relative threat of the encounter.

Let's make the math a little easier: For a party of 4 players, 3 L+0 creatures is a Severe encounter, which should award 120 XP. However, for a party of 6 players, 3 L+0 creatures is only a Moderate encounter, and should only award 80XP. AFAIK, there is not actually a situation where an encounter could award 150XP - XP award is based on the threat of the encounter, not the XP values of the individual creatures. 3 L+0 creatures and an L-1 creature for a party of 4 players would be close enough to an Extreme encounter that it should probably "round up" and award 160 (from the "building encounters" rules: "Many encounters won’t match the XP budget exactly, but they should come close").

From a programming standpoint, what you probably want to do is calculate the total XP value of the encounter, and then "round" it to the nearest "whole threat level" based on party size.

[dsaraujo]

I disagree. Budget is informed by threat. Award is determined by the XP value of individual creatures per rules as written. Per CRB: "When the group overcomes an encounter with creatures or hazards, each character gains XP equal to the total XP of the creatures and hazards in the encounter", pg 507. Since pg 508 says "(...)—always award the amount of XP listed for a group of four characters", then it is clear that XP award is not changed by party size.

Which makes sense: this is to make it easier to plan and write adventures/modules/APs, not to determine the pace of leveling PCs. Larger parties will encounter easier encounters if you run then as written. If you add more creatures, to keep the challenge, you also gives more XP. In my mind, it makes more sense to go through an AP, as written, easier with 5 PCs and harder with 3PCs.

[MaxAstro]

The line you quote doesn't make sense unless it works the way myself and Trenloe are saying. "Note that if you adjust your XP budget to account for party size, the XP awards for the encounter don’t change—you’ll always award the amount of XP listed for a group of four characters."

Severe encounter for four players: XP budget of 120, XP award of 120. Severe encounter for six players: XP budget of 180. If you award 180 XP, then you have changed the XP award for the encounter, despite the encounter still being severe. Therefore, the severe encounter is still worth 120 XP.

APs are not intended to be run "as written" with larger or smaller parties - the GM is supposed to adjust encounters to keep the encounter rating the same. If this resulted in a change of awarded XP, then the party would level up more quickly or more slowly than intended.

[dsaraujo]

So you are saying that encounters can only award 40, 60, 80, 120 or 160 XP? No intermediary values ever?

Edit: I got it now. This fundamentally breaks my approach completely, because it will force the selection of threat before selecting monsters. I'll have to add a budget field so it is clear when you are overbudget (I don't want to stop you from adjusting creatures numbers).

[MaxAstro]

I was a little confused at first myself, because the text on page 507 does seem to contradict the encounter building rules. However, the first sentence under "Party Size" on 508 is "the rules for advancement assume a group of four PCs", which implies that the rules on 507 are assuming a group of four PCs and the instructions for adjusting for party size override those rules.

EDIT: Also, I don't think you need to choose threat beforehand? You can still calculate it on the fly, you'll just need to round the XP to the "nearest threat" and make the XP award based on that.

So for example, GM is building an encounter with a party of 6 players. They add two L+0 creatures to the encounter. Total XP in the encounter is now 80, which is pretty close to 90, the "low" threat budget. Encounter threat is Low, and XP award is 60. GM adds another L+0 creature. Total XP is now 120, which equals the "moderate" budget. Encounter threat is updated to Moderate, XP award is updated to 80. GM adds a fourth L+0 creature. Total XP: 160. Closer to Severe than Moderate, so threat and award change again. Etc...

[Trenloe]

So you are saying that encounters can only award 40, 60, 80, 120 or 160 XP? No intermediary values ever?

I don't believe that's the case.

Adversaries and Hazards
Encounters with adversaries and hazards grant a set amount of XP. When the group overcomes an encounter with creatures or hazards, each character gains XP equal to the total XP of the creatures and hazards in the encounter (this excludes XP adjustments for different party sizes; see Party Size on page 508 for details).

So, if you have a party of 4 then each PC gets the total XP of all the creatures and hazards.

The difficulty comes in when there are more or less than 4 PCs in the party. You pretty much have to either start with the threat level, which will give you the budget and the character adjustment value, or do some reverse calculations to get back to the base XP for 4 PCs.

Table 10-1 Encounter Budget on page 489 gives the threat level, budget and character adjustment. If you have more than 4 PCs you need to essentially create a new table - adding the character adjustment to the XP budget to know the various threat level thresholds.

The character adjustment XP per PC different than 4 are based off the base threat level: Trivial = 10, Low = 15, Moderate = 20, Severe = 30, Extreme = 40.

For example:

• 2 PCs have the threat levels as Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 20, 30, 40, 60, 80.
• 3 PCs have the threat levels as Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 30, 45, 60, 90, 120.
• 4 PCs have the threat levels as Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 40, 60, 80, 120, 160.
• 5 PCs have the threat levels as Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 50, 75, 100, 150, 200.
• 6 PCs have the threat levels as Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 60, 90, 120, 180, 240.

But, even though the encounter budget is different for a party size of other than 4 PCs, the base XP awarded is still based off the 4 PC levels: Trivial, Low, Moderate, Severe, Extreme = 40, 60, 80, 120, 160.

So, let's say you have 5 PCs in the party and, after adjusting the encounter the total XP is 195 - there's no specific rules that I've read that say exactly where the thresholds are, so I usually go with the closest. 195 XP for 5 PCs is closest to the Extreme budget of 200. We need to calculate the XP award value based off 4 PCs: the extreme character adjustment is 40 per PC different than 4, so the XP that should be awarded to each PC is the total XP of the encounter minus the character adjustment: 195 - 40 = 155 XP.

[MaxAstro]

That makes the math really complicated, because you have to figure out what the nearest threat level is to determine how much XP to subtract... If you have 5PCs and 175XP worth of stuff, is that Extreme and worth 135XP, or is it Severe and worth 145XP? Why is it worth more XP if you decide it's closer to a lower threat level?

I don't like that. XD