D&D Gold/XP Equivalency (is now general D&D playstyles thread)
 

So I'm looking at the rules for hiring spellcasters to do stuff for you. I want to have one cast permanency, but the rules don't account for XP costs in the hiring cost. Is there a set rule for XP/gold equivalency, or do I need to bargain with my DM?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/...ices.htm#spell
5 gold per XP lost is in the rules.
I usually charged 25 gold becuase I hate my players.

Edit: It just occured to me maybe you're some kind of crazy person playing 4th ed. In which case my answer is : Who fucking cares.
Also as far as I'm aware there is no real 4th ed SRD. There is something floating around the internets but it nonsense.

Okay, so I am just blind. Thanks. And no, I'm not playing 4th. Somehow I doubt that 4th edition gets into anything like permanency.

There are no real spells per say in 4th ed. They either got sifted into class powers or rituals and basically anyone can learn a ritual with the proper skills and cash. Though most rituals are basically utilitarian and take a lot of time to setup and execute. I don't recall seeing anything about permanency.

You can ad-hoc some of it but it throws the game balance out of whack, because no matter what you do you'd be giving someone an at will, per encounter(five minutes), or daily ability.

Yeah 4th in general is more balanced but definitely less fun for a caster. I just wish classes without magic weren't so (comparitively) weak in 3.5.

Agreed completely.

The real trick is just to have all the villains super paraniod about magic. Wizards are remarkedly easy to shut down, especially with other wizards. Counterspelling is surprisingly effective with appropriate feats.

Also target attacks at thier spell component pouches. I guarentee the following discussions will be hilarious.

The group I'm with uses 3.5 and laughs at 4th edition calling it simplified. is that actually true? I haven't had a chance to read through the books yet myself but I was wondering if there is any merit in what they say. Is 4th Edition an improvement? Or just different in general?

4th ed is very very different. It is simpler in that everything is far more streamlined whereas 3rd ed was a lot more modular, allowing more ability to add and remove things.
4th ed is far more balanced. Playing 3rd ed requires you to ban lots of things if you have munchkins in your group but 4th not so. 3rd ed allows mroe options and the ability to define your character more while leaving the possiblity for brokenness while 4th ed limits you more but is much more balanced.
4th ed is a lot more streamlined as in all class abilities work the same.

Basically the way I would sum it up:
If you have an inexperienced DM and your group likes lots of combat- play 4th ed.
If you have an experienced DM and your group likes lot of roleplaying- play 3rd ed.

Oh and 4th ed is fantastically shit.