Fortunately, he's too high. My entire group of 8 is all the correct level except for him. He has 18,972 XP and he's level 7. I don't know how long this has been like this. You guys seen this one? I only noticed because I was trying to see how many XPs I needed to level anyone in my group.
It could be because he has died and you raised him. That reduces the XP of the character, but will not make them lose a level in the game.
Technically, we've ressed him several times. Not "Raise Dead" but Jaroo's resurrect. I didn't know there was an XP penalty for dying. So you're saying he dies and the penalty swings him low enough to drop a level... but the game doesn't drop you a level? That would explain it. I think I have 4 or 5 toons that haven't died yet... and the rest have all died at least 3 or 4 times...
No matter which method you use (except for St. Cuthbert's method) there is an XP penalty for being brought back from the dead. In ToEE, if this drops your XP to lower than what is necessary for your level, you do not drop down a level. I don't know if that is per 3.5 rules, but it's not something we can easily change, if at all.
Its not rules compliant. If you are raised from the dead, you should lose a level AND the XP to put you at the midpoint of your new level's xp requirement. (Well, "True Resurrection", lvl 9 cleric spell, doesn't cost you the level/xp). However, it seems a reasonable way of dealing with the problem in the computer game. Indeed, some PNP Dms have a similar house rule because if adventures are designed for certain levels of experience, it tends to bugger things up if PCs suddenly lose power. Edit- casting restoration on a raised PC will give you back some of your lost xp (unless this has been changed in 5.x). This is also non rules compliant, but you don't have to do it if you don't want to.
what are the stats of your character? if his main stats are lower than 16 he may not be awarded as many xps as the other characters.
I'd say that it's good that the character gets any xp penalty. Look at IWD, BG(none), or NWN (100xp per level?! come on!). This is at least semi-rules compliant.
Bonus XP for high stats was only in 1st and 2nd edition. In 3.x, there is none. The designers felt it was silly to reward a character with extra XP when they're already having an easier time of things due to high stats, and I agree. TimSmith has the rules issues correct. I suspect Troika couldn't figure out how to de-level characters within the engine, which is why the level loss for Raise Dead is implemented the way it is and why level-draining undead are non-existant.
Moradin's Soul Hammer stripped a level from my chaotic good fighter when he equipped with it, but that was only temporary. He's since gone back to using Cold Fury, the demon killing glaive (holy and frost). Also, my Lawful Good cleric is taking a to hit penalty for non-proficiency with this hammer. I guess it's a martial weapon?
Right. Temporary negative levels aren't an issue, since they're just a set of penalties applied to a character. Actually losing a level, however, involves permanently removing hitpoints, feats, saving throw modifiers, BAB, skill points and spells. I have a feeling it's the feats and skillpoints that were the issue. (Of course this is all conjecture on my part.) Yes, warhammers are martial weapons in 3.x, so a cleric wouldn't be proficient without taking a level of fighter/paladin/ranger or spending a feat. (In previous editions of the game, clerics were allowed to use all blunt weapons, so warhammers were fine. [They also sucked statwise only doing 1d4+1 damage.] One of my players took found a way around the only blunt weapons and they all suck rule when 2nd Edition Combat and Tactics introduced the maul. Same damage as a two-handed sword, but bludgeoning. His character was scary)
