In my campagins, my players have alot of down time in towns and villages. They want to use this time to "train", which is increasing thier skills and atributes. Should I let them do this?
Sure, have that explain how they acquire their new feats and skills for each level up. Rather then just -ding- Power Attack!
They might be interested in the Teamwork section of Dungeonscape for actually practicing together and learning something new and spiffy. (Since I'm sure you're meaning they want some sort of reward for their 'practice')
As the above poster wrote, alternate rules for teamwork to improve a character are great, or using "training" as flavor text to explain where their feats and skills come from when they level is a fine idea.
However, to let them use their down time to gain extra skill ranks and attribute points they didn't earn by adventuring and leveling? Probably not a good idea.
Eh. It's a design choice. Increasing ability scores? Probably not wise; it can easily break the game, because ability scores mean so much and are supposed to be very difficult to increase. However, for training feats and skills? That can be more reasonable.
As a houserule? Some games implement XP buy rules for skills and feats, meaning you can blow XP to, instead of leveling, get some more skill ranks or feats (though you can't break the cap). The light-weight rule on skills that I can recall was 100 XP/skill point. You may want to fluff it up or down, particularly depending on level, or (if your group doesn't mind the accounting) you may want to scale the prices depending on how far they've advanced that particular skill.
Like, let's say a character wants to train a rank in Stealth. Let's say they have zero ranks right now. Perhaps it costs 100 XP and a day's training, because it's the first rank. But if they want to train a second rank this way? 200 XP, two days' training. Tenth rank? 1,000 XP, ten days' training (not necessarily consecutive), and the training may incorporate some sort of mission. You could make the cost increase quadratic, as well, though in that case, you may want to lower the base cost to maybe ten, since getting a skill up to 20 ranks would have the same price as getting to level 20 in the first place in fast progression if you used 100*rank#^2.
For feats? A consistent method would be to cap extra feats at half of character level (round down, meaning you could, through training, get a ), and for the price? Feats are a big deal, so maybe 500*feat#^2. So, 500XP, 2000XP, 4500XP, 8000XP, 12500XP, 18000XP, etc.
An alternate way to spend XP can be nice... though it does kinda defeat the point of PF removing XP costs. ^^U
In my campagins, my players have alot of down time in towns and villages. They want to use this time to "train", which is increasing thier skills and atributes. Should I let them do this?
Well do not give them free ones, but I use this in may games to explain how your ranks get higher and you gain new feats. You can not level until you have down time, and can not gain new skills out of the blue but must take time to learn them
I agree. I assume characters are using their downtime to hone their skills and allocate skill points as per the players' wishes. I don't see any reason to give out free skills and feats for downtime. They already get these things.
On the other hand, my players' characters spent several weeks on a ship. I gave them the option to loaf around like landlubbers or lend a hand and help out with sailing the vessel. Those that helped out I rewarded with a rank in sailing. I didn't think it would be fair to force them to spend skill points in specific ways simply because they got stuck on a ship so I gave them the rank for free.
In this case I felt it okay to give them something for free, but I don't think I would ever give away free feats.
In this case I felt it okay to give them something for free, but I don't think I would ever give away free feats.
Eh, depends on the feat. Some just don't matter a whole lot. 3.5 Toughness, a lot of the skill feats keyed to more fringe skills, Weapon Focus in a secondary weapon, a single instance of Fleet, and really, a lot of the incidentals don't matter much. They're nice, but not huge, even though they're feats being given away.
Yeah I don't mind occasionally giving feats or skill ranks as rewards, but when I do I choose them much as I choose any other treasure I hand out, with the understanding that is what it is. This isn't a common thing I do... it happens at most once in a campaign but if it seems the right reward for the situation I don't mind doing it anymore than I do giving anything else out. In many ways it can help slow down wealth creep towards the later levels when players are much more interested in permanent magical items instead of the one shot items. With the feat they get a reward and I'm not so worried about what it will do to the campaign because I know what it will and won't lead to.
This can manifest in other ways too: NPC contacts that can provide actual help in some way (perhaps that woman the fighter wooed in the tavern is actually a witch that doesn't mind brewing up a potion every now and then for him or casting a spell for free as long as he's with her), or an extra spell known (in the case of a sorcerer this can be quite the reward though most wizards like receiving this too), or an extra rogue talent/rage power/ etc. (of DM choosing of course).
There is a lot of room for minor perks to be added in as rewards that have meaning without throwing power curves over the top or making it all about the loot.
But should I let them raise thier atributes by a little. One of my players uses a monk and he wants to spend 3 weeks in the mountains traing to raise his strength by one point. Should I let him do that?
Well, it's your game, but...no.
Stat increases are already built into the game. And there are items that do that as well. Getting a stat increase outside of those should be a major reward for accomplishing something. And it should probably have a gold piece value attached to be deducted from treasure awarded, altho it could just be a straight bonus. But you really shouldn't just give them one.
The game kinda assumes that characters are training and practicing and trying to develop new skills in the down time. That's how the acquisition of new skills, class abilities, and even whole new classes when a character goes up levels are assumed to occur. You really shouldn't just give them out 'cause the players ask for them.
But it is your game. If it's fun, go for it. But I don't think very many DMs would agree with it.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Personally? I would not allow this kind of thing. HOWEVER...
If you plan on letting them, make sure there is serious risk involved. After all, they're potentially getting something for free!
For your monk-in-the-mountains, I'd say do this: Have him make a Fort save for each week of training. The DC of this save should be 20 + (2 x his current STR modifier) (so if he has a 16 STR, the DC is 26). If he succeeds on two of the three saves, he gets his STR increase (1 point). If he fails ANY of the saves, however, he permanently loses 1 point of CON from overexertion and fatigue.
Thus, it is possible for him to succeed at two checks and fail the third, gaining 1 point of STR and losing 1 point of CON. If he rolls a natural 1 on any of the saves, I would give him the automatic CON loss and prevent him from making any more checks after that.
Obviously, this should only be permitted once per character. At higher levels, he's more likely to make the saves, but the 1 point of STR won't matter as much then. If he attempts it at lower levels, there's a substantial reward but also serious risk.
basically you shouldn't allow stat increases, if you want to allow them benefits by training anyway, I'd advise minor skill bonus' and probably very situational, you could go as far as a rarely picked feat.
In all these cases it might be best to make them pay for instruction by a mentor or do it on their own much slower, like crafting to make gold (which is slow by adventurer standards).
This way you balance gold value they might otherwise have converted in other resources like magical items into something else that is comparable.
btw 3 weeks of mountain training is way too easy to get a strength increase, compare a + 1 increase to a wish spell for 25,000 gold and that is an inherent bonus with less 'stacking potential'
(and a whole different powerlevel presumably being a 9th lvl spell)
I played in a game where a DM allowed training. If you could get the training in you got +X% on experience gained in adventuring over X days where X is the number of weeks you spent training up to maximum of 10 weeks. So you could train for 10 weeks and a 10% bonus on experience for duration of 10 days.
The DM did this mostly for the downtime spent when creating magic items so the martial classes had something to do that was of value.
It worked ok but it was extra book work to keep track of though it wasn't abused in this game I suspect it could be in some games. I don't do this though because it more work that I just don't want to do.
If you wanted to give them something for practicing their new skills that is both cool, and thematic, but not very game affecting then after a few weeks of training you give them a skill trick.
Skill tricks are from Complete Scoundrel, they normal cost 2 skill points. Basically they let you do cool movie like moves. Such as running along a five foot section of a wall during a move action.
Basically they're just another way for them to use the skills they already had so you aren't giving them extra ranks or rather powerful feats.
But should I let them raise thier atributes by a little. One of my players uses a monk and he wants to spend 3 weeks in the mountains traing to raise his strength by one point. Should I let him do that?
Now, you're talking the effect of a Manual of Gainful Exercise; a 26,250g magic item. If he pays the 26,250g? Sure. If not? No.
But should I let them raise thier atributes by a little. One of my players uses a monk and he wants to spend 3 weeks in the mountains traing to raise his strength by one point. Should I let him do that?
Sure it's an inherent bonus... takes the place of a wish spell or the book they might have read instead... just knock it off of their wealth by level accordingly.
I'd be tempted to allow monks the ability to incorporate "magical items" into their ki instead of actually making them wear specific items.
That way instead of buying a wearing an amulet of mighty fists, the monk spends some time in the mountains meditating and punching his hands into vats of hot sand and viola at the end of this period he's incorporated the amulet into his being.
He can't violate the number of items on slots this way but I would be almost tempted to allow intrinsic items like this to be [Ex] in nature which means that the monk would still be a powerhouse while in an anti-magic effect. Otherwise I would justify negating the effect as the vibrations of the anti-magic sphere interfere with the monk's chi.
The question most people are answering is "Is this balanced?" The OP asked, simply, if he should.
If you do allow training to increase attributes and skills, a lot of things are going to happen.
Firstly, the players are going to become more powerful than they are at their current level. This means you can throw slightly more challenging stuff at them until they take a break to train again. Then the process continues upwards. They will be more powerful than the norm b a measurable amount if you let them increase attributes. Skill ranks? Little to no effect unless they're getting increased by more than two. If you allow this option they will want to do it again. For the sake of consistency, you'll probably have to allow it. This will make them a bit more powerful, but if they really like it, you could amuse them greatly by doing this.
If you don't allow it, they will feel their time in town is mostly spent to just gear up again. They may question their feeling of immersion, or they may decide not to train at all in game. Some of them may still train for roleplaying reasons.
The middle ground? Give them roleplaying XP for training in their downtime, maybe charge some of them gold if they're learning from a guild or school. Tell them they feel like they've almost got the grasp of what they're reaching for, but they're not there yet. They may be disappointed that it wasn't what they asked for, but in this way you can follow the standard model of the rules and reward them for roleplaying.
Honestly though, a lot of the people here are so wrapped up in the mechanics they're not seeing what your players are trying to do: Get stronger. Be sure to challenge your group, maybe send a monster two CRs higher than them their way! You'd be surprised how hardy PF characters can be.
I see this going two ways:
I wouldn't give anyone free power for downtime like that, because I think once you open that barrel, you encourage players moving the campaign forward half a decade and give them ginormous bonuses to everything.
It also doesn't work in a class and level based system, where your power is derived from your class and level.
In my campagins, my players have alot of down time in towns and villages. They want to use this time to "train", which is increasing thier skills and atributes. Should I let them do this?
I would say: NO
But if you are DM, it really is your Call based on your Campain.