It doesnt seem likely in organized play, but Ive been playing an Andoran and recently purchased the Companion book. I really wish I had this on character creation because I picked up a trait just to get it over with and now I'd like to use one from my companion. Is this possible, or do I have to take the extra traits feat?
I think something like that you might ask your venture captain. They might let you tweak your character if it is still level 1.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Officially there is no retraining of characters in Pathfinder Society. As much as it pains all of us to find that perfect feat, trait, or spell in subsequent releases or purchases to our character's generation, we are not allowed to adjust those things on our character.
This is why I'm of the opinion there should be a PP cost associated with your faction re-training you. It could cost 10 PP and say "your faction retrains any one feat that is not a pre-requisite for any other feats you have, and allows you to choose another feat that you qualify to meet the requirements."
This way, PCs who find things in later supplements aren't missing out, given they wish to spend the PP. And wording it that way would make sure someone can't retrain a feat that is at the base of a feat tree.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Of course, if no one ever asked you what your Traits were, and the "bad" one you picked has never come into play (like it only gives you a bonus in a certain situation, and you've NEVER been in that situation), then you could probably just quietly make the change without anyone noticing.
Not that I endorse that kind of thing. No sirree.
|
This is why I'm of the opinion there should be a PP cost associated with your faction re-training you. It could cost 10 PP and say "your faction retrains any one feat that is not a pre-requisite for any other feats you have, and allows you to choose another feat that you qualify to meet the requirements."
This way, PCs who find things in later supplements aren't missing out, given they wish to spend the PP. And wording it that way would make sure someone can't retrain a feat that is at the base of a feat tree.
I like this idea. 10 Prestige would be a hefty price to pay, but still something you'd probably do willingly.
|
This is why I'm of the opinion there should be a PP cost associated with your faction re-training you. It could cost 10 PP and say "your faction retrains any one feat that is not a pre-requisite for any other feats you have, and allows you to choose another feat that you qualify to meet the requirements."
This way, PCs who find things in later supplements aren't missing out, given they wish to spend the PP. And wording it that way would make sure someone can't retrain a feat that is at the base of a feat tree.
I agree, this is a good idea.
|
So, the most common scenario I've run into regarding adjusting characters involves players brand new to PFS, who have created their first character on the spot, 20 minutes before their first game.
After this first game it is not uncommon to have these folks ask if they can make some slight alterations. I've allowed it after this first game, with one caveat - they can't change race or class.
I figure that if they want to swap a trait, feat, or a couple of stats due to an oversight at character creation, it's worth allowing. Especially if this accommodation helps guarantee this new player's continued participation.
This is why many campaign have a time frame in which you can make changes to your character. The most common I've seen is by the start of the fourth scenario. It allows you to test out the game without losing out on PC credits.
I am not a fan of changing characters well into their progression. Trading out a feat or a trait, to me, isn't as simple as 'paying off a cost' Those are part of who your character is now. I can see disappointment in not getting to use the new stuff that has come out, but I feel it is superior to a game that alwyas feels to be in flux.
If there was going to be a PP cost fro retraining, I'd make it as least equal to Raise Dead, and probably closer to resurrection.
Of course, ymmv, and probably does. I can be a bit of a stick in the mud, but I like consistancy.
:P
|
|
I am not a fan of changing characters well into their progression. Trading out a feat or a trait, to me, isn't as simple as 'paying off a cost' Those are part of who your character is now. I can see disappointment in not getting to use the new stuff that has come out, but I feel it is superior to a game that alwyas feels to be in flux.
If there was going to be a PP cost fro retraining, I'd make it as least equal to Raise Dead, and probably closer to resurrection.
Of course, ymmv, and probably does. I can be a bit of a stick in the mud, but I like consistancy.
:P
I have to heartily disagree with this sentiment. For instance (and I have a friend in this exact situation), let's say you build a fighter centered around using a whip. You managed to get your way up into the higher levels, and ended up taking feats that were useful, but were mainly taken because there really wasn't anything else.
I'm sure in Ultimate Combat there will be plenty of delicious things for whips, especially with all those different feats Paizo has pushed into other products (Serpent's Lash anyone?). I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that is within the concept of the character to drop a feat for one of the newer feats geared towards the type of fighter he wants to build. Also, you're not going to see a person create another character who does the exact same thing just so he can take feats he couldn't take before. That gets old, boring, and stale pretty quick.
I think a PP cost is a perfect solution for re-training feats. Being at or more than a Raise Dead is entirely too much I think, but I don't think it's outrageous to say you might need 10 PP and 20 Fame to do it.
The only thing I'm not on-board with is there being a PA cost with adding / changing an archetype of a character. That changes too much of the class to warrant a cost. But a feat? Meh, that doesn't change much
|
I generally agree that retraining for Feats is a good thing. I actually stopped playing my Summoner almost entirely after level 5 until Ultimate Magic came out to avoid choosing feats that were 'filler' for lack of any better choice. This also isn't the first time I've had this problem in organized play by a long shot. I'm also certain that Ultimate Combat will come out and I will wince as a feat that makes my Crossbowman work better hits and it's too late to take it without giving up other, more necessary things.
Archetypes I'll admit I'm torn on, as this seems to be a constant question with every new release that includes them. I do agree it edges into the area of intrinsic qualities to the character that should not be "re-trainable" like traits, race, or ability scores. Especially given that for some classes, like Sorcerers, "retraining" your archetype is changing your very bloodline. For other classes like fighters or rogues, however, it isn't as big a stretch.
|
|
I am not a fan of changing characters well into their progression. Trading out a feat or a trait, to me, isn't as simple as 'paying off a cost' Those are part of who your character is now. I can see disappointment in not getting to use the new stuff that has come out, but I feel it is superior to a game that alwyas feels to be in flux.
If there was going to be a PP cost fro retraining, I'd make it as least equal to Raise Dead, and probably closer to resurrection.
Of course, ymmv, and probably does. I can be a bit of a stick in the mud, but I like consistancy.
:P
I have to heartily disagree with this sentiment. For instance (and I have a friend in this exact situation), let's say you build a fighter centered around using a whip. You managed to get your way up into the higher levels, and ended up taking feats that were useful, but were mainly taken because there really wasn't anything else.
I'm sure in Ultimate Combat there will be plenty of delicious things for whips, especially with all those different feats Paizo has pushed into other products (Serpent's Lash anyone?). I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that is within the concept of the character to drop a feat for one of the newer feats geared towards the type of fighter he wants to build. Also, you're not going to see a person create another character who does the exact same thing just so he can take feats he couldn't take before. That gets old, boring, and stale pretty quick.
I think a PP cost is a perfect solution for re-training feats. Being at or more than a Raise Dead is entirely too much I think, but I don't think it's outrageous to say you might need 10 PP and 20 Fame to do it.
The only thing I'm not on-board with is there being a PA cost with adding / changing an archetype of a character. That changes too much of the class to warrant a cost. But a feat? Meh, that doesn't change much
Changing Feats, at times, can significantly change your character. Anything that significantly changes your character, imho, makes him no longer the same person.
I'm not wholly against a retraining option, but I feel the cost must be significant or things could just get silly. At 10 PA, players could be retraining every other level. At that point, why bother leveling the character in the first place?
I'm not without empathy for the people who want to retrain. I just think its unnecessary.
Anyway, just my opinion, and I expect it to be just as unpopular as many of my others :P
|
|
Stuff.
Fair enough. Although, I have a hard time seeing a single feat change a character. Individual feats, in my opinion, don't change characters. Changing entire feat trees, now that's a different story (and at 10 PP per change, that's pretty cost prohibitive).
Players COULD be changing their feats every other level with a cost of 10 PP, but that's not very likely. You average about 4.5 PP per level, so by that standard, you're looking at a change every 7 scenarios (double that if you're taking the slow track). That really isn't too bad considering you probably won't be changing feats that often.
But if you are changing feats that often with a system like that in place, I invite you to sit at my table. We'll see how far changing feats all the time gets you when you need a Raise Dead (or Resurrection when you get high enough) - I bet that new bow feat doesn't look so good now because it didn't save you from a [i[Slay Living[/i]. Players would dig themselves into holes really quickly and having readily PP available to you is handy now that there is a cost associated with things like getting your body back from a sealed-off tomb.
Changing feats would be nice for players who don't have access to divination spells IRL to see what new feats are coming, and a cost of 10 would make it restrictive enough where a player truly needs to want it enough to switch it.
Changing the build makes sense when:
1. You've never used a trait or feat and it has become redundant.
2. Something you took doesn't work the way you thought it did, or there's so much table variation it destroys your sense of consistency to the point where you never use it.
3. After a few modules your sense of 'character' has solidified and a slight change to the build can better represent that.
In terms of keeping a character the same, sometimes its worth changing things slightly to keep them the same, if that makes sense. That might include new archetypes too.
Fighters can also swap out bonus feats every 4th level, so retraining is part of the core rules, in that sense.
I used to be a complete stickler for following the rules, but now the game seems to be encouraging GM variation I'm nowhere near as bothered about it. If you'll have more fun by making a small change then just do it. No-one is going to care, and if they do then remind them its a game and not a tax return.
I bet that new bow feat doesn't look so good now because it didn't save you from a Slay Living. Players would dig themselves into holes really quickly
There's a difference between players who swap feats around because they want to try something new, and players who retrain because they're really not happy with the character as it stands. In the latter category they may not even care that much if they can't get the character raised.