RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 17 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 31 people marked this as a favorite. |
This topic has been brought up before, but it was scattered among multiple threads and was right before GenCon and it's all buried etc etc etc... So I thought I'd make a new thread for it.
I (and some others, though I don't know how many) would like to request that traits be opened up for retraining in PFS. Using the rules straight out of Ultimate Campaign, traits aren't a listed option for retraining, so currently it's not legal to do so.
Which is weird, since you can even go so far as to retrain entire levels, or even alternate racial traits.
Here's why I think being able to retrain traits would be a good idea:
1) Unsatisfactory trait choices are harder to "fix" than most character choices. With feats, you could always just take a better one at your next character level. You've blown a slot, but you get more, so you can deal. But with traits, you have to pick them both at 1st level. Sure, you could take the Additional Traits feat, but that's where you run into the other issue: categories. If the new trait you want is in the same category as one you already have, there is currently no way to acquire that new trait. This is especially rough for newer players, who might play up to 2nd level with a pregen, pick traits more or less at random, then later encounter something that would be perfect for their concept/backstory. Currently, they're stuck unless the new trait just happens to be in an unused category, and even then it'll cost them a feat.
2) A 2nd-level paladin can use Ultimate Campaign to become a 2nd-level sorcerer, but can't swap out the now-redundant trait that made UMD a class skill. Doesn't that seem a bit... off? And let's not even get into the fact that you can retrain racial traits but not Race Traits...
Here's how it could work simply and elegantly:
I think it would be pretty easy to implement trait retraining:
"A Pathfinder Society Organized Play character may retrain traits (whether the two selected at 1st level, or those gained via the Additional Traits feat or similar sources). To do so, use the rules for retraining feats, except that the cost is calculated based on a 3-day retraining time instead of a 5-day retraining time."
Boom. Done. All it would take is a line like that in the FAQ, and it's case-closed.
Thus far, I'm not aware of any issues this would cause. You can already retrain bigger things than traits, so I can't see this wrecking anything. Three days (3PP and 3x10xlevel gold) seems a fair cost, being half (rounded up) the cost of a feat.
I know GenCon only just wrapped up, but I thought I'd go ahead and throw this out there and cross my fingers. Once the Powers That Be have the time, I think enabling this could make a lot of players very happy. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think the reasoning for no, would be that we don't want to start adding new rules to the game if we can at all help it.
Not sure why the developers chose to leave traits off the list, but left Race on the list.
In general I agree, but in this specific case, the omission of traits from retraining is so bizarre (and their inclusion so natural-sounding) that I think in practice it'll play out to "feel" like more of an "extra rule" to not be able to retrain traits than to have that ability.
I think a lot of people reading through those rules went "Huh?!" when (if?) they realized traits were excluded. Filling in the hole with what's expected will, I think, add less complexity than is added by keeping that jarring disconnect in place.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMHO Retraining is nothing more than (another) tool used primarily (not always, but primarily) by those more interested in tweeking out every last ounce of power out of their character rather than just playing. Having watched them grow more powerful with each release (and subsequently watched my fun playing at those tables go down), seeing more tools available for those kinds of players doesn't make me happy. In fact, in your specific example of traits, I find them to be primary examples of what defines a character. So while retraining of feats, classes, and even hit points irritates me to no end, I find it abhorrent to allow trait retraining because it damages my verisimilitude.
So your examples of why it wouldn't hurt gameplay mean nothing to me, because they do not address a fundamental issue I have with the rules in general.
Retraining is a phenomenon from the MMO world, and frankly it's one I think PnP gaming can do without. It'll never be allowed at my home table, and while the decision has been made for PFS, I'll be happy to enforce every last rule involving retraining to the letter to try to minimize it from occurring. We already have enough custom rules in PFS, we do not need a custom rule for this.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMHO Retraining is nothing more than (another) tool used primarily (not always, but primarily) by those more interested in tweeking out every last ounce of power out of their character rather than just playing. Having watched them grow more powerful with each release (and subsequently watched my fun playing at those tables go down), seeing more tools available for those kinds of players doesn't make me happy.
I see the opposite:
I see the kinds of players you're talking about sitting around planning out every last detail in advance, and not needing to retrain later. Then the players who don't go to that extreme, and who in the past were punished for it by being stuck with choices that left them unsatisfied later on, now have a chance to redeem poor decisions instead of feeling pressured to spend all that time and research pre-planning every detail of every level of their character.Retraining throws a bone to those who don't spend their time finding every possible bonus, and to those who do, it's nothing but an inefficient PP sink that they'll rarely (if ever) use.
Think about it: in what circumstance would a gamer of the sort you describe want to retrain a trait (or anything else, really)? It's not going to be to correct a mistake, because they did all their planning very carefully. If anything it'll be because a new book came out with a powerful trait in it, but even then, which of their already-uber traits are they going to give up?
Your protest feels like a nonspecific "options feed the munchkins" knee-jerk reaction, and I think your fear is unfounded. If you try to imagine specific retraining situations, I think you might discover that what you fear will actually be extremely rare, and retraining (traits or not) will almost exclusively be a boon for the casual player who either fell for a trap early on or found something that better fits their roleplaying concept.
EDIT:
TLDR - Retraining barely affects the munchkins, while being a huge boon to droves of casual players. Frankly, it seems like something that should be right up your alley.
|
IMHO Retraining is nothing more than (another) tool used primarily (not always, but primarily) by those more interested in tweeking out every last ounce of power out of their character rather than just playing. Having watched them grow more powerful with each release (and subsequently watched my fun playing at those tables go down), seeing more tools available for those kinds of players doesn't make me happy. In fact, in your specific example of traits, I find them to be primary examples of what defines a character. So while retraining of feats, classes, and even hit points irritates me to no end, I find it abhorrent to allow trait retraining because it damages my verisimilitude.
So your examples of why it wouldn't hurt gameplay mean nothing to me, because they do not address a fundamental issue I have with the rules in general.
Retraining is a phenomenon from the MMO world, and frankly it's one I think PnP gaming can do without. It'll never be allowed at my home table, and while the decision has been made for PFS, I'll be happy to enforce every last rule involving retraining to the letter to try to minimize it from occurring. We already have enough custom rules in PFS, we do not need a custom rule for this.
I agree, mostly. I have no interest in retraining, but neither do I intend to more harshly enforce this set of rules. Just because it isn't my kind of fun doesn't mean to me that those that need (want) to retrain are having bad fun.
|
|
I see the opposite:
I see the kinds of players you're talking about sitting around planning out every last detail in advance, and not needing to retrain later. Then the players who don't go to that extreme, and who in the past were punished for it by being stuck with choices that left them unsatisfied later on, now have a chance to redeem poor decisions instead of feeling pressured to spend all that time and research pre-planning every detail of every level of their character.
Except that I sat down to a table of 6 of them on day one of the new rules and two retrained, and third couldn't due to not having the book. So my actual experience is very different.
|
|
Think about it: in what circumstance would a gamer of the sort you describe want to retrain a trait (or anything else, really)? It's not going to be to correct a mistake, because they did all their planning very carefully. If anything it'll be because a new book came out with a powerful trait in it, but even then, which of their already-uber traits are they going to give up?
Jiggy, I built my wizard around two traits that served me well getting to 12, but now that I am 13.2, serve no purpose whatsoever. From a purely powergaming perspective, it would behoove me to swap out both (and since I have plenty of prestige never having spent much of it at all), it would hardly be a speedbump in my prestige gains. So again, for your specific example, I can give you from my own character selection, a character that would benefit from a pure powergaming perspective.
Your protest feels like a nonspecific "options feed the munchkins" knee-jerk reaction, and I think your fear is unfounded.
Again, day 1 - 3 retrains by those I would consider to be in the peak of the powergaming crowd. My direct experience is entirely contrary to what you're suggesting.
The word "knee jerk" is thrown about lightly, but I've watched these players, and I know what kind of shenanigans get pulled. There is no functional reason for somebody not invested in finding out how to improve their character to retrain, so regardless of the crowd, it's not something I like to see.
Plus, none of your arguments really deal with my fundamental hatred of retraining. As I said before, it's a rule now, I'll enforce said rule, but I don't have to like it, and I will vocally decry expanding on it.
|
Can I ask what it is you dislike so much about retraining?Because quite frankly it tends to open doors up for extreme cheese character builds that are based on retraining. Traits are a particurlarly hard option to swallow as they aren't just half-feats, they represent your character's past and upbringing.
And outside of access to a TARDIS, it's really hard to justify retraining your past.
True, but even with a really nailed down backstory, you'd be surprised how often new traits come out that are great fits for existing characters. I couldn't believe how many traits there were in 'Faiths & Philosophies' for instance that seemed tailor-made for my characters, from both a crunch and fluff perspective.
|
True, but even with a really nailed down backstory, you'd be surprised how often new traits come out that are great fits for existing characters. I couldn't believe how many traits there were in 'Faiths & Philosophies' for instance that seemed tailor-made for my characters, from both a crunch and fluff perspective.Can I ask what it is you dislike so much about retraining?Because quite frankly it tends to open doors up for extreme cheese character builds that are based on retraining. Traits are a particurlarly hard option to swallow as they aren't just half-feats, they represent your character's past and upbringing.
And outside of access to a TARDIS, it's really hard to justify retraining your past.
There is nothing stopping you from accessing these new traits right now.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
True, but even with a really nailed down backstory, you'd be surprised how often new traits come out that are great fits for existing characters. I couldn't believe how many traits there were in 'Faiths & Philosophies' for instance that seemed tailor-made for my characters, from both a crunch and fluff perspective.Can I ask what it is you dislike so much about retraining?Because quite frankly it tends to open doors up for extreme cheese character builds that are based on retraining. Traits are a particurlarly hard option to swallow as they aren't just half-feats, they represent your character's past and upbringing.
And outside of access to a TARDIS, it's really hard to justify retraining your past.
Pretty much this. My cleric's backstory involves over a decade of harsh wilderness travel (from Tian Xia to the Inner Sea, but very much not in a straight line), followed by having been recruited to the church of the Inheritor by a paladin who was given a divine vision instructing her to go and retrieve him from the woods. He then became a cleric and has spent this chapter of his life preparing for a special calling: war in the Worldwound. He spent his youth wandering in the rough, and his adulthood being prepared and empowered for mission from Iomedae herself.
So back when he was level 1, with his rougher days not that far in his past, it made sense that he was good at swimming and could defend himself well with a dagger (River Rat trait). But now, at 8th level, he relies more on Iomedae's empowerment to overcome obstacles (full caster, did an entire underwater mission using divine magic and not a single swim check, and uses his deity's favored weapon). His wilderness days are far behind him. Meanwhile, the power Iomedae is granting him in preparation for the toil ahead is growing more and more prominent (more casting, staples like divine favor scaling with level, etc). It would be fantastic if I could represent this shift in his narrative by retraining River Rat into Fate's Favored; it's a perfect reflection of how he's grown and evolved (and will continue to grow and evolve) as a character.
But nope, the details of his past that used to be a prominent influence on him will remain in full force forever, and any indication of character development is the same as rewriting his past. You know, just like how the only way for me to forget all the payroll tax laws I memorized when I worked in an accounting firm 5 years ago would be for me to travel back in time and keep myself from ever learning them in the first place. I definitely couldn't forget them due to my life going a different direction; people aren't like that at all, and to let a PC grow and change shatters verisimilitude! /sarcasm
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
There is nothing stopping you from accessing these new traits right now.
Except possibly the "one per category" rule. Or perhaps a distaste for having to pick up a second, random, not-character-related trait when taking Additional Traits, if it was just one trait that you were wanting.
|
Jiggy,
Backstory is the crux of the issue. Lets look at characters from novels and such. How many of them grew up as an orphan by a river, learning how to use boats and such, suddenly stop knowing how to use boats and such because they started adventuring or went on a quest?
Lets take "The Wheel of Time" as an example:
Matt Cauthon learned how to use a quarterstaff. So much so, that in The Dragon Reborn (third book of the series) he destroyed two of the best Warder students in a sparring match while they were using swords. The master of the Warder training told them to never underestimate a farmer with a quarterstaff again.
Indeed Rand's history with the flame in the void was a great precursor to him learning how to channel Saidin, the male half of the One Power. But how much sense would it make for him to suddenly not be good at shooting his bow just because he now channels and has become a blademaster? That's still who he was and is tied integrally into who he is currently.
Same with Matt. Does it make sense that he would just suddenly forget how to use a quarterstaff just because later in the series he's the reincarnation of an ancient people's general and doesn't need to use the quarterstaff anymore? That now he has supernatural and uncanny luck and likely will not need to fight ever again?
Your traits should be integral to your back-story, which I know you did for Thomas.
But because they are integral to your back-story, it absolutely does not make sense that just because you've chosen a different path in life, that you suddenly forget where you came from.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Jiggy,
Backstory is the crux of the issue. Lets look at characters from novels and such. How many of them grew up as an orphan by a river, learning how to use boats and such, suddenly stop knowing how to use boats and such because they started adventuring or went on a quest?
Your traits should be integral to your back-story, which I know you did for Thomas.
But because they are integral to your back-story, it absolutely does not make sense that just because you've chosen a different path in life, that you suddenly forget where you came from.
If it's something you haven't used in years, you can forget a lot of the details.
As an example, I was always very good at math growing up. I did math competitions in school, and I remember in high school traveling to a national competition and coming home with a 2nd place trophy. I'd say that's a pretty major part of my background.
Fast forward more than 20 years, and a few months ago, I was struggling to remember how to do basic algebra when I tried to tutor my nephew - the same stuff I was so good at back then. I went into a career where I never use that kind of math, so I haven't looked at it in ages, and I don't remember most of the details.
In game terms, I might still have some ranks in knowledge (algebra), but I think I've lost my +1 trait bonus in it due to lack of use.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Your traits should be integral to your back-story, which I know you did for Thomas.
But because they are integral to your back-story, it absolutely does not make sense that just because you've chosen a different path in life, that you suddenly forget where you came from.
Getting slightly rusty at swimming and no longer being better at fighting with a dagger than with his deity's favored weapon is a far cry from "suddenly forget where you came from".
There are lots of things from my past that were integral to my personal development and that still impact me deeply, but which used to manifest in tangible ways that they no longer do. To suggest that applying the same phenomenon to my PCs somehow breaks verisimilitude is about like that GenCon story where a GM had blind PCs running in random directions: it tells me that that which I've experienced in real life is somehow unrealistic for my PC.
That shatters verisimilitude.
|
|
There is nothing stopping you from accessing these new traits right now.True, but even with a really nailed down backstory, you'd be surprised how often new traits come out that are great fits for existing characters. I couldn't believe how many traits there were in 'Faiths & Philosophies' for instance that seemed tailor-made for my characters, from both a crunch and fluff perspective.Can I ask what it is you dislike so much about retraining?Because quite frankly it tends to open doors up for extreme cheese character builds that are based on retraining. Traits are a particurlarly hard option to swallow as they aren't just half-feats, they represent your character's past and upbringing.
And outside of access to a TARDIS, it's really hard to justify retraining your past.
Not other than being feat-starved :) And, as Jiggy suggested, not really wanting *two* new traits.
I mean, I'm not sure whether I would *actually* trade out 'Empyreal Cultist' for 'Monastic', on my Andoletta-worshipping, monastery-trained Monk/Magus, but I would consider it, and it's certainly not game-breaking at all.
And it's arguably *less* cheesy and backstory-breaking than taking the Additional Traits feat and also grabbing 'Magical Knack' for no discernable reason other than mechanical goodness.
|
|
Jiggy,
Backstory is the crux of the issue. Lets look at characters from novels and such. How many of them grew up as an orphan by a river, learning how to use boats and such, suddenly stop knowing how to use boats and such because they started adventuring or went on a quest?
Your traits should be integral to your back-story, which I know you did for Thomas.
But because they are integral to your back-story, it absolutely does not make sense that just because you've chosen a different path in life, that you suddenly forget where you came from.
If it's something you haven't used in years, you can forget a lot of the details.
As an example, I was always very good at math growing up. I did math competitions in school, and I remember in high school traveling to a national competition and coming home with a 2nd place trophy. I'd say that's a pretty major part of my background.
Fast forward more than 20 years, and a few months ago, I was struggling to remember how to do basic algebra when I tried to tutor my nephew - the same stuff I was so good at back then. I went into a career where I never use that kind of math, so I haven't looked at it in ages, and I don't remember most of the details.
In game terms, I might still have some ranks in knowledge (algebra), but I think I've lost my +1 trait bonus in it due to lack of use.
But the Traits don't give you the ability to do algebra. They give you the ability to learn algebra better.
And that potential never changes unless you have a serious brain injury of some kind.
|
|
Your traits should be integral to your back-story, which I know you did for Thomas.
But because they are integral to your back-story, it absolutely does not make sense that just because you've chosen a different path in life, that you suddenly forget where you came from.
Getting slightly rusty at swimming and no longer being better at fighting with a dagger than with his deity's favored weapon is a far cry from "suddenly forget where you came from".
There are lots of things from my past that were integral to my personal development and that still impact me deeply, but which used to manifest in tangible ways that they no longer do. To suggest that applying the same phenomenon to my PCs somehow breaks verisimilitude is about like that GenCon story where a GM had blind PCs running in random directions: it tells me that that which I've experienced in real life is somehow unrealistic for my PC.
That shatters verisimilitude.
The point is, that just because you don't continue to use or train your potential, doesn't mean the potential suddenly stops being there.
I grew up canoeing. I haven't canoed regularly in 20 some years. I went canoeing for the first time in a long time last Summer. Took me a few minutes to get the steering down again, and I still haven't quite gotten the inverted steering so I never have to switch sides with the paddle back yet. But I'm still pretty damn good in a canoe. Its in my blood. The potential is still there.
You can't just change your background because your background doesn't apply anymore.
Fromper and Jiggy, you guys are still who you are, from the age of 0 to today. And your young life experiences still affect you today. You still have the potential of that training and experience from a very impressionable age. You also still have the potential you were born with. Even if you don't use it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand the argument about not being able to change a character's background, but given the inclusion of retraining alternate racial traits, a sircerer's bloodline, etc., changing the mechanical benefit of your background doesn't seem like that big of a deal. Nothing is saying your actual background has to change. You're just altering which part of your background gives you a mechanical benefit. Maybe you spend the time concentrating a training effort on recalling that talent from youth or whatever. Certainly it's not a bigger deal than suddenly gaining or losing Darkvision or the ability to more easily learn languages. In those cases, Paizo's answer to how was, essentially, a wizard did it. I see no reason that can't be the case with traits as well, and I don't see allowing traits to be retrained creating a larger issue than the rest of the retraining rules.
That being said, I think it's important to remember that Mike, Mark, and John just made the change to include retraining, and it just took effect last week. I think it's fair to expect that they may want to see how it works out in practice before expanding the rules.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
There is nothing stopping you from accessing these new traits right now.
Just encountered a "yes there is" mere minutes ago.
Wife was looking through traits in Ultimate Campaign for her new druid (still in 1st-level limbo land) when she excitedly called me over to show me Kin Bond:
We have a pair of PCs (just reached 4th level) who we built from the ground up as being twins. We're the same race, use similarly-themed classes (magus and arcane duelist bard), use the same fighting style (rapier and buffing magic), have the same feats (Weapon Finesse and Precise Strike - yes, a teamwork feat in PFS!) and always try to play as a "unit". Lo and behold, a new trait that fits our existing concept(s) PERFECTLY! We got all excited about taking Additional Traits at 5th so we could further cement the "twin-ness" of our PCs.
Then I remembered:
"Wait, what category is that in?"
It's in the same category as Focused Mind, which her magus already has. So much for that idea. If trait retraining were allowed, she'd drop Focused Mind for Kin Bond in a heartbeat (and I'd either retrain into it or take the feat) so that our characters could match even more.
--------------------------
I won't deny that there will be some players who use it as "just another mechanic", and I'm sure it was pretty disheartening when MisterSlanky ran into them on Day 1. But I'd wager a guess that for every such player out there, there are five more casual gamers who are in a situation like I just described, seeing That Perfect Trait get printed in a category that's no longer available to them.
|
|
I would support this, but then again I really like the idea of retraining to begin with, far more than I thought I would.
Recently I have been contemplating a new character idea that I can either start from scratch or retrain one that I haven't played in probably 7 months. While I am going to lose a good chunk of prestige and waste some money on some gear I can't use anymore, I get to salvage that character and his chronicles. Overall the power level will be a little less than if I started from scratch and worked back up, but it also saves me the time of doing those first couple of low levels again. It kind of seems like a win win for everyone.
In this case, a character is sapped of some consumable priced resources and gets to trade half a feet. Management is happy with curbing the excess money a little and the player is a little happier with a little more complete concept.
|
|
I'll go ahead and say I am in favor of this. I'd like to see trait retraining added. But I would completely understand if campaign management decides to put that decision off for a while. I don't even know if I would actually use it on any of my characters. I have a character who would have taken Magical Knack had it been legal at the time, and who I'd just played for the first time above level 1 a couple of weeks before it was made legal. But I might not even bother, as due to a raise dead, he's prestige poor. I'd need to look through the newer books more carefully to see if there's anything that's conceptually better for any of my characters than what they have.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I fully support the idea of retraining traits. Given all the other stuff that can be retrained, it doesn't make any sense that traits are not in the list. I also think that trait retraining will be of more use to casual players than to powergamers (though I concede that the latter will get some benefit in terms of choosing to swap traits that are more useful at certain levels).
I disagree that retraining a trait means erasing your character's background. Instead, it's simply choosing *which part* of your character's background you want to emphasize. Just because you have a new trait on your character sheet doesn't mean the old one never existed. Instead, it means that you've chosen to focus on a new part of your character's history. People do that all the time in real life; it's *way* more realistic than, say, changing your character's race or sorcerer bloodline!
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Here's an alternative solution: if the campaign leadership doesn't want to allow retraining of feats, for whatever reason, there is a way that we could solve the problem of trait lock-out due to already having a trait from a given category. Simply allow characters to drop a trait.
From a balance perspective, I can't see *any* possible reason why this would be a problem. You're not getting any additional benefit. Just scratch the trait off your character sheet; you can't use it any more. It doesn't "open the slot" so you can't put another trait in there. It's just a wasted slot that you can't do anything with.
However, then you would have the option of taking the Additional Traits feat, and picking a new trait in the same Category as the trait you crossed out.
Thoughts?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Retraining a trait would mean your erasing a background and replacing it with a new background.
No.
It doesn't mean that at all, and I'm baffled that so many people seem to think it does.
Typically, if a PC has any background at all, it consists of more than two details. That means that out of the entire PC background, two details are mechanically represented while every single other detail is "just fluff". Retraining a trait means that you're changing which details have mechanical impact and which ones are "just fluff". It doesn't change the backstory AT ALL; it only moves the mechanical representation from one aspect of the backstory to another.
I can understand some of the other complaints, like the fear that it'll be used more by powergamers than by casual-types, or that we don't need to be adding an extra rule. I disagree, but the concerns are valid.
But the whole "retraining a trait means you're re-writing your background" thing? That's just silly.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Jiggy,
That's what traits were made for. To mechanically represent someone's background.
Otherwise, background is just fluff and has no game effect.
'
Right. Traits mechanically represent someone's background.
What Jiggy is arguing is that there is more to someone's background than just traits. Said other parts of the background are just fluff, with no mechanical effect.
The argument Jiggy is making here is that retraining traits simply means transferring the mechanical benefit from one part of the fluffy background to another. It doesn't mean rewriting history, just changing the emphasis (and therefore which part of the background the mechanical bits are drawing from).
Does that make sense?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I am in support of this, but I am predicting players will use it to squeeze every last drop out of traits like 'magical lineage' or 'dangerously curious.' It matters not, I will roll my eyes at them and get on with the game.
Come to think of it, weren't people making the same prediction when 1st-level rebuilds were first opened up? Like, predicting that suddenly we'd have hordes of uber-HP barbarians at 1st level who all spontaneously turned into wizards at 2nd level? I remember that prediction, but I never saw it happen at any significant magnitude. Maybe that's why I'm not worried about this idea either.
|
|
Come to think of it, weren't people making the same prediction when 1st-level rebuilds were first opened up? Like, predicting that suddenly we'd have hordes of uber-HP barbarians at 1st level who all spontaneously turned into wizards at 2nd level? I remember that prediction, but I never saw it happen at any significant magnitude. Maybe that's why I'm not worried about this idea either.
But did you see it happen; I did. I'm more of a live and let live kind of person, but it does seem to take away from the game when you don't have to make your wizard useful at first level.
|
|
I think what Andrei means is someone could start with Magical Lineage (snowball) at level 1. At level 3, retrain it to Magical Lineage (flurry of snowballs), then at level 5 retrain it to Magical Lineage (lightning bolt) and so on.
These are not doable with level 1 retrains.
Also, on your last point, I HAVE seen the 29 hp barbarian at level 1 turn into wizards at 2nd level. Not rampant, but definitely more than two.
|
|
Jiggy,
That's what traits were made for. To mechanically represent someone's background.
Otherwise, background is just fluff and has no game effect.
'
Right. Traits mechanically represent someone's background.
What Jiggy is arguing is that there is more to someone's background than just traits. Said other parts of the background are just fluff, with no mechanical effect.
The argument Jiggy is making here is that retraining traits simply means transferring the mechanical benefit from one part of the fluffy background to another. It doesn't mean rewriting history, just changing the emphasis (and therefore which part of the background the mechanical bits are drawing from).
Does that make sense?
No.
But then I don't like retraining at all, but that's life I guess.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does that make sense?No.
Hrm. Maybe I can illustrate better.
Okay, let's take Luke Skywalker. Here are some details of his background:
• Traumatic birth
• Twin
• Grew up in the desert
• Grew up around jawas and sandpeople
• Lonely childhood (isolated, minimal friends/family)
• Talented pilot
• Decent sharpshooter (bulls-eyed womprats in his T-16)
• Strong with the force
• Good-hearted
• Kind of a brat
• Parental figures murdered
So at character creation, he picks two traits that represent a couple of those points. When we're talking about retraining traits, we're not talking about removing one of those background details from the list and writing in something new. We're talking about just having a different pair of the already-established background details represented mechanically. The list will still look exactly the same as it did before. Changing from having traits representing his traumatic birth and his desert upbringing, to having traits representing his piloting talent and the murder of his aunt and uncle, doesn't change the fact that all four of those things always were, and still are, part of his background.
There is no re-writing happening. None. His background is exactly the same post-retrain as it was pre-retrain.
I'm curious: when traits first came out, and people had to add them to existing characters, was that viewed as suddenly adding events to their past? Or was it more like "Oh hey, now this event that was already there all along can have some mechanical impact"? Same with the retraining - we're not talking about removing an event from a PC's past and inserting a new one, we're talking about already having events A and B in their past, and switching from "A is represented while B is not" to "B is represented while A is not". Both A and B were always there, and still are.