| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So one thing I liked from vanilla wow is you had to visit your trainer you.don't just automatically know how to cast that wonky spell that just knocked the socks off that big ugly dude gotta learn it
So couple questions:
Has anyone tried this. Simple most asked question on this board but experience is best
Would you mind having to find a trainer to "level up"
What are some ways to impliment the "training." Was thinking if a divine thing the 'god'can bestow the knowledge I guess I dunno
Would it cost? After all nothing is really free
Would it take time? Game or real life
How long would you have it take? 1d10minutes? Rounds?days?
Where would trainer be located?
That's all I got for now will be back with more (questions/ideas/concerns)
Thanks in advanced
I used to use training in my games back in 1st and 2nd Edition of AD&D. the individuals would need to search out for trainers in their specialty and build a positive relationship with them. While this was an easy endeavor at low levels it would be progressively harder to find that person as you went up.
Generally people would not be required to train until they hit a certain level (3rd through 5th is my memory). This was to symbolize that they could learn things on their own up to a point.
I believe that it would take weeks of time to complete, possibly 1 week per level that you were advancing to.
The system was very nice in the many games that I ran using it as well as played in with it. However, when we converted to 3rd Edition it felt like it fit less in with the style of the game. I am not saying that to discourage you, but to provide insight into our feelings on it as we went along.
It can be a fun and rewarding aspect of the game. One thing I liked about it back in the old days was the question of when you would go for it. You wanted things to be settled down on your business, but do you take a couple weeks to train up when only you need it? What if 3 of 4 people need training? Produced some fun scenes and the downtime encounters that would happen at times were fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd use the downtime rules from Ultimate Campaign for cost and time to train yourself up, and it takes longer if you don't have a trainer. (maybe x1.5 or x2 to the time it takes)
Very Respectfully,
--Bacon
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. I hated this with a white hot hatred. Every. Single. Time. it was used, it was from a DM that wanted to hyper-control the Pc's.
You'd get the eps, but not the time or money to level. Then you'd have to go adventuring- being a level short and not earning any eps, since you couldn't level twice.
if you took the time anyway, the DM would pull crud to make sure you knew who was boss.
So it will be more like welcome back to the table you paid 25 silver for training and 2 gold for that swanky life style you.like you spent 6weeks training while we were sleeping here's what your characters missed ...
Originally I was thinking (if/when) you found trainer he would be like "go clear this out or bring me the head of a ancient gold dragon and ill train you"
Maybe a dungeon crawl or social skills I dunno but some miniquest to gain new powers would help if you didn't have any other life threatening quest going on and needed to kill downtime
And maybe there is a trainers guild if classes are big in your world so could find a group of trainers in major city's
Or maybe tavern keeper is like "I heard old man Jenkins used to use that big ax on stuff other than the great oaks he's fellin now... " if I was a greataxe weilding Barbara I would definately put old man Jenkins on my people to visit list
Definately not trying to "hyper-control" just bring story and fun to my players who like me played wow since vanilla was going for a little Easter egg type thing that would make them go.I remember this
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the problem... sometimes it just doesn't work.
If you're doing a dungeon crawl with basically no plot, sure... you can just pull out of the ruins, trudge back to wherever and spend however long you want, "getting better". You can even have a training montage. Whatever.
But let's take a typical adventure path as a different example. Evil So-And-So plans to X, Y and Z the ABC until they're all dead. World-shattering important OMGWTFBBQPONIES.
There's rarely time off. Please don't say "Kingmaker". I'm talking about all the other adventures, ever.
The more the apocalyptic evil looms, the less time-off makes sense. Crafting is equally bad this way. And yet you want your PCs to improve. So... it Just Happens.
Formalizing a "training" thing might work for some style games, but not for all, so it likely shouldn't be part of the rules.
It doesn't work for me on several levels (we ignored it in 1/2e), primarily because the odds of finding an NPC with more than 4 PC class levels is miniscule, and they invariably have better things to do.
If you want to bring "training" into the game my suggestion is to do it organicaly not mechanicaly.
What I mean is simply this. You say that you want to "bring story and fun" to your players. Then do that. Have a master swordsman meet your party aspiring swordsman and have him impart some knowledge to him... just so happens that this encounter takes place when the group levels and the fighter can now choose a feat that he "leanred" from the master swordsman mentor.
Have an NPC wizard take an interest in the young mage who he has been hearing so much about and teach him a sepll or two... or if the wizard happened to just level then you can thematicaly explain how the old wizard taught him a bit of meta magic.
Point is, make it organic and part of the overall narative. Not a mechanic that must be met in order to progress.
Just my two copper bits...
I like this but seems like I can only do this once before it just doesn't work again
But it would be cool to do I think
Maybe wizard or swordsman or (insert class here) says feel free to come visit me in (insert hard to reach place) when you wanna learn more
Not needed to level but maybe little bonus to meeting him?
Oh and homebrew campaign where later on they will be running a city evil necro type thing. They will technically have as much downtime as they like .... if they don't mind being attack by the all holy crusade of the Capitol city ran by the most pompous paladin imaginable
I just call it the 'magic of experience points', providing learning without actually needing training. If magic can let you cast a fireball and make the earth quake, downloading information out of the akasha certainly isn't a stretch.
Training has OTHER benefits.
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
want training mechanics?
don't make it a requirement
but allow gold to be spent training feats, skills, or stats above the norm.
Yes, the RAW instantaneous level up does break characterization.
That's because the entire level up system is abstract. It is inherently divorced from the game's world. To give an example, how does your character know it is time to seek out a trainer? The player knows because they reach the set amount of XP, but XP doesn't exist in the character's mind. Does the PC has to return to this NPC and train regularly in between level-ups? What happens when the PC needs to level up in the middle of a dungeon? What if their trainer is on vacation, or gets killed by the BBEG- does that prevent the PC from leveling up?
The more try to reconcile the abstraction with the game world, the more one of them is going to fall apart.
[edit] Looks like I took too long typing T_T
|
in my last campaign i GM'd i didnt allow automatic spells for wizards, sorcerers/oracles had to perform rituals to unlock spells known, clerics had to hold onto spell books like wizards, and martials had to learn techniques from trainers.
this system forced more role-playing, which the players didnt like at first but later actually liked more then the generic way, and allowed the players to earn their skills and abilities. it added a lot of depth to the campaign, and im thinking i may use this system from now on with all my games.
you know when you earn something you appreciate it more.
Yes, the RAW instantaneous level up does break characterization.
That's because the entire level up system is abstract. It is inherently divorced from the game's world. To give an example, how does your character know it is time to seek out a trainer? The player knows because they reach the set amount of XP, but XP doesn't exist in the character's mind. Does the PC has to return to this NPC and train regularly in between level-ups? What happens when the PC needs to level up in the middle of a dungeon? What if their trainer is on vacation, or gets killed by the BBEG- does that prevent the PC from leveling up?
The more try to reconcile the abstraction with the game world, the more one of them is going to fall apart.
[edit] Looks like I took too long typing T_T
but so does the concept of requiring a trainer to progress if it prevents the first fighters or whatever from breaking first level. it also defies the paradigm of a lot of adventure paths, by forcing a change on how time works to keep up with the challenges
it also has the downside of being a tool for control freak DMs to limit player options by restricting them to choose a trainer they have seen. don't want fighters training in the falchion? simply don't include a falchion specialist trainer.
it becomes even more unfair to martial PCs because you are effectively telling them "you can't take this particular combat feat without my permission."
it also penalizes spontaneous casters even more, and inflicts a lot less penalty on prepared casters, whom can simply buy scrolls if arcane, or download their god's knowledge if divine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have long hated training requirements. They really don't work.
We tried them in one game where we had to spend XXX amount of days with a trainer, and the whole campaign came to a screeching halt. All those missions we were on? All those kidanpped people we were trying to track down? Didn't matter as much banging my sword on some guys shield for 2 days.
It instantly created a Roleplay vs Mechanics animosity that was tough to balance
Now... the idea is sound, but the reality is questionable. It would need to be a VERY specific playstyle with lots of downtime. The Kingmaker game we're doing now could problably work... but that's so far outside the norm it barely counts.
Also, it trivializes the idea of experience in those experience points. It's frustrating to hear that facing Forty goblins and a minotaur and surviving didn't teach you anything that talking with some guy for a couple of days did.
All those fights, all those tricks that you've been practicing for the last two weeks trapped in that dungeoncrawl have 'finally' paid off. Your faster, smarter, better coming out of the lair then you were going in... That's the core to 'leveling up'.
If I already DID what I needed to do to EARN that level... then yeah, I want it. :P
My suggestion would be this. Introduce some trainers in the game. Whenever there are down times the players can hang out with them, do some drills, get some ideas...
Then when they level up halfway through the dungeon... whatever the trainer has been trying to teach them finally clicks. They understand now in a way that they never did sitting in class.
If I remember in World of Warcraft, you still gained all the benefits from leveling (extra hp, better attack, etc), but not the skills. That wouldn't be that tough to recreate. Just give the players all of the things in the BAB, Fort, Ref, Will, Skill Points, and HP areas (and extra movement speed, unarmed damage, and armor bonus for monks) when they level. But if they want to learn anything from the "Special" column of the class writeup, they gotta search for a trainer. Some classes can bypass this (cleric channeling, fighter bonus feats, oracle revelations, sorcerer bloodline powers). And the spellcasting goes to a trainer (or a library).
This would make some classes more convenient to players (like the martials compared to many casters). I had thought of adding in something similar in any game that I would run. Certain class abilities in the "special" column would need to be trained. And if you want to multiclass (depending on class), then you would need to be trained. A lot of it can be handwaved as "You worked on this thing as you were adventuring". This, of course, works much easier in a non-prepublished adventure (except kingmaker), as most APs and modules assume you are trekking through nonstop, only pausing to replenish your spells and such, and then getting right back out there slaughtering your way through everything in your path.
I always found that optional rule back in 2nd edition to be rather interesting thing to include.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People don't actually "level" when they get good at something. Levels are a way to record progress and help make good challenge ratings. I always felt like you were slowly growing toward that level as you acquired experience and the leveling was just a benchmark for where you are at that point in time.
I could see some value in a trainer if you wanted to improve skills outside of experience. I might also consider something like this for certain feats, like magic item crafting for example - especially if the player's background or class made a certain feat selection illogical or strange. But learning to take a hit, developing skills, and learning to use your own talents better are generally things that are acquired through life experience. I think having to trek to some dude so he can "ding" you is silly.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
you know when you earn something you appreciate it more.
You already DID earn it. You overcame obstacles and leveled up.
Problems with requiring 'trainers' to level up:
1) Can cause players to be stuck in lower level than they have earned in a situation or area due to in game adventure where they cannot get to a trainer and have to wait at a lower level to finish the dungeon/etc. No one likes playing a lower level than they have earned.
2) If all the players do not level at the same time you have level variances in the party. While not usually critical it can be a pain to go to town and train character A then two sessions later have to do it again for Character B, even if the group has no other reason to go to town.
3) If the party overland travels a lot, then they have to continually find people to train them over and over in each new area they adventure in if they level up and it is not time appropriate to travel back to their last trainer.
I am sure there are many other reasons. While trainers CAN be nice for the lower levels if the party is in a static location for an adventure or three, they become somewhat tedious at higher levels.
Also, if your going to charge them for training then make sure to increase their party wealth accordingly to cover it, otherwise it becomes a cash penalty for leveling up, which is frankly unfair.
In every campaign I have been in that has used the 'trainer' concept it was eventually dropped as being not really necessary and annoying.
The only one that worked was in a campaign that only required you to visit a trainer up to level 5. After that level you were considered able to train yourself via real world experience. But that campaign was written that each character had a 'mentor' they learned their class from and was plotted to have them leave their 'home' area at level 5. That game also did not charge for training and training took about 1 day per level to be gained, I.E. gaining 4 level took 4 days of training.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People don't actually "level" when they get good at something. Levels are a way to record progress and help make good challenge ratings. I always felt like you were slowly growing toward that level as you acquired experience and the leveling was just a benchmark for where you are at that point in time.
I could see some value in a trainer if you wanted to improve skills outside of experience. I might also consider something like this for certain feats, like magic item crafting for example - especially if the player's background or class made a certain feat selection illogical or strange. But learning to take a hit, developing skills, and learning to use your own talents better are generally things that are acquired through life experience. I think having to trek to some dude so he can "ding" you is silly.
That's not actually true in the game.
You do suddenly get better. A button is pushed, your soul grows, you gain hit points, saves, BAB, caster levels, and new spell slots very suddenly.
Any reasonably world would have long codified the process and know exactly what levels mean.
But saying you need mundane training to level is hardly a requirement. The process of gaining and accumulating xp can be just as magical as the process of casting a spell or making a magic item, only YOU are the magic item.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TL;DR
"Leveling" is a measure of the lessons you learned back there. You changed the way you held your blade, you reached into an until-now unknown arcane miasma to understand magic; that style your master displayed at tournaments- you get it now. You've reached the pinnacle of subtle movement, and recognize when a fireball is about to hit and react.
Getting better at something is a culmination of experience.
My character gets better at her class because she's had enough field and battle-tested moments that those experiences inform her future choices. New wellsprings of power are deviated from her innate potential.
I see advancement as organic in-game, not a literal interpretation of numbers. The latter is straight-up boring.
Though I do believe you must rest to level up, so maybe a character is powered by dreams.
First of all, let me state that I don't require my players to seek out training when it's time to level, simply out of convenience, but if I did, here's what it would be like:
At the lowest levels, finding a trainer works fine. Proceed as normal. But as Zhayne mentioned, pretty soon the party members are going to find that they're already more capable than any trainer they could typically find, as the real powerhouses of the world have better things to do. At this point, the PCs don't require trainers, they require training.
Instead of learning from someone, the PCs are now developing their own techniques. They've gotten some good ideas of how to improve themselves from their time spent in battle, but need to hammer out the exact details in a controlled, safe environment, and put some basic amounts of practice in:
The fighter goes to the barracks and grabs a low-level grunt to swing his weapon at the fighter as instructed as the fighter develops his own fighting style. Sure, mechanically, the feats work the same as anyone else who took them, but he's developing his own way of swinging his sword, his own stance, and so on.
The rogue goes to the Thieves' Guild, where he can find training walls to climb on with mats underneath, so he can practice daring stunts without risk of serious injury, or putting the party in a bad spot if he hasn't quite had a chance to work out all the details. Likewise, there's padded traps for him to dodge and disarm, and other such mechanisms. Perhaps he's even been giving advice on how to further develop these tools for better fit his advanced needs.
The arcane caster goes to the local magic guild, and tests his own theories about how magic works, as well as experiments with new levels of power in an environment where there's minimal risk (and other casters to help provide clean-up) if he accidentally calls upon more power than he's able to control.
And so on and so forth. I'm sure you get the point after the above. But you should always be willing to hand-wave the training requirement if it doesn't make sense to the plot, like if the BBEG is about to bear down on them, or if they're halfway down some massive dungeon. Sometimes, you do wind up having to test these new techniques in a live-fire situation, and the PCs are just skilled enough, lucky enough, and/or desperate enough to get these new methodologies to work right the first time.
Instead of learning from someone, the PCs are now developing their own techniques. They've gotten some good ideas of how to improve themselves from their time spent in battle, but need to hammer out the exact details in a controlled, safe environment, and put some basic amounts of practice in:The fighter goes to the barracks and grabs a low-level grunt to swing his weapon at the fighter as instructed as the fighter develops his own fighting style. Sure, mechanically, the feats work the same as anyone else who took them, but he's developing his own way of swinging his sword, his own stance, and so on.
The rogue goes to the Thieves' Guild, where he can find training walls to climb on with mats underneath, so he can practice daring stunts without risk of serious injury, or putting the party in a bad spot if he hasn't quite had a chance to work out all the details. Likewise, there's padded traps for him to dodge and disarm, and other such mechanisms. Perhaps he's even been giving advice on how to further develop these tools for better fit his advanced needs.
The arcane caster goes to the local magic guild, and tests his own theories about how magic works, as well as experiments with new levels of power in an environment where there's minimal risk (and other casters to help provide clean-up) if he accidentally calls upon more power than he's able to control.
And so on and so forth. I'm sure you get the point after the above. But you should always be willing to...
This I like.
The TSR Marvel game had a comment in it that was very similar. Leveling up was nigh-impossible in that game, but they had a 'training' concept. It boiled down to TWO ways...
1) Get a teacher. You had to find someone who could train you and had a facility set up to work out. This was basically the X-men and Avengers Danger room type enviroments...
OR.....
2) Go on Patrol. Go out there, get in fights and learn from field experience. This was the training method of Spiderman and Daredevil types.
Either are fine. In these types of games, I prefer the Patrol method as trial by fire is just... cooler then 'fighter school'
|
Wow. I hated this with a white hot hatred. Every. Single. Time. it was used, it was from a DM that wanted to hyper-control the Pc's.
You'd get the eps, but not the time or money to level. Then you'd have to go adventuring- being a level short and not earning any eps, since you couldn't level twice.
if you took the time anyway, the DM would pull crud to make sure you knew who was boss.
A million times this. Don't forget the DM's that disagreed with what you wanted to train in, so finding one was impossible....
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even WoW has backed away from the training mechanic in steps.
There is one class that already has something similar, and that's Wizard. They can find a"trainer" in the form of a fellow wizard and pay to learn spells. Not the spells they get automatically for leveling, but other new spells. If you want to make it like that, that's a good thing. Maybe the fighter can learn a combat trait or some other trick from a trainer. Maybe the rogue could learn how to sneak at a better speed, or disable traps faster. Maybe a cleric could learn to cast a specific spell as though they were +1 level. Don't use training as a way to hold them back, use it as a way for them to improve.
I only enforce training in 2 specific instances:
1) gaining ranks in a skill that noone else in your party has - you simply haven't had the opportunity to see first hand how that skill works.
2) gaining a prestige class - in my games these are all tied to organizations who don't just give their secrets away for free.
otherwise I let characters level up as they see fit.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We never would have survived that trek over the Crown of the World if we had to level up this way.
Personally, and it may sound odd, but not allowing the default abstracted levelling and requiring training does more to hurt an organic feeling for most campaigns rather than helping.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Worse than trainers are systems that only provide experience towards stuff you've used or done. Need to learn a new language? Too bad, you didn't do any linguistics related stuff, so you can't. Want to use a new weapon? Better put aside the weapon you are good with, and use that weapon with the non-proficiency penalty to gain 'experience' with that weapon, so that you can gain (or improve) proficiency. Want to improve your abjuration skill, despite the only abjuration spell you have being a long-lasting mage armor type buff you only put up at the beginning of the day? Better stand in a corner casting that buff on yourself every six seconds for the next four hours, to 'skill up abjuration.'
EverQuest 1 was like that. You could be a 10th level Paladin with 100 skill in 1H Sword, but if you'd never used a 2H Sword, you would start swinging and missing and see that 'you have gained 2HSword skill 2!' message.
Meh. Some levels of realism, I don't need.
My ideal gaming experience, I'd level up, magically learn a bunch of new stuff, even if I was up to my dangly bits in the World's Largest Dungeon and an entire dimension away from the nearest wizard trainer or temple to my very specific god (where, logically, I would go to learn to cleric stuff, which would require every adventuring location to have temples to *every god in the setting,* to accommodate clerics of those gods!), and all my gear and carried loot would fly apart into sparkly mist and reform as the new (subject to GM approval!) WBL appropriate gear.
Training, like shopping and selling and all that other crap, can happen off-screen. When I and some friends have finally blocked out four hours in a month that we can all sit down and play the game, I want to play the game, not waste a single second on character maintenance.
EverQuest 1 was like that. You could be a 10th level Paladin with 100 skill in 1H Sword, but if you'd never used a 2H Sword, you would start swinging and missing and see that 'you have gained 2HSword skill 2!' message.
Meh. Some levels of realism, I don't need.
Actually, in Everquest I REALLY liked that... The swimming going up as you used it.. only reading the languages you knew... the drinking till the world went fuzzy and you couldn't walk straight....
That was kind of fun!
However, I agree that wouldn't translate to one of these games ;)
One of us DMs (not me) used to enforced the notion of trainers and seeking them out and training with them back in our 2nd Ed games. It sucked mightily. Mainly because instead of just allowing this to be something that happened behind the scenes - flashforward style - he made us actually play (stuck at the same level and still accruing XP) while we searched and searched and searched, and frankly I think we hardly ever found anybody to fit the bill. Sometimes we'd acquire enough XP for two levels before we found anybody, and guess what? We could only gain one level from one trainer at a time. Basically, we walked around with a surplus of XP, unable to use it (and lost half the time in his magical labyrinthine forest).
This used to provoke endless arguments about whether actually going out in the world and fighting monsters COUNTS as training towards... well, you know... FIGHTING MONSTERS.
Of course it does. But he was a college guy, and I was a working guy, so I think our philosophies diverged in that way. In my life, the best training is the life experience of being on the job, and he believes the best training is the kind you get in the classroom. So maybe that was where the stylistic differences came from.
Anyway, fantasy is full of precedent for characters increasing power without strict classroom training. Watch enough TV, enough Saturday morning cartoons, enough Anime, read enough comic books, you'll see plenty of characters utilizing powers they never dreamed they possessed in the heat of battle, or when some other crucial moment came upon them. You will also see examples of characters trying to harness powers they know exist or have seen demonstrated, failing until - voila! - they suddenly can do it (also often in the heat of the moment). Sometimes they can do it only once or intermittently, and have to rediscover or refine the ability.
The opposite also exists. Training scenes from The Karate Kid come to mind.
Both can coexist. But I think it should probably be a matter of style for each player. A player who thinks his character is the type to learn on the fly, who improvises a lot, should be allowed to "level up" as he goes. A player who loves to hear the Rocky Theme blasting out as he does his sit ups under the pounding fists of Master Pai Mei, should be allowed to have his fun, too.
EDIT: I should also point out that, as a musician, I "leveled up" - that is, improved - slowly and steadily over time. I did so through accumulated experience and practice. I didn't need a trainer to get better. I just got better because I did it all the time.
EverQuest 1 was like that. You could be a 10th level Paladin with 100 skill in 1H Sword, but if you'd never used a 2H Sword, you would start swinging and missing and see that 'you have gained 2HSword skill 2!' message.
Meh. Some levels of realism, I don't need.
Actually, in Everquest I REALLY liked that... The swimming going up as you used it.. only reading the languages you knew... the drinking till the world went fuzzy and you couldn't walk straight....
That was kind of fun!
However, I agree that wouldn't translate to one of these games ;)
that kind of system is kind of situational. while it sounds realistic, and is fine for a free roaming video game with fully customizeable characters along the lines of Skyrim or Everquest, it doesn't fit so well in pathfinder or even savage worlds.
How do trainers learn the skill in the first place?
If you want the flavor of being schooled, sure. If you want the flavor of discovering/reverse-engineering stuff on your own, sure.
I agree with everyone who says it's terrible. It introduces a fair amount of friction to a system that's already complicated and doesn't really add anything to the game, unless your players believe it adds (rather than subtracts) realism or they get that it's an inside joke from WoW.
Pathfinder, like all the games that came before it, break horribly if you try to actually imagine it as an organic world. You have wizards going from raw apprentices to demigods in the span of a handful of months in most of the adventure paths. If you accept that it's a movie set instead of a virtual reality, you'll probably enjoy it more than if you keep trying to edge it closer towards a reality.
|
So when does that first level fighter come find you mister 5th level to teach him how to use his sword better? If that happened i would be okay with training would give a chance for some possible amusing rp. Its why levels are a little wonky in things. I spent 6+ years with the army I would like to think in my daily training and adventures overseas i might have gotten the xp to level a time or two. I got better at my job. Better at teaching others how to do my job, heck i even prestige classed into being a ranger. I didnt get a 'ding' moment nor did i spend everyday for a month doing nothing but montage training scene to learn those things either.
Im with the person who mentioned the whole, what do you think they have been doing everyday while adventuring thing. you learn over time.
I have no problem with finding trainers for narrative purposes. It's when you tie it directly to the experience mechanics that it becomes an issue.
Here's an idea:
When you get a break in the story, characters can visit trainers if they wish. However, they don't get any mechanical benefit for this - just include a preview of them beginning to learn abilities from their next level.
Example: the wizard gets to visit their master, who imparts knowledge of a higher-level spell to them. They practice a bit, but keep getting it wrong. The master tells them with time and practice they'll be able to get it right.
Then later on, in-game, at the time they level, that's the time it pays off and they're finally able to cast that spell and get it correct.
The RP and the mechanics can still be related, yet occur at different points in time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a player, I'd hate it if after earning the 40,000xp needed for my next level I was told "Hey, Go do this quest for me and I'll teach you how to be better at X". If I need a trainer to teach me how to hold my sword better, or how to make my fireball bigger, what was the point of spending the last few months swinging my sword or blasting fireballs? When you get better at something in RL, do you only improve when you sit down and receive formalized training?
Ask your players if they want it, if so, sure add it in, but I don't see the point of giving experience for challenging encounters, then making it meaningless unless they do a side quest. Plus, will you factor training costs into WBL? If you're playing an AP where the PCs are on the clock to stop the big bad, do you want Rovagug eating Avistan because the party had to spend 3 weeks getting to level 18, or do you want the party getting killed because they knew they couldn't spare 3 weeks of time, so they went to save the day at level 17 instead?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It also feels a bit back-to-front.
Training should be introducing the concept, not honing it to the point where it can be executed. Luke Skywalker didn't level aboard the Falcon where Ben Kenobi was training him, he levelled from experience in action later on, that's when his use of The Force "clicked".
Got it lol general thought is bad training... don't show up in game .. which is cool I figures it wouldn't work just random idea popped in my head and was on here a minute later lol
meh...as a player I tend to RP this aspect of the game during adventures. My PC will practice a spell/feat/skill/whatever around the camp fire at night...Visit appropriate guilds, etc. I do it because otherwise the roleplayer in me gets annoyed with the roll-player in me.
But that is my personal preference, I will admit it bugs me when someone switches a class with no RP justification behind it (Okay I was a Fighter and now I can cast spells because I took a level in Cleric even though my PC hasn't shown the slightest hint of any interest in the divine...) wouldn't stop anyone from doing it as a GM though.
As always as long as everyone is having fun who cares.
meh...as a player I tend to RP this aspect of the game during adventures. My PC will practice a spell/feat/skill/whatever around the camp fire at night...Visit appropriate guilds, etc. I do it because otherwise the roleplayer in me gets annoyed with the roll-player in me.
But that is my personal preference, I will admit it bugs me when someone switches a class with no RP justification behind it (Okay I was a Fighter and now I can cast spells because I took a level in Cleric even though my PC hasn't shown the slightest hint of any interest in the divine...) wouldn't stop anyone from doing it as a GM though.
As always as long as everyone is having fun who cares.
See this is how I would run it (as a player) but seems there are more roll players vs role players now a days (not. Implying anyone on this thread...)
As to the trainers I might do what somepeople said random down time wizard shows up blah blah blah lol or might have them train skills and feats (extra ones than normal maybe teamwork feats)
When my players tell me the "end goal" they tell me alright I am going fighter 7 and cleric 2 then Barbar 11 I ask why would your character ... they usually give me a good reason the char would do it like.. my pa was a fighter always wanted me to grow up like him my ma was a cleric of (diety) who told her that her first born /or seventh son would inherent her powers I was just a late Bloomer but then those powers didn't sit well with my char and he lost his mind (barbar. Uncontrollable rager or whatever) not best I could come up with but you get the idea
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ive personally always played the charector not the class. There are a few times i planned multiclass, like my elven ranger-rogue, but his background was parents both had been adventuring heros, one ranger, one rogue, and he sort of picked up on their tricks and when they disapeared went searching for them. I have had a fighter turned paladin because of a come to the light and god moment in a module that seemed to just fit him.
Training actually worked out very well in our game.
It worked out perfectly in Forgotten Realms/ Ravenloft because there was a heroic figure nearly a days ride away in almost any direction. and it gave purpose to having such heroic figures, who were always some sort of quest giver/ trainer/ lore dump.
to find them it was a simple skill check.
diplomacy, bluff, gather information, knowledge local, knowledge history, knowledge politics, or knowledge war w/ variants.
You then found an impressive hero you may have read about in the novels and you paid the time and gp cost as appropriate. If the adventure was an impending threat or time sensitive event, we simply gave the feats and skills as appropriate, then had the person then go to the proper trainer after the adventure was complete.
In 3.0/ 3.5 we used the training cost and time in the dmg, but with a twist. we had the option to relearn feats and skills as well, so it allowed an adventurer to take the best feats/ skills for survival at low levels, retrain to something better at mid levels, then take the best skills/ feats at high levels.
Also of note, we did use craft/ profession/ leadership heavily in our games. we were all shocked when we logged into the forums and saw several feats and skills considered as broken/ unplayable.
our games basically went the route of adventure which could take several days to a month to complete, then nearly a years worth of down time in game. (poor half orcs)
(wrath of arshardalaon would take neary 8-12 years to complete in game time and about 2 months in real time)
We also had skill challenges that would gain them roleplaying experience. but thats kind of off topic lol.