People with unique and original builds are the kind that don't need trainers. The creatives that others copy through the ages!
People with plageristic board builds are the ones that lack the creative spark and do need trainers. They lack inventive capacity.
Apply to story to increase rp and balance!
I really do not think you could stormwind harder if you tried. I want to applaud your efforts on the behalf of the stormwind fallacy.
I love your 'badwrongfun'.
|
As far as the apprenticeship goes, this is Exactly how I explain games in which the PCs start at higher levels. The Wizard was a student under a greater master who went into the field one day and never returned. The fighter was a soldier in the defense of a larger city and was constantly taught by his squad captain until he earned his own rank, etc.I hope signing up for your explanations is optional, I myself have always preferred to build backstories of high level characters who got there by doing and living the life while risking it out on the Adventure train.
It was beyond a certain level, but to put this in perspective MY idea of starting at higher level is between level 3 and 4 :). And as I said in another post, most of my home games centered around a single city or countryside until level 7 or 10. The last "homebrew game" I played was actually set in Falcon's Hollow (via some modules I read and got inspired by). The party never even left the town's immediate area. They got to around level 7 and retired wealthy, local heroes.
The thing I hate about this, besides pinning down the players, is that it mandates a high level world. I like the idea of a world where virtually all the NPCs are level 2 or under, with the rare exceptions in the 3-4 range. Everything beyond that is for the PC's to learn and discover on their own.
Sure there are higher level people 'out there' but trying to find them would be an entire adventure unto itself... for each PC...and by the time you hit level 9 or so you've pretty much completely tapped out anybody who can be found without pissing them off.
Agreed.
While I never subscribed to it... a lot of the forgotten realms complaints was that the Npcs are too powerful and the pcs weren't really needed.
This kind of mentality only guarantees that everywhere you go, whateever mission you're on... there is SOMEONE else in town who can do everything you can... only better.
I found it easy to say 'Elminster is dealing with his own stuff on another plane right now... this is on you!' However if there is another wizard that you are learning from... how do you justify him NOT wanting to protect the village from the dragon?
Very easily. the same way there's awesome tournament long distance shooters out there who are not serving as snipers in Afghanistan. It takes a special type of someone to go out and face the rampaging dragon. That wizard would likely prefer to just stay home and make magic items, not throw himself in front of several tons of reptile and get fried.
Also, keep in mind that 1E had the 'train yourself' thing automatically kicked in after name level. The training thing was basically at low level.
And the reason you hire someone to train you is that it is tons faster then figuring things out on your own. It's called passing down knowledge to the next generation. Training is realistic and useful. It's the whole 'leveling up' without training which is very, very unusual.
Just look at our modern militaries. They are training ALL THE TIME. Who are a lot of the trainers? Civilians.
===Aelryinth
People with unique and original builds are the kind that don't need trainers. The creatives that others copy through the ages!
People with plageristic board builds are the ones that lack the creative spark and do need trainers. They lack inventive capacity.
Apply to story to increase rp and balance!
I really do not think you could stormwind harder if you tried. I want to applaud your efforts on the behalf of the stormwind fallacy.
I love your 'badwrongfun'.
Not Stormwind at all. Nor is he calling badwrongfun.
People with unique and original builds are the kind that don't need trainers. The creatives that others copy through the ages!
People with plageristic board builds are the ones that lack the creative spark and do need trainers. They lack inventive capacity.
Apply to story to increase rp and balance!
I really do not think you could stormwind harder if you tried. I want to applaud your efforts on the behalf of the stormwind fallacy.
I love your 'badwrongfun'.
I suggest you check your sources on that fallacy.
Nothing to do with said fallacy. I'm not even mentioning optimization ABOVE.
Some copies of board build I have seen played suck as the theory doesn't translate well or the player just - don't get the build - and so play it against its strengths. Some of the original unique builds I have seen ARE the most powerful.Creative people create, copiers copy is all. Creative people chafe at the very thought of copying (and even basic schooling) and more so the more creative they are (just look at history).
This often translates to better builds AND better role playing - which is basically stating the opposite of said fallacy.By definition creative people are more creative in the game world. This can translate to RP as they can think on their feet and adapt insitu as opposed to needing to look up manuals - build ones or monster stat manuals etc to cope/come up with solutions.
Copiers copy someone elses optimized build and play drizzt clones (or a current incarnation of book/comic/movie fandom plagiarism).
Nothing wrong with it just saying such players are likely the ones whose characters would need training (as being trained is already in the build as they were trained to make it), as opposed to those that forge 'their own path' who basically cannot be trained by someone else (again by definition).
You are right, it's not an exact match on the fallacy. Instead your version is, "If it came from somewhere else you need training in game because you did something out of game."
AND then added to it with "People with an 'original' build are automatically going to be creative (not a given) and better at role playing."
Finally following it up with, "People that do copy aren't going to be good role players and therefore should have an in game mechanic to make up for their out of game actions."
So yeah I'm going to set with even if not directly the 'optimized vs role player' you still actually hit the fallacy.
The reason being is that you have taken two things and falsely connected them. That being the source of the character's inspiration and the player's ability to role play.
And then in true fashion of those that hit on this you then use an in game thing to hit on something out of game and insist you are 'helping' the person involved.
IN FACT your confusion of out of game and in game situations (that being the 'build' needing help in character for some reason because 'one will automatically be regular in the campaign and the other automatically isn't') is even worse in my opinion.
|
There's only been one time where I've ever wanted to see this happen (and ironically, our GM didn't do it) - it's when we played Star Wars d20 and hit level 7 with our jedi characters to reach Jedi Knight status.
I thought there'd be some funky process we'd go through with a Jedi Master; something like that would've been cool (assuming we'd still gain exp while doing it, of course).
But that would be once in the character's career, not once every level.
|
| 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 bestWould 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
Whoa. Based on the responses, people want different things from Pathfinder/D&D in how they responded. This all largely depends on what you want to do with your Chronicle (i.e. Campaign) and what players are seeking. The Extra Credits videos break down video and computer games down into specific experiences on what they deliver. A roleplaying game is different. Although mechanically, the Roleplaying Game is skewed to deliver a certain experience, any roleplaying game can be used by the GM to deliver the experiences that players want from the game. first, lets Extra Credits define some terms of Game Experience.
Roleplaying Games all carry a fantasy aspect: the ability to play a character that is something other than yourself. However, Roleplaying Games also deliver different aesthetics instead of the Fantasy aspect -- and with certain GMs -- you can get more aesthetics than what came into the box.
ABNEGATION -- this is the first Aesthetic we are going to talk about, I'm also lumping Catharsis into abnegation, because the goal is the same for these two -- the player seeks a thrill or seeks to tune out. When players want to tune out and feel a thrill in their RPG, they aren't seeking a realistic experience. They want to hit things and feel good about it. They don't care about the underlying core mechanic. It's like roleplaying a first person shooter or roleplaying Breakout.
Games -- RPGs that deliver Abnegation includes, humorously enough, D&D 4th Edition!!! (I compare D&D 4th Edition to the 1st Person Shooter game like Call of Duty). D&D Basic, Street Fighter, and probably Mekton.
THE JOURNEY -- All RPGs that are level based gives us the Journey Aesthetic. Here, you're on a journey from the kid straight out of farmville to the -- hang on it's just a word -- the most bad @$$@4 warrior in all the Land! RPGs that stress the journey include D&D 2nd Edition, D&D 3rd Edition, and Pathfinder. You can put Rolemaster in there, although Rolemaster delivers a different Aesthetic.
EXPRESSION -- The Expression aesthetic allows us to express ourselves in some manner within the gameworld. It allows us to try and be something we are not and to express that. The game allows us to express something of ourselves through play. RPGs that stress expression as a core aesthetic include: Champions, Mutants and Masterminds, EXALTED, Werewolf: The Apocalypse, and RIFTS all deliver Expression as a core aesthetic. Although some do it better than others (show a Rifts player EXALTED, and he'll switch!).
REALISM -- Realism is an Aesthetic, but most games do not deliver this as a core aesthetic. Realism brings to the table bloodletting combat and realistic drama play. Realism appeals to a certain kind of gamer, and this gamer is often forced to play or GM that they consider to be boring games for what they want to experience (I'm a realist by the way). Games that deliver Realism as a core aesthetic include Runequest, Rolemaster, HARNMASTER, and GURPS.
SENSATION -- This is currently what I'm trying to deliver in my games using Pathfinder. Sensation delivers sight and sound, and gives the players a certain fulfilled experience. I've been using sound and sight in my games to help immerse my players into the game world. Movie clips, sound bytes, of these are my tools. There are very few pen and paper RPGs that deliver sensation, so this is an aesthetic that the GM tries to deliver by himself. Computer RPGs do a better job of delivering sensation, but the best RPGs that deliver sensation is probably reserved for your bedroom. With your spouse or life partner. Seriously.
Probably the last Core Mechanic is DISCOVERY -- and this is all up to the GM, even though E. Gary Gygax tried to design an RPG that is all about discovery as it's core aesthetic. Discovery is discovering new places in the Game World. This is best expressed through the published game worlds of TSR -- BIRTHRIGHT, FORGOTTEN REALMS (2nd Edition, please!); DRAGONLANCE, DARK SUN, and GOLARION all stress discovery as their core aesthetic. Also, the original Blue Planet RPG delivers this as well.
NARRATION -- Finally, the last Core aesthetic of an RPG is Narration. White Wolf would love to say their games are based on the Narrative. However, the System comes straight into it's own with EXALTED as an expressive system. Narration as a core aesthetic stresses the story over the journey or other aesthetics of the pen and paper RPG. The character creation mechanic and game mechanics depend greatly on Narration to deliver. These are games like Lost Unicorn Games' STAR TREK RPGs, the Lord of the Rings RPG (CODA system), Chaosium's CALL OF CTHUTHLU (Yes, I'm spelling it wrong! give me a break!), And Pendragon are all based on the Narrative.
So, why did I bring this up? Well, before you implement Trainer Rules, ask your players why they play the game. IF it's just for Cartharsis and Abnegation, it's best not to use them since they aren't looking for realism for drama between adventures. They want to tune out and hit something to get rid of their stress.
If they are looking for narrative or for realism, they might welcome such rules. Training rules in Pathfinder should always be optional because Pathfinder's core aesthetic is the journey, but the game also delivers abnegation. Write the rules, and check with your players if they want to try it. If they say "these rules suck," they are trying to get something out of Pathfinder you aren't delivering.
I would center my campaign around it or not touch that with a ten foot pole.
Let's say... level 1 they have an Harry Potter style adventure in the academy where they root out spies or something. Level 2, one year later they get in a field mission with a master. The master get into a fight with another master, while they fight, the PCs fight the underlings/protect a vital target. Level 3 another year later they have their final exam where they have to fight teams from other schools. After graduation (level 4) they get a mission to bring back a legendary teacher, he tells them they have learned more reaching him than he could ever hope to teach them. Level 7 when they get back to the academy they are now the teachers, rubbing shoulders with those NPCs that were once their masters. After that you can contninue making them rise through the ranks until they get to rule the academy.
Add in lots of downtime so they get to train early and teach later.
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 bestWould 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
Whoa. Based on the responses, people want different things from Pathfinder/D&D in how they responded. This all largely depends on what you want to do with your Chronicle (i.e. Campaign) and what players are seeking. The Extra Credits videos break down video and computer games down into specific experiences on what they deliver. A roleplaying game is different. Although mechanically, the Roleplaying Game is skewed to deliver a certain experience, any roleplaying game can be used by the GM to deliver the experiences that players want from the game. first, lets Extra Credits define some terms of Game Experience.
Roleplaying Games all carry a fantasy aspect: the ability to play a character that is something other than yourself. However, Roleplaying Games also deliver different aesthetics instead of the Fantasy aspect -- and with certain GMs -- you can get more aesthetics than what came into the box.
ABNEGATION -- this is the first Aesthetic we are going to talk about, I'm also lumping Catharsis into abnegation, because the goal is the same for these two -- the player seeks...
I think this is an interesting concept, but I think it's not necessarily as useful to look at for Tabletop RPGs, since the GM can do a lot to change the aesthetic of a game. The mechanics do matter, since games like BECMI are never going to be "Expression" games, no matter how hard the DM tries, but, for example, 4e, if the DM tries hard enough can easily become "Journey" or "Sensation" or even "Narration" if the DM stresses a different style.
So I think it's useful to separate these aesthetics between what the mechanics provides (like, for example expression is largely dependent on the mechanics of the system) and what the DM provides (like sensation is really DM dependent, mostly).
requiring a trainer to level up hurts the possibility of ascending past 1st level, because the first NPCs, would have nobody to train them.
Don't you know Umbri? In a campaign that requires training to level up, there were mysterious legendary heroes of the past who didn't need training, but the PC's aren't special enough to qualify.
of course, it still breaks my immersion. there are many ways a character can learn on their own through experimentation. many fictional heroes have either very little basic training, very hurried training, or simply train themselves.
Eragon might have had basic explanation of a key tool, such as being told "Brisingir is the true name for fire" but he often taught himself how to use the tools by experimenting on the field, despite having very little formal training, because he was literally the only dragon rider in existence
as a Freeform RP Example, Ilina Aniri. she was a third generation Beaker Born nymph, her daughters being 4th Gen and her mother Being 2nd Gen. she had arcane Talent, but no real tutor and well, she taught herself alchemy by experimenting with what started as mixing drinks and later became proper alchemy.
in fact, being born in a beaker gave her a reason to dabble in alchemy, she wanted to be a mother, but couldn't yet neither bear a child naturally nor support any children she created. she developed her arcane talents on her own, realizing she had an affinity for the 6 elements and unlike most of her kind, was truly elementally neutral. she caused some minor damages, and to her, magic and science, were two halves of the same coin.
Ilina got accepted into an Adventuring Party involving a goddess whom would later reveal herself to be her aunt, and didn't really so much tutor her, as much as explain basic uses for elemental tools
the basic uses, lead to Ilina constantly experimenting with the rules of her elements, and eventually learning, she shared Conflitta's ability to Gestalt 2 or more elements into a seamless mixture. and from adventuring with Auntie Conflitta and Watching her, she learned the Art of Elemental Junctioning, where she could make herself Stronger by Junctioning captured Elementals to herself, and the art of Dual Wielding.
Ilina had to do the physical part herself, and Auntie Conflitta would always be too forgetful to give her anything beyond the basic tips. she had to learn the complex applications herself.
Ilina instead of Striking with her offhand weapon, preferred to parry with a knife and Riposte with a Junctioned mainhand strike. channeling, fusions of any 2 or more from fire, water, earth, air, light or darkness.
i guess you can consider her a magus whom uses her offhand not to attack, but to protect herself akin to a shield and runs around in next to no armor. relying on elemental junctions to protect herself as she deflects.
she was 95 percent self taught and like 5 percent tips and recommendations.
Don't you know Umbri? In a campaign that requires training to level up, there were mysterious legendary heroes of the past who didn't need training, but the PC's aren't special enough to qualify.Or you could make a simple rule that it takes a lot longer without a trainer, since you're going by trial and error. Then poof, the NPCs can have leveled up, taking years to do so if necessary.
i'd rather trust a guy whom learned from trial and error over a guy whom learned from a book in a class room.
trial and error doesn't take any longer than finding a trainer, and in fact, trial and error, is a better way to learn, than being shown how to do something, then reading a book.
in fact, tips to explain the tools are fine, as long as the character actually teaches themselves how best to apply them for themselves.
in fact, the issue with the regurgitation of information, that requires finding a trainer, is that what may be compatible with a trainer, is incompatible with the character being taught, different people have different learning styles, and require different tools, and well, the tools the teacher would use, are the tools the teacher learned from, not the tools best suited to the apprentice.
How I'd Handle "Training"
When visiting trainers, I'd allow characters to re-build their characters (as per the re-training rules).
I'd also allow individual trainers to grant boons based on their particular skill set or fighting style. For example, a PC might seek out a fighter known for his or her dual-wielding expertise. After training with this NPC for "X" number of days, the PC is granted a boon that makes them a more competent dual-wielder (something like, "reduce the attack penalty suffered by your secondary attack by 2 when wielding a light weapon in your off-hand; thus, your two-weapon fighting penalties would be -2/-0 when wielding a light weapon in your offhand.")
Trial and error doesn't take any longer then finding a trainer?
What planet did you grow up on?
Our entire SOCIETY is based on the fact that knowledge has been passed down from teacher to student generation after generation. That's what all those books ARE.
There is NO skill you can think of that can't be learned faster and more surely with the help of a trainer. They've already found out what works and what doesn't. They can guide you past all the stupid ideas, dead ends, and get you focused on what works.
You think it'd be easier to learn fencing by yourself instead of with a master?
Kung fu?
Blacksmithing?
Algebra?
Horseback riding?
leatherworking?
Without looking at anything, go out and put together a table. No, you don't get to ask anyone what kind of wood, tools, oils or anything, or look at any plans. Because, you know, that would be book learning, or using a teacher.
I'll go find myself a carpenter like, oh, my dad, who can show me what to do, what tools to buy or borrow, what kind of problems I'm going to run into, etc etc.
And I bet not only will I make a much better table then you, I'll get it right the first time, and get it done in much, much less time then you.
And I'll be black belt proficient in Tae Kwon Do long before you will, too.
The reason NPC's can teach you is because teachers taught them, and over the course of thousands of years that knowledge has been distilled into all the feats and maneuvers and other stuff in the game. Just like nobody stumbles on fine gunpowder overnight, everything we learn has been refined in the passing of it from generation to generation.
They ALSO attended the school of hard knocks, and learned what does NOT work. The reason you are going to them is to learn what NOT to do, before you do it. Which saves tons of time. It's the little bits of lore that add up and make instructors extremely valuable.
Trial and error is better then a teacher...yeah, right. And while everyone can have different learning styles, the core knowledge is going to remain unchanged. What you call 'teaching yourself' is more widely known as 'discipline'. Sure, you have to do it yourself to truly learn it.
But doing it from 'nothing'? Right...not.
===Aelryinth
i'm not saying you can learn without the requisite tools of what you are studying, but what i am saying, is you don't require a more experienced sentient being telling you what to do beyond the essentials.
the essentials could also be picked up from a book or common sense. it should be common sense, that a sword hurts more when swung in both hands, nearly intuitive, and well, it would make sense, that once you have learned to throw a fireball, that you have over the course of the next level, learned how to reverse that fireball into a frostball or reverse that haste into a slow
and some ideas, are just plainly so dumb that nobody with a decent functioning brain would waste time upon them unless they were extremely overconfident in their chance of success, like wielding double edged sword chucks without a handle (even a 1 int fighter wouldn't do that), trying to wade through lava for more than a round or grappling a dragon
you don't need to go to a dojo to learn how to fight, you can teach yourself how to fight just as well from a variety of sources, from getting in a lot of brawls during your youth, to watching fighting videos on a screen and emulating their lessons
what i am saying, is once you have the basics, whether from tips or books, you can teach yourself just fine with no significant difference.
a lot of what does NOT work, is so blatantly obvious it shouldn't need a recommendation against it.
I completely understand not wanting to implement training rules, however, the "who trained the first hero" argument is a little unrealisitic. There are litterally countless examples in real life of the "first person to figure out X" followed by everyone learning from the people who came before them and improving the process if they can. A few of the top of my head:
.
1. Making Fire.
2. Making Tools.
3. Agriculture and animal husbandry.
4. Building a civilization.
5. Written Language.
6. Building Guns.
7. Building Bombs.
8. Math in general.
9. How to make a Flying Machine.
10. Land Navigation.
11. Star Navigation.
12. Harnassing Electricity.
13. The Telephone.
14. The Internet.
15. Table Top RPGs.
There's a very simple solution to this. Plan it around the downtime. The fighter in the group visits the swordmaster during downtime in the campaign, the wizard visits the mage's guild etc. It's an ongoing process, but doesn't need to be an obstacle.
Think of any pursuit, fencing, any sport, even the best continually seek sources of improvement, which is one of the reasons that they are the best. The PCs are no different, but they shouldn't have to take time out in game to go train, nor should it be required. Make it a backstory item for how the fighter learned a new weapon feat. Through their constant desire to improve and continuing study during downtime, they were able to learn the new feat. If that means that they do it while in "the field" it simply means it was something the master was teaching that finally clicked. Training is never a system where you suddenly desire to learn something and go learn it. You have an idea, or an instructor does, and you're taught the basics of it, or you've seen it somewhere and research it, and implement it. Make training a background item, rather than an in game requirement. Unless going to a trainer pushes the story further, it's an unnecessary time sink.
"Standing on the shoulders of Giant", you need the giant for all that they have done before you. He might be in the form of all those magic spells you found in your adventures or by apprenticing from a strong veteran fighter, but at some point the characters should do some standing of their own
I think we lose some of that when we use trainers to advance in levels. At some point your players should push beyond what their peers have done.
And I find it funny that you should be 'easily able how to work out how to reverse a fireball into a frost ball, or haste into slow', for a spell that you can probably cast 2-3 times a day, if you are a wizard.
Yeah, lot's of practice you get with that. And the first time you goof up, you get a wild magic surge centered on yourself, complete with explosive gore and dead wizard spread everywhere. There are DRAWBACKS to experimentation. Pure Spell Research is not cheap! And that's if you already have access to a library. From scratch, with no books? They don't even really have rules for it!
A sorcerer? He doesn't even have to know how or why something is happening, he just willpowers it into existence. Likewise a priest, 'my god made it so.' Masters of magic design? I think not.
Yeah, MUCH easier to build on the shoulders of the giants who took the risks, found out what worked by not dying, and then brought it all together for you to use.
Yeah, you can get good at fighting by street fighting. You know who is also really good? Trained men with experience at fighting. You can take your self-taught street fighter and I'll put him up against military spec ops killers without much hesitation. Or unlimited Combat guys ...none of them are self-taught, either. They've drawn on the wisdom and skills of generations of men who learned how to kill and passed on what they know.
==Aelryinth
"Standing on the shoulders of Giant", you need the giant for all that they have done before you. He might be in the form of all those magic spells you found in your adventures or by apprenticing from a strong veteran fighter, but at some point the characters should do some standing of their own
I think we lose some of that when we use trainers to advance in levels. At some point your players should push beyond what their peers have done.
And that's going to be a problem, because it would be assuming that no one else in the campaign ever got to high levels.
Note that even 1 and 2E assumed that after you reached name level that you trained yourself.
==Aelryinth
Yeah, MUCH easier to build on the shoulders of the giants who took the risks, found out what worked by not dying, and then brought it all together for you to use.
Ummm... why are the trainers allowed to have 'found out what worked by not dying...' but the Player character heroes aren't?
Levels 1-15 are basically 'trying stuff out without dying'... Then after retirement THEY could be the trainers, but to say it's impossible to learn without a trainer.... then say that the trainers did just that seems off somehow.
Aelryinth is driving at process of elimination. He's saying those who got lucky out of large numbers of experimentors survived to pass on what they learned.
I can't say I'm a fan of that philosophy for pretty much any class except Wizard (and even then that's just the default fluff, its not like there aren't alternatives), but there it is.
Sure, I can buy into that... I'm just saying that having fought 4 bandit groups, a dozen goblins and three ogres put you INTO that club of surviving Experimentors. All those nat 20's were awesome moves you tried that succeeded, and the nat ones are the tricks that failed...
And poor poor Bob, may he rest in peace, will not be in the club of 'future trainers...' I however have passed through the fire.
Multiclassing, and level dipping, I can see the need for backstory fluff there. I mean, it's not RAW and this game falls apart with TOO much examination...
but 'got better with sword I used to KILL the dragon,' is better then 'guy told me how to kill a dragon'...
One way of handling the Training side of things is to tie it more closely into the RP side of things. Just little details are enough like The
You ask your players "what are you doing to improve yourself?"
The guy who says I gamble all day and wench all night you tell him; you can only gain a level in an Intuitive class.
The guy who says I practice each morning while the Wizard reads his books; You can advance in Self-taught classes
The guy who buys books, talks to experts, attends school, apprentices with his master, writes a thesis on a topic, takes on an apprentice (teaching is a form of learning). He gets to advance in a trained class
It's not about forcing the characters into downtime, it's about making them aware that their characters are doing things every day to improve their skills, so that when they have enough XP to gain a level, they have already done the things needed to justify advancing.
And that's going to be a problem, because it would be assuming that no one else in the campaign ever got to high levels.
What I was trying to say is that being trained at everything you do by people that are better than you takes away a bit of what those characters accomplish. Yes training is important but you should figure where formal training end in your setting.
There are other way that knowledge is shared and spread, you can use those too. Books, journals, conferences and many other. requiring aprenticeships to learn things even when you should be considered a master or one of the movers of the world strains credibility as much as a character figuring everything by himself.
And I find it funny that you should be 'easily able how to work out how to reverse a fireball into a frost ball, or haste into slow', for a spell that you can probably cast 2-3 times a day, if you are a wizard.
Yeah, lot's of practice you get with that. And the first time you goof up, you get a wild magic surge centered on yourself, complete with explosive gore and dead wizard spread everywhere. There are DRAWBACKS to experimentation. Pure Spell Research is not cheap! And that's if you already have access to a library. From scratch, with no books? They don't even really have rules for it!
A sorcerer? He doesn't even have to know how or why something is happening, he just willpowers it into existence. Likewise a priest, 'my god made it so.' Masters of magic design? I think not.
Yeah, MUCH easier to build on the shoulders of the giants who took the risks, found out what worked by not dying, and then brought it all together for you to use.
Yeah, you can get good at fighting by street fighting. You know who is also really good? Trained men with experience at fighting. You can take your self-taught street fighter and I'll put him up against military spec ops killers without much hesitation. Or unlimited Combat guys ...none of them are self-taught, either. They've drawn on the wisdom and skills of generations of men who learned how to kill and passed on what they know.
==Aelryinth
i have no more to say
but training rules shouldn't really exist. it should really be fluff. i understand you need a foundation to build upon. but that foundation could be picked up from a book, a blueprint or a series of tips picked up from professionals.
the reason a self taught street fighter would lose to Military Spec OPs killers. is not because the Spec OPs are higher level and leveled faster, but because the Spec OPs are highly specialized in one specific role, and because the Spec OPs have access to better gear
it's pretty clear that the weapons of the street brawler, are no match for the guy with assault rifles and other advanced weapons. the military guys may be better with their martial weapons and more specialized stats.
but the Street Brawler has the advantage in self taught versatility derived from independence. they had no crutch to count upon, walked on their own feet, and well, the soldiers are pretty much dependant on their advantages in Numbers, Gear, and Specialization
it's the same as pitting a 3rd level ranger whom focused their training on one or two effective combat styles versus the self taught 3rd level monk whom fought opponents whom utilized a variety of styles and had to learn to counter each on the spot.
the military is very categorized, most snipers, are snipers for the entirety of their career and even the elites, are highly specialized in one or two roles, and in rare cases, a third that may be compatible with the other 2.
You're moving the bar. I'm talking about guys getting into a fight on equal terms, not who has the better toys.
The spec ops guys will win because they have combat experience AND great trainers. (And if we're talking improvised weapons, sorry, these guys are trained to kill with butter knives if need be.) The street fighter is going to be worse in ALL categories to these guys.
The UMA guy will win because he has awesome trainers and regularly fights. I'm sure they'll absolutely suck with weapons, too (not).
The Street fighter regularly fights. See the difference?
==========================
I'm thinking that the PC who fought 3 bandit groups and two monsters and brawled a bit has learned not to lead with his chin, roll with a hit, and his nat 20 is a single fake-out move he manages to execute just right.
One fighter can find martial immortality by inventing just ONE new move to add to the Martial lexicon. Bruce Lee, Way of the Flying Fist, his approach to kung fu revolutionized the art. Dempsey Rolls are a cornerstone of modern boxing. The Gracie family in Brazil turned Unlimited Martial Arts on its ear by small men beating bigger men and showing how important grappling was to real martial arts. Master Ueshiba invented a martial art with no offensive moves, called Aikodo, and it's considered one of the most lethal in history.
These are not things you just stumble into...all of these men built on what they had been taught by their own masters and made something new out of it, they didn't just 'jump into existence'.
An experience level might mean you pick up ONE trick on your own...but you've seen more of them used against you. But if you have a teacher, you can see the tricks all those other people who leveled up ALSO saw. Thinking you can rival the experience of all of the hundreds or thousands of skilled fighters before you is dumb. Draw on their knowledge. You don't learn it all like osmosis.
==Aelryinth
but learning on the field, is just as valid as sitting at a dojo and sparring a master. in fact, i would consider learning in the face of danger, the encourage more of a need to perfect what you can, then swinging a shinai against an armored straw dummy.
but i guess there is an advantage to building upon the network of trainers, but requiring PCs to spend time training between levels. requires a drastic change to how every adventure is written and paced.
This seems to largely be a tone thing. I like games where the characters get all their 'foundation skills' taught upon taking their first level (naturally if multi-classing out into something dramatically different the new foundations will need to be built as part of obtaining that new first level) in their base class, and everything from that point forwards is personal growth.
i prefer that concept too.
I've DMed the same group for over ten years now. I've approached the game from many different viewpoints and angles. The training stuff is better left in the background and only comes forward as a story event. ex) Your mentor is kidnapped by flesh eating man/bear/pig. Corpses of men, bears, and pigs that followed man/bear/pig are stacked like chord wood but use was unable to resist man/bear/pig.
Ah, but the other side of the coin is that the right to learn higher level techniques and skills is one of the reasons that you level in the first place!
Yes, at some point you're going to surpass your master, "I have nothing else to teach you, you must find Master Po in Shen Zho to advance your knowledge further."
The problem here is that there are no 'special skills' in PF. Anyone can learn any feat, you don't need a trainer. Likewise to level up. It streamlines play, and if that's what you want, more power to you. It does take away from immersion, however.'
And if the DM abuses the power, it can bring everything to a screeching halt, naturally.
==Aelryinth
I would argue that there is also immersion to be had in these heroes are growing on their own, from their own experiences in the field of battle. It's immersion in a different mindset.Speaking personally I find the idea that anybody over level 1 requires 'further training' in order to value from their EXPeriences to be the immersion breaker.
I found a lot of immerssion breaking when we hit 3.5/pathfinder... in 2E You had to be proficent with every weapon you wanted to use...
Now, you get them in giant clumps. My level one archer is apparently proficent in great axes and polearms and multple types of swords... Why?? /shrug
My backstories rarely encompass WHY a character knows EVERY type of martial weapons and armor and shields...
I agree that most of the truly intense training didn't happen from level 1 to level 2.... it happened from level 0 commoner to 'PC class 1'
I haven't read three pages of this. I got halfway down page 1, saw that it kept going, and decided I just couldn't do it.
But, what if you had to train, but you could also train to a lesser extent just by yourself, while camping and on the road? But, in various towns, there are trainers and masters of different styles, and different kinds of specialists who can turn you into a better whatever-you-are?
It could even lead to possible quests if the DM wanted. It would rule.
How is "training on the road" different from the current baseline assumption that some of every day's downtime is spent practicing?
Right. Remember, only about maybe a hour is spent adventuring. You have another 8 sleeping and that leaves a least a dozen hours to ‘train”. Saying that “well, you have to tell me how you’re training during each day’ is like saying “Oh, your PC has died of starvation.” “Umm, why? we have plenty of food, don’t we?” “well yes, but you didn’t specify each day you were taking so many meals.“
Or worse “Your PC’s bowels exploded”. “HUH, was there a save, a spell, wtf???” “No, you never told me about rest stops during the day, spelling them out what you did, what you wiped with etc, thus you died.”
I had a DM that tried that once, So I said "My character breathes in, then out, then breathes in , then out, then breathes in , then out, then breathes in , then out...."
How is "training on the road" different from the current baseline assumption that some of every day's downtime is spent practicing?
Right. Remember, only about maybe a hour is spent adventuring. You have another 8 sleeping and that leaves a least a dozen hours to ‘train”. Saying that “well, you have to tell me how you’re training during each day’ is like saying “Oh, your PC has died of starvation.” “Umm, why? we have plenty of food, don’t we?” “well yes, but you didn’t specify each day you were taking so many meals.“
Or worse “Your PC’s bowels exploded”. “HUH, was there a save, a spell, wtf???” “No, you never told me about rest stops during the day, spelling them out what you did, what you wiped with etc, thus you died.”
I had a DM that tried that once, So I said "My character breathes in, then out, then breathes in , then out, then breathes in , then out, then breathes in , then out...."
Your character gets high from all the oxygen. Roll a will save.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IF you wanted to be serious about it, you'd divide what you get automatically by leveling and what you'd need training to improve.
For instance, for general characters, you don't get the bonus feat 1/2 levels without seeing a trainer.
You don't gain any additional class features or special powers.
Spellcasters wouldn't gain access to the next level of spells, but could improve their current ones as they wished. They shouldn't learn any new spells, either...if the fighters can't get feats, the casters shouldn't get spells.
Your BAB, Saves, and hit dice would all improve without a problem, as would caster level, pools of stuff you already can do (rage rounds, bardic music rounds, ki points, etc). So you'd be better, more experienced, and tougher...but you wouldn't have the KNOWLEDGE and extra tricks.
But all that would require work and realism. Not exactly great lures in a game.
===Aelryinth
IF you wanted to be serious about it, you'd divide what you get automatically by leveling and what you'd need training to improve.
For instance, for general characters, you don't get the bonus feat 1/2 levels without seeing a trainer.
You don't gain any additional class features or special powers.
Spellcasters wouldn't gain access to the next level of spells, but could improve their current ones as they wished. They shouldn't learn any new spells, either...if the fighters can't get feats, the casters shouldn't get spells.Your BAB, Saves, and hit dice would all improve without a problem, as would caster level, pools of stuff you already can do (rage rounds, bardic music rounds, ki points, etc). So you'd be better, more experienced, and tougher...but you wouldn't have the KNOWLEDGE and extra tricks.
But all that would require work and realism. Not exactly great lures in a game.
===Aelryinth
some things are best handwaved to retain the flow of the game, encumbrance and training, are 2 of them.
IF you wanted to be serious about it, you'd divide what you get automatically by leveling and what you'd need training to improve.
For instance, for general characters, you don't get the bonus feat 1/2 levels without seeing a trainer.
You don't gain any additional class features or special powers.
Spellcasters wouldn't gain access to the next level of spells, but could improve their current ones as they wished. They shouldn't learn any new spells, either...if the fighters can't get feats, the casters shouldn't get spells.Your BAB, Saves, and hit dice would all improve without a problem, as would caster level, pools of stuff you already can do (rage rounds, bardic music rounds, ki points, etc). So you'd be better, more experienced, and tougher...but you wouldn't have the KNOWLEDGE and extra tricks.
But all that would require work and realism. Not exactly great lures in a game.
===Aelryinth
See, I love, love, love this ideas, they're great.
Because, like, say you're a Rogue, and your party has been sleeping in a dungeon because it's gonna take a week to clear it out. Where in the hell did you learn how to shoot a firearm, or how to fly a dragon, or how to communicate with an underwater whatever? You'd get better at doing what you're doing right now, but you'd need to go elsewhere to learn the new stuff.
IF you wanted to be serious about it, you'd divide what you get automatically by leveling and what you'd need training to improve.
For instance, for general characters, you don't get the bonus feat 1/2 levels without seeing a trainer.
You don't gain any additional class features or special powers.
Spellcasters wouldn't gain access to the next level of spells, but could improve their current ones as they wished. They shouldn't learn any new spells, either...if the fighters can't get feats, the casters shouldn't get spells.Your BAB, Saves, and hit dice would all improve without a problem, as would caster level, pools of stuff you already can do (rage rounds, bardic music rounds, ki points, etc). So you'd be better, more experienced, and tougher...but you wouldn't have the KNOWLEDGE and extra tricks.
But all that would require work and realism. Not exactly great lures in a game.
===Aelryinth
See, I love, love, love this ideas, they're great.
Because, like, say you're a Rogue, and your party has been sleeping in a dungeon because it's gonna take a week to clear it out. Where in the hell did you learn how to shoot a firearm, or how to fly a dragon, or how to communicate with an underwater whatever? You'd get better at doing what you're doing right now, but you'd need to go elsewhere to learn the new stuff.
what about really passive and possibly intuitive feats, such as toughness? weapon finesse? dervish dance? open minded? power attack? pirahna strike? improved initiative? weapon focus in a weapon you used frequently in the dungeon? or iron will?