PFS Character Retraining rules, a bit over the top?


Pathfinder Society

51 to 70 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

Regarding the "kindness" of allowing players that purchase a $40 dollar book to use content from it in a game organized by the manufacturers of that book, I'm not really sure I follow. Especially when very little else from that book is legal for PFS play.

Seems like lowering the PP cost of retraining would encourage players to purchase the Ultimate Campaign book, if they haven't already, so I'm kinda surprised the PP cost is as high as it is.

Regarding balance, Unless the player has played a scenario before, there really shouldn't be any way to tailor a character to an encounter. And since PFS is very restrictive regarding allowing players replay scenario, it doesn't really seem like there is any risk regarding characters tailored for each session.

And regarding gold costs of retraining, while the initial costs are low, I think with constant retraining, the minor gold costs will eventually bankrupt any character. Aside from the HP one, I think the gold costs alone would prevent players from heavy use of the retraining system.

And, as currently written, they can only retrain at the start of the session and only if the GM deems themselves to have enough time to spare on auditing and initialling the retraining of a character. So even if you intend to retrain every session, the GM can just say 'no' within the current system.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

I think $10 for the PDF is just fine if all they want is the retraining rules for PFS.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I think $10 for the PDF is just fine if all they want is the retraining rules for PFS.

wasn't it in the humble bundle too?

Shadow Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't know, couldn't download it.

Scarab Sages

Besides, I think most people would say a single trait is worth the price of the book/pdf. At least until the reprint errata kills fates favored.

3/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Besides, I think most people would say a single trait is worth the price of the book/pdf. At least until the reprint errata kills fates favored.

UC still has a ton of great traits that don't come up all that often. Honestly, I've gotten way more use out of Pragmatic Activator and Bruising Intellect. Then again, I don't play a Warpriest...

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

at lv3 retraining a class level is 3*5*10, 150 gold. Seriously, the gold prices are super cheap.

even at lv10 10*5*10 = 500gp to retrain. when you're earning 6000gp a scenario, retraining for 500 is a steal.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Looking at it from a 'mechanical' perspective, that PP is the Society helping to *find* someone to retrain you properly, setting up the appointment, and your character spending time retraining.

Given that for 5 PP you can have a 'body retrieval', that's the sort of range most retraining would cost.

20PP for a new language hearkens back to the concept that even the best linguists take a while to pick up a new language. Perhaps there could be a discount for races that have Natural Linguist or something similar that can learn two languages when most other folks learn one? Or the character could learn two languages for that same expenditure?

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8 aka WalterGM

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:

Regarding the "kindness" of allowing players that purchase a $40 dollar book to use content from it in a game organized by the manufacturers of that book, I'm not really sure I follow. Especially when very little else from that book is legal for PFS play.

You're right. Very little of that book is legal in PFS. But a lot of it is legal in multiple Paizo published adventure paths and however many home games GMs think it fits into. I'd even wager that Ultimate Campaign is probably being used by people that don't play Pathfinder, who use it as a guideline for campaign construction or to help with character backgrounds.

I don't think usefulness of a book in PFS should be the sole driving factor for content in the material Paizo publishes, since PFS represents a weird unique group of Pathfinder participants. If it were, we wouldn't have things like Mythic Adventures, any of the unsanctioned APs, or the latest AP where you can play as evil PCs, to name a few.

It wasn't a gotcha gimmick, or anything done to spite PFS players that more of UC wasn't made legal in PFS. The fact is, had more of the content been appropriate for PFS, more of it would have been made legal. Simple as that.

No one is required to get Ultimate Campaign. No one is required to retrain. But if you want to retrain your PFS character using these rules, you need to have the resource those rules come from. Just like the Guide to PFS states. Heck, before that book came out retraining wasn't even an option and we all did fine.

*shrugs*

Thems the rules we agreed to when we decided to participate in PFS. And it's unfair to others who do follow the rules not to follow those rules or to expect special treatment.

5/5

Murdock Mudeater wrote:


While I understand the point of the retraining rules are to limit players that swap character rules often, the PP costs seem like overkill, as the player is left with a considerably poorer and lower PP than their fellows. This, in turn, results in an unbalanced character when compared to other characters with the normal levels of PP and gold gains.

As this thread has probably shown, retraining rules are not used to make an unviable character viable. If your character is unviable, your best bet is either to get your hands on a free retrain boon (rare as hen's teeth), or hope that an errata comes along that allows you to retrain for free.

What people are using the retraining rules for is to either end up with a character that would have otherwise been impossible to make (for example, Pirate Rob's D-dooring Horizon Walker), or to allow a character to make a short-term decision without worrying about the longer-term consequences (Cleave being an obvious example).

Whether this was what was intended, I don't know. But your understanding - looking at it from the context of 'swapping a character' is not how it works.

5/5 Venture-Agent, Netherlands—Utrecht aka Quentin Coldwater

I think most are just fine and I understand it's to prevent changing your build completely between scenarios, but I think it's a bit too restrictive. I have a fifth-level character with an archetype that in retrospect wasn't that great, but he has so many class features I simply don't have the PP to spend. And I calculated, when I have enough to get rid of the class features I have right now, I'll have gained three levels and gained two more class features I need to retrain. And that's excluding possible loss of PP for buying stuff, losing out on success conditions, and so on.


I don't think the costs are too high for high level characters.

But, I do think the PP cost makes it impossible for low-level characters, even if they can afford the gold.

And, the people who build their characters badly are the ones most in need of retraining and also not likely to make it to high levels (whether through death or quitting in frustration).

So I think it would be nice if there were a reduced cost at lower levels.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

I do agree that 5PP for a single skill rank is too much. The typical character gets a feat every other level; in the same time, the typical character probably gets 8 or more skill ranks; at least four. So, retraning a feat for 5PP is a way better deal than retraining a skill rank for 5PP.

I'd put the cost of retraining a skill rank at 1PP or 2PP.

That being said, it makes sense in-world that you can't retrain a skill rank in a day or two. The "1PP per day of retraining" cost is a simple rule that covers most things. It'd be nice to have a PP exception for skill ranks, though. A boon for those bards who want to retrain several skill ranks after getting Versatile Performance.

(OK, who wants to argue that Bards are seriously overpowered?)


rknop wrote:

I do agree that 5PP for a single skill rank is too much. The typical character gets a feat every other level; in the same time, the typical character probably gets 8 or more skill ranks; at least four. So, retraning a feat for 5PP is a way better deal than retraining a skill rank for 5PP.

I'd put the cost of retraining a skill rank at 1PP or 2PP.

That being said, it makes sense in-world that you can't retrain a skill rank in a day or two. The "1PP per day of retraining" cost is a simple rule that covers most things. It'd be nice to have a PP exception for skill ranks, though. A boon for those bards who want to retrain several skill ranks after getting Versatile Performance.

(OK, who wants to argue that Bards are seriously overpowered?)

Actually I think they are one of the most powerful classes, particularly in PFS 1-11 scope

Grand Lodge 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
HP: 3pp (and unclear if legal in PFS) Seems right.

Here's the Michael Brock post saying you can do it.

5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere aka Rei

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
I think $10 for the PDF is just fine if all they want is the retraining rules for PFS.
wasn't it in the humble bundle too?

*checks own downloads* Huh. Yes.

Silver Crusade

Rosc wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Besides, I think most people would say a single trait is worth the price of the book/pdf. At least until the reprint errata kills fates favored.
UC still has a ton of great traits that don't come up all that often. Honestly, I've gotten way more use out of Pragmatic Activator and Bruising Intellect. Then again, I don't play a Warpriest...

Yeah, I've got a warpriest and inquisitor, and I considered taking Fate's Favored for both, but in both cases, there were more important traits to take. But for my witch, Pragmatic Activator was my first choice of trait.

Also, for that witch, I decided I like the idea of taking the Ward hex at level 1, even though it becomes useless at higher levels, since it doesn't stack with rings of protection and cloaks of resistance. So I'll take Ward at level 1 and probably retrain it at level 5, since there are a few hexes that hit their stride at 5 (Flight, Tongues, Healing), and the 5 prestige cost seems reasonable for something like that.

So I finally bought the pdf of Ultimate Campaign for $10 just for that witch.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

Have retrained a feat to qualify for a prestige class after bad build planning. And after getting a discounted retraining boon I did an intentional retrain to get greater grapple at lvl 8 instead of 9, and to trade out an animal companion for a druid domain. On my cleric I've decided not to retrain bad feats and instead spent the PP on consumables.

So yes, class features and feats feel right cost wise. Skill points remain prohibitive. I never even considered retraining hp.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Oh, forgot that I trained out to get technologist on Shankar. Haven't used any of the books yet though that impact it.

Shadow Lodge 3/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Skill Ranks: 5pp : Way too high.

Racial trait: 20pp: way too high . Should be more in line with a feat.
Feat: 5pp Just right
Class level: 5-7pp Just right
Class feature: 5pp: Just right
Archetype class feature: 5pp The archetype is far too expensive to retrain> It needs to cap out at 3 pp per level or something
Ability Score Increase: 5pp seems right
Spells Known (spontaneous caster): 2pp seems right
HP: 3pp (and unclear if legal in PFS) Seems right.

Hahaha, holy crap yeah the Racial Trait retrain cost is insanely expensive. I understand where they are coming from with that cost, but it's so exorbitantly high that it's painful to even consider it. lol

51 to 70 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / PFS Character Retraining rules, a bit over the top? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.