|
I am starting a new thread for the topic of prestige retraining fees, since it seems a bit off-topic for the OP's question and I am interested to hear what others think.
On the point of prestige cost [for retraining], I dislike the heavy prestige tax for retraining in Pathfinder Society. The sentence in the Guide on this point is nonsensical.
"...as well as 1 Prestige Point per day of retraining since time between adventures is undefined."The well-defined rebuild cost in Ultimate Campaign already includes a daily gold multiplier, and I'm not sure what difference it makes (or what the relevance is) if the time is undefined. For example, it shouldn't cost 5PP to move 1 skill rank in addition to all the gold. The same is true in your case. 10PP seems excessive in addition to the gold.
Also, considering that a PC is paying gold++ to retrain, it's not really calling in a favor from their faction. So, spending additional prestige has no real bearing on anything, except to tax the player and make it more difficult to retrain (which is counter to fun and flexibility). I love that retraining is allowed, however.
If the mechanic in PFS were to allow players to use prestige instead of gold to retrain, that would make more sense to me. Or, it could also be used to reduce the retraining time and required gold, which might be handy at higher levels where the cost increases. Maybe factions have experts that can streamline retraining for notable PCs. But, an arbitrary "undefined time" prestige tax makes no sense to me. YMMV. (original post)
In the rules in Ultimate Campaign, there is a requirement for a teacher/trainer when you are retraining. The prestige cost in Pathfinder Society is to cover that requirement since roleplaying finding and convincing a teacher is beyond the scope of general downtime. (original post)
Hey DH! Thanks. Yes - that's true. My concern is that it doesn't seem like the right solution and/or is an unnecessary mechanic that detracts from fun and, in some cases, might hinder player engagement with the campaign if they don't like their character and it's too hard (or unreasonable) to change. Wherever possible, the rules should foster engagement, connection and player satisfaction (given that PFS is organized play).
Do you think that gold should be sufficient to recruit a teacher, especially at the rates that retraining costs?
Searching for/finding a teacher should not require prestige, since the PC is paying for the privilege. Otherwise, why not add PFS prestige taxes to find any skilled hirelings anywhere? Or, charge players PP in scenarios when they are looking for things they have to find. It's always a skill check made in the presence of a GM. Downtime doesn't need additional burdens. For example, per the CRB, a PC can hire a skilled local guide for a few silvers who should be able to find anything.
Further, do teachers, whose job it is to teach, need convincing other than to say: "here's a huge pile of gold - teach me some stuff!" (again, vs. skilled hirelings that cost on the order of sp/day)? And, presumably, in a city like Absalom, the City Center of Golarion, PCs can find and pay just about anyone to do anything without having to pull in faction favors to do it (which is the only relevance for faction-based prestige).
Hey DH - I bet I could convince you with a pile of gold! ;-)
In terms of the mechanic, the challenge of finding a master at the appropriate level with the requisite skill seems to be covered by the level multiplier in the retraining fees. Issues relating to time are similarly covered by the time/day gp multiplier.
If there is a further need to prove that PCs, for example, orbit through Absalom in their downtime (and they did not conclude an adventure there), then maybe retraining could be easiest when playing a PFS scenario that ends in Absalom or some other big city center. That kind of rule might make some sense.
Otherwise, PCs could make a Diplomacy/Knowledge (local) skill check with level scaling to locate training at the appropriate level if they are not in Absalom, pay extra gold to find a teacher, OR pay a prestige finder's fee (but not a daily prestige tax, which makes no sense). But, even at 1PP (150gp), that's a pretty high fee to find a local resource.
Prestige should be a substitute for gold to grease the wheels of success and probably shouldn't be used as a tax or excessive fee.
Similarly, if there were a PFS rule that said that PCs spend their downtime wherever they conclude an adventure (or as modified by vanities or boons that confer estates, or maybe at their declared home), that would also be a very reasonable approach. At that point, the population/location would determine what resources are available (if not Absalom, for example) based on the rules in the CRB.
There's no need to try to use a prestige tax to force a mechanic on top of some perceived issue with downtime that doesn't really seem to be an issue in the first place (at least not to me). And that observation is especially true when the tax is disproportionately high vs. the activity taking place (as in 5PP to retrain a skill rank or some other relatively minor character attribute).
Retraining is a great conceptual mechanic -- I really like it -- but the PFS prestige tax needs some revision.
|
I'll start by saying I haven't looked at the retraining rules much.
The one PC that I intend to use the retraining rules with is a pre-planned thing. My buff/heal witch took the Ward hex at level 1, knowing that it loses its usefulness later because it doesn't stack with cloaks of resistance or rings of protection. My plan is to retrain it at level 5, when the allies I'd use it on should have those items, and that's the level some of the other hexes (flight, tongues) become really good, so I can replace it with one of those. When I looked at the retraining cost, my thought was that it was actually cheaper than I expected, and not that big a deal, both in terms of gold and prestige.
From what you're saying, it sounds like skill points are expensive to retrain. Personally, I would never even consider retraining those, so I wouldn't have looked into the cost. Those are trivial enough to just add a bunch to the skill you want to boost the next time you level up. They're not something I would expect people to retrain frequently, so I can understand intentionally making them prohibitively expensive, to cut down on "gaming the system" by maxing out different skills going into different adventures.
Really, I think the main point of making it semi-expensive to retrain is to discourage over-use of it. You're supposed to plan your PC right the first time and not change them. Retraining should be rare.
Like I said, I haven't done it much, but when I did look at the costs, they seemed reasonable. It should mostly be used for major class features, and it should be expensive. The current cost (at least for a witch hex) is a little costly if you're hoarding prestige, but not enough to completely prevent it, which is exactly how it should be, IMHO.
|
|
Retraining is 1 PP per day. Since there is an infinite and non-existent amount of time between sessions the PP expenditure is spent instead of days. The gold cost is crazy cheap, and if you removed the PP then you'd probably see rampant retraining going on.
at lv2 retraining HP is 3 days and 10x2x3 = 60 gp for 1 HP. As a level 2 barb I could spend 300gp to gain 5 hp. at level 3 I could spend 450gp to gain 5 more hp. I just bought the toughness feat through lv10 frontloaded at lv2 and 3, that stacks with toughness, for 750 gp. And I can continue to do this every level and it's a tiny fraction of my gold. It's less than 1 scenario's gold to get 5 extra HP for that level.
Currently the limiting factor is your PP, spending 5 PP every level for the 5 HP is a pretty big limiter as you'll likely only get 5 or 6 pp a level.
|
Appropriate or Excessive?
If I have to pick between the two, I'd pick Appropriate. If anything, the 1PP/day price is too low.
The "true" cost for retraining, as given in Ultimate Campaign, is the downtime that keeps your PC off adventures. In PFS, you get infinite downtime between chronicles at no cost. If it were just a couple hundred gold for the cost of retraining, given that there's no GM enforced "sanity check" for rebuilds... well it'd be ugly to combine a retroactive qualifiction dimension to "character builds". For example, if there weren't a Prestige cost, the only level 10-11 level Witches with any non-Major hexes would be owned by those players who lack the "system mastery" to retrain all their hexes gained from levels 1 to 9.
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Really, I think the main point of making it semi-expensive to retrain is to discourage over-use of it. You're supposed to plan your PC right the first time and not change them. Retraining should be rare.
In a game where its a complicated morass of mechanics to get through and is completely impossible to tell whether or not something is even effective on paper its kind of a pain to plan correctly.
|
Searching for/finding a teacher should not require prestige, since the PC is paying for the privilege. Otherwise, why not add PFS prestige taxes to find any skilled hirelings anywhere? Or, charge players PP in scenarios when they are looking for things they have to find. It's always a skill check made in the presence of a GM. Downtime doesn't need additional burdens. For example, per the CRB, a PC can hire a skilled local guide for a few silvers who should be able to find anything
Almost all rules material in Paizo products is baselined to the "Adventure Path" level. One thing most Adventure Path characters have to deal with is very limited access to high-level NPCs (as well as time before the BBEG implements his plan). PFS house rules are intended to account for the "unlimited access" that PFS characters have. In an Adventure Path you would be hard-pressed to find someone with Improved Critical (seven-branched spear) to retrain you.
The Prestige Point cost represents your faction scouring the planet and bringing the right person to you. Is it a perfect system? No. it works pretty good for feats. Less well for class features. 20pp to learn Kelish is pretty ridiculously high. But it also prevents abuses. (I'll be honest; all my characters would have max HP if there was no Prestige cost.)
Short of rewriting the entire retraining section - or disallowing it - I think the Prestige requirements are a pretty good balancing factor.
|
|
In a game where its a complicated morass of mechanics to get through and is completely impossible to tell whether or not something is even effective on paper its kind of a pain to plan correctly.Really, I think the main point of making it semi-expensive to retrain is to discourage over-use of it. You're supposed to plan your PC right the first time and not change them. Retraining should be rare.
While I emphasize...and even approve of the retraining rules' inclusion in PFS play....
There's a world of difference between realizing you would rather have had Power Attack and retraining to grab it, and retraining to get it on your level 2 that didn't qualify for it at lvl 1. Not only do you now have to not wait until level 3 for PA, at level 3 you already have PA plus whatever else. Retraining lets you retroactively qualify for/ignore prerequisites, and unless retraining is kept rare it literally breaks game balance.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm fine with the rules we have on Retraining as they exist, but it's the "double dip" penalty for Retraining your own class that I would like to see remedied.
For example, I'll be doing another round of Eyes of the Ten this Thursday. One Player is a Cleric-9/Rogue-2 and wants to Retrain their 2 Rogue levels into Unchained Rogue so that they can get Dex-to-damage when they become Cleric-9/URogue-3.
But he can't simply Retrain Rogue to Unchained Rogue. He has to Retrain Rogue to something else, and then Retrain that to Unchained Rogue. Same for Ninjas that want to Retrain into Unchained Rogue.
It's a corner case occurrence, but it's an unnecessary barrier that has resulted in the shelving of myriad PFS characters.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
In a game where its a complicated morass of mechanics to get through and is completely impossible to tell whether or not something is even effective on paper its kind of a pain to plan correctly.Really, I think the main point of making it semi-expensive to retrain is to discourage over-use of it. You're supposed to plan your PC right the first time and not change them. Retraining should be rare.
While I emphasize...and even approve of the retraining rules' inclusion in PFS play....
There's a world of difference between realizing you would rather have had Power Attack and retraining to grab it, and retraining to get it on your level 2 that didn't qualify for it at lvl 1. Not only do you now have to not wait until level 3 for PA, at level 3 you already have PA plus whatever else. Retraining lets you retroactively qualify for/ignore prerequisites, and unless retraining is kept rare it literally breaks game balance.
Wouldn't it just be easier to eliminate that loophole than to make it prohibitively expensive to actually use the mechanic?
|
|
Rogues had a free jump onto unchained rogue when unchained came out.
In fact, we're so excited about these classes that we're announcing a one-time limited rebuild to anyone with one or more levels in these classes, allowing those characters to switch any levels in the four classes to their unchained version at no cost. This includes the automatic retraining of any rage powers or rogue talents, as well as the free retraining and selling at full cost of any feats, items, and other character options that no long function properly due to the unchained classes features. For example, a rogue automatically gains the ability to add her Dexterity bonus to damage, so she could sell back her +1 agile rapier at full price. Likewise, a barbarian with the Raging Vitality feat would no longer benefit from its increased Constitution bonus, so she could retrain that feat for free. Much like when we have offered free faction changes in the past, you'll need to take advantage of this opportunity before you play the character after April 29, 2015.
Ninjas were still out of luck (but at least there there's some upsides)
|
|
Wouldn't it just be easier to eliminate that loophole than to make it prohibitively expensive to actually use the mechanic?In a game where its a complicated morass of mechanics to get through and is completely impossible to tell whether or not something is even effective on paper its kind of a pain to plan correctly.Really, I think the main point of making it semi-expensive to retrain is to discourage over-use of it. You're supposed to plan your PC right the first time and not change them. Retraining should be rare.
While I emphasize...and even approve of the retraining rules' inclusion in PFS play....
There's a world of difference between realizing you would rather have had Power Attack and retraining to grab it, and retraining to get it on your level 2 that didn't qualify for it at lvl 1. Not only do you now have to not wait until level 3 for PA, at level 3 you already have PA plus whatever else. Retraining lets you retroactively qualify for/ignore prerequisites, and unless retraining is kept rare it literally breaks game balance.
I'm saying I feel the prestige cost DOES fix the abuse/loophole. If you really want to do the change, you'll pay the cost. If you just want to fit some build together that only works via retraining... probably not so much.
The loophole/potential for abuse only exists due to the disempowered nature of GMs in PFS. In regular play the GM can always just not allow the retrain to happen... but to allow that veto in PFS is to make major changes to PFS with implications far beyond retraining.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
I'm saying I feel the prestige cost DOES fix the abuse/loophole. If you really want to do the change, you'll pay the cost. If you just want to fit some build together that only works via retraining... probably not so much.
At the cost of it actually being a useful mechanic. Most builds don't usually rely on one feat which is kind of what makes it prohibitively expensive.
|
|
Well, I don't think retraining should be a common assumption in builds. You can do things via retraining that you simply cannot do without retraining.. feats are just the tip of the iceberg. I'm pleased with the balance struck... retraining is still available to legally correct/undo regretted investments, but it's expensive enough that retraining shouldn't cause a power divide in PFS characters.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Well, I don't think retraining should be a common assumption in builds. You can do things via retraining that you simply cannot do without retraining.. feats are just the tip of the iceberg. I'm pleased with the balance struck... retraining is still available to legally correct/undo regretted investments, but it's expensive enough that retraining shouldn't cause a power divide in PFS characters.
So what you are saying is that you want to stop creative builds in PFS because sweet jesus there are a ton of classes let alone archetypes that are impossible to figure out mechanically on paper.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I don't think retraining should be a common assumption in builds. You can do things via retraining that you simply cannot do without retraining.. feats are just the tip of the iceberg. I'm pleased with the balance struck... retraining is still available to legally correct/undo regretted investments, but it's expensive enough that retraining shouldn't cause a power divide in PFS characters.
it really bites when a prestige class comes out thats perfect for your character, but you simply can't spend enough prestige to hop into it.
|
|
Not at all. In fact, given the complexity of what's legal for PfS, having a legal outlet like retraining is necessary, or else people will just cheat and illegally retrain choices that aren't working out.... if they have no legal way to do so.
I think we're having a big disconnect on what counts as an exorbitant price. 1PP/day is imo not exorbitant. Only time you can't afford that (once) is level 1, when you have infinite retrains anyway. By the time you're mid-to-high level, you're usually swimming in prestige with nothing to otherwise spend it on but vanities. You can easily afford a handful of retrains even w/o dipping into savings for raise dead.
|
|
eh? How'd you get stuck?Rogues had a free jump onto unchained rogue when unchained came out.Indeed, but that doesn't help now, and the option to take Rogue still exists.
Well, as I already mentioned, one of the players this Thursday has a Cleric-9/Rogue-2 he's wanting to level into a Cleric-9/UnchainedRogue-3.
He must Retrain effectively 4 levels to do so.
Rogue to Unchained Rogue is a distraction, though. It's the necessity of having to double dip Retrain your own class that I take issue with. I had a similar instance trying to Retrain a multiclassed character of mine. Likewise any other Unchained or non-Unchained characters must go through the same ordeal.
It can actually become impossible to Retrain certain combinations because of the x2 cost, since you have to continue leveling your character in order to acquire the Prestige to Retrain.
But, as Pirate Rob pointed out up thread, the system largely works. It's just this corner case that doesn't.
|
|
Kudor here is an example of extra power gained through retraining.
He's got the Dimensional Dervish line despite only being level 9 by retraining 2 feats at level 9.
Additionally he retrained into Greater Bull Rush at level 6, thus getting an extra higher level feat even then.
Here is the build skeleton if you want to see how he's built.
Here is a build skeleton for a very silly character concept who uses retraining repeatedly to keep his animal companion at max level.
|
|
Well, I don't think retraining should be a common assumption in builds. You can do things via retraining that you simply cannot do without retraining.. feats are just the tip of the iceberg. I'm pleased with the balance struck... retraining is still available to legally correct/undo regretted investments, but it's expensive enough that retraining shouldn't cause a power divide in PFS characters.So what you are saying is that you want to stop creative builds in PFS because sweet jesus there are a ton of classes let alone archetypes that are impossible to figure out mechanically on paper.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. How does the current retraining stop creative builds?
If there's some strange unique combo of stuff to maybe pull something off, take it to the rules/advice forum and they'll do the work for you, because it's quite easy to figure out mechanically on paper how well a character will do in play.Like, I'm not sure what the point you're trying to make is.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the comments regarding my question. I appreciate this discussion. I read through all of them and have some additional thoughts.
1. I'm not overly concerned about certain abuse cases. Several of you mention hit point abuse and that is certainly possible, but also easy enough to restrict in PFS. However, potential abuse on hit point retraining, among other things, shouldn't color all other reasonable retraining where players are acting in good faith - changing a feat, moving skill points, changing an archetype, etc. Everyone has a different learning curve and anyone can make a mistake or need to adjust a PC along the way.
2. I'm also not worried about feat abuse. Reasonable restrictions should apply where you cannot retrain to something that you could not have reasonably qualified for in the first place. The same applies to languages. If you want to retrain a language, fine. If you want to learn new languages, maybe that should be in the restricted pile, since there is already a clear mechanic for learning new languages based on Linguistics skill ranks...or retrain a skill rank into linguistics. Very easy. Languages would be another case where trying to use prestige to restrict unbounded downtime to prevent abuse is not the right course of action.
From these two points, please take my comments to mean that I favor retraining/replacing something which the PC already has and/or must qualify for in order to receive. And, as I have commented in other threads, if you retrain away from a class (or class level) or feat, etc., then you must, logically, sacrifice anything that was granted to you by that class as a class ability or other feats if you no longer meet the prerequisites (there are other discussions and FAQs on this point). For example, you can't take a level of Wizard to get a spellbook, then try to retrain away from it and keep the spellbook (granted as a class feature). Or, you can't retrain away from Power Attack and keep Improved Sunder.
I tend not to agree that factions need to scour the world for experts to retrain my skill points, a basic feat, a class level, and most (if not all) other things. Prestige is not the right metaphor to attempt to manage downtime. If PCs are in Absalom or other major cities, maybe they should be able to find whatever they want in terms of training. If a +1 seven-branched sword is always available, then maybe the training is also (or is at least findable with a skill check or even hireling helper). Above, I mention that downtime location could hypothetically be tied to where you complete an adventure (or have an estate or downtime boon). If there's really a need for a time constraint, then instead of using prestige, bar the PC from play during retraining (5 days, 10 days - whatever), but, again - that is not really fostering player engagement. There is a boon precedent for this type of mechanic and also time-limited boons from various scenarios.
Alternately, if we are talking about retraining to exotic weapon proficiencies, maybe the PC has to be in a region where the exotic weapon has devotees. For example, maybe PCs head east to learn eastern exotic weapons (or finish an adventure there), or head to Varisia's Mierani Forest to learn the elven curve blade. OR...pay an equivalent finder’s fee in gold or PP, as above. There are always available items in PFS and training should mostly follow that model for, perhaps, anything except exotic weapons (another alternate strategy).
I also agree that it's challenging to plan for character progression or players might not realize that things won't work as they had planned as they learn more about the Pathfinder and see other PCs in action (or there might be new content, as others mention above). For example, I was glad to be able to rebuild my -1 rogue when unchained came out, because he needed better planning. I was just starting out. I also screwed up my -2 druid feats and had to fix and retrain. I wasn't initiailly aware of the issue of not being considered to have a class ability until you attain the level at which it is granted. Oops. Currently, I'd like to get an INT headband for another one of my PCs and want to retrain some overlapping skill ranks (since the headband covers them), but it is ridiculously overpriced. There no abuse...just a need to do some basic improvements and repairs.
So, to address the points above and the interesting feedback from all of you, I guess I would like to see PFS retraining that:
1. Eliminates the abuse-case-driven design (hp, languages, etc.) and clearly states and enforces prerequisite mechanics to also prevent any feat and class abuse. Hopefully, that would satisfy most of the legitimate concerns for PFS expressed by others above regarding abuse. Also, given that retraining requires a GM, it is up to GMs to limit the abuse (hmmm...unless GMs are the culprits, but hopefully not - best intentions, etc.).
2. Eliminates the prestige tax, or uses it as a gp equivalent as it is used elsewhere in the campaign...or even vs. skill checks or a finder's fee. Maybe a boon like Expedition Manager is peripherally relevant for discussion, where players can start expeditions with prestige at various gp levels.
3. Includes a downtime mechanic that uses location where PCs complete adventures and maybe includes related skill checks (or equivalent fees) to find training, as needed.
4. Includes a time management mechanic that actually manages time (if one is really needed), as a function of real-world time or maybe total # of retrains per career or level, etc.
Thanks for reading and for the feedback! I do not believe the current system works and that improvements are possible to keep players engaged with their characters instead of wishing they could change things if not for the high cost of the repair.
|
|
the +1 seven-branched sword is always available BECAUSE the society is able to call in favors. Getting a certain sword on a shipment, easy. Getting a level X person with feat Y to come and help you for Z days. Less easy.
Also, PFS doesn't like to alter RPG rules. RPG has rules for retraining. PFS uses RPG retraining, adding on PP for days.
Trying to limit abuse cases is MAJOR refactoring of the RPG rules/creating their own new rules and PFS doesn't do that.
Like PFS even says, "while the intent is for players to live with the choices they make, player with the book may retrain using 1PP per day."
Also that PFS level of competence is set pretty low, low enough that having some skills in the wrong place or less useful feat isn't going to cripple your character. So it's not hard to live with your choices. There's a lv11 cavalier that said the other day, "I picked the worst race for the class that is one of the worst to accomplish my character vision which is using a bad combat style for the class and not even doing that well. I thought he'd have died levels ago, but here I am, about to retire."
So I'm not sure I see the need to loosen retraining rules.
|
|
eh? How'd you get stuck?
Well, as I already mentioned, one of the players this Thursday has a Cleric-9/Rogue-2 he's wanting to level into a Cleric-9/UnchainedRogue-3.
He must Retrain effectively 4 levels to do so.
Did he not heed/ not get the "no! go unchained!" warning when he got the rogue levels, went rogue before the unchained rogue came out and then played without switching, didn't have unchained the week it came out etc
|
|
BNW, could be he was taking a break when Unchained came out. Could be he just doesn't pay close attention to the boards, could be a Core character transferred over to Standard. There are lots of reasons core rogues might still be kicking around. I'm thinking about making a crb rogue so I can make an Eldritch Scoundrel.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I think in general it works quite well. I've retrained quite a few feats and class levels on some of my higher level PCs. Honestly, it's not like I was really using the prestige for many other things anyway, since I don't die all that often and the number of really desirable vanities isn't that high.
Archetypes however are the exception. They're so varied in how many features they replace that costs for retraining all over the place. It always costs about the same to replace a feat; an archetype for a class you have two levels in could be anything between 5 and 20 prestige. That amount of variety doesn't seem like fully thought-through design.
|
|
Did he not heed/ not get the "no! go unchained!" warning when he got the rogue levels, went rogue before the unchained rogue came out and then played without switching, didn't have unchained the week it came out etc
eh? How'd you get stuck?
Well, as I already mentioned, one of the players this Thursday has a Cleric-9/Rogue-2 he's wanting to level into a Cleric-9/UnchainedRogue-3.
He must Retrain effectively 4 levels to do so.
Again, that's not the point.
The character exists, and requires Retraining.
The same would be true of an Unchained Barbarian wanting to Retrain to Barbarian.
The player must pay twice the cost of any other Retraining option.
And for no good reason.
|
|
there have been more than a few times that I tried something that just didn't work in a real game like I thought on paper and the newer you are the more likely that is to happen.
so yea, I don't mind a prestige cost for retraining because some kind of extra cost needs to be there. but that being said the current cost is pretty damn steep. I wish they toned it down a little maybe a max of 5pp for any one retraining session. or at least did something to make it a bit more gentle to retrain your mistakes.
Like what types of things are you talking about? Some 5 level multiclass build that didn't work out? Like since you've had it happen more than a few times care to share an example of one to help show what kind of thing you're talking about?
What type of thing are you talking about that would need some intense retraining to make a passable character because of some major oversight?|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
"
Also that PFS level of competence is set pretty low, low enough that having some skills in the wrong place or less useful feat isn't going to cripple your character. So it's not hard to live with your choices. There's a lv11 cavalier that said the other day, "I picked the worst race for the class that is one of the worst to accomplish my character vision which is using a bad combat style for the class and not even doing that well. I thought he'd have died levels ago, but here I am, about to retire."
The PFS level of competence is entirely random to the point where there have been scenarios written that are more infuriating than Bonekeep. You can avoid them but it doesn't mean that the level of competence is set pretty low.
|
|
The character exists, and requires Retraining.
The same would be true of an Unchained Barbarian wanting to Retrain to Barbarian.
The player must pay twice the cost of any other Retraining option.
And for no good reason.
Well, the reason seems that they want a decision of being unchained or not to really be something you decide before starting into a class, based off of the difficulty of swapping them.
BNW is pointing out that if the character already had rogue he had a chance for a free swap over and should have done it.
BNW is pointing out that if the character didn't have rogue he had a chance to start with unchained, and that it should have been obvious which one to choose.
Choosing core rogue any time after unchained existed was a choice, that is harder to undo then other choices.
|
|
The PFS level of competence is entirely random to the point where there have been scenarios written that are more infuriating than Bonekeep. You can avoid them but it doesn't mean that the level of competence is set pretty low."
Also that PFS level of competence is set pretty low, low enough that having some skills in the wrong place or less useful feat isn't going to cripple your character. So it's not hard to live with your choices. There's a lv11 cavalier that said the other day, "I picked the worst race for the class that is one of the worst to accomplish my character vision which is using a bad combat style for the class and not even doing that well. I thought he'd have died levels ago, but here I am, about to retire."
So I'm curious which scenarios these are that having a few changed skill points or a useless feat on one character would be the tipping point of a scenario to be a failure.
I've not heard of any where you need a party of highly optimized character to even have a chance of succeeding. Bonekeep being considered a hard scenario, that has a disclaimer it's supposed to be hard, doesn't require everyone have super optimized characters. I've seen it succeed with a party of core pregens, and I've not met anyone that says the core pregens are anywhere near optimized.
|
|
I always found the prestige cost to be a reasonable limitation to keep characters from significantly being altered frequently.
If you need to do a significant amount of class or class feature retraining consider the Expert Trainer feat from Quests and Campaigns.
Or the Monastery vanity from Pathfinder Society Primer.
|
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
Skills and archetypes are way too expensive to retrain but I've retrained feats a couple times and it's worked out well for my characters.
I wish skill training was less expensive. It makes it tough on my characters with versatile performance to hold out and not take a skill until they can finally get it for free at sixth level...
Hmm
|
|
I can agree with making archetypes less crazy, have an archetype or alternate class be like changing class to a synergy class that you have to do all your levels at once, that way it's clear how much it costs rather than figuring out how much is changed.
skills is hard, but I'd prefer a fix to the bard over a fix to retraining ;) but I agree that versatile performance is lame to work with.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for all the comments. I think the discussion is helpful. I definitely agree on skills and archetypes and you can also throw spells into that pile @ 2days/spell level x PP.
Kevin - No worries - no problems here. I tried to put forward a rough idea of how I thought it could work above. Is there something that should be more clear? I think I addressed mechanics of time, location, discovery, cost, possible skill checks vs. gold vs. PP, general philosophy, etc.
What I see is a misapplied prestige mechanic that is trying to control retraining abuse, rather than addressing the potential for abuse directly while trying to keep the UC content pure (if that's the primary concern). Not modifying printed content is probably #1 on the Paizo list.
I personally don't care about the abuse and would hope that most players are retraining out of a genuine need or interest with respect for the system and a reasonable degree of common sense. Abuse is also gated by GM supervision, as above. I would rather see a lifetime retraining cap (or maybe by retraining category) rather than a PP cost. There could be a cap like: 2 class levels, 1 archetype, 5 skill ranks, etc. (or even just total # of retrains -- easier to remember). I don't think the campaign needs to address retraining at the frequency level, but there are definitely tweakers out there who are never satisfied. You know who you are. ^_^ Also, there are obvious cases that need to be fixed (that are not corner cases), as mentioned above.
As a GM/Store Coordinator, I am often evangelizing PFS, trying to recruit new players, and I like to see mechanisms that don't stand in the way of fun and engagement. I love level 1 retraining for that reason. It's very easy to get new players started with pregens.
Keeping players coming back to the table, especially new players, is more important to me than trying to micromanage retraining abuse with a prestige tax. PCs translate to massive amounts of time immersed in Paizo content. At 15hrs/level (assume that amount includes build/research time), by level 7, we have put in over 100hrs. on a PC, which represents a lot of time and maybe even attachment, depending on the player. Some players are very attached to their characters, as we all know, whereas others make the most of the -newPC system that PFS allows, which is also great (I'm at -21, I think...).
Given the time they put in, players have a right to make the most of their PCs, so who cares if they retrain here or there? The bigger picture goal should be to help that player be as happy as possible with their character in the larger context of the campaign so that they feel like the game system provides the necessary flexibility and they are not stuck living with mistakes they wish they hadn't made.
Pathfinder has tremendous diversity, where content and player understanding are always in motion. So, retraining is a great thing. When players feel like the system is too restrictive, they just go to another gaming system. I've had that discussion numerous times with PFS vs. System X, mostly with people who don't want the burden of character tracking in an organized campaign. This dynamic is just one more thing to consider and balance vs. what retraining means in the context of organized play. Help the players be happy. Limits are OK, but the prestige retraining tax, as we have been discussing, is a bit much.
Also, parenthetically, I see the Monastery Vanity as a trap for PFS. It only reduces the number of days by 1 (or 1PP), but costs 5PP, meaning that you have to retrain 5x just to break even on the expense, assuming you have the spare 25PP in the first place to blow on retraining. It's probably not worth it, but is certainly flavorful!
|
|
It is a tax but it is only taxing an extra resource provided in PFS anyway. I don't think it is an issue taxing the 2,250 free gold you get above normal wealth by level. Any extra prestige you have after retraining is all upside. There is also more than enough prestige available per level to accommodate significant changes to your character.
|
|
There is also more than enough prestige available per level to accommodate significant changes to your character.
Sorry - don't agree - see above discussion. Also, my PCs never seem to have enough prestige. And, when it comes to paying 5PP to move a single skill rank, or similar issues with other skewed cases outlined above, it's just not worth it.
perhaps if 1PP bought you 2-3 days of retraining?
...or just eliminate it and replace it with something that makes more sense, is more fair across the board and keeps players happy and engaged instead of regretting their PC choices when they didn't fully understand their build options.
|
I think 3 of my PCs have taken advantage of retraining.
One retrained a feat, Channeled Shield Wall, because it just wasn't really as useful as I first thought. Allies didn't often benefit because they didn't want to stay grouped together and shield of faith was better for myself.
One retrained a rogue level to a fighter level and then separately retrained a few skill points. Because Profession (soldier) actually comes up in adventures whereas Profession (courier) doesn't, and both fit his background.
The only cost that really hurt was the archetype retrain I did. I had always roleplayed my barbarian/druid as having a strong affinity for plants and plant creatures, so when leshy warden came into existence, I had to have it. The problem is that leshy warden has 3 features at level 1, so it was 15 PP to retrain. (I guess I could say that my character just about died to become a leshy warden).
|
I've used retraining on several characters to fix builds that weren't quite working. It can be expensive, but it's manageable for a lot of situations. The outliers have already been mentioned. Retraining archetypes can be very expensive. And the system wasn't set up to punish unchained classes. It just didn't have to consider a situation where you're retraining from one class to technically the same class.
The other issue is that retraining happens level by level. Otherwise, if you're retraining all levels of Rogue to Unchained Rogue, it would make sense that they be ruled to have synergy and you can just go from one straight to the other. I think a clarification for PFS allowing that would be a really good thing. They have synergy, but you must retrain all levels at once (since it's not legal to have levels in both classes). Right now retraining from Rogue to Unchained Rogue costs more per level than retraining from Rogue to any other class, and that doesn't seem right.
I know BNW wasn't saying the character should have retrained when he had the chance, but others have basically said that. The thing is... Maybe he didn't own Pathfinder Unchained when it first came out, but kept playing the character. Maybe he's planning to buy Unchained now so that he can retrain. There are any number of reasons why the free rebuild might not have been used.
As for the prestige cost in general, keep in mind that it wasn't set to represent anything in game. It was set where it is, because retraining was new to Pathfinder. Having just the gold cost would have made it too common to fast. Setting 1 prestige per day was a convenient way to set a higher cost, but still make it easy to determine that cost. Retraining is now part of the game and has been for a few years. There should at least be anecdotal evidence whether or not it's being abused or damaging the game. So if John, Tanya, and Linda want to reevaluate the system that's in place, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't. But if they want to keep it as is, I'm ok with that, too. It would be great if some of the corner cases like the Unchained classes could be addressed. Otherwise, it's more or less working.