Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
Removed From Thread
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
genshou
First Post
I've never been fond of forcing my characters to repeatedly sacrifice XP in order to self-train once there are no more NPCs of higher level. Even at the lower levels, it throws the Wealth by Level mechanic off.
I do like that a character can declare themselves a higher level without taking the time to train, though. In my games (the ones that have training, at least), characters who self-train take double the required time. This option is only usually invoked in the first four level increases.
I do like that a character can declare themselves a higher level without taking the time to train, though. In my games (the ones that have training, at least), characters who self-train take double the required time. This option is only usually invoked in the first four level increases.
Afrodyte
Explorer
Interesting. You mention that the students need trainers to learn their special abilities. How about, instead of keeping their levels low, they gain none of the class abilities of the next level until they find a trainer? Not to mention, new trained-only skills may need to be put on hold. Of course, when it comes to fighters, this may need to be adjusted somewhat.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Removed
Removed
Last edited:
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
As the main DM I don't employ such stirct rules of training and down time. However, I do from time to time, simply say that we are at a breakaing point and when we return next week, two years will have passed. Then I ask them to think about that and the next week we talk over how each would spend the time. I also put in some fixed pieces of info, for example: "You were invited to study with The Wiizardess for four months and you taught your apprentice for 7 months- the rest of the time is yours to study or make stuff and seek 'training' from one of the other NPCs you know. With one fighter in our gorup, I have an old fellow or two nearby their little keep. The old fellow is a crafty old fighter rogue who can offer many insights to the various pc's in teh group.
If I wanted to make a restriction to toughen up the learning process I'd use the above suggestion: Let them level up, but not learned their class abilites for that level until trained. As for skills in trained things, like Open Lock, I'd let them add the full points, but I'd bump up every Open Lock DC check by 2 to 5 points as a circumstancial modifier- until they either got lots of ingame practice while adventuring, or until they got some training.
I try not to hold players back and if they skyrocket to a level I can't DM well, I either turn the game over or suggest we start new characters.
The main point though, for my campaigns, is that I simply advance time 1 to 10 years at a shot and I tell the players well in advance of the time jump so they can prepare mentally and do some stuff with their PCs from an ingame standpoint.
Bottom line, only do what everyone thinks is fun. If anyone balks at the training or time jumps, it is time to talk and reconsider. Maybe make a real life Persuade Check.
If I wanted to make a restriction to toughen up the learning process I'd use the above suggestion: Let them level up, but not learned their class abilites for that level until trained. As for skills in trained things, like Open Lock, I'd let them add the full points, but I'd bump up every Open Lock DC check by 2 to 5 points as a circumstancial modifier- until they either got lots of ingame practice while adventuring, or until they got some training.
I try not to hold players back and if they skyrocket to a level I can't DM well, I either turn the game over or suggest we start new characters.
The main point though, for my campaigns, is that I simply advance time 1 to 10 years at a shot and I tell the players well in advance of the time jump so they can prepare mentally and do some stuff with their PCs from an ingame standpoint.
Bottom line, only do what everyone thinks is fun. If anyone balks at the training or time jumps, it is time to talk and reconsider. Maybe make a real life Persuade Check.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Removed
Last edited:
Aus_Snow
First Post
I currently only have a somewhat 'similar' rule for multiclassing: characters must meet certain requirements in order to multiclass into any given class, which are like the prereq's for PrC's, but less demanding.
Time must also be taken 'in game' to learn, study, train, practise, hone self-discipline, develop techniques, come to grips with new paradigms, and so on. This can be done during the course of adventures and such, but the progress might well be slower then. It's all 'played out', and this has worked well so far.
I also insist that if a player wishes to increase a character's skill rank in a particular skill, they must have utilised that skill consistently, or possibly in a new or significant manner. Reasoning: skills do not improve themselves. No complaints here either.
I'm not sure I like the idea of introducing training rules for levelling up per se, though - for my campaigns, I mean. If it works for you, or others, great!
I think I'll start insisting that feats and class abilities be learned however, either by means of self-training (for example, to move from Weapon Focus to Weapon Specialisation with a specific weapon), or courtesy of assisted training (for example, to learn Track).
Basically, I like the 'piecemeal' approach to training, rather than a 'whole-level-at-a-time' approach.
But I'm quite open to hearing any particular benefits or drawbacks either method might have.
Time must also be taken 'in game' to learn, study, train, practise, hone self-discipline, develop techniques, come to grips with new paradigms, and so on. This can be done during the course of adventures and such, but the progress might well be slower then. It's all 'played out', and this has worked well so far.
I also insist that if a player wishes to increase a character's skill rank in a particular skill, they must have utilised that skill consistently, or possibly in a new or significant manner. Reasoning: skills do not improve themselves. No complaints here either.
I'm not sure I like the idea of introducing training rules for levelling up per se, though - for my campaigns, I mean. If it works for you, or others, great!
I think I'll start insisting that feats and class abilities be learned however, either by means of self-training (for example, to move from Weapon Focus to Weapon Specialisation with a specific weapon), or courtesy of assisted training (for example, to learn Track).
Basically, I like the 'piecemeal' approach to training, rather than a 'whole-level-at-a-time' approach.
But I'm quite open to hearing any particular benefits or drawbacks either method might have.
Similar Threads
