Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PHATsakk43" data-source="post: 9645774" data-attributes="member: 7041071">That is a suggestion within a broader outline of an optional rule that was just included because of  how central Gary had made "training" in pre 2E. The 2E DMG discussion is far less insistent upon training and the RAW states plainly: "When a character earns enough experience to attain the next level for his character class, he immediately gains several benefits (unless the optional rules for training are used)."I'm sorry you got stuck with DMs that just wanted to make things "realistic" when they were annoying. I never saw anyone who bothered with training and I've never utilized it in any of my games. I've never played 1E, nor played with anyone who started with it either so I've not really had to deal with the grognardism. I got into D&D in 1990 or so with RC BECMI and a year or so later with 2E. So, I can't really speak to the 1E DM Screen. I've got all the core 1E books, but mostly as curiosities. I had never read them until very recently, and honestly, I don't see the appeal.  That said, I never took the Mountaineering NWP to be anything other than what it says it is, a specially trained skill that pertains to a specific technical activity. After going through this thread, I think I may relook at my house rules and possibly do some fiddling with the base thief along the lines of what I discussed earlier. I'm not 100% on wedded to letting Int be score that provides the sole boost to thief skill points per level. Maybe something akin to the method of PSP gain for psionicist?</blockquote>

Verification