Abstruse
Legend
Does it help if I say it was the old offline builder and not the new online one?
"Banking" retraining - Rules clarification needed
- Thread starter AngryJack
- Start date
1. No, it's not how it's enforced in the CB. That would be a major bug.
2. No, it's not RAW -- explicitly RAW, when you retrain a feat, you can retrain it to any feat that is now legal. (and retraining to have two paragon feats at 11, etc is explicilty allowed by phb).
I think you're not using retraining in CB correctly; I do that sort of thing all the time. You can't, of course, if you going back in time and using earlier retrain options, retrain to things that weren't legal at the time -- but then, doing so without explicit permission of the GM (or playing in LFR, where doing so is legal any time you're levelling up your character) isn't legal in the first place.
My take on the OP's quesiton: No, if you're going by RAW, players only get one retrain per level, which must be used at the point you level up the character (though a common allowance is to allow it to be used at any time before you gain another level).
OTOH, I think much more agressive rebuilds are totally ok (including stat redistribution or even Lab Accidents where class&/or race change) -- but those need to be worked out with the GM and unless they really are seamless, worked into the story. You don't want to force someone to play something they don't want to play--even if it was "I thought I wanted to play this, but now I don't," but you also want the game story to make sense in the context of the characters.
2. No, it's not RAW -- explicitly RAW, when you retrain a feat, you can retrain it to any feat that is now legal. (and retraining to have two paragon feats at 11, etc is explicilty allowed by phb).
I think you're not using retraining in CB correctly; I do that sort of thing all the time. You can't, of course, if you going back in time and using earlier retrain options, retrain to things that weren't legal at the time -- but then, doing so without explicit permission of the GM (or playing in LFR, where doing so is legal any time you're levelling up your character) isn't legal in the first place.
My take on the OP's quesiton: No, if you're going by RAW, players only get one retrain per level, which must be used at the point you level up the character (though a common allowance is to allow it to be used at any time before you gain another level).
OTOH, I think much more agressive rebuilds are totally ok (including stat redistribution or even Lab Accidents where class&/or race change) -- but those need to be worked out with the GM and unless they really are seamless, worked into the story. You don't want to force someone to play something they don't want to play--even if it was "I thought I wanted to play this, but now I don't," but you also want the game story to make sense in the context of the characters.
Nemesis Destiny
Adventurer
No, they're both buggy and full of errors; they are no substitute for a solid understanding of the rules.
In any case, the poster above me is correct - when you retrain, you can select anything that is currently legal. Many players retrain at 11th so that they can gain two paragon feats, for example.
If you tried selecting and using a retrain from a previous level, which is not technically allowed, then you are only shown options that would have been legal at that level.
the Jester
Legend
Use it or lose it.
Even ignoring the RAW, the idea of retraining one thing at a time makes a lot more sense to me than the idea that, "Hey, look, I'm 6th level, suddenly half of my powers and feats are different!"
Even ignoring the RAW, the idea of retraining one thing at a time makes a lot more sense to me than the idea that, "Hey, look, I'm 6th level, suddenly half of my powers and feats are different!"
I'm in the use it or lose it camp as well, in terms of straight rules interpretation.
In reality, as a DM, I would be more lenient, particularly with new players, or with players who built re-training into their character concept (i.e. find an in-game reason to change it rather than just boredom). But I have yet to DM 4e, so my opinions as a DM are based on all the other editions rather than the current one
Ahrimon
Bourbon and Dice
Use it or loose it. However... I feel that if they announce their intention, then they are free to do it at a later time. Preferably the next time they are in a place where it can be done.
For example. Barbarian with a fullblade. The player decides he'd rather use the weapon feat on something else but his weapon enchantment is an important part of his build to him. So he plans on swapping the enchantment to a greatsword and retraining the feat. The problem is they are in the middle of clearing out the horrible temple of naughtiness and can't leave until they finish. The characters level up. By the use it or loose it retraining, if he retrained he'd be hosed on his weapon while they tried to finish defeating the temple. So I would allow a player to announce that they were going to do it, and then anytime during the next level they could do it. If they leveled up again before switching it out, then it would just apply to that new level.
For example. Barbarian with a fullblade. The player decides he'd rather use the weapon feat on something else but his weapon enchantment is an important part of his build to him. So he plans on swapping the enchantment to a greatsword and retraining the feat. The problem is they are in the middle of clearing out the horrible temple of naughtiness and can't leave until they finish. The characters level up. By the use it or loose it retraining, if he retrained he'd be hosed on his weapon while they tried to finish defeating the temple. So I would allow a player to announce that they were going to do it, and then anytime during the next level they could do it. If they leveled up again before switching it out, then it would just apply to that new level.
airwalkrr
Adventurer
I have been a fan of fairly lax retraining rules in any game I play just because I know the frustration of making a poor decision and being stuck with it for the entire life of the character. Sure, it's more "realistic" to preclude retraining as much as possible since that kind of stuff doesn't happen in real life. but this is a game. Personally, if I were to run 4th edition, I would probably allow retraining of at least one power every level. I might charge the players some gold for it, but it would be available.
So I say, if letting your players "bank" retraining makes them happy, let them do it. That's not to say that every situation needs to be handled "because it makes the players happy," but this situation is one of them.
So I say, if letting your players "bank" retraining makes them happy, let them do it. That's not to say that every situation needs to be handled "because it makes the players happy," but this situation is one of them.
The RAW is use it or lose it. The CB isnt the rules.
On the other hand, all that is irrelevant. If you want to let the characters change, let them change. If you dont then dont. Just be up front about it right now.
My personal opinion is that that retraining rules are pretty irrelevant. If a player wants to change something, I will at worst have them wait until there is an appropriate moment, but I will let it happen. Not all the ways the rules interact are all that clear, so getting stuck in a build you dont like kinda sucks.
Another opinion is that life is too short to argue rules. If I am running the game, every minute I am argueing a rule is one that I am not thinking up a new adventure, and a minute you are not giving me a new plot hook. So, if it is a question, I make a judgement and that is the way it is. I you really can t play that way, run the game.
On the other hand, all that is irrelevant. If you want to let the characters change, let them change. If you dont then dont. Just be up front about it right now.
My personal opinion is that that retraining rules are pretty irrelevant. If a player wants to change something, I will at worst have them wait until there is an appropriate moment, but I will let it happen. Not all the ways the rules interact are all that clear, so getting stuck in a build you dont like kinda sucks.
Another opinion is that life is too short to argue rules. If I am running the game, every minute I am argueing a rule is one that I am not thinking up a new adventure, and a minute you are not giving me a new plot hook. So, if it is a question, I make a judgement and that is the way it is. I you really can t play that way, run the game.
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Yeah, the reality is if players have made choices and found that they are unhappy with them then allowing some kind of rebuild, maybe tied into some plot device, is a good idea. If a player seems to be trying to take advantage of a DM's leniency in this area then I'd have a talk with them, but personally I've found in general when it comes to how the player is primarily interacting with the game (through the device of a PC) they're the ones who have the best idea of what will work for them. Frankly most players in my games quickly get into the spirit of the game and don't worry about it too much. If a player makes some unusual choices or niche choices I'll just throw something at them that makes their choice cool and fun now and then.
