Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 5122550" data-attributes="member: 710">I am not a fan of training rules because I got the experience from my adventures - why do I need to do non-adventuring stuff to get better at adventuring itself? There is a disconnect for me there.That said, I still would like games to support training seperate from the &quot;ding-a-new-level&quot; approach. At least, if I wanted to have a game that feels a little more (dare I say it?) &quot;realistic&quot;. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I think an interesting way would be to have something like &quot;lateral&quot; advancement built into game systems. Basically, there are two directions in which you can get better, and one is modeled with training and the other is modeled by practical experience.For example, learning languages in 3E and 4E essentially requires gaining levels. I think it should be possible to learn new languages by just spending in-game time to learn them. There is no need to kill an Orc for learning Elven. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Spell-Learning for Wizards (at least in 3E) is a good example, too - you pick up a new spell of a level you have access to by acquiring a scroll or spellbook and write the spell in your own book, essentially learning it by spending time. I think it's okay when you still have to kill Orcs to achieve new spell levels...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 5122550, member: 710"] I am not a fan of training rules because I got the experience from my adventures - why do I need to do non-adventuring stuff to get better at adventuring itself? There is a disconnect for me there. That said, I still would like games to support training seperate from the "ding-a-new-level" approach. At least, if I wanted to have a game that feels a little more (dare I say it?) "realistic". ;) I think an interesting way would be to have something like "lateral" advancement built into game systems. Basically, there are two directions in which you can get better, and one is modeled with training and the other is modeled by practical experience. For example, learning languages in 3E and 4E essentially requires gaining levels. I think it should be possible to learn new languages by just spending in-game time to learn them. There is no need to kill an Orc for learning Elven. ;) Spell-Learning for Wizards (at least in 3E) is a good example, too - you pick up a new spell of a level you have access to by acquiring a scroll or spellbook and write the spell in your own book, essentially learning it by spending time. I think it's okay when you still have to kill Orcs to achieve new spell levels... [/QUOTE]

Verification