I am...perplexed by this situation.

[Storyteller01]

Background first:

I have a relatively new player in my group. He has only played one or two sessions from the previous campaign before it was scrapped. I 've been writing up a new campaign, and announced on our on-line group that I would be intro'ing a system for purchasing skill points/feats beyond those alloted by level increase.

I had a system in place for this in the last campaign, but it became unwieldy as the feat chains grew, but character levels didn't. So I changed it. The main diff: you have to do research, finding books/journals/blue prints with the info you seek to gain the additional skills/feats. The option is still there, you just have to work a little harder to get them.


My problem: When I intro'd this option, the newer player informed me that he felt it was a waste of his time. He didn't mind finding schools or instructors, but questing for a mundane book was uninteresting/boring/unrealistic. He wasn't in the mood for 'scavenger hunting'.

This is a first for me. I've never had someone complain about having an option they didn't have to use, and I'm a bit apprehensive. ANyone ever had this problem before? Anyone know what I can expect?

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Then simply flat-out tell him that his character doesn't have to do it if he isn't "in the mood" for it, but won't get the associated bonus either, and get on with the game?

 

[Sammael]

I've had players complain about my custom (or house-ruled) spells, feats, and prestige classes. In such cases, I make sure to discuss the change with ALL my players at the same time, thoroughly explain the reasoning behind the mechanics, and then let the players debate it among themselves. In 99% of cases, the majority of players agree with me. In the few instances where this was not the case, I listened to my players' feedback and changed the mechanics.

 

[Glyfair]

This is a first for me. I've never had someone complain about having an option they didn't have to use, and I'm a bit apprehensive.

However, if they don't choose to use it, they'll have a less powerful character than others who choose to use the option, correct? From a game balance standpoint, this can be a problem.

However, if you aren't concerned with the game balance issues, or they aren't a problem, let it go. Just be wary of the consequences.

 

[Felon]

Sounds like you were a little put off by the tone of his response more than anything. He actually has a reasonable point. A feat's supposed to enhance your character above and beyond all the magic bling-bling he lugs around, so feeling like he has to go out and hunt down yet another item to improve his character may sound unappealing. A lot of people play RPG's to get away from the drudgery of homework. Finding schools and instructors do make more sense, and are a bit less nebbishy than a bunch of PC's sitting around a reading room in their downtime (I get this mental image of Krusk the barbarian with tweed patches on the elbows of his armor, wearing a pair of little bifocals).

As far as this being an optional rule, realize that once you've made this path available to your players, it's only "optional" in the same sense that a player taking his fair share of treasure from an adventure is "optional". Sure, you can always pass on getting any magic items. But it's frustrating to handicap yourself mechanically because a DM has a house rule that iis unappealing for conceptual reasons.

The most common example I can think of would be all those DM's who come up with "piety" systems that reward a player for earning his god's favor. Now, I don't like the notion that whatever character I play has to kowtow to a higher power, and I think dangling a carrot in my face to get me to do so is lame in the extreme. But the DM's thinking is that he's not hosing anyone over--after all, he doesn't actually force everyone to worship a god, right? They just miss out on the goody bag. In practice, however, denying someone a mechanical advantage for roleplaying is effectively the same thing as applying a penalty for those whose style of rolepalying don't mesh with those rrequirements.

 

[Joshua Randall]

If I were the player, I would also be slightly annoyed. I probably wouldn't have acted out the way he did, but I would agree with the sentiment that "scavenger hunts" in order to gain abilities are lame.

There are plenty of scavenger hunts to be had on MMORPGs (or even the non-MM RPGs like single-player Neverwinter Nights and such) -- no need to introduce those into tabletop D&D.

Have you considered an alternate method of allowing the players to gain additional skills or feats? Such as buying them with XP (similar to how item creation works)?

 

[Sammael]

Have you considered an alternate method of allowing the players to gain additional skills or feats? Such as buying them with XP (similar to how item creation works)?

I use this method, and it's fairly balanced (IMC, at least). Here's the relevant section from my house rules document:

It is possible to gain additional feats by spending experience points. You must declare at least one session in advance that you are planning on taking an additional feat. “First‐tier” feats (with no prerequisites) can be obtained by expending 3,000 experience points. To acquire the more powerful feats, you must satisfy their prerequisites normally, and their cost is increased by +1,500 xp for each feat listed as their prerequisite. Thus, you could obtain Mobility (provided you have Dodge) for 4,500 xp, or Whirlwind Attack (Combat Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack) for 9,000 xp. Level, class ability, and attribute minimum requirements impose no additional cost. You can never gain more than one feat per character level in this fashion, nor can you expend so many experience points so as to lose a character level.

The base feat cost was derived from the following formula: a magic item that grants the effects of a first‐tier feat costs 5,000 gp. A purchased feat has no space limitation (x2) and cannot be dispelled, disjoined, suppressed in an anti‐magic field, or stolen (ad hoc x1.5); this puts the final price at 15,000 gp. The ratio of experience points to gold is 5 gp per 1 xp (as mentioned in the Dungeon Master’s Guide), which results in the final cost of 3,000 xp.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

It's funny...a GM sets up a system to simulate additional learning of feats and skills by spending time and money on the task, and keeps it optional as an add-on to the existing system, and people complain that they have to follow that option or otherwise their characters "fall behind" mechanically.

If you're loath to have your character spend time in a library, searching up information pertaining to a certain skill or feat, nobody forces your character to do that. He could as well spend the time and money locating a wizard and have him whip up a magical item for him to even out the mechanical disadvantage. Or create a masterwork weapon in the spare time while another character sits in the library.

And as far as I got the description, it's just a bit of flavour text around "mechanical" effects...spend X amount of time and Y amount of money to locate/purchase the needed information and gain Z amounts of skill points. That there's some roleplaying attached is a preference of the individual GM, no? And just because one player isn't "in the mood", he's supposed to put his ideas aside? Sorry, sometimes a player either takes the carrot if he wants the goodie bag attached, or he looks for another carrot.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

Many things happen during "off time", this is the standard explanation to the increases a PC makes when he levels. A fighter is constantly practicing, but the aplication in real life while on an adventure unlocks the increase in skill. Under standard rules, he need not take extra time to gain his +1 BAB from leveling.

One posibility is to increase all PC skill points by 2 (I do this and like the results), and maybe increas the base feats to one every other level, and just give them the extra power.

Another would be to make more "carrots". While on an adventure, the PCs find a book on an ancient kingdom that gave rise to the current one, if studied this book grants +x ranks in knowledge, history. They also find an old minning log from a long lost mine, not large, but possibly profitable to them. Now, the PC can either spend time reading, or organizing a small group of workers to man the mine while he adventures. When he levels, he gets the skill points, or a little bit of money. No extra time spent, nothing taken from the current adventure.

 

[TonyLB]

I just don't get why you, as a GM, would hesitate to give this player what he wants. Especially since he so clearly stated it.

"Looking for magic book-marks, NO. Looking for curmudgeonly teachers, hidden sects of warrior-monks and knights guarding magic bridges, YES."

He's not objecting to going out and exploring the setting. He's telling you that the inanimate targets you're proposing are boring to him (as they would be to me) and instructing you that human interaction and nets of NPC connection are the way to recapture his interest. If only ALL players were so blunt and honest!