PHBII: Retraining?

[jcfiala]

Adding the retraining rule lets people be more relaxed and flexible about their advancement. It lets you model a wizard who starts out tough (toughness), but who eventually loses his brawn as he concentrates instead on magic (replaces toughness with spell focus.) I really like that idea.

This new rule also helps casual players who want to try an interesting-sounding feat, but who aren't sure it's best. I know that I've had a PC who took improved sunder and then found himself fighting only monsters with natural attacks. I'll enjoy that character even more if I can swap it out.

I haven't read the new rules yet (PHBII hasn't arrived), but I'd like to repeat what Piratecat is saying here. Especially for feats - most characters get so few, and discovering that you're locked out of an interesting story opportunity for three levels because of a badly chosen feat at 1st level really bites. Plus, new players can relax - if their choice of feat doesn't work out, well, we now have rules for fixing that.

This strikes me as a good idea especially for changing the Weapon Focus - if you only have Weapon Focus (longsword), but then are given the GreatAxe of the DwarfFriend +2, it makes sense for the player to practice with his new, story-appropriate weapon and change his Weapon Focus (longsword) to Weapon Focus (greataxe). IMHO, of course. (Now, if you had the Greater Weapon Focus (longsword) on top of Weapon Focus (longsword, that would be a harder thing to change.)

 

[ThirdWizard]

This is strange and frightening.

I'm used to a game where if you learn something, no matter how insignificant, you never get worse at it and know it forever. Put some ranks into Profession (cook) at 1st level and never do any cooking or restaurant work for fifty years. After those fifty years you'll be just as good at your Profession (cook) as you were as a lad.

Now you're saying I can forget how to Power Attack? Or fight my Favored Enemy? That's just crazy.

*puts fingers in ears* lalalalalalalalalalalalala

 

[KarinsDad]

This is strange and frightening.

I'm used to a game where if you learn something, no matter how insignificant, you never get worse at it and know it forever. Put some ranks into Profession (cook) at 1st level and never do any cooking or restaurant work for fifty years. After those fifty years you'll be just as good at your Profession (cook) as you were as a lad.

Now you're saying I can forget how to Power Attack? Or fight my Favored Enemy? That's just crazy.

*puts fingers in ears* lalalalalalalalalalalalala

 

[Hypersmurf]

No, the deity grants the Domain. The PC is not entitled to change anything given to him by a deity. IMO.

Sounds like the best reason to play a non-affiliated cleric yet!

(Hey, it's in the Core Rules! I'm entitled to play a cleric with no deity! )

-Hyp.

 

[Thaniel]

(Now, if you had the Greater Weapon Focus (longsword) on top of Weapon Focus (longsword, that would be a harder thing to change.)

It would just take longer.
First level up: Change Greater Weapon Focus to some other plausible (in character) feat as he starts training with his new axe.
Second level up: As he's continued training, he can now change his Weapon Focus to work with his axe.
Third level up: Now change that other feat (or some other) to greater weapon focus. Or not. whatever suits the character's bg.

 

[nogray]

It would just take longer.
First level up: Change Greater Weapon Focus to some other plausible (in character) feat as he starts training with his new axe.
Second level up: As he's continued training, he can now change his Weapon Focus to work with his axe.
Third level up: Now change that other feat (or some other) to greater weapon focus. Or not. whatever suits the character's bg.

In one less level:
1st Level up: Change Greater Weapon Focus (Longsword) to Weapon Focus (Greataxe)
2nd Level up: Change Weapon Focus (Longsword) to Greater Weapon Focus (Greataxe)

Similar changes could be made for longer feat trees, but the idea is there. It also avoids the reality disconnect of having an intermediate feat that you never intended to have except as a stepping stone and goes straight from weapon-training feat to weapon-training feat. (Since we're talking about GWF, the fighter's bonus feats may very well make the transition easier, too.)

 

[MarkB]

In one less level:
1st Level up: Change Greater Weapon Focus (Longsword) to Weapon Focus (Greataxe)
2nd Level up: Change Weapon Focus (Longsword) to Greater Weapon Focus (Greataxe)

Similar changes could be made for longer feat trees, but the idea is there. It also avoids the reality disconnect of having an intermediate feat that you never intended to have except as a stepping stone and goes straight from weapon-training feat to weapon-training feat. (Since we're talking about GWF, the fighter's bonus feats may very well make the transition easier, too.)

Strictly speaking, you can't do this, because you're swapping out specific levels' feats, and your choice of new feat not only has to be valid now, it has to have been a valid option at the time you took the original feat.

So, for instance, you could swap out your 12th-level Greater Weapon Focus (longsword) feat for Weapon Focus (greataxe), but you couldn't then later swap out your 2nd-level Weapon Focus (longsword) feat for Greater Weapon Focus (greataxe) because at second level you didn't have the prerequisites to take Greater Weapon Focus (greataxe).

You can still do it via the three-level progression because all changes are considered retroactive.

 

[0-hr]

Everyone seems to be focused on changing things (like feats) that you thought would be good but turned out not to be so good. My concern is purposely taking a feat that you KNOW you will swap out in three levels.

For example, I'm a wizard so I take Toughness at 1st level. I know that those hp will be trivial later but I can just swap out the Toughness for something like Empower Spell (which would have been a waste at 1st level) once that is more beneficial for me.

The rebuilding rules don't say you can only swap out things that didn't work out as planned - they just say you can swap one thing a level. In effect, they are encouraging a character plan that includes swappable abilities. You should maximize your low level feat choice and decide right up front when you will swap things out to keep you at the top of the power curve.

It's this added source of endorsed munchkinizm that worries me.

(and I'm a player, so don't tell me to "just ban it" if I don't like it)

 

[FireLance]

Ah yes, power creep, munchkinism, nostaligia. I wonder why these complaints are so prevalent in D&D rules when in almost every other area of human endeavor, progress is usually considered a good thing.

When I get the latest, fastest PC on the market, I don't hear complaints of power creep.
When I add shares from the most recent IPO to my investment portfolio, I don't get accused of min-maxing or being a munchkin.
Even though people abuse cars by drink driving and speeding, I haven't come across anyone who said that horse-drawn carts are the one true means of transport.

I have no doubt in my mind that there will be gamers who use the rules to make the bland, flavorless, one-dimensional collection of combat statistics that they call characters even more powerful. But so what? They're having fun.

There are also gamers who will use these rules to reflect the organic development of their characters in their games. Guess what, they're having fun, too.

If the mere existence of these rules reduces your enjoyment of the game, despite the fact that neither you nor anyone else that you game with uses them, then you can have my sympathy for all of one second.

After that, I'm going back to having fun with my game.

 

[Piratecat]

Everyone seems to be focused on changing things (like feats) that you thought would be good but turned out not to be so good. My concern is purposely taking a feat that you KNOW you will swap out in three levels.

I just don't see this as a problem. Mind you, as ThirdWizard said, it's scary and runs counter my D&D mindset... but I don't see any problems in my campaign if I include the new rule. Since I think it would make my game more fun for everyone, I'm okay with it.