PHBII: Retraining?

[hong]

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)

I see nothing wrong with more people taking Toughness.

 

[FireLance]

I see nothing wrong with more people taking Toughness.

I think he's worried about the twinkery of (gasp) taking Toughness at 1st level and then changing it for Improved Toughness at 3rd level. This is an option that is better than Improved Toughness at low levels, and Toughness at high levels.

Spoiler

[Drama]The horror! The horror! Aie! Aie! The power creep comes! Fly, you fools! The end of the world is nigh![/Drama]

 

[Mr Jack]

I think he's worried about the twinkery of (gasp) taking Toughness at 1st level and then changing it for Improved Toughness at 3rd level. This is an option that is better than Improved Toughness at low levels, and Toughness at high levels.

You can't do that, though. Improved Toughness requires you to have Toughness.

Yeah, a smart Wizard will take Toughness as level 1 and then swap it out later; you know what? I really couldn't care less. Wizards are so unbelivably useless and fragile at low levels that anything that helps make them worthwhile is good with me.

 

[Staffan]

You can't do that, though. Improved Toughness requires you to have Toughness.

One might think so, but no. It only requires a base Fort save of +2. So either a class with a good fortitude save, or a minimum of 6 levels in classes with a bad one.

 

[Mr Jack]

One might think so, but no. It only requires a base Fort save of +2. So either a class with a good fortitude save, or a minimum of 6 levels in classes with a bad one.

Oops, my bad.

However, how often do you take Improved Toughness for a class with a good fortitude save? And this trick only works if you have one. Really, it's such a trivial abuse that I can't see any reason to care. So you get an extra 2 hp at 1st and 1 hp at 2nd - hardly game breaking, is it?

 

[KarinsDad]

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.

Who says that adding these rules in DND is progress?

I consider it devolution.

 

[Space Coyote]

I thought I would add some input to this topic as well.

In my friends campaign our characters are level 18 and the players in my campaign are level 14-15. I have been toying with the idea of "swapping" out feats for a few weeks now. Although I have not read the section on "retraining" in the PHBII, I dont see an issue with changing feats at a later level.

However, I do think that swapping these out every level seems a little overdone. Perhaps every level you get a new feat (every 3rd level) you can also swap out an old one. I also would not allow things like Wizard specialization or Cleric domains to be changed.

As for skill change, I can see a 2 for 1 trade off. You can take 2 skill points off of one skill and put 1 point in another skill. Sort of represents your character "forgetting" a skill and applying themselves in a different skill.

 

[glass]

I'm especially concerned because the book has a name very similar to "The Player's Handbook", which might make many consider it "core" material.

I wouldn't worry about it. It's optional variant subject to DM approval, just like any other supplement.

If any players get uppity about that, point out that the core books all say 'Core Rulebook' on them. PHBII does not.


glass.

 

[Nail]

I see nothing wrong with more people taking Toughness.

Nor do I, even if they "plan for it". So what?

 

[hands_miranda]

The only issue I see with rebulding is the substantial extra amount of paperwork involved to keep track not only of what feat was taken at what level, but also where all your skill ranks and the like got spent. It does seem like a nice option to help out with PrCitis (i.e. the requirement to plan your character from the ground up to be able to enter a PrC) and also with the issue of new appropriate feats showing up in a new book for the character. I know the campaogn I might be playing in soon will use it, so I am much more willing to try weird things out with a character, since he can recover from a "mistake" later in the campaign. If they came up with a bookeeping sheet for leveling up, it would solve the problems with retraining substantially.

Raymond