The Idea of training to level

[Crothian]

My requireing training has a lot of player options built in. They can train by themsleves or with each other. They can space out the training over many days as they travel. They don't have to train exactly when they have enough XP, they basically practice whenever they have free time and this counts as their training.

Now, if they actually take the time and go to a training hall or other special place they have to have the money to afford it, and many days if not weeks to devout towards it. In doing this they get better training and earn a little something extra (a few skill points, a weak feat, or some other minor ability; whatever it is is assigned my me, the DM).

As you can read it's a pretty relaxed system and allows the PCs to choose how they want to do it. In the end you have to make sure the Players don't mind the training (if you use a training system).

 

[mseds99]

"I would look at this as silly quandries to deal with. In heroic literature, the hero almost never has to travel back to his trainer to learn how to handle the foes he'll face rescuing the princess. He develops his skills along the way."

Elder-Basilisk, in many ways I agree with you and I certainly appreciate your point. Normally, in storyland, training does take place on the road. A character usually furthers their techniques and skills over the natural course of the game. Of course, the problem is that we use a mechanical system that use levels, while in reality people learn skills in smooth curves, not steps.

That being said, in some literature, albeit the minority, charcaters are forced to learn their skills, especially magic, at institutes which take the character out of the main action of the story. For example, in the Wheel of Time (I haven't read it in 5 years so I'm sure I'm off on many of the details) I believe that for the Aes Seidi to gain further advancement, they need to be mentored for a considerable amount of time. You also see this in other examples, which to be honest, I can't think of off the top of my head. Of course, to keep the charcater going and involved, the training period becomes part of the story itself, which is exactly what I was doing. I was NOT saying "Go into the big bad guy's lair at a lower level or go home and train to go up a level.". It came across as "Through your trials and tribulations you realize that you have not fully maximized your considerable talents to their fullest capabilities. With the decisive insight of a master (they are fairly high level), you realize that <Trainer's name> would prove invaluable to your personal growth at this time. Of course, the princess is still in the clutches of the big baddie. The choice is yours, for YOU must decide the fate of all." It's a considerable difference, IMO. Of course, we all realize its due to the mechanics of the game, but so is much of the action of the story, including but not limited to: combat, skills, feats, performing and pretty much everything else that involves a dice roll. I really don't see the difference. Why is a completely mechanical action (ie. skill check) ok for storytelling one while the concept of training is not? The key, if you want to make your game narrative in nature, is to incorporate the mechanical aspect of the game into the storyline itself. If you look at it this way, you won't consider the options to be meta-decisions.

To be clear about my position, I am not advocating making character's train for a certain length of time. I am simply pointing out that it doesn't have to be considered a negative to the overall storyline and, if cone properly, can actually ADD to the whole campaign experience.

I hope that wasn't TOO boring.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Where did you get the idea that people just train and gain levels? That concept seems completely made up. THe DMG goes into length on optional training rules and no where is it suggested to gain levels just through training.

Didn't get it nowhere. Never said it was so. But if you require training to level-up, that suggests you have to train to become better.



As I said: to become better, you have to go out adventuring. Of course, you don't learn whirlwind attack in the middle of the dungeon: you learn it over the course of a whole level (or maybe even several levels, since you only get a feat avery 3 levels, not including bonus feats), aquiring and improving (and finally perfecting) the combat move of attacking several enemies with one long, round stroke. That's how the character gains it, or you would gain it in the real world. But you can't do it so in game terms: you won't have things from "quarter whirlwind attack" over half to three quarters to full, you either have it or you don't.

And to me it sounds rediculous to go adventuring for weeks without getting better at fighting, skill use, or spellcasting (because you don't level up then, and your stats don't increase), but if you hit the gyms a week after you come back out that dungeon, you're suddenly better at all the stuff. As I said: levels are an abstraction just like age (I'm not really 21: I'm several weeks older than that, but whenever I'm asked I only say "21"), and a level-up (or birthday for our example) just represents the work of a long time of adventuring (or a year of aging), gained at a single moment to make things easier. And this moment can happen in the middle of a dungeon (although I would require a good night sleep so you won't level-up in the middle of a fight).

 

[Kae'Yoss]

It's hard to rationalize a quantum leap in a PCs' power otherwise...

Actually, it's quite easy: the numbers are an abstraction. I think everytime a character fights an enemy he becomes better at it. But you surely don't want the BAB to increase at 1/1000-steps, right? So the rules "ignore" a lot of gradual increases and give you all that increment in one big package.

And, as I said, I can't rationalize weeks time of adventuring without any leap in the PCs' power whatsoever, when the quantum leap happens after a couple of days/weeks' worth of training in a hall.[/QUOTE]

 

[Kae'Yoss]

We don't require a week of training when you change your class. We usually require that you start taking interest in the activities of the new class at the beginning of the last level. But that won't keep you from adventuring, as you pick it up along the way.

 

[AuraSeer]

I believe that for the Aes Seidi to gain further advancement, they need to be mentored for a considerable amount of time.

I'm glad you brought this up, because it's a good illustration of why I don't require training for PCs.

Egwene, Elayne, and Nynaeve spend some time studying in the White Tower, but then they go out on their own. By the time they return to the Aes Sedai, they've basically taught themselves, and have become stronger than most women who've been studying their whole lives.

In that series, those women (and all the other protagonists) are special. They're a little bit smarter or stronger or luckier than the rest of the world. In D&D, such exceptional characters are called PCs. Even if your average shmoe needs weeks of training to advance in level, a PC fighter should improve without any time in front of a practice dummy.

TIJMO. YMMV.

 

[mseds99]

huh?

what the heck do all those letters at the end mean?

 

[Cullain]

"I would look at this as silly quandries to deal with. In heroic literature, the hero almost never has to travel back to his trainer to learn how to handle the foes he'll face rescuing the princess. He develops his skills along the way."

But there is always Luke Skywalker being trained by yoda- does he get more training to be a more effective jedi, or does he rush off to help his friends?

I don't use much training in my campaign, only for PrCs. But i just wanted to say that there are examples of stories that use training, even using training as an important plot point. So I can see why some people would use it.

Cullain

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I imagine that Star Wars D20 would describe Luke's choice to visit Yoda as taking his first Jedi Guardian level instead of continuing to advance in the Starpilot class.

In my D&D campaign, it would be viewed as Luke, the Fighter/Jedi (1) being a couple hundred experience points away from Fighter/Jedi (2). Luke could spend the time training with Yoda and gain enough experience to advance a level or he could rush off and join the other PCs in the adventure despite not quite having the skills he would (probably) need. Luke probably would've got experience for the adventure, but he didn't overcome the challenge posed by Vader and consequently returned to Dagobah and trained for the last bit of experience he needed to level.

That's really the exception rather than the rule in fantasy though. Usually, the hero is on a significant and important quest and he can't afford to stop or turn back every time he's ready for something new. In my experience, it gets really frustrating when your characters are on a long and involved quest that will last for a few dozen campaign sessions but can't level up because they need to find trainers.

But there is always Luke Skywalker being trained by yoda- does he get more training to be a more effective jedi, or does he rush off to help his friends?

I don't use much training in my campaign, only for PrCs. But i just wanted to say that there are examples of stories that use training, even using training as an important plot point. So I can see why some people would use it.

Cullain

 

[hong]

Re: huh?

what the heck do all those letters at the end mean?

I think it's an anagram of IYKWIMAITYD.