Training Costs to Level Up

[Janx]

This might be slightly tangential, but in the last several years I've come to see the importance of training in the time it takes, not the money it takes.

I hate hate hate the whole "30 levels in three months" thing that 3.x and later editions encourage. Adding training time (if it is significant) suddenly makes a huge difference. What if it takes 1 week per level you are going to gain to train? Then by the time you've attained 30th level, you have spent nearly nine years training.

One of the solutions I imply, is that you don't pay the training cost when you have the XP, you pay it over time, just as a matter of course.

adjusting and applying that idea to time being another component, you make accruing time, money, and XP be something you do BEFORE you can level up.

so to level up from level 1 to level 2, you must spend at least 1 week as a level 1, earn 1000 XP, and spend 100GP on upkeep(supplies, maintenance, trainiers).


thus, there's no DING for enough XP, and then you get all herky jerky with trying to meet all the other requirements, you work on these other requirements WHILE earning the XP.

What I argue against is the idea of you've got 1000 XP, now go train. that's arbitrary and unrealistic. If you're going to require training, make it ongoing so its effectively paid for BEFORE the level up (though there may be situations where it still gets stuck waiting)

 

[kitsune9]

I hate hate hate the whole "30 levels in three months" thing that 3.x and later editions encourage. Adding training time (if it is significant) suddenly makes a huge difference. What if it takes 1 week per level you are going to gain to train? Then by the time you've attained 30th level, you have spent nearly nine years training.

Just a few thoughts...

I agree that I don't like the leveling up in a single year's game time. The way I do is more like the old RPGA style of issuing out time units for each adventure and then stating that it takes X amount of time to complete an adventure, X amount of time for players to do their own thing like profession checks, perform checks, crafting checks, and making magic items. Adding a training time can also be something that the DM adds.

For DM's who want players to train before leveling up, I would recommend to not grant any XP during sessions until the adventure is over or reaching a certain "save point". For example, here's my thinking:

At 1st level, the PC's are hired to explore a ruin and recover a magic dagger. Unfortunately, the ruin is swarming with orcs.

From the outset, the DM determines that the PC's will spend a month on this adventure. So if the campaign starts Jan 1st in the year 1300, then once the adventure is finished, it's Feb 1st, 1300.

Secondly, the DM factors in a time period for player characters to do other things aside from adventuring. Got professions, performance, craft skills? You get to use them in this time. To make it simple, the DM decides that this represents another month. So at the conclusion of this adventure, it's now March 1st, 1300

Thirdly, the DM now tallies up the XP for the adventure and determines that the PC's kill haul is 1,500 XP, enough to make 2nd level. Now the DM determines that time must be spent making arrangements to level up. He determines that this is another month. Now it's April 1st, 1300 and the PC's have played one adventure and three months have gone by. If the campaign goes from 1st to 30th level, it will take roughly 87 months to reach 30th level which comes to just over 7 years. Now if we have the PC's sit out the winter for three months out of the year, I believe that will almost three years so a campaign will run almost 10 years from 1st to 30th level. Of course, if we go with Jester's excellent 1 week per level suggestion then we just added created 9 years for training alone and now our campaign goes from 10 years to almost 16 years campaign.

So what do we do about mega-adventures and time-sensitive adventures--or worse mega-adventures that are time-sensitive?

Well, let's break it down by the parts first.

For the mega-adventure in which players are expected to gain several levels (at least two), the DM must identify a "save point" in which to do all the stuff as above. If the PC's must journey to another town halfway through the module, then that's your save point in which the DM awards XP, states X amount of time has passed and begin training. It's important for the DM to make notes of when that point will occur.

For the time-sensitive adventure, then handwaiving that taking X amount of time for each adventure, isn't going to work. The DM will just need to keep track of the actual time expended toward the conclusion of the adventure; however, at the end of the adventure, he can backload extra time for players to handle their own personal activities and training so that it still equals out a three month period of time or whatever the DM sets.

Now for the mega-adventure that's time-sensitive, well, this is probably going to be the big challenge for the DM. This probably an issue where there is going to have to be some kind of tradeoff. If the DM is really hardup about instituting training time, then he should factor that in to allow for the end date to occur later or allow players to waive it while on this kind of advenutre. Personally, I avoid creating the mega-adventures that are time-sensitive and opt for ones that are shorter and don't reward much XP.

Happy gaming!

 

[shadzar]

What I argue against is the idea of you've got 1000 XP, now go train. that's arbitrary and unrealistic. If you're going to require training, make it ongoing so its effectively paid for BEFORE the level up (though there may be situations where it still gets stuck waiting)

Since I think you are still off track with everyone else, what exactly would you do to have this "training" occur as you level up in order to dump coins back into this town so the players affect the town more than just passing through once?

How do they spend money while in a nearby dungeon to get it back to this town, etc?

In a general since it doesnt seem like a problem, but for this particular case, that has me curious where it will lead, how can they do the training that results in the money getting back to town?

Also why is it arbitrary to pay for a service when you need it?

1. PCs don't or shouldnt know anything about the metagame, such as their level.
2. There is ALWAYS an artificial DING, and how you treat this within the game depends on the players of the group.
3. A game that ha all PCs level at the same time to where everyone is getting new skills is even more arbitrary and unrealistic, unless they all have the same INT/WIS.
4. I challenge you to play a game without the players knowing their XP or level of their characters

I simply dont see how training over time, as it were, really does anything outside of just the DING you leveled grab new skills.

I also dont see how it would help invest in a town either financially, or in other ways.

MAYBE if using those next levels skills was allowed while at this level to actually try them at a decreased chance of success, so they could actually be learned and improved over time before gaining the new level, then maybe I could see you learning them, otherwise training or just to DING is really the only way I can see it to just be given the skills when you level.

 

[Janx]

I think you're missing the point I'm trying to support.

IF you want to have a training cost, requiring payment at the DING is ugly design. It makes the level mechanic glaringly obvious in-game and makes the cost of leveling intrusive to the PC.

Wheras, making payments during the course of the current level to the next level, makes it easier explain smaller payments as to what they represent, then 1 large payment.

If you're somehow getting on my case because I'm not just talking about ways to spend the money, you're infringing on my right to discuss the full matter of leveling costs.

The mechanics of the training system are pertinent to explaining what those costs represent. Let alone the OP's motive for having these costs in the first place.

if the cost is marginal, then it's easy to explain it as buying new wooden practice swords, etc. As the cost goes up, thats a lot harder to explain, because a 20th level fighter can use the same wooden swords as a first level.

But if the cost is truly marginal, then it may not even be worth tracking, as it is a pittance to the scale of money the PC is carrying around.

If the cost isn't marginal, then it tends to be so, because the GM is trying to divest PCs of money.

So long as we're talking about the OP's topic, we're not abusing it. A discussion of training costs in general is relevant to the examples of training costs.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Might not work with your house rules, but another way to go is to somewhat divorce the trained things from level.

For example, in otherwise RAW 4E, it would be fairly easy to say that the list of powers that you can pick from is the list of powers you have bought training in. (Or otherwise gained as quest rewards, special training from NPCs for service, etc.) To remove most of the issues of always having to run back to town, simply say that a character can get this training before they can even use the power. You could the same thing with feats, in addition to or instead of powers. Then merely provide plenty of opportunities to do so.

That doesn't mean you have to make everything available, everywhere, either, which I think would be a good fit for the kind of resource game you are discussing. For example, the party pleases the local thieves guild. As a reward, they'll give you a cut rate at "unlocking" Improved Initiative. Each player can look at that and decide whether that would ever be an option for them. Or maybe it would, but they'd rather save the money now and buy it full price 5 levels later.

But I particularly like this option for feats and powers in 4E. We already view "retraining" as "you know all of this stuff reasonably well, thus the +1 per 2 levels, but powers you actually have and trained skills represent things that you've dedicated recent practice to." So in the suggested variant, "all of this stuff you know reasonably well" would be a subset, instead of everything in the book.

Incidently, a similar system would also be a way to handle those with simulation concerns over things like the Athletic desert guy being able to swim so well. Basically, make the skill possible scope and size work per RAW, but you don't get all of the possibilities without training. If you've bought swimming training, then you get to use your full Athletics skills to do it. If you haven't you flounder.

If that's entirely too much bookkeeping (and it could be), then you could break it down over some broad guilds or other organizations, charge a fair penny for it (depending on scope and advancement, and unlock whole scopes of things.

For example, you buy "Heroic tier training" with the "Mercenary Guild". This unlocks a whole pile of powers, feats, skill options, etc. The "Thieves Guild" unlocks a different list, with some overlap. The "Merchant League" unlocks a different list, again with overlap. If a player feels cheated by the overlap, tough. That's part of the resource game.

In your game, you could tie these tier training options by the resource sources. You buy Overlook Village training, you get -- long list of things you can pick.

I rather like some of these ideas for my current game. Thanks for provoking them.

 

[shadzar]

I think you're missing the point I'm trying to support.

IF you want to have a training cost, requiring payment at the DING is ugly design. It makes the level mechanic glaringly obvious in-game and makes the cost of leveling intrusive to the PC.

Wheras, making payments during the course of the current level to the next level, makes it easier explain smaller payments as to what they represent, then 1 large payment.

How?

This would seem to have the character have knowledge of the metagame in which they know they have levels. Otherwise how would they be paying along the way?

Wherein if paying when they want to learn some new skills, they are actually paying to learn that new tactic from an expert in that tactic, and it removes the visibility of the metagame from the PCs.

From a money standpoint it may seem better than jsut dumping a lump sum, but form other angles, it just brings the fact the PCs are characters in a game, into the game itself.

So how does paying over time, not show the meteagame?

We seem to be disagreeing on where the metagame shows itself, and I am not at all following how paying for training at once somehow does this, as you aren't paying to level, but paying to learn some new powers for 4th edition. A new sword swing refined, or whatever.

While I see the metagame showing if for some reason you are spending money on something that the PC shouldn't know is there.

 

[howandwhy99]

Anyway, I have no idea what all that GP is actually spent on. I could handwave it, but I'd rather not.

Tutors? I don't want to have a lot of high-level NPCs running around.

I go with tutors. The payment covers their teaching during the time required.

Tutors halve the time during it takes to train in my game. They are not required, but they do speed things up. 1/2 the trade price goes to the tutor, the other 1/2 goes to costs for the trainee. Double the time, but not the cost for a trainee attempting to train themselves. 2 weeks x the level you are leaving (mastering) is standard, double for self training. Costs vary by trainer, but a minimum of 100gp per level. Costs are not halved for self training, but not doubled due to time. New classes require 12 weeks (3 months) per class, trainers are required for new classes.

To train another person a character only needs to be 1 level higher. So high level NPCs are needed, but not everywhere.

Your training rules really are up to you, but I'd keep them simple and obvious.

EDIT: You can always have pre-training too. This way PCs level up once they reach their XP total during sessions rather than stopping an adventure because the player prefers to train.

 

[Janx]

Looks like u identified the point we're disagreeing on. Good, that helps me refine my response.

Aeons ago,some of us gamers deemed that stopping to train to level was a gamist mechanic and didn't make sense as a realistically. We're talking 1e/2e here.

Couch that mindset with the OP's goal to have level training (that which by its original incarnation I had deemed stupid).

So for me to support level training, i have to present it as an ongoing activity that the PC doing as part of their self improvement and growth.

To level up,the pc needs to spend time working on improving their skill. This time can be spread out across the current level, rather than jammed in at the end when the pre-requisite XP is earned.

What i'm trying todo is account for a number of peoples goals (level training, time gap between leveling, no artificial train to level as an in game mechanic)

If your just regularly going to the dojo to train,one day your skills improve.

Theres nothing in my idea that says you cant cram time at the dojo for 3 weeks. If nothing else, i want folks to consider that cramming should not be a requirement of the design

Once training is spread across time,it opens up more rationalizations for the cost.

 

[kitsune9]

For example, you buy "Heroic tier training" with the "Mercenary Guild". This unlocks a whole pile of powers, feats, skill options, etc. The "Thieves Guild" unlocks a different list, with some overlap. The "Merchant League" unlocks a different list, again with overlap. If a player feels cheated by the overlap, tough. That's part of the resource game.

I rather like some of these ideas for my current game. Thanks for provoking them.

I have this in my current campaign too! I wanted guild memberships to be important in the campaign and to encourage the players to join a guild would open certain feats and special abilities; otherwise, they just get access to the Player's Handbook and that's it.

 

[shadzar]

Looks like u identified the point we're disagreeing on. Good, that helps me refine my response.

Aeons ago,some of us gamers deemed that stopping to train to level was a gamist mechanic and didn't make sense as a realistically. We're talking 1e/2e here.

Couch that mindset with the OP's goal to have level training (that which by its original incarnation I had deemed stupid).

So for me to support level training, i have to present it as an ongoing activity that the PC doing as part of their self improvement and growth.

To level up,the pc needs to spend time working on improving their skill. This time can be spread out across the current level, rather than jammed in at the end when the pre-requisite XP is earned.

What i'm trying todo is account for a number of peoples goals (level training, time gap between leveling, no artificial train to level as an in game mechanic)

If your just regularly going to the dojo to train,one day your skills improve.

Theres nothing in my idea that says you cant cram time at the dojo for 3 weeks. If nothing else, i want folks to consider that cramming should not be a requirement of the design

Once training is spread across time,it opens up more rationalizations for the cost.

Interestingly enough, aeons ago, some of us gamers deemed that instantly getting the boons of gaining level was a gamist mechanic and didn't make sense as a realistically. We're talking 1e/2e here. So training was used to actually have the PCs learn new skills to simulate refinement of idea they got throughout the course of gaining that level.

So with that in mind training was a way to get someone that knew a new skill of the trade to teach things that would be learned during the course of training, which LEADS to the new abilities from gaining a level. Having different level scales at that time had different peoples level at different times, so becomes easier than a unified scale for leveling in which all persons level at the same time....

Since we were, and still seem to be, on opposite sides of the training issue; I can see plausibility in your method, but only so long as there isnt payment for it, via the concept of your exploits and others talking about them spurred your new abilities camp.

I am sure you understand my view, as you dismiss it as a preferred method of play, but I still don't see how you would pay over time for this training.

I have several ways to level people that are with training once you get the XP, as well as training over the course of the level.

I just don't see where the payment part plays into it and NOT show the metagame as you train as you go, as well as pay as you go for that training in some fashion.

Still going with the OP and concept of the idea is to train, and remove coinage, from the players, to go into this "town", or just remove the coinage somehow to account for that trainings costs.

Who are they paying to train when doing it as they level but before the DING, which we both agree is there in any method; and how are they paying for it, and how is the metagame not showing through as they do it?​