XGE "Training" Downtime Activity - does it devalue tool proficiencies?

[S'mon]

I definitely wouldn't let 'mending' create new material, so shoes will still wear out eventually.

 

[MNblockhead]

Here is where my thinking is on this now.

I'm going to go with XGE over the PHB rule.

But for every language or tool proficiency beyond those from your race and background (those that you had when you first made your character), you have to spend some downtime between levels for those proficiency to carry over. This works for my campaign because you have to train to level up. So, during that period, you have to spend some additional time and money to keep your language and tool skill current.

One way of doing this is to use the XGE's "Work" downtime activity. That way you actually MAKE money AND keep your proficiency. I would allow someone to work as a translator/interpreter to keep their language skills up and make money from them.

I would also allow the carousing downtime activity to be used to keep current with a language if you are carousing with native speakers of that language.

Training could also be used and I thought of making a variant of training called "sharpening the saw" but I don't know why anyone would choose to pay for more training if they can meet the requirement with work. One option would be to allow someone to do another round of training (10 minus intelligence-modifier weeks @ 25 GP/week) for an additional +1 to their proficiency modifier with the tool. But that could be come game breaking.

If a character makes significant use of a language or tool during adventure play, I will waive the downtime requirement. I'm not going to create a rule for how much time as I don't want players to have to bookkeep how much they are using a skill while we are playing. I'll be pretty permissive because, ultimately, I want to encourage the use of tools and languages.

 

[jayoungr]

Depends. Tool proficiencies are not just using the tool, it is also knowledge of the art and materials related to the tools.

I definitely wouldn't let 'mending' create new material, so shoes will still wear out eventually.

That's why I specified "adventure-related challenges." Seriously, I've never played in a campaign where shoes wore out. If you play in campaigns where that happens regularly, then obviously tool proficiencies are more useful at your table.

My main underlying point, though, was that I don't think languages should be devalued in comparison with tool proficiencies, and since MNblockhead has decided that's also true at his/her table, then I won't press the point further.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I definitely use the language culture connection in my campaigns. Tools too, but to a lesser extent. Languages are *the* way to add a new body of knowledge to your character. So if you pick up Elvish, you probably know the names and portfolios of the primary elven deities even if you don't have the Religion skill, for instance. I just think "what basic things would almost everyone who grew up speaking this language know?"

 

[MNblockhead]

That's why I specified "adventure-related challenges." Seriously, I've never played in a campaign where shoes wore out. If you play in campaigns where that happens regularly, then obviously tool proficiencies are more useful at your table.

Right. That has never happened in any game I ran and if it did it would be session/challenge specific. Never liked the need to repair and maintain equipment Everscroll and other VRPGs, don't find it fun in TTRPGs. But the ability to conduct maintenance to travel farther per day without exhaustion or using the proficiency to determine information from tracks, etc. could very well come up and I find the Xanathar rules for tool proficiencies to be inspiring in helping my players and I make them more meaningful to our games.

 

[MNblockhead]

I definitely use the language culture connection in my campaigns. Tools too, but to a lesser extent. Languages are *the* way to add a new body of knowledge to your character. So if you pick up Elvish, you probably know the names and portfolios of the primary elven deities even if you don't have the Religion skill, for instance. I just think "what basic things would almost everyone who grew up speaking this language know?"

Very good point and something I don't think I or my players think to take advantage of enough.

There is a lot of religion and history built into language. You don't need to be well educated to get the gist of many of sayings and terms that draw from religious stories and history.

 

[Li Shenron]

I've incorporated many of the downtime activities in Xanathar's Guide to Everything (XGE) into my campaign. This includes training for languages. But to learn a new tool, I use the PHB rule of 250 days, instead of the XGE rule of 10 workweeks minus the character's intelligence modifier.

I'm finding myself waffling on which time requirement to use for training in a new tool proficiency and would like to get perspectives of other DMs.

My original concern was that a tool proficiency represented a significant investment in time working as an apprentice. The PHB's 250 days seems more reasonable than the XGE 10 weeks minus the character's INT modifier. But, with a 250 day requirement, I'm not sure anyone will ever learn another tool. On the other hand, over the course of the campaign, we could easily have a character learning pretty much every tool proficiency if I go with the XGE rules.


I worry XGE devalues tool proficiencies, which in turn makes backgrounds and character creation choices less meaningful. I'm less worried about this with languages. There are many different languages and languages are less mechanically impactful.

There are ways I could tweak it and make home brew rules on having to keep in practice, but I don't want the extra complexity and rules overhead. So, ultimately, I just need to decide on whether to go with PHB or XGE time requirements for training in a new tool.

Which do you use, if either, and why?

I haven't use these variant rules because I don't have XGE, but I think the conflict here is between a gaming group that (a) has an occasional need for an extra tool proficiency or two, and a PC who (b) wants to stack extra tool proficiencies just because they are free. The standard rules make (b) not very easy to accomplish, but may be detrimental to the more genuine case (a) especially because I can imagine that in such case a player comes up with the idea of gaining the extra prof possibly before the next adventure... so the XGE variant comes help with case (a) but makes it easier to exploit for player (b).

As a matter of fact, if I'd been one of the designers I would have considered downtime rules to grant retraining rather than additional training, so that spending some downtime would allow a PC a chance to swap a proficiency with another (in addition to what many classes can already do e.g. with spells or special abilities, but only when they level up). This way there is essentially no room for exploiting the option.