Feat Training [Archive] - Wizards Community

Feat Training [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Kyamsil
11-09-04, 08:45 AM I made a house rule for characters being able to train additional feats. This house rule has been updated a couple times and was adapted too by the other DM of our group.

Currently, the only difference between the system we use is the limit on how many feats can a character train and at which levels, but I am considering making it similar to the way he does (that seems more balanced).

Long story short, since 3.0 was released there has been an avalanche of new feats, which hasn't ceased. Each and every new book released has some new cool feats. Which good are all those feats when you have so many few choices available to get on your career? If we also take into account that most prestige classes need some of the core feats as prerequisites, even entire "feat chains" in some cases, this makes it even worse.

So we wanted a system that allowed characters to train themselves to learn new feats, expending resources on the process. We agreed that GP was not a good thing to balance the system with. It sounded better that the characters had to spend some XPs on learning those feats. If the characters use an NPC as the teacher, the DM can always charge GPs, ask for a quest, or something like that as another campaign utility.

To calculate the XPs you need to spend on learning an extra feat we made up a formula that is simpler than it seems at first glance:

[(# of trained feats + 1) x 100] + [(# prerequisites of the feat + 1) x 50]

This takes into account several factors: feats with more prerequisites should be more difficult to master and thus have a higher cost. Also, the more extra "tricks" you learn, the costier it would be to manage the learning of more of them.

So for example, if you have not trained any feat, and you want to learn Dodge, you need: [(0 + 1)x100] + [(1+1)x50] = 200 XPs
If you had already learned 3 trained feats and wanted Improved Critical instead you'll need: [(3+1)x100] + [(2+1)x50] = 550 XPs

We have ruled that you can cut those costs in half for certain feats that are nothing more than improved versions of existing feats: for example, Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus. That is: any feat that supersedes the bonus of an "earlier" feat with a higher bonus, but this is up to the DM.

The availability of a teacher able to train you, the amount of time it needs, any GP price he/she charges for the training, and any other circunstances are up to the DM, it can be as easy or difficult as you want, as relaxed or tight a system as suits your campaign.

How to balance characters with extra feats?Simple. Each of the DMs on our group do it differently, but it is equally balancing. I prefer to run a running total of XPs of each character, one with their actual amount and another with their amount + amount spent on training. I calculate encounter levels and XP awards with this higher total. It works. The other DM prefers to count the total of XPs spent multiplied by 5 as part of a character wealth by level, so the characters are better trained but don't have so much money and items. It also works. I recommend using either of those systems if you allow Feat Training in your campaign to avoid it getting out of hand.

The number of feats a character can train this way is also up to the DM. I started my high-powered FR campaign offering way too many feats. I intended that it would mean that more characters would get "flavorful" feats as Agile, Skill Focus, and so on, but this wasn't the case. They haven't gone too deep into powergaming either, but characters are getting too powerful for their level. The limit I put at the beginning is: half your level+1 but never more trained feats than standard feats. This benefited fighters or any other class with bonus feats. I'm thinking on limiting it the way my friend does, with the characters retaining their trained feats but having to wait a long time before training more of them: 1 trained feat each 5 levels.

If your campaign gets to Epic levels, I wouldn't recommend the training of Epic Feats. I'll allow my players to continue training standard ones, but epic feats are too powerful to allow them to be trained so easily, even if you multiplied the XP amounts x10 or so.

Any feedback or opinions is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Derren S.
11-09-04, 09:40 AM The limit I put at the beginning is: half your level+1 but never more trained feats than standard feats. This benefited fighters or any other class with bonus feats.

I don't think that that is a good system.
Why should classes with many feats get even more feats compared to other classes?
Imo all classes should recieve the same number of trainable feats.

How dos this work with LA races?
Lord_Anthrax
11-09-04, 11:22 AM I do something similar, but at greater cost. To gain a feat which has no other feat as a prerequisite(we'll use Power Attack as an example)which you meet the other prerequisites for(i.e., Str 13+ for Power Attack), you take a solid month off for training(no adventuring or making items, etc.), you spend 2500 GP to represent the costs of trainers, assistants, materials used and so forth, and you lose 5000 XP. If you wish to gain a feat that has another feat as a prerequisite, double the time(two doublings equals a tripling as usual)and costs for each feat it requires(i.e. to learn Cleave would take 2 months, 5000 GP and 10000 XP, while Great Cleave requires 3 months, 7500 GP and 15000 XP). Roleplaying reasons can reduce or eliminate the GP costs, of course(such as a party member or NPC training you for free). Feats gained in this way need to be the sort of thing you could reasonably teach someone to have(such as combat technique feats like Power Attack).

Alternatively, I introduce a new Wondrous Item: The Feat Tome. Similar to the Stat Increase Tomes, this one instead gives you the Feat it was written for after a week's study and training, much like the Stat Tomes. With a Feat Tome, you can acquire any feat for which you meet the prerequisites. They require the creator to have Craft Wondrous Item, the Wish or Miracle spell and knowledge of the feat in question. For feats which have no other feats as prerequisites, the market price is 27500 GP. For each feat the feat in question requires, double the cost. Thus a Tome of Power Attack is 27500 GP, Cleave 55000 GP, and Great Cleave 82500 GP.

And for Epic Feats, the same rules apply, but multiply the base time and cost by 10. For Epic Feats, only other Epic feats apply in multiplying the cost further. For example, gaining Epic Prowess would require 10 months of solid training, 25000 GP and 50000 XP. Gaining Devastating Critical would require 20 months of training, 50000 GP and 100000 XP. The same applies to Epic Feat Tomes.
Kyamsil
11-09-04, 03:00 PM I don't think that that is a good system.
Why should classes with many feats get even more feats compared to other classes?
Imo all classes should recieve the same number of trainable feats.

How dos this work with LA races?

Originally I thought that it would be easier for that sort of classes to train. For example, the fighter would have an easier time training for some sort of special technique and such. I wanted to make the fighter feel more "special" as far as combat training went. After all it is the only defining factor of his class: to have more combat feats as any other. This has proven to be unnecesary.

As I said, I am in the process of reworking this system to have 1/5 level as the number of traineable feats. This solves the fact that all classes would have the same number of trained feats. As for LA races, I would recommend using ECL to work the number of feats, but not allowing the character to have more trained feats than standard ones.

Lord_Anthrax: Your system looks nice and without need for an external balancing factor. Blowing so high amounts of XPs and gold makes it a thing to be carefully thought before being abused.

I really like the idea of the Feat Tome. I may as well "steal it" for my campaign with your consent ;)
Lord_Anthrax
11-09-04, 03:47 PM Well, my view is that if they're set on spending it, let them. If someone can afford a permanent bonus to a stat, I figure they're roughly equivalent, given stat increases versus feat acquisition based on character level. And thanks to the Open-Minded feat from the XPH, the same can be applied to skill points. It's a good way to let characters acquire "flavor" feats that give certain bonuses but don't have the benefit of "crunch" feats that really expand their options. And since it takes time to do so, it adds the factor of aging and downtime to the game better. It could get a little sticky at Epic levels, but at that point even NPC's can reasonably afford such things, so you can better control treasure gain AND make tougher foes to counterbalance such things.

As for Feat Tomes, idea's free for anyone to use, but if you stick it into print somewhere a credit would be polite. :cool:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kyamsil 11-09-04, 08:45 AM	I made a house rule for characters being able to train additional feats. This house rule has been updated a couple times and was adapted too by the other DM of our group. Currently, the only difference between the system we use is the limit on how many feats can a character train and at which levels, but I am considering making it similar to the way he does (that seems more balanced). Long story short, since 3.0 was released there has been an avalanche of new feats, which hasn't ceased. Each and every new book released has some new cool feats. Which good are all those feats when you have so many few choices available to get on your career? If we also take into account that most prestige classes need some of the core feats as prerequisites, even entire "feat chains" in some cases, this makes it even worse. So we wanted a system that allowed characters to train themselves to learn new feats, expending resources on the process. We agreed that GP was not a good thing to balance the system with. It sounded better that the characters had to spend some XPs on learning those feats. If the characters use an NPC as the teacher, the DM can always charge GPs, ask for a quest, or something like that as another campaign utility. To calculate the XPs you need to spend on learning an extra feat we made up a formula that is simpler than it seems at first glance: [(# of trained feats + 1) x 100] + [(# prerequisites of the feat + 1) x 50] This takes into account several factors: feats with more prerequisites should be more difficult to master and thus have a higher cost. Also, the more extra "tricks" you learn, the costier it would be to manage the learning of more of them. So for example, if you have not trained any feat, and you want to learn Dodge, you need: [(0 + 1)x100] + [(1+1)x50] = 200 XPs If you had already learned 3 trained feats and wanted Improved Critical instead you'll need: [(3+1)x100] + [(2+1)x50] = 550 XPs We have ruled that you can cut those costs in half for certain feats that are nothing more than improved versions of existing feats: for example, Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus. That is: any feat that supersedes the bonus of an "earlier" feat with a higher bonus, but this is up to the DM. The availability of a teacher able to train you, the amount of time it needs, any GP price he/she charges for the training, and any other circunstances are up to the DM, it can be as easy or difficult as you want, as relaxed or tight a system as suits your campaign. How to balance characters with extra feats?Simple. Each of the DMs on our group do it differently, but it is equally balancing. I prefer to run a running total of XPs of each character, one with their actual amount and another with their amount + amount spent on training. I calculate encounter levels and XP awards with this higher total. It works. The other DM prefers to count the total of XPs spent multiplied by 5 as part of a character wealth by level, so the characters are better trained but don't have so much money and items. It also works. I recommend using either of those systems if you allow Feat Training in your campaign to avoid it getting out of hand. The number of feats a character can train this way is also up to the DM. I started my high-powered FR campaign offering way too many feats. I intended that it would mean that more characters would get "flavorful" feats as Agile, Skill Focus, and so on, but this wasn't the case. They haven't gone too deep into powergaming either, but characters are getting too powerful for their level. The limit I put at the beginning is: half your level+1 but never more trained feats than standard feats. This benefited fighters or any other class with bonus feats. I'm thinking on limiting it the way my friend does, with the characters retaining their trained feats but having to wait a long time before training more of them: 1 trained feat each 5 levels. If your campaign gets to Epic levels, I wouldn't recommend the training of Epic Feats. I'll allow my players to continue training standard ones, but epic feats are too powerful to allow them to be trained so easily, even if you multiplied the XP amounts x10 or so. Any feedback or opinions is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Derren S. 11-09-04, 09:40 AM	The limit I put at the beginning is: half your level+1 but never more trained feats than standard feats. This benefited fighters or any other class with bonus feats. I don't think that that is a good system. Why should classes with many feats get even more feats compared to other classes? Imo all classes should recieve the same number of trainable feats. How dos this work with LA races?
Lord_Anthrax 11-09-04, 11:22 AM	I do something similar, but at greater cost. To gain a feat which has no other feat as a prerequisite(we'll use Power Attack as an example)which you meet the other prerequisites for(i.e., Str 13+ for Power Attack), you take a solid month off for training(no adventuring or making items, etc.), you spend 2500 GP to represent the costs of trainers, assistants, materials used and so forth, and you lose 5000 XP. If you wish to gain a feat that has another feat as a prerequisite, double the time(two doublings equals a tripling as usual)and costs for each feat it requires(i.e. to learn Cleave would take 2 months, 5000 GP and 10000 XP, while Great Cleave requires 3 months, 7500 GP and 15000 XP). Roleplaying reasons can reduce or eliminate the GP costs, of course(such as a party member or NPC training you for free). Feats gained in this way need to be the sort of thing you could reasonably teach someone to have(such as combat technique feats like Power Attack). Alternatively, I introduce a new Wondrous Item: The Feat Tome. Similar to the Stat Increase Tomes, this one instead gives you the Feat it was written for after a week's study and training, much like the Stat Tomes. With a Feat Tome, you can acquire any feat for which you meet the prerequisites. They require the creator to have Craft Wondrous Item, the Wish or Miracle spell and knowledge of the feat in question. For feats which have no other feats as prerequisites, the market price is 27500 GP. For each feat the feat in question requires, double the cost. Thus a Tome of Power Attack is 27500 GP, Cleave 55000 GP, and Great Cleave 82500 GP. And for Epic Feats, the same rules apply, but multiply the base time and cost by 10. For Epic Feats, only other Epic feats apply in multiplying the cost further. For example, gaining Epic Prowess would require 10 months of solid training, 25000 GP and 50000 XP. Gaining Devastating Critical would require 20 months of training, 50000 GP and 100000 XP. The same applies to Epic Feat Tomes.
Kyamsil 11-09-04, 03:00 PM	I don't think that that is a good system. Why should classes with many feats get even more feats compared to other classes? Imo all classes should recieve the same number of trainable feats. How dos this work with LA races? Originally I thought that it would be easier for that sort of classes to train. For example, the fighter would have an easier time training for some sort of special technique and such. I wanted to make the fighter feel more "special" as far as combat training went. After all it is the only defining factor of his class: to have more combat feats as any other. This has proven to be unnecesary. As I said, I am in the process of reworking this system to have 1/5 level as the number of traineable feats. This solves the fact that all classes would have the same number of trained feats. As for LA races, I would recommend using ECL to work the number of feats, but not allowing the character to have more trained feats than standard ones. Lord_Anthrax: Your system looks nice and without need for an external balancing factor. Blowing so high amounts of XPs and gold makes it a thing to be carefully thought before being abused. I really like the idea of the Feat Tome. I may as well "steal it" for my campaign with your consent ;)
Lord_Anthrax 11-09-04, 03:47 PM	Well, my view is that if they're set on spending it, let them. If someone can afford a permanent bonus to a stat, I figure they're roughly equivalent, given stat increases versus feat acquisition based on character level. And thanks to the Open-Minded feat from the XPH, the same can be applied to skill points. It's a good way to let characters acquire "flavor" feats that give certain bonuses but don't have the benefit of "crunch" feats that really expand their options. And since it takes time to do so, it adds the factor of aging and downtime to the game better. It could get a little sticky at Epic levels, but at that point even NPC's can reasonably afford such things, so you can better control treasure gain AND make tougher foes to counterbalance such things. As for Feat Tomes, idea's free for anyone to use, but if you stick it into print somewhere a credit would be polite. :cool: