Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 archangel62 Sep 05, 2006 6:16:36	This is an idea that I've been floating for a while in my games and have found that players generally enjoy it and it has yet to create any balance issues. The idea is fairly simple, allow the players to train for additional feats and skillpoints in order to more fully customize their character and gain a bit more of an edge. The reason why I made this mechanic and felt that it would be worthwhile is a key problem I found in D&D for me conceptually. I always liked the idea of the fighter who sought out the 12 greatest swordsmen in the world to learn their techniques in order to defeat his foe. But because of how the game works mechanically it's closer to "I trained with the 12 greatest swordsmen in the land and all I got was this stupid T-shirt." The mechanic I have currently works off of a percentile system that increases and decreases depending on how far above the minimum qualifications a player is, the level difference of them and their trainer, time taken, and relative quality of equipment used for the training. The biggest problem that people pointed out to me was that they feared that it would greatly unbalance the game. The truth is that so far it seems to make the game work better and also helps the players as a whole. Training will take a minimum of one week and the minimum cost will be 1000gp, and that is for a feat with no prerequisites whatsoever. Increases in cost are incremental based on other prerequisites. A cost is determined based on the number of skill points, stat requirement, level requirement, class ability requirement, prerequisite feats, and level of the trainer as well as the training area. The higher level the trainer is the better your chances of success, same with better equipment, but if you fail you lose your money and your time. It is the reason for the fighter colleges in all the towns and it is also what many of the warriors do when the crafters are out making magic items. Metamagic feats are almost universally more expensive than any feat but possibly whirlwind attack, and even then it's a bit of a stretch. Tactical feats can also be trained for however it would require more time and money, and the chances of success would drop. After implementing this I found that the group was able to better define their characters. Some still shelled out the gold for the newest weapons, others would seek trainers to master new styles and tricks, to learn new ways to shape magic or learn to better wield a weapon. It also deals with the standard dip problem. With new feats becoming available it may become unworkable for all but general feats but I believe that there may be a future in this and wonder if any others have attempted something similar in their games.
#2 artector Sep 14, 2006 18:04:46	It sounds like an interesting system. The GP costs regulate would regulate the feats well. Also the fact that the GM needs to provide A) the NPC, and B) the Gold lets it be regulate without being restricted. Overall I like the idea, could you post it?
#3 igotsmeakabob Sep 14, 2006 19:38:42	Can you give us the formula for determining how the cost is worked out? This sounds like a good idea, but something more detailed would be helpful.
#4 robertliguori Sep 14, 2006 23:14:53	Huh. As a possible balance issue, you may want to look at what benefit a magic item with the listed costs would give, in comparison to the given cost. If, for instance, there is a 25% chance of a 1000 gp training session granting the Great Fortitude feat for free, then the player is effectively spending 4000 gp for a slotless, +2 non-resistance bonus to Fort saves, and the ability to take feats and prestige classes as if he had one more feat than he did. Why not simply let the player pay 10,000 gold worth to buy a virtual slotless bracers of archery, and not have to deal with players gaining early access to feats and prestige classes that they should not gain access to?
#5 black_kitten Sep 15, 2006 3:09:12	I like this one, but considering mechanical balance, you could impose XP loss for the learning of feats, since feats are in a way 'part of levelling up'. Instead of getting his XP after defeating 20 monsters and becoming lvl 10, he needs to defeat 25 monsters before he gains his level. He may be stronger than the average character of his level, but he has had to work harder for it, not unlike monsterous races. Just my 0.02
#6 spawnofmorgoth Sep 15, 2006 5:58:08	Feats for cash and downtime and appropriate instructor.... sounds like you could handle that as a GM since you got several factors to restrict the flow of feats. 1) cash - this campaign may require better economic control than a typical one would. As a PC I know I would probably prefer to go for training than buy magic items as the training is not subject to theft or mord's disjunction. Don't be surprised if your PCs feel similarly and see this as an opportunity to get 'stuff that can never be lost.' So you might want to limit the campaign cash machine. Consider not allowing the fabricate spell or other money making magic in your world to reduce possible hassles later. 2) downtime - I have been in campaigns where it seems as though you are in a TV show similar to Buffy, with an apocalypse of the week, and rarely any time to catch a breath. You can always control the flow of feats this way, as long as you don't allow other planar time tricks to allow PCs to 'squeeze in' a few months training between breakfast and lunch. 3) trainers - Well the PCs would have to locate a teacher. If the PCs are goodnicks the teacher would also have to be willing to train them and agree to a price (a couple hurdles there, and even a plot hook to railroad PCs into a 'quest'). If the PCs are not so good though, blackmail or magical thought influences could be used to 'force a deal through.' Yes, your idea sounds like a lovely experiment. The best candidate for control that I can see from those listed above to allow the GM to reign in the abuse factor is the control of downtime. It'll mean coming up with world ending plots, fired one right after the other. Hey, that even sounds like a great reason why the PCs gotta get trained-up, the world sure seems to rely on them to keep saving it. If you don't wanna work that hard as GM, you will be at the mercy of your players not to break your campaign. So you might as well lay it on the line to them. If your group is reasonable roleplayers (and avoided the dread munchinitis virus) let the PCs know that the new system could definitely be abused, and if the PCs could abuse it then a NPC who has been around longer then them could have abused it even worse! Tell them to keep things reasonable and not break the campaign so you all can have some fun and not concentrate so much on 'winning the game.'
#7 sunai_retsinis Sep 15, 2006 12:24:20	I like your idea and I am very curious about how you determine this. How does you percentile system you use to determine when and how much it takes to gain an extra feat work? Do you have some worked out examples at hand? Thanks in advance
#8 jokei Sep 15, 2006 12:44:29	Sounds good to me. What would Whirlwind Attack cost?
#9 jdrock Sep 15, 2006 14:08:24	This sounds really cool. I'd be interested in hearing exactly how you break down costs for different feats (i.e., what's the added cost for each prerequisite, and so on). Also, you mention success at learning the new feat, which implies you can fail in your attempt to learn it. How does this work?
#10 finarin_panjoro Sep 15, 2006 14:35:47	I think training of this type is an interesting idea. It seems to me that the simplest way to achieve this goal is to set limits on it that match the limits provided in the game. I would structure it such that a character who is training with a master to gain a specific feat can gain that feat at the time of the training. However when he reaches the next level at which he gains a feat that is the feat that he gains. At this level if he wishes to train for another feat he may take that feat early and so on. Thus a character never gains more feats he merely gains them earlier. I would also allow them to gain the feat without meeting some of the prerequisites (BAB) so long as they will have them by the time they reach the appropriate level. Skill points would work the same way. They may train to gain additional skill points and apply them early on even to the point of going over their normal level cap (lets say by a +3 max). However they must spend those skill points normally when they level up until they are paid for (meaning that if they take a class in which their trained skill is not a class skill they must spend cross class points for it). In neither case would I allow a trained feat or trained skill to grant entry into a prestige class. You'd have to have accounted for the feats and skills with your normal levels for this. There would of course have to be a significant cost for this benefit to offset what they're getting. I would recommend a quest for the master and/or a payment equal to 1/4 the cost of a magic item that would grant that bonus.
#11 crystal_monk Sep 17, 2006 14:24:09	For starters, I'd like to say that I completely agree with the concept of what you're doing. While I'm in no way against the D&D "level up, gain skills and maybe a feat" system, I also think that giving the PCs time to train and thus gain additional skills and/or feats is idea I fully endorse. Having said that, could you provide more mechanical information on how you get the percentage numbers for training? I know that, in the future, my PCs will be able to train to gain new feats or skills, and while it'd be easy to say "okay, you pay your gold and you get your training, we pick up a month later," I think it'd be interesting to have some mechanics behind it. It’d probably make my players want to seek out the best trainers and the like, which could make things more interesting and add some new NPCs to the game.
#12 zombiegleemax Sep 18, 2006 11:18:26	Could you give some sort of ballpark guidelines regarding details as to how the mechanic you use works? That is to say, how do prerequisites for feats affect the cost for learning a new feat. Is it a percentage of the base cost (1000 gp) and base time (1 week), with percentages increased via multiplication or summation. That is to say, if needing a specific stat say of 13 for a feat increases the cost by 10% and an other feat that adds 20%, would the two percentages become summed into +30% or would the end cost be +32% (1.1 * 1.2))? [It should be noted that mixing and matching summation and multiplication is probably a bad idea, however it should also be noted that a summation method is costiler for lower percentage increases, while a multiplication method is costlier for more expensive percentages] Or is it via another calculation method? Also, what governs success rates? Does spending additional time increase success rate? For example, the player wants to spend 50% more time and funds to increase his character's ability to retain the skill he is trying to learn. Does it give him a 50% increased chance of success, or is spending more time and money give diminishing rewards (an thus essentially forcing players to choose to try normally and simply fail, and retrain, since spending double time and money would only give too small an increase in success rate)? There are more questions that I'd like to ask, but having some inkling as to how the system works to begin with would allow for more specific questions.
#13 antioch Sep 18, 2006 12:41:59	Experience is how that all plays out. If you go train with the "Twelve Swordsman of Wherever" then you probably gained some XP, and leveled up, and if you took fighter then you PROBABLY got some feats to burn. I don’t allow PCs to "train" for free XP. That’s most likely what they did to get to 1st level, and they aren’t gonna get even better than they already did by training. Training could be a gateway to certain feats, and is a very good in-character method for access to prestige classes. You could even put a restriction on leveling up without first seeking someone to train the characters. Also, a random chance of success is bad. You are punishing players for having bad luck by wasting their time and money (this is why crafting magic items does not have a Craft check). I don’t think it’s a matter of customization. I think the real issue is that people want too much, too soon, or that they just want more. They want to have x number of skills already maxed out at first level, above and beyond the SPs granted by their class, regardless as to whether the skill can be used untrained, or if taking 10/20 on it can essentially render skill checks useless (especially at early levels). Even though they only need skills like Survival at, say, 10 ranks to have a good chance to not only succeed on all the checks (assuming a Wis of 10) but to also probably help out your entire party, they have to continually dump more points into it because darn it, their character MUST be the best at it. It’s really a matter of priorities; if you make smart choices and take the things that NEED to be taken (i.e. trained skills and feats like Manyshot, which let you do something you could NOT do otherwise) then you should be fine. Otherwise, you probably just want too much too soon.
#14 archangel62 Sep 18, 2006 18:33:47	The idea is that they can pick up additional feats during the course of the campaign. However I also use this for my own NPCs, it can also be a way to help balance things somewhat as it allows a control of the flow of gold in both directions. The main reason I do this is because it can greatly help groups and can allow players to better customize their characters. I should also add now that bonuses from magical items cannot be used to gain the feats or bonuses thereof, you can only get them from your base stats and skills. Feat Training Rules Success Chance: Base: 20% chance of success Level: +4% chance per character level Exceed: +2% per numerical (increments of 1) exceeding of base prerequisite Trainer Level: +3% per level above you -5% per level below you Additional Time Spent Training: +2% per day, +20% for a week. Previous Failures: -10% per failure Improper Equipment: -30% Cost: Base Cost= Character Level of TrainerX50Gold+ Variable Cost+ Training Area Training Area: 4000gp Stat Requirement: 2000gp per point above base 10 Base attack Bonus Requirement: 4000gp per BaB point. Skill Ranks: 500gp per rank Prerequisite Feats: ½ the cost of each prerequisite feat added in Class ability: 1500gpX minimum level gained from your class Caster Level: 5000gp per caster level Spell Level: 6000gp per spell level Racial Specific Ability: 1500gp Size Prerequisite: 1500 per difference from medium Tactical feats have a 50% increase in cost, -20% chance of success and will automatically take one month to train for. Feats gained this way are not subject to retraining or psychic reformation. Currently the way to teach feats are that you must have the Trainer feat, which is one of the few untrainable feats, which requires character level 8. Master Trainer gives students a +20% chance of success but it makes the person far more expensive. Currently ruling against players teaching each other feats but might modify those rules later.
#15 teydyn Sep 19, 2006 3:37:36	I like the idea, BUT if you give away extra skillpoints, you take away from the rogue, if you give away extra feats you take away from the fighter. In both cases casters win, and they don’t need that, they are good enough. No to a system cash->feats, yes if rarely given as bonus by the DM, not if requested by the players, chosen by the DM, not the players.
#16 zombiegleemax Sep 20, 2006 13:31:35	Feat Training Rules Success Chance: Base: 20% chance of success Level: +4% chance per character level Exceed: +2% per numerical (increments of 1) exceeding of base prerequisite Trainer Level: +3% per level above you -5% per level below you Additional Time Spent Training: +2% per day, +20% for a week. Previous Failures: -10% per failure Improper Equipment: -30% Cost: Base Cost= Character Level of TrainerX50Gold+ Variable Cost+ Training Area You should make it so that the Clvl for training is Min lvl 8 or 9, since Trainer is an 8th+ lvl only feat. The Training Area costs 4000 gp....? You should include it in the base cost so there is less confusion. Base Cost= Level of TrainerX50Gold [Min 9th lvl: 450 gp] + Training Area (4000) + Variable Cost Training Area: 4000gp Stat Requirement: 2000gp per point above base 10 Base attack Bonus Requirement: 4000gp per BaB point. Skill Ranks: 500gp per rank Prerequisite Feats: ½ the cost of each prerequisite feat added in Class ability: 1500gpX minimum level gained from your class Caster Level: 5000gp per caster level Spell Level: 6000gp per spell level Racial Specific Ability: 1500gp Size Prerequisite: 1500 per difference from medium Tactical feats have a 50% increase in cost, -20% chance of success and will automatically take one month to train for. Feats gained this way are not subject to retraining or psychic reformation. Currently the way to teach feats are that you must have the Trainer feat, which is one of the few untrainable feats, which requires character level 8. Master Trainer gives students a +20% chance of success but it makes the person far more expensive. Currently ruling against players teaching each other feats but might modify those rules later. Base Cost= Character Level of TrainerX50Gold+ Variable Cost+ Training Area Alertness, for a 1st lvl character. Trainer: 450 (min 9th lvl to be able to train) Training Area 4000 No other prerequisites. Sub Total: 4450 Base chance: 20 + (8*3) = 44% I'm guessing that you pay the Training cost per day/week in additional Trainer's fees? So, for a week; that's 3150 (450*7) and adds +20%; resulting in a 64% chance of success. To reach a higher percentage of success, we might as well spend 1 more week, to hit 84% [Total so far: 4450 + 6300: 10750 gp). I dunno, burning 10k GP for something like alertness with only an 84% success rate seems a bit weak. If I'd use this system, I'd probably increase the base success rates. Up to 30%, if not 50% at the least. If not the GP costs are extremely high. If one looks at the Teamwork Benefits abilities out of DMG 2 & PHB 2, you see some pretty interesting options that can be trained by party members. The Teamwork Benefits usually require quite a high requirement from the Team Leader, but team members usually only need to know the rudiments in a skill to join a team (something like... 1 rank in spot/listen for the Team Infiltration Benefit, while the leader must have at least 8 in both). However, after a "week of training" the entire roster of team members automatically can contribute in a meaningful way to other team member's abilities. Some of the benefits include: every member can take 10 on hide/move silently checks; team members have Evasion from other team member's spells (Yes, Evasion, even on fighters and clerics etc.); Spell Caster team members can increase the Reflex DC for subsequent Team Member's Spells; Party tanks can automatically interpose themselves on attacks on other adjacent team members and the attack then uses the now interposing character's AC. In any case, I can always mix and match with this system to find something that I like more. Getting a baseline helps. I have some questions regarding the "Spell Level" cost; not many Feats require you to be able to cast a specific spell; and if it did, why not merely pay the PHB costs for hiring someone to cast a spell? Or, does it relate to metamagic feats?
#17 jdrock Sep 20, 2006 18:13:54	Another way to enforce regulation of feat and skill point purchases, you could restrict how many and what types of feats/skills are available. Here are some possible variants: - A fighter would have the widest selection of trainable feats. - A rogue would have the widest selection of trainable skills. - Casters would only have access to feats related to their school of magic. - Certain feats/skills are only available from certain NPCs (roguish skills are only available from the thieves' guild, arcane feats are only available from the wizard school) - Some feats/skills require specific quests to obtain. Some PCs may decline to do these quests, as it would be objectionable to their character. (As a side note, I don't think any XP should be gained from activities directly related to acquiring feats/skills) Anyway, just some thoughts. There are plenty of ways for the DM to make the acquisitions of feats and skills an enjoyable and entertaining part of the game. I certainly don't think there should be feat/skill vendors located in every town.
#18 archangel62 Sep 22, 2006 14:17:27	The spell level has to do with something like, "Able to cast Xth level spells"
#19 zombiegleemax Sep 27, 2006 14:33:02	The spell level has to do with something like, "Able to cast Xth level spells" Which brings me back to my original question. Why is this even listed? I don't think any feats require one being able to cast X level of spell that couldn't already be covered by the existing Minimum Character level needed for the Trainer. Also, this system must assume that gold is played fast and loose, if not players will simply invest in equipment over feats that have huge cost with dubious chance of being learnable. How often is the system you outlined used by your gaming group? Do the players simply keep pumping gold into a feat to make it a 100% chance of success? How easy is gold access in the games that your group runs? This one is kind of key, a campaign with roughly average or below average treasure will have characters rely on gear over burning cash to get feats; while in a higher-wealth access setting, burning cash for feats is probably a good idea; seeing as there are no items of Leap Attack or Craft "...." .
#20 archangel62 Sep 28, 2006 7:53:36	Which brings me back to my original question. Why is this even listed? I don't think any feats require one being able to cast X level of spell that couldn't already be covered by the existing Minimum Character level needed for the Trainer. Also, this system must assume that gold is played fast and loose, if not players will simply invest in equipment over feats that have huge cost with dubious chance of being learnable. How often is the system you outlined used by your gaming group? Do the players simply keep pumping gold into a feat to make it a 100% chance of success? How easy is gold access in the games that your group runs? This one is kind of key, a campaign with roughly average or below average treasure will have characters rely on gear over burning cash to get feats; while in a higher-wealth access setting, burning cash for feats is probably a good idea; seeing as there are no items of Leap Attack or Craft "...." . The gold is roughly average, if you're playing from the beginning you might end up about 20-30% ahead of the wealth by level chart overall but it also depends on what is in the party. My groups use it when they feel that it's necessary. The mage slayer in the group wanted to train to get a few more save oriented feats and some other feats he felt would be good against casters. The monks use it pretty frequently. Also, in some cases if they guys help a monastery, secret order, something like that they can get aid from this group in the form of feat training. Most of my groups mix it up, focusing on a few extra feats that they would like to learn and putting the rest into having gear created if they can find a craftsman or focus heavily on feats if they aren't very gear dependant. It hasn't ever really created a balance issue in any of my games and all of my players seem to enjoy it.
#21 thowk Sep 28, 2006 15:00:08	As one of the people who help make these rules, I can tell you they work. Playing a fighter and hitting about lvl 15 with all the gear you need (not want but need). Training helps by allowing you to get feats like improved unarmed strike or shield bash. Things real fighter could do.
#22 Falen Sep 29, 2006 20:12:31	I might try something like this later, and a couple new ideas came to mind. 1. Limiting the number of extra feats they can get by the bonus of Int or Wis. Maybe even limiting the number of feats that require an ability score (including feats that have in their prerequisite a feat with an ability score requirement) to the bonus of that ability. 2. Affiliations would be great in this regard. Maybe being affiliated with one group excludes from being affiliated with another. These groups would have unique feats. 3. Excluding certain feats that can be taken this way. These feats can only be gained through experience (not spending XP, but living life). Those are just a few ideas that came to mind reading this thread. I'm not sure I like the idea of having to always spend money for a feat, but I see that it emulates real life. Also, I would prefer to spend money than XP.
#23 theotherdraxen Sep 30, 2006 20:24:24	If you ask me, training with the 12 greatest swordsmen would probably give you access to a new prestige class. But I digress. A concept for training that I came up with was one based on improving stats. Originally, this idea was presented by sren, a local here, but he gave me the okay to post it, and I’ve made my own changes, of course. The premise is to allow players to train themselves over time to improve their stats and skills. Like wizards building magic items, other classes can too improve themselves through hard work, training, and a little cash given to the right people. Consider this an extension of the retraining rules found in the Player’s Handbook II. Let’s say that the poor wizard has found that his 7 strength just isn’t working for him: he can’t carry enough equipment and the DM doesn’t want to just solve it all for him. Besides, the fighter really wants the belt of Giant’s Strength, and who wants to take it from him? So the wizard decides that it’s time to hit the weights. The system: this follows the process given in the Player’s Handbook II. A character earns points in order to improve their stats. Earning points can be done in different ways, based on what the Dungeon Master will allow and which way the player would rather retrain. Earning a point always takes at least two months (or 60 days, if you prefer) of rigorous and dedicated training. Depending on the stat in question, this training can be anything from weight lifting to hours of peaceful meditation. 1) A flat gold piece rate can be paid to train a player. This money is spent on facilities, special diets, instructors, and anything else necessary to improve the stat that the player is hoping to increase. The cost: 6,000 gold pieces. 2) The player can expend both gold and experience. Much like crafting a magic item, a player must pay a personal expense along with the gold necessary to hire the right people and purchase the right things. The cost: 3,000 gold pieces and 240 experience points. 3) Sometimes, one can train ones self, though at a greater personal cost. If someone wishes to improve a stat, but chooses to do so without the help of any kind of outside influence, then they may pay the price purely in experience. The cost: 1,240 experience points. The points themselves are spent on the stat the player is trying to increase. The player must declare which stat they are trying to increase before earning points. They cannot change their mind later; if they do, all their work is lost. In any case, raising a stat whose score is lower than 14 by one stat point only costs one point. So the wizard with 7 strength will have to earn only one point to increase his strength to an 8, and 3 points to reach a 10. However, the fighter, with his unadjusted strength of 15 is going to have to earn 2 points in order to increase his strength to a 16. Use the chart in the Player’s Handbook II for stat boost costs. The effect: by implementing this system, players will be able to improve their stats without the aid of magic items or having to spend time waiting between lengthy levels for their stat boosts. Players will find that training generally costs more and takes much more time to improve stats than magic items, but these improvements are permanent, and cannot be dispelled or deactivated by anti-magic effects. They also take up no slots on the person, and these increases stack with magical effects. In order to preserve racial advantages (and disadvantages), consider removing the racial adjustments before determining the point cost to reach a goal. So a Half-orc barbarian with 19 strength is treated as having 17 strength as far as point cost is concerned. Likewise, his 6 charisma is treated as an 8. For balance purposes, consider limiting the maximum score in pre-epic levels to 23.
#24 archangel62 Oct 03, 2006 14:33:03	I'm not sure I like the idea of having to always spend money for a feat, but I see that it emulates real life. Also, I would prefer to spend money than XP. I don't always use gold either. In one recent game the group helped a city of sand giants reclaim a mage tower that had been taken over by lizardfolk. The Giants repaid the party by offering to train them in some of their arts or abilities.
#25 catra Oct 05, 2006 19:05:40	I don't know about you guys, but learning a feat is one thing and teaching one is something else. It takes considerable talent and insight to be able to train someone else in something, and in D&D that translates into feats. I think that whoever your PCs are learning these feats from should have some sort of Trainer feat, with prerequisites something like 13 Int + 13 Wis + the feat they are teaching. This way the considerable amount of money a trainer can make from teaching feats isn't extremely unbalanced. Why aren't your PCs teaching people feats to earn extra cash?
#26 archangel62 Oct 12, 2006 2:54:15	I don't know about you guys, but learning a feat is one thing and teaching one is something else. It takes considerable talent and insight to be able to train someone else in something, and in D&D that translates into feats. I think that whoever your PCs are learning these feats from should have some sort of Trainer feat, with prerequisites something like 13 Int + 13 Wis + the feat they are teaching. This way the considerable amount of money a trainer can make from teaching feats isn't extremely unbalanced. Why aren't your PCs teaching people feats to earn extra cash? Well, first off I believe I mentioned that you need to take a trainer feat for it to work. Also, in order to do it you need people to teach which means towns. You need proper areas to train in for the person to have some semblance of a chance of success, and those cost money. Also, most of the money is upkeep, maintaining the buildings, trainers’ guild dues, things like that. Players have asked and I explained it, roughly the trainer gets about 50-300gp per training depending on the feat. This translates into a week of downtime spent doing this and usually getting very little for your trouble. Also, the trainer feat can't be trained for itself, and since you can only train feats that you yourself know it would usually be a wasted slot. Good questions though, glad to see that others are analyzing this.
#27 catra Oct 12, 2006 18:28:52	Well, first off I believe I mentioned that you need to take a trainer feat for it to work Sorry, I guess I missed that. I don't think it would be the big waste you imply. It would be great for story opportunities. You could have one higher-level character who is a trainer (working with you), and the rest be his pupils. Maybe a monk dojo? Anyways, the one character, possibly working closely with the DM to ensure story continuity, would send the others out on missions along with an intelligent magic item to guide them (hence, the trainer PC would be able to be a part of the story even while his trainer character would be back at the dojo). As an added bonus, he would be able to tell if they're lying to him. OR, all the players are ninja trainers, but their martial arts school gets attacked. In order to [advance the plot], the PCs have to secretly train the group of students into elite ninjas while fending off spies and perhaps running various other operations to gain information on the ones who attacked them. What about a camp of Paladin knights? Or, if you're really feeling racy, a tribe of half-orcs preparing for war? It wouldn't exactly be a standard conventional adventure, but it would definitely be interesting.
#28 theotherdraxen Oct 14, 2006 22:25:35	Why aren't your PCs teaching people feats to earn extra cash? See the rules for running a business in the Dungeon Masters Guide II.
#29 juannavarro Oct 17, 2006 13:42:18	My group had used the training options but mostly for leveling in the campaign. I found it a bit stifling, but say applied with your mechanic it would a lot more interesting to play. Reminds of the system Chaosium had at one time with Stormbringer, where the Skills, based on percentile, increased by use; it you got 10% or lower of your total skill, you got another roll with your intelligence, to see if you learned something in practice. Example: Say you Lockpicking was 62% and rolling two d10 you got 05, well then you get to roll and see if your lockpick skill had gone up. I liked it because it promoted skill use, and really balanced character, the more you use them the better off you are. I always wanted to try something like that into a campaign, and thought that it could be done with criticals successes and such, but don't know how to institute it... I like the idea you have going here, if anything, please post results in the future!:D
#30 zombiegleemax Oct 17, 2006 14:59:32	I like the idea, BUT if you give away extra skillpoints, you take away from the rogue, if you give away extra feats you take away from the fighter. In both cases casters win, and they don’t need that, they are good enough. No to a system cash->feats, yes if rarely given as bonus by the DM, not if requested by the players, chosen by the DM, not the players. So how about giving bonuses to those classes? Fighter has double % chance of successfully learning new feats, Rogue has double % chance of successfully learning new skills. Of course if you do this you'd probably want to reduce the % success chance drastically so Rogue and Fighter are in-line with what is already posted. Gaining new feats for other classes, while still possible, is quite a bit more difficult.
#31 archangel62 Oct 19, 2006 14:21:59	Well, the fighter actually has the best odds for feats, as does the rogue. The fighter will get bonuses to learning feats by how much he beats the base requirements and consider that a fighter who is based in ranged combat will have a higher dexterity at any rate. Also, it serves those classes better because they can focus and strengthen their personal abilities better with having more access to feats as well as allowing for greater design for personal combat style and ability.
#32 Optimator Nov 07, 2006 16:08:56	I think losing XP is a great way to price the training. My DM is pretty generous when it comes to treasure, so the gold prices are gonna be astronomical. But the XP loss is kinda like a LA penalty. I approve.
#33 archangel62 Nov 08, 2006 18:19:27	XP can work but I found it easier to work with gold because the XP formula wasn't going clear, if anyone finds a better format for it lemme know.
#34 FriendlyBiscuit Dec 11, 2006 4:38:55	Exp would be simpler if you were using the variant static XP tables near the back of Unearthed Arcana. Take a look at it, if you haven't, even if it sounds unappealing at first.
#35 archangel62 Dec 16, 2006 4:29:52	Exp would be simpler if you were using the variant static XP tables near the back of Unearthed Arcana. Take a look at it, if you haven't, even if it sounds unappealing at first. I try to avoid the static XP variant for reasons mentioned in my CR article, not to mention that static XP always kinda rubbed me the wrong way.