Training Domain Action

[Arlen Blaede]

OK, the Book of Regency lists Training as one of the optional domain actions for your regents. However, I want to know how this takes affect under the 3E rules.

Do you just gain a certain amount of experience per action, or do you instead gain an amount of skill points or even a new feat?

Are there any rules listed for this anywhere, or do you have any house rules that you have been using?

[Lord Eldred]

In order to advance in levels you must train. The training must take up a domain action for regents or the equivalent time for non-regents. I believe training can also be used to improve certain attributes but I would have to check my books to be sure. All the Book of Regents is trying to tell you is that in order to advance, you must train and if you are training you don't have time to do other domain actions.

[Arlen Blaede]

OK, no problem there. However, my GM has instituted some rules on training that grant specific benefits.

When training for skills you gain 2 skill points per domain action used. These can be spent on any skill allowed by the GM. You are still limited in the maximum number of ranks by your level.

For Feats he has instituted a different system. If you spend a domain action training for a feat you then roll a d6 to determine your progress. You must accumulate 30 points on these die rolls in order to gain the new feat. So even if you rolled amazingly well, it would still take you atleast 5 domain actions to acquire a new feat this way. However, this will let those pesky mages and clerics acquire a few more of the many metamagic feats that are available.

Do you see anything broken with this or do you have any better ideas.

[Riegan Swordwraith]

Doesn't sound like a bad idea..........However while you are off training your realm might just fall down around you.

[Lord Eldred]

Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede

OK, no problem there. However, my GM has instituted some rules on training that grant specific benefits.

When training for skills you gain 2 skill points per domain action used. These can be spent on any skill allowed by the GM. You are still limited in the maximum number of ranks by your level.

For Feats he has instituted a different system. If you spend a domain action training for a feat you then roll a d6 to determine your progress. You must accumulate 30 points on these die rolls in order to gain the new feat. So even if you rolled amazingly well, it would still take you atleast 5 domain actions to acquire a new feat this way. However, this will let those pesky mages and clerics acquire a few more of the many metamagic feats that are available.

Do you see anything broken with this or do you have any better ideas.

Are these feats above and beyond the ones you already earn?

If so I would not have a problem with the amount of time that is being invested because it is creating the equivelant of earning the experience to get the feats the good old fashion way.

If not than I think it is way too much lost time.

[Arlen Blaede]

Yes Lord Eldred, these feats are above and beyond any you may earn through gaining levels in your chosen class.

Oh, I have definitely seen how this could take a hoard of time to complete. I don't see myself spending at least a six months out of the year trying to gain a new feat.

But lets say that your regent got tossed out of power some how and spent about five years doing nothing but hiding, training and building a small corp group of completely loyal companions?

Kinda leaves you sitting there gasping when you realize how many feats you could acquire in this manner.

[Lawgiver]

The idea of training for feats is a bit flawed if you allow Train to be used to gain level. You get a new feat every 3 levels of experience. it would be faster and BY FAR more beneficial to train for XP levels. To get a new feat you need only 3 train actions and you not only get a feat but the benefits of 3 XP levels.

I personally have restricted the use of Train all together for gaining levels. You can use it to get a flat number of XP (1000). IMO its illogical for a high level character to be able to Train for a single month and go from 16th to 17th level.

I have also implemented XP rewards for nearly all other domain actions (except stuff like Move Troops or Finances) so that regents need not go on adventures or train to get XP.

[Arlen Blaede]

Lawgiver, I may have misread something, but did you say there was a rule somewhere that says that 3 train actions will give my regent an increase in level? That just seems way too powerful to me and I agree with getting rid of it.

Right now, I don't believe my GM is letting us gain levels/experience through the train action. As for experience for other types of domain actions I am not sure. We haven't really gotten to do a lot in the way of domain turns because we are suffering through a rather painful adventuring phase.

[Arlen Blaede]

PS Hey Lawgiver, do you happen to have a list up somewhere of the XP rewards you use for domain actions?

[Lord Eldred]

Orginally posted by Lawgiver

The idea of training for feats is a bit flawed if you allow Train to be used to gain level. You get a new feat every 3 levels of experience. it would be faster and BY FAR more beneficial to train for XP levels. To get a new feat you need only 3 train actions and you not only get a feat but the benefits of 3 XP levels.

I personally have restricted the use of Train all together for gaining levels. You can use it to get a flat number of XP (1000). IMO its illogical for a high level character to be able to Train for a single month and go from 16th to 17th level.

I have also implemented XP rewards for nearly all other domain actions (except stuff like Move Troops or Finances) so that regents need not go on adventures or train to get XP.

I did not interpret the ability to train as the ability to gain experience points. I argue that if you have enough experience points to go to the next level, in order to get there you must train. This training would include honing the skills of the new feat you will get, any new skill points, beefing up to get more hit points, etc.

I would never allow training in and of itself to allow the increasing of levels without having earned the experience points the normal way.

[Arlen Blaede]

I have never thought that you could just train up to a level. Their had to be something substantive occuring for their to merit an increase in power.

[Lord Eldred]

I think it would help me understand what we are discussing here if everyone listed what they are allowed to do during the train action according to their GM.

[Arlen Blaede]

Well, since I started this thread I'll go first.

My GM allows you to do one of two things with the Train action.

1) Increase your skills: Spend an action and gain two skill points to spend towards any skill (or skills) the GM agrees with. Note-the restriction on maximum ranks still applies to these points

2) Try to gain a new feat (above and beyond those you may receive for class and level): For every action you spend training in this manner you roll a d6. You need to accumulate a total of 30 points in this manner. When you do, you will have trained sufficiently and have acquired a new feat.

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede
Lawgiver, I may have misread something, but did you say there was a rule somewhere that says that 3 train actions will give my regent an increase in level? That just seems way too powerful to me and I agree with getting rid of it.

According to the boxed set:
Training for Levels: If the optional rules for traing to gain new levels are in play, the character can spend a character action to do so. He must find a mentor or instructor and pay any training costs.

Its an optional rules that I threw out.


My original comment was that if you used this rule then training to get 30 pts at a rate of 1d6 was flawed. Because according to the Core Rules you get a new feat every 3 levels. thus, if you used Train 3 times and gained three XP levels you would gain a feat by default, plus the benefits of 3 XP levels!

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede

PS Hey Lawgiver, do you happen to have a list up somewhere of the XP rewards you use for domain actions?

It on my website http://fan_of_enoch.tripod.com under 'Domain Actions' --> 'Experience for Domain Actions'

[Arlen Blaede]

YIKES!!! Yes, I now agree even more at your decision to toss that rule out the window. I didn't realize it the first time, but with that rule you gain one level/action. I was thinking 1 level/3 actions when I read it the first time.

And thanks for the link to that info. It's appreciated, and if I like it I'll recommend it to my GM.

[Lord Eldred]

Orginally posted by Lawgiver


Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede
Lawgiver, I may have misread something, but did you say there was a rule somewhere that says that 3 train actions will give my regent an increase in level? That just seems way too powerful to me and I agree with getting rid of it.

According to the boxed set:
Training for Levels: If the optional rules for traing to gain new levels are in play, the character can spend a character action to do so. He must find a mentor or instructor and pay any training costs.

I believe you misinterpreted the rules. I thought that the optional rule meant that when you had the appropriate amount of experience to go to the next level you didn't automatically go up to the next level you had to train. Hence training when you didn't have enough experience would be pointless and wouldn't raise you levels just because you trained.

Its an optional rules that I threw out.


My original comment was that if you used this rule then training to get 30 pts at a rate of 1d6 was flawed. Because according to the Core Rules you get a new feat every 3 levels. thus, if you used Train 3 times and gained three XP levels you would gain a feat by default, plus the benefits of 3 XP levels!

[Arlen Blaede]

[quote]Orginally posted by Lord Eldred

I believe you misinterpreted the rules. I thought that the optional rule meant that when you had the appropriate amount of experience to go to the next level you didn't automatically go up to the next level you had to train. Hence training when you didn't have enough experience would be pointless and wouldn't raise you levels just because you trained.


I had actually forgotten about that rule in 2Ed. It makes more sense when you look at it this way, and it isn't quite so broken now.

[Arch-Sorcerer Gargamel]

I think that training should impart experience. Training implies practice, and practice is what makes you better at something. I'm not saying a lot of experience, but I believe that a small amount should be gotten, based on the nature of the training.

[Chioran]

The problem with training is that, typically training is predictable and safe. If you are training for sword fighting, you are typically doing it in a safe environment and you operate on a few principles. Most of the training was done en masse and very little thought was given to preparing the recruits for the unexpected. In my opinion, training to advance a level after you have already acquired the experience to do so is daft. The way training should be applied is...

Once you have advanced to the next level, before you can add ranks to skills or add feats, you should have to train for these. THis should in no way inhibit your ability to advance in level. That was earned by your deeds in battle/adventuring.

[Arlen Blaede]

As regards the thought that training is usually safe and predictable, not really. In the times of the knight and sword training was sometimes done en masse, but the most useful lessons were taught while they were receiving one on one attention from whatever teacher there was. Mind you, they were quite often wearing real armor and using some very sharp weapons. Quite often a soldier would gain scars during this training that would emphasize and reinforce these lessons.

Furthermore, I don't necessarily agree with the idea that you have to go through more training in order to gain the skill levels acquired at a new level. Quite often you learn to preform an action better, not by the repetition of training, but from the painful classroom of living through your mistakes. Also, cosider that during the time that you were gaining the experience to reach a new level, you were probably also training your skills during your "off hours."

An example: Paladin wakes up and exercises to losen his muscles as well as rehearse combat tactics. Then, he goes off to slay the demon. Afterwhich, he spends his time healing and studying herbalism.

Just my idea of the way it works.

[Chioran]

Let me clarify what I meant by safe. You were most likely not going to be killed during training. Notice that I did not say that it never happened. Accidents always occurred, but training was done in armour and with blunted weapons for the most part. Thereby making it safer.

Are you suggesting, Arlen, that whilst adventuring a character has the time to pause, seek out a master in a particular skill and learn from him/her? If that is the case then please let me go on such an easy and carefree adventure.

As far as one-on-one training goes, there were not many who actually received this type of training. Only the elite were granted this special dispensation. The majority were in fact trained en masse. When training is done en masse the training is very much methodical and the movements almost choreographed.

As far as training in your "off hours" goes, please provide some detail about how this would be possible. First, you had to find someone who was considered well versed in the skill to instruct you. This training needs to be more than some ad-hoc self study course to be meaningful. To find a person well versed in the skill you want to learn would take some time. Most likely, they will not instruct you for free.

Therefore, doing this training in your "off hours" is impractical.

Let me illustrate this point using modern examples. Let's say that you are pursuing an MCSE certification. Over the course of a month of working full time are you going to spend some of your off hours review a study guide and then pass the test? Of course not. You will engage in several weeks of training from someone who knows and is certified. Then you will take the test, probably more than once. Only then will you be certified.

Anyhow, the point I was making in my previous post was that it makes very little sense to train, in order to qualify for my next level, if I have already accumulated the experience necessary to do so.

[Arlen Blaede]

My assertion was not that you would be able to seek out a master to instruct you, but that you would train yourself. Part of that is practicing what you did that actually has worked, and the other is learning from the time you fell on your face in an attempt at a specific maneuver. These ideas can also be applied to mental skills as well.

Your argument about advanced training is valid, but I have always felt that forcing the players to take time away from their chosen pursuits to train causes an immense hassle for both the players and the GM. As well, I think it takes away from the idea that the characters are supposed to by extraordinary. (Note: this is really just a GM preference on how you want to run this aspect of the game. I am just explaining my view.)

To finish on your last point: I agree completely that characters should not have to train in order to gain the benefits of a level that they have all ready reached with experience.

[Chioran]

The question I pose to you then, Arlen, is if I have no one to show me the right way, how long will it take me to discover the correct way of doing something? It seems to me that this will take even longer than if you found someone to train you. Not to mention being more painful. :P

[Arlen Blaede]

Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede

Well, since I started this thread I'll go first.

My GM allows you to do one of two things with the Train action.

1) Increase your skills: Spend an action and gain two skill points to spend towards any skill (or skills) the GM agrees with. Note-the restriction on maximum ranks still applies to these points

2) Try to gain a new feat (above and beyond those you may receive for class and level): For every action you spend training in this manner you roll a d6. You need to accumulate a total of 30 points in this manner. When you do, you will have trained sufficiently and have acquired a new feat.

Here's the way it works in the campaign I'm am currently in. Note that each action takes four weeks and so it'll take atleast that long to improve your skills and at least 20 weeks to gain a new feat.

[blitzmacher]

Here's what I came up with for my campaign.
First it costs 1/2GB per skill point. After the character decides how many points they wish to gain they then roll a D20 at a DC of 10 plus the target rank that the skill. If they want to better their chances they can spend an additional GB per point that they want the DC lowered to.
example: Guilder Joe wants to raise his hide skill from 5 ranks to 7. He first pays 1GB for the appropriate teacher. The DC he needs to beat is 17. To inprove his chances he pays an additional 2GB to ensure everything runs right, he has the right training equipment, and is making sure the teacher teaches him everything he can. This improves his chances by 2, so now a roll of 15 or better gains an improvement and anything less fails.
For feats I set the cost at 1GB to find a mentor and made the DC a 20 to gain the feat. Each additional GB spent lowers the DC by 1.

[Chioran]

Orginally posted by blitzmacher

Here's what I came up with for my campaign...
<snipped>



Presuming that you still limit to the appropriate max ranks I like your implementation.

[Arlen Blaede]

Yes, the limit on max ranks still applies.

Wouldn't that be just plain silly otherwise.

[Chioran]

Orginally posted by Arlen Blaede

Yes, the limit on max ranks still applies.

Wouldn't that be just plain silly otherwise.

Quite.

[Arlen Blaede]

Orginally posted by blitzmacher

Here's what I came up with for my campaign.
First it costs 1/2GB per skill point. After the character decides how many points they wish to gain they then roll a D20 at a DC of 10 plus the target rank that the skill. If they want to better their chances they can spend an additional GB per point that they want the DC lowered to.
For feats I set the cost at 1GB to find a mentor and made the DC a 20 to gain the feat. Each additional GB spent lowers the DC by 1.

I like your idea here, but to be honest I disagree with being able to spend money (GBs) to improve your chances of success. That's why we have just allowed for "point goal" in the campaign I am in.

I think what I like most about this though is that you have made it harder to increase a skill at the higher levels of training.

[Temujin]

In my last gome game, which lasted over twelve BR years, I had instituted a home system for about every unclear rule we found. I made a very simple system to clarify the xp training action, which went as follow:

A character that had a teacher at least 1 level higher than him, could gain a level in a number of training action equal to his next level. If the teacher was at least 3 levels higher than the character or twice his level(whichever was higher), the training took half the normal time. And if the character could find no teacher of sufficient skills, the time would be doubled.

It would thus go as follow:
A level 1 fighter wants to go up in level, but doesn't want to adventure on his own yet, so he decides to train instead.
If he can find a trainer who is at least level 4 fighter, a month of training will be enough to advance to level 2. If he can find a trainer who is level 2-3 fighter, it will take him two months of training to advance to level 2. And finally, if he can't find a trainer, or wants to do it on his own, it will take him 4 months of training to advance in level.

A level 11 fighter wants to do the same. If he can find a level 22 fighter trainer(unlikely in Birthright!!!), he would have to spend 6 month of training. With a level 12+ fighter as a teacher, it would take him a whole 12 month, which is a lot, and its still very unlikely that a major NPC like that would want to spend a whole year training the character. Since the character will likely have to rely only on himself, it would take him a whole 2 years of training to rise up in level! He's probably better off adventuring....

In 3rd edition, it would convert as follows, thanks to the easy to remember xp scale:

Training on your own: 500 xp
Training with someone of higher level: 1000 xp
Training with an exceptional trainer(level +3 or level x2, whichever is higher): 2000 xp

Here is the tricky part however!

Under 2nd edition, the xp scale was based on the level in the new class, not so in 3rd edition! Which means that if a fighter 11/mage 1 wants to raise in mage, it will take him no less actions than for gaining another level as a fighter, except that, he would only have to get a teacher level 4 mage to drastically reduce the time needed for the training.
Other rules I use in my 3rd edition game now:

Feat Training: Requires 6 months of training to gain an extra feat if one can find a trainer, double if training on your own.
Skill Training: 1 month of training = 1 free rank in a skill.

I might allow someone to gain ranks beyond his normal level maximum, but I haven't decided on how to handle that yet. My reasoning is that its possible for a level 1 commoner to be an exceptional craftsmen, etc... though it would take a much longer time to gain a single rank, so its unlikely it would be useful for Player Characters.

Any thoughts?:)

[blitzmacher]

Yes the max rank rules for skills still applies.
The reason for allowing GBs to be spent to increase chance of success is to find a better teacher, and training equipment therefore improving his chance of success. Even half a GB bar is a lot of money for a teacher.
The one thing I don't like about Temujin Khans version is the length of time it takes, four weeks of constant training on one thing is a lot of time. Besides the PCs in my campaign rarely have the time to take a training action lest their realm may fall into jeopardy.