PDA

View Full Version : How to Handle "Between Level" Training



S Ferguson
April 20th, 2013, 20:25
Just wondering how other CK's handle this often tenuous and/or overlooked subject. I'm looking for House Rules here. I don't think the manual mentions it in any detail whatsoever: so any idea is open season for consideration. I just hate the "Alright, two weeks have passed and you improve your skills." line. I'm looking at maybe stealing from Runequest where skills used in an adventure are eligible for advance, but those that weren't aren't. This doesn't help though, with skills that require training. I need help here.

dr_venture
April 21st, 2013, 00:33
What kind of skills are we talking about? Class skills go up with level, so are you talking about stuff like secondary skills?

Just off the top of my head (literally - have not thought this out), I suppose I'd center it on Stat check (not surprisingly) made when the character uses the skill successfully. I'd give the roll modifiers for things like how high the skill already is (i.e., non-linear progression - easier to improve at low skill level, then tougher as you get more and more skilled), the character's level (you get better at knowing how to learn, basically), how "well" they just successfully used the skill (like, did they just use their skill in a mundane way, or pull off a spectacular maneuver/skill use?)... stuff like that. The down side is that you'd add a fair number of rolls to your game. The up side is that you'd give players potentially immediate reward for participating in the game.

A friend of mine running AD&D uses a method where you get "Skill Points" equivalent to your earned XP, then at times (like when you have leveled or are spending time training), you can spend the Skill Points on buying additional abilities in the skills that you have been using (he has you put a checkmark on a skill you use, and then remove it when you buy advancement in that skill, so you have to use it again to advance).

Finally, you could do something like what is described in the CKG for wizards to learn new spells: after training for a base number of days, you make a stat check when you start training. Then, based on whether the check succeeds or not, it takes an addition d10 or d20 days to advance in the skill.

Just some ideas.

S Ferguson
April 21st, 2013, 01:52
What kind of skills are we talking about? Class skills go up with level, so are you talking about stuff like secondary skills?

Just off the top of my head (literally - have not thought this out), I suppose I'd center it on Stat check (not surprisingly) made when the character uses the skill successfully. I'd give the roll modifiers for things like how high the skill already is (i.e., non-linear progression - easier to improve at low skill level, then tougher as you get more and more skilled), the character's level (you get better at knowing how to learn, basically), how "well" they just successfully used the skill (like, did they just use their skill in a mundane way, or pull off a spectacular maneuver/skill use?)... stuff like that. The down side is that you'd add a fair number of rolls to your game. The up side is that you'd give players potentially immediate reward for participating in the game.

A friend of mine running AD&D uses a method where you get "Skill Points" equivalent to your earned XP, then at times (like when you have leveled or are spending time training), you can spend the Skill Points on buying additional abilities in the skills that you have been using (he has you put a checkmark on a skill you use, and then remove it when you buy advancement in that skill, so you have to use it again to advance).

Finally, you could do something like what is described in the CKG for wizards to learn new spells: after training for a base number of days, you make a stat check when you start training. Then, based on whether the check succeeds or not, it takes an addition d10 or d20 days to advance in the skill.

Just some ideas.

The class skills going up with level (and secondary skills) are precisely the problem. When a character moves from, say, 5th to 6th level, there shouldn't have to be some sort of "epiphany" (not really the word I'm looking for but it will do) in which skills miraculously change with your level. It's this 5.5 hump to get over, that I don't believe can be gained from idle contemplations. I don't think Conan ever sat down and reflected on his doings.

(BTW The "Law of Diminishing Returns" is the non-linear method you were talking about, in which it takes much more effort to achieve higher proficiency).

I like the idea of the checkmark on skills used, with perhaps another modifier for skills performed with flair, or panache. That way characters can interact with gusto and skills used more, increase naturally, and the ones practiced little atrophy. I believe that is a realistic assumption of human behavior.

The wizard example is what I'm trying to get away from. A fighter spends two weeks training. Roll dice see what the result is. I admire Rolemaster, for doing this, but at the same time I find it slightly unrealistic. I mean what type of character spends time actually "training?" IN between adventures their might be a little time, but between adventures your usually holed up in a "one-horse town" (tm). Hardly a place to find a 6th level fighter to get you over that 5.5 hump.

Perhaps another type of point system endemic to the rules? Coupled with the checkmark system it might prove to be interesting, providing a pool of the character's "experience" that they can draw from to boost skill rolls or something. Sort of a credit card system.

Thoughts?
SF

dr_venture
April 21st, 2013, 03:11
Well, the whole idea of levels is far more simulation/approximation than reality, but to me, in the case of C&C, it's an unrealistic generalization that has the benefit of working well in the overall game... it's not worth the effort to me. Even when a character levels up and gets a boost in abilities, it's only a shift in probabilities... it's still an abstraction. To me, it's as realistic as regimenting actions into 10 second rounds, it's just one mechanism for an orderly game.

That said, obviously that's totally just my personal observation, with a big honkin' YMMV tacked on! That's why there are a bunch of different game systems, and why C&C is so house-ruled. :)

If you're only unhappy with the stair-step-like gaining of abilities for the character, perhaps you could just define what the actual changes in abilities are for the classes, then have each player roll for gaining some number of them at the half way point of leveling (as opposed to receiving all benefits at level up). Then when the character does finally level, they receive any abilities they haven't already picked up yet. That would shift characters' ability gains somewhat earlier, so you could build in some kind of delay... blah blah blah.

It sounds like maybe what you're really looking for is a non-level-based system?

S Ferguson
April 21st, 2013, 04:10
Oh, heck no. CnC is too clean of a system to want to make classless. I just want the characters more involved in roleplaying the use of their skills - especially the one's they don't use to often. I want CREATIVITY to reign :bandit: . With such a nice transparent rules system, going classless wouldn't make sense.... I think the pool of XP "boosts" to practiced skills would be a good house rule. Basically one checkmark would be say a +something (maybe someone can help me out here) or the equivalent of a "take 20."

Besides, I have GORE. for transparent classless systems.

dr_venture
April 21st, 2013, 04:18
OK, I hear ya. Yeah, tying the use of a skill/ability to it's progression (especially if used with flair) seems like a good, simple mechanism. When you decide on the deets, please post here!

S Ferguson
April 22nd, 2013, 23:23
Well the "official party line" (tm) is that when a character reaches the EPP required to advance a level they have to take as many weeks as their level number "studying and training before they gain the benefits of the next level. This means your new 5th level Knight, can't gain the benefits of advancement until he trains for 5 weeks in an appropriate setting. Pretty difficult in the middle of a wilderness adventure, with small hamlets or trading posts.

I don't know. This rule, ripped directly from D&D if I recall, never made much sense to me then, and it still doesn't now (well it makes sense, but in the wrong way). You are awarded XP for Monsters slain, Adventures completed (which usually depends on a monster vanquished) and Roleplaying (with an optional ramp up rule for treasure). Aside from increasing combat related abilities I fail to see how the "between levels" would function with any other skills. Roleplaying is what we're striving for but roleplaying skills used should account for more.

The optional rule, in which a character receives a percentage of the XP gained from treasure, struck me though (even though it is a rule I hate). What about the Roleplaying of the after market value on the treasure? This would be what I usually do. So why not include a rule that would act as, for lack of a better word, a "boost"
to raise skills that were practiced during the adventure to a measure halfway between the current levels abilities and the next. The old add two and divide by two formula.

This would give characters raises in roleplayed skills, and combat (usually) and could tie adventurers over 'till they have a chance to officially "train" with a higher level class holder or "study" for the requisite number of weeks.

Thoughts?

dr_venture
April 23rd, 2013, 01:21
I'm not sure what to suggest - for me, it sounds like too much work for too little return.

My extremely subjective and unauthoritative experience on the subject:

If I give players the opportunity to use their skills, they are usually very happy and anxious to do so. If they're not using their skills very much, it's usually because I don't give them enough opportunity to do so. Sometimes I find I have to give a little nudge to players to remember their skills/abiities - this doesn't bug me, as if they were really their character, it'd be second nature for them to use an ability they know. I always appreciate a player who in engaged enough to not need a reminder, but heck, I need reminders sometimes, too. It's the nature of rpgs as opposed to reality.

I have tried stuff like requiring skill use to advance in the past, and for whatever reason, I found that in addition to making players more conscious of their abilities, there was also the less desirable result that the more carefully I watched for characters using skills, the more players went out of their way to kinda 'invent' excuses to use their skills in a semi-appropriate fashion, just to get the check mark. Because the player's goal was to get a check mark instead of having fun using skills in the course of role playing and problem solving, it wasn't very fun. I'd either have to adjudicate the half-hearted skill attempt (really more of a manipulation of the rules) which felt like sort of a waste of time, or I'd have to engage in the frustrated discussion with the player over what exactly is required to use a skill in the right way to get a check mark (or whatever the means of gaining the skill is). Sometimes the players would metagame and let the characters with the least likely chance of accomplishing a task go first, just to get the check mark... which is actually probably more realistic, but for me the realism wasn't worth the result. In the places where the skill use was appropriate and fun, they usually would have used the skill anyway.

For my gaming tastes, I'd rather spend my GMing effort in coming up with situations that give the players the opportunity to use their skills as much as possible. The ones who are engaged will jump at the opportunity, and the ones that are less engaged... I guess I'd rather they just play in the way they enjoy most rather than try to get them to make a half-hearted attempt to use all their skills in order to avoid penalty.

Now that's all super, super subjective, based on what I like to do as a GM. These days I'm into a simplified approach to gaming, which is why I dig C&C so much. There's no reason why you should enjoy the same style of playing, so I really just throw all that out there FWIW... hope it doesn't come across as a critique of your gaming style, Scott, as no critique is warranted! :) Dunno if anyone will find it interesting, but there it is.

S Ferguson
April 23rd, 2013, 05:27
Oh, man, heck no. I GM in a really loose "Paranoia" style fashion. I like keeping the game fast and furious, which means little time to come up with solutions, and players have to be very "in character." Metagaming I don't usually allow as it IMHO slows the game down to a crawl, so if the PCs hang around having a discussion it's a perfect opportunity to be surprised by a wandering patrol; and be warned in combat don't hesitate, otherwise that's what your characters do. I find it a good style that gets players more involved in building characterization, rather than character building. It does take a mature group to do so, however.

I know what you mean about putting the nail there for the hammer to hit and sometimes they need to be reminded of their abilities and sometimes I need to be reminded of something, but we're talking about "between levels" here.

Would you really want to roleplay each development phase? 7 weeks at the tourneys for a sixth going on seventh character? I usually steal the time forms off of GURPS so it happens "in between adventures," and gives a log of what the character had been doing with his time away: a simple, elegant, solution that can be filled out by the players before each adventure starts (Hmmm... might be an extension here).

I don't like the idea of making the game more complex, but a "between levels" adventurer should have some benefit before he starts his training, especially when it comes down to combat, primary skills, and secondary skills. I'm not expecting, say, "seduction" to be bumped up or for an adventure that doesn't offer an opportunity to use it, but if your character concept is a Lothario then you better well play it up, at every opportunity you can. In any case it would just be a temporary modifier, easy to keep in your head. Instead of 12, 18 you might have 12 and 20. or 12 and 18 (+2) difficulty, until they're fully trained.

It might be just me, but the simplicity of the Siege system lends itself well to modification (hurrah for house rules), and if all it takes is to give a temporary boost in abilities, before "training" I think the players (or rather the characters) need it. It gives a sense of accomplishment before getting the golden horseshoe of a new level, and it keeps the characters alive long enough to get their training.

Regarding the Experience system, Besides, taking an easy percentage of XP earned, and adding two numbers and dividing by two, isn't any more challenging than doling out the XP (and possibly treasure) for the encounter. It is metagaming, but as a GM who expects you to describe there actions flamboyantly,(I usually don't even use combat maps aside from general positioning - otherwise it switches to an exercise in wargaming:) ). Set it at an easy 10% and the calculation is trivial.

And this would be just a temporary boost and not a permanent change. maybe a modifier based added to a racial or class ability within reason. A 3rd level Rogue who's earned enough XP to hit the EPP for fourth level shouldn't be given the Sneak Attack ability until they've been trained to do it.

Also note these are "ramblings" at the moment shaping up to be a "house rule" I haven't tried this yet, but my group is very good, and it shouldn't be to hard to playtest. I enjoy C&C for the same reason that you do, for simplicities sake, but with computer assistance, this isn't much different than the Rolemaster Criticals, you use.

Cheers,
SF

dr_venture
April 23rd, 2013, 06:42
Hmmm... I guess I'm not really understanding what you mean by "between levels" and "bumping"... my bad. Can you give a specific example of a skill, how it levels now, and what you don't like about it? For some reason I'm not getting it. I keep thinking that what you're suggesting is adding complexity, but it sounds like that's not what you're getting at.

Answulf
April 23rd, 2013, 07:56
So for an entirely different approach:

I've gone through a lot of different phases over the years (2013 is my 30th anniversary as a GM!), but I've mostly just ignored between level training altogether or morphed it into "on the job" training. I do think it serves a purpose in soaking up player resources, but I would rather do that in more creative ways.

More recently, however, I've been playing around with various incarnations of downtime like that found in Pendragon and Mouseguard. I really like the idea of having an off season from adventuring where time passes significantly, with anywhere from a few months to as much as a couple of years or more of game time passing in between adventures. During the off season characters train, level up, start construction on that small keep they've been wanting, conduct spell research, etc. I will usually let them make some minor tweaks to their character, like say drop a skill they no longer use and pick up a new one. We typically roleplay it out in a single session or through a series of individual discussions, but player actions are big-picture ideas and are measured in days, weeks or even months. The best way I can describe my style with it is that it is like adding backstory, but in between levels - which makes it a lot more important and interesting to the players than their original backstory.

Quick example: I had a player with a wizard who wanted to build a small mage tower, find an apprentice and research some new spells. This took him about two years in game time, but just one session where we worked out some of the details, gave him a few new custom spells and an apprentice hireling. The other characters in the group did other things for two years - one of them got married and had a kid just so that the player could play his son as a character some point down the road - then the next 'real' adventuring session involved the old gang getting back together when the wizard's tower was razed to the ground.

By adding a significant passage of time, you open up all types of character advancement and/or mechanical changes to player creativity - and at the same time add an extra layer of realism. It's been really popular with my players so far and I enjoy GMing it.

S Ferguson
April 23rd, 2013, 18:42
So for an entirely different approach:

I've gone through a lot of different phases over the years (2013 is my 30th anniversary as a GM!), but I've mostly just ignored between level training altogether or morphed it into "on the job" training. I do think it serves a purpose in soaking up player resources, but I would rather do that in more creative ways.

Ditto. Far too many phases to count, and each was fun at the time. I'd like to gloss over this as I did in the past but I also want it to be a part of the game the players look forward to. Hence this thread.


More recently, however, I've been playing around with various incarnations of downtime like that found in Pendragon and Mouseguard. I really like the idea of having an off season from adventuring where time passes significantly, with anywhere from a few months to as much as a couple of years or more of game time passing in between adventures. During the off season characters train, level up, start construction on that small keep they've been wanting, conduct spell research, etc. I will usually let them make some minor tweaks to their character, like say drop a skill they no longer use and pick up a new one. We typically roleplay it out in a single session or through a series of individual discussions, but player actions are big-picture ideas and are measured in days, weeks or even months. The best way I can describe my style with it is that it is like adding backstory, but in between levels - which makes it a lot more important and interesting to the players than their original backstory.

Gosh, I love Pendragon (esp. the 5.1 version out now - Greg Stafford's ultimate take). Unfortunately, the difference between it and other games is that it is dependant on the "Great Campaign" from Uther's reign, to Arthur's succession, to the Dolorus Stroke to Arthur's sending off to Avalon. Whipping up a campaign of the scope of that measure would be a Herculean feat, using the standard adventure format of today. Even in Pendragon, though, there are periods following the Dolorus Stroke, in which your knight almost constantly questing, gaining glory and renown. This would be where most roleplaying games sit these days. The adventures are linked and in order to hit the big payoff, there's no real "downtime" in travelling from one place to another.


Quick example: I had a player with a wizard who wanted to build a small mage tower, find an apprentice and research some new spells. This took him about two years in game time, but just one session where we worked out some of the details, gave him a few new custom spells and an apprentice hireling. The other characters in the group did other things for two years - one of them got married and had a kid just so that the player could play his son as a character some point down the road - then the next 'real' adventuring session involved the old gang getting back together when the wizard's tower was razed to the ground.

By adding a significant passage of time, you open up all types of character advancement and/or mechanical changes to player creativity - and at the same time add an extra layer of realism. It's been really popular with my players so far and I enjoy GMing it.

I suppose I wouldn't have a problem with this, except for the "significant" part. Humans, etc. have limited time on their hands so in order for a son to proudly say, I am son of Olaf, leader of men, who fought with honor on the fields of Agincourt, his father would either have had to been called away to service for his kingdom (a technique I've used to fuse mass combat, that makes a difference, into the works with a few rolls on a table), and have had to accumulate renown in order for his name to carry weight. The mage in your example gaining an apprentice, and the other's marriage, I would put on "rotation," effectively putting them out of the next "two years" of adventuring.

And I mean two years is a lot of time in which skills are forgotten, combat edges fail to remain honed, and taking on a student means less time to engage in personal studies. Adventuring, IMHO is a full-time occupation, and that may also be why I started this thread. I'm not a staunch realist in my games (in fact far from it) but I do look at the Most-Plausible-Outcome-of-an-Event-Factor (tm) in retrospect seeking to keep players entertained and me on my toes.

But you bring up good points. Perhaps a shift in perspectives is needed. Time to put on the old thinking cap again...:)

Answulf
April 24th, 2013, 06:35
I gotcha. I was just throwing it out there that lately I've drifited in the opposite direction of your preference - rather than trying to account for their time more accurately, I've been hand-waiving off large swaths of their lives and the payoff has been added depth to the story of the lives of their characters, and added creative input from the players - which is why I have enjoyed it so much.

The only real success I've had at making between level training a more engaging part of the game for players is in the form of quest-related requirements. I think making it engaging through game mechanics is a tougher road, which is why most players are happy to gloss over it. However, if I were going to to try to house rule it instead, I would probably fall back on usage like you mentioned - but try to keep it simple.

Just off the top of my head as an idea:

I would probably start with some end-of-the session assessment kind of along the lines of roleplaying rewards. If they used their skill to great effect that session they get +2 "points", if they used it a little they get +1 point and if they didn't use it they get -1 point. Then figure out what to do with the points. Maybe require a minimum to advance the skill when they gain a level, or they can advance it independently when it reaches a threshold. They lose it (and have to replace it with something else they are doing that they don't have a skill for) if it goes too far negative. Maybe you just use the points collected as a frame of reference when they do level up to discuss how they want to tweak their character.

sakmerlin37
June 18th, 2013, 19:17
Over the years, I've played with some great GMs and some not so good; I remember one in particular, who was particularly dedicated to creating a fun, immersive game. Often times, training for a warrior, as an example, would be one-on-one adventures to hone the skills; for example, my warrior belonged to a guild where training would be done in the arena. I would pick the skills my character would focus on and then he would run either a planned or an impromptu one-on-one adventure session to account for leveling, learning of new skills, honing the old skills, etc.

Not a path for everyone, but, as a player, I really enjoyed it. It's always been my goal to incorporate that methodology into my GM style; it is when I began to do so that I noticed just how committed my friend was to making the game fun for everyone; I know that he enjoyed the complexity this provided.

S Ferguson
June 18th, 2013, 19:31
Over the years, I've played with some great GMs and some not so good; I remember one in particular, who was particularly dedicated to creating a fun, immersive game. Often times, training for a warrior, as an example, would be one-on-one adventures to hone the skills; for example, my warrior belonged to a guild where training would be done in the arena. I would pick the skills my character would focus on and then he would run either a planned or an impromptu one-on-one adventure session to account for leveling, learning of new skills, honing the old skills, etc.

Not a path for everyone, but, as a player, I really enjoyed it. It's always been my goal to incorporate that methodology into my GM style; it is when I began to do so that I noticed just how committed my friend was to making the game fun for everyone; I know that he enjoyed the complexity this provided.

I think that's an amicable solution to the problem, using Guilds and travel times as an opportunity for players to enjoy the game and practice in their respective "factions." One-on-one gaming is usually a pain in the butt to orchestrate between time zones, but if the players enjoy the session, that's what counts.

Cheers,
SF

Gargomaxthalus
August 15th, 2013, 20:55
Hmmm interesting stuff. About the training thing, training for a number of weeks equal to your level sounds a bit to hokey to me. I'd more rather have this process be a bit more complicated in a manner similar that thing about fighting in an arena but with some extra flair. The idea of a Knight participating in tourneys just plain makes sense as would a Rouge doing contract work or a Fighter doing a stint in an arena. The way that I would handle it would be to set it up as a full fledged event with activity appropriate rewards and risks. This event wouldn't just be for the player who is training, it would be loaded with side opportunities for the rest of the party such as placing bets, fixing fights, or the party helping with a Rouges contract work. Such a thing could lead to fantastic story hooks such as pissing off an influential noble by stealing a family heirloom or a Knight becoming a Lady or even Princess's champion and getting various benefits and complications from it(this would be upper level content of course). The event would directly scale to the PC's level and serve as the intermission in the story, having everyone go through this process would be really complicated, challenging and time consuming, but it would vastly enrich the experience.



(This post was created by someone who has never even played PnP, no matter GMed, and would likely make for a terrible GM at that. He is also prone to anxiety issues and probably won't return to this thread. He just likes sharing his ideas when they prove capable of overwhelming his irrational fears.)

S Ferguson
August 16th, 2013, 23:56
Hmmm interesting stuff. About the training thing, training for a number of weeks equal to your level sounds a bit to hokey to me. I'd more rather have this process be a bit more complicated in a manner similar that thing about fighting in an arena but with some extra flair. The idea of a Knight participating in tourneys just plain makes sense as would a Rouge doing contract work or a Fighter doing a stint in an arena. The way that I would handle it would be to set it up as a full fledged event with activity appropriate rewards and risks. This event wouldn't just be for the player who is training, it would be loaded with side opportunities for the rest of the party such as placing bets, fixing fights, or the party helping with a Rouges contract work. Such a thing could lead to fantastic story hooks such as pissing off an influential noble by stealing a family heirloom or a Knight becoming a Lady or even Princess's champion and getting various benefits and complications from it(this would be upper level content of course). The event would directly scale to the PC's level and serve as the intermission in the story, having everyone go through this process would be really complicated, challenging and time consuming, but it would vastly enrich the experience.



(This post was created by someone who has never even played PnP, no matter GMed, and would likely make for a terrible GM at that. He is also prone to anxiety issues and probably won't return to this thread. He just likes sharing his ideas when they prove capable of overwhelming his irrational fears.)

Sounds like you have the makings of a GM already. You've raised good points about story hooks, and involving the entire party rather than just a single player. I agree that knights and tourneys (or even one on one duels) does make a lot of sense. I also like the idea of making an intermediary story amongst the main campaign; but that's what I started this thread for. It's an issue that rarely gets raised, but I think it's important nevertheless. To learn from others is the best source of information gathering.

And forumophobia can be easily overcome. You just have to work at it.

Cheers,
SF