Brcs Feats And Skills

[irdeggman]

All of this discussion of training for skills and not training for skills seems rather house-rules-ish. IMO, Character training should be left in the background and up to the individual GM for how he/she wants to incorporate it into his/her campaign.

3.5 DMG, pg 197 “Research and training aren’t a part of the standard rules. They’re assumed to be going on in the background.”

BRRB pg 60 “Training. Training for level: If the optional rules for training to gain new levels are being used, the character can spend a character action to do so. He must find a mentor or instructor and pay any costs.”

BRCS pg 104 “If optional rules for training are being used, then character actions may be required to advance in level, learn new skills, feats, or languages and other such activities. This training does not provide experience points or bonus skill ranks; it simply represents time characters spend getting their level-based abilities. Characters may not generally gain skill ranks or experience through training alone.”


Key phrases are the use of the word "optional" whenever refering to training rules, hence they are just that "optional".

Someone also said that in 3.0/3.5 character are no longer assumed to be training continuously,

pg 58 of 3.5 PHB "training and practice: Characters spend time between adventures training, studying or otherwise practicing their skills. The work consolodates what they learned on adventures and keeps them in top form."

[RaspK_FOG]

It seems that a lot has been discussed over a single suggestion I made. That means I should either feel fluttered (a small study in psychology or philosophy could easilly explain you why) or go and hide as quick as possible, afraid of my life! :lol:

Really now, I understand that what I proposed was a house rule. What annoys me, though, is the fact that most jumped to conclusions even if I said otherwise! For example, I never said I want people to train for all their skill points to apply - I am one of those people who like to set rules to stone, as long as they can form them up, and assigning vague skill points would be a far greater problem to me than assigning vague XP awards! Furthermore, I made an effort to explain that I was suggesting an alternative for those of you who liked the idea of giving a reward to characters who trained on their skills, just for that small bit of realism; me and my DM even allow characters to "pay" XP for feats, provided they don't go above 5, and that an appropriate cost is assigned to feats. I do not suggest such a thing, knowing how many people would go overboard, yet still you quarrel over-it. I suggest you got that in another thread, where you could explicitly disgust on that subject?

[geeman]

At 07:02 PM 10/27/2003 +0100, irdeggman wrote:



> All of this discussion of training for skills and not training for

> skills seems rather house-rules-ish. IMO, Character training should be

> left in the background and up to the individual GM for how he/she wants

> to incorporate it into his/her campaign.



There is an awful lot of stuff on training in both the core rules and the

BR materials.... A bit more attention to the issue in an update might be

appropriate. But if all anyone gets out of it is some ideas for their

house rules that`s OK too. Not everything has to make it into the BRCS.



Gary

[Osprey]

What game was it, and in which language? One of my favorites is EON, a
Swedish game. Among skill-based fantasy games, it is numero uno on my
list.

What makes it unique is that a skill of 12 with Swords and a skill of 12
with Fire Magic are comparable in lethality. Makes it easier to balance
the "CR" of various encounters in a skill based system.

Should have been translated.

Cheers
Bjørn

I was referring to Drakkar och Demoner - also Swedish, and no doubt an inspiration for EON (maybe by the same designers/company?). It was kinda' the original Swedish fantasy RPG, no? I got introduced to it spending a year there back in '93-94, and a few years later did my best to reproduce it in English for my own campaign, mainly from memory. Hmm, I wonder where all those notes got to?

[RaspK_FOG]

I am also looking forward to formulating a set of rules that would make combat prowess a matter of skills, but I don't have the time right now: I go to university, run a campaign, play in in another campaign, and design a whole new campaign that, with a little luck, will run for a few years at least (I hope it goes beyond 5), and still have to manage a few other things, so I am not sure if I could do this as well... Does any of you have made up any such rules? I would be really grateful for a copy!