Topic: Question about training packages and apprenticeship development

[Urbannen]

Do the skill ranks you get from a training package count towards the maximum ranks you can development during your apprenticeship phase?

 

[David Johansen]

Nope

They probably should though, well that and not be discounted.

Stacked TPs can be a bit broken in spite of the aging effect they have.

I love the concept of TPs, in fact I'd probably cut the number of Professions and use more TPS if I were designing a new edition.  But I'm not thrilled with the implementation.  For one thing, TPs and Culture Packages should never ever ever hand out unspecified ranks only specific skills.  The amount of flipping back to the skill list that could be avoided is staggering.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

With the exception of a few of the training packages I believe most are discounted because they contain a certain amount of "background skills" i.e those that probably wouldn't have been purchased had the full amount of DP been required to be paid for them.

I believe that the TP aid in producing well-rounded starting characters with in-build backgrounds (or at least give a guideline for the characters history). While it is possible to abuse the system by stacking up ranks in specific skills I don't really think that in the long run this abuse matters to much for game play, those who do so generally hit the diminishing returns wall just a little faster.

TP's like the weapon master are the ones that needed to be fixed points-wise, because they simply over-emphasise a favoured skill that would have been purchased anyway, exchanging a few of the weapon skill ranks given in this TP for related lore skills might of made them a little less unattractive and a little more logical.

The material benifits to be gained (equipment mainly) is quite disproportiate between the various TP, and it is this, if anything that needs to be addressed with regard to discounting the TP.

In some ways perhaps the starting Training Packages should be paid for with Talent Points (or Background options which ever you use).

[Urbannen]

Well, specifically I was making my first RMFRP magician last night, and I took the Amateur Mage training package. 

The Amateur Mage training package gives you three ranks in an Open List.  I was just wondering if those ranks applied to the "only five spell lists per level or you're gonna pay" limit. 

If not, I'm going to either use those ranks to cherry pick three lists at level one, or I'm going to get another 3 ranks in one additional list. 

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

The ranks would not count against how many ranks you can purchase in a given level.

However, for the spell list, that is not related to ranks you purchase. It is lists gained, and so I would count that list against the 5 lists per level limit.

[Urbannen]

Hmm, that's true.   Thanks.

But you could in theory then get more than 3 ranks in one list using those extra ranks.  Hmm...

[Temujin]

Hmm, that's true.   Thanks.

But you could in theory then get more than 3 ranks in one list using those extra ranks.  Hmm...

Correct.  You couldn't get 5 additional lists since you get 1 from the TP, but you could build up more than 3 ranks because you can have those from the TP + however many your profession allows you to develop in the list.

[markc]

 The other thing to remember is that TP skills are limited to 10 ranks unless it is a life style skill, then it is 15 ranks.

 Another option is as a GM you can look at the race generation rules and see how may backgroud skills are given. Let the PC take the Hobby skills and place them where thewy want. But you as a GM place the other ranks you assign based on thier backgroud. Now this can radically alter PC's so as a GM you should be careful and keep the numbers balanced. This would also be a home rule not an offical rule.

MDC   

[pastaav]

But you could in theory then get more than 3 ranks in one list using those extra ranks.  Hmm...

Before you go that road I would sugest that you check the rules for overcasting. It is possible to cast spells of a much higher level than yourself with enough preparation, but it is tricky enough that you probably is better of with some general adventurer skills like climbing, trading and similar.

[Urbannen]

I understand the dangers of overcasting.  The motivation would not be to get more higher level spells to cast.  The motivation would be to find creative ways to get around the strange limits on acquiring spell lists. 

The system is designed such that a spellcaster has to buy levels of spells he can't safely cast yet if he wishes to use his DPs efficiently.  I think any pure or hybrid spell caster is going to want to develop more than five lists per level. 

In order to do it efficiently, however, he'll have to spread out acquisition of these lists over two or three levels by taking multiple ranks in single spell list.  Otherwise some the spell list ranks will start costing twice as much or more. 

Using the TP ranks to push the total ranks in one or more Open Lists may be one strategy for the long-term conservation of DPs for the diversified spellcaster.     

[markc]

 Another option if you GM allows it is to not start at 1st level. In my game I start pure arms at 3rd, semi's at 4th and pure/hybrids at 5th. This gives almost everybody a good starting skill and spell position to begin play. Note if you are using Arcane casters I penalize them 1 level to keep power balance.

MDC

[Phil]

On the subject of getting extra ranks at 1st level, check out the Priest of Magic in Channeling Companion - they can pick any one list as Everyman, meaning that with a nice bit of optimising you'll have a 1st level character throwing out 16th level spells:

1. Pick a High Elf (starts with 4 ranks in a single open list)
2. Allocate 3 ranks using Hobby skills
3. Amateur mage package adds another 3 ranks
4. Select that open list as your Everyman list
5. Buy another 3 ranks with DPs, which doubles up to 6 ranks

4+3+3+6 = 16 ranks.

[Ecthelion]

...which isn't so much different from that same High Elf choosing to be any other Pure Spell user profession and getting 4+3+3+3 = 13 ranks at first level. And both would blow themselves up if they then tried to actually cast their highest-level 13th/16th-level spell at level 1, getting absurdely high penalties to their SCSM.

[Phil]

....but of course the differences grow from 16/13 at 1st level to 22/16 at 2nd, 28/19 at 3rd until that Priest of Magic can cast 50th level spells at 7th level. And with maxed Empathy, plenty of time on your hands and a magic item or two, you can reduce the penalty to, oooh, a mere -100 or so

[Ecthelion]

The SCSM mod for a spell of >= 22 levels higher than the caster's level is -220 and can be reduced to -200 by preparing it for >= 9 rounds. I doubt that high Empathy and magic items usually available could reduce this much further than perhaps -150.

From my experience casting a spell 5-6 levels higher than the caster's level can often make sense. If the difference is much higher the risks are just too high. The problem is a potential Absolute Failure or Spectacular Failure result which requires a Spell Fumble roll with x2 or x3 the sum of the negative mods. And a Spell Fumble roll with -100 (or -150 to -200, what I think is more realistic) x3 is certain death.

So yes, the difference would grow. But the benefit would IMO not. Such a character build is theoretically possible but would not result in a character that could really make regular use of his high level spells.

[Phil]

The -100 estimate was including +50 from having 50 ranks in the list. You're quite right, it would be a risky maneuver indeed, but to my mind a 7th level character doesn't need to have "regular" use of 50th level spells to be unbalanced, just an intermittent use of 15-20th level spells would be bad enough IMHO.

[Arioch]

The -100 estimate was including +50 from having 50 ranks in the list.

Limited skill progression stop giving bonus at rank #30, with a +25 bonus at max (cfr. pp.:31 RMFRP).

IMHO even trying to cast a 20th level spell for a 7th level character is not a good idea, most of the PCs I've seen trying to accomplish something like that fried they're brains in the attempt...

[markc]

 As to the everyman spell list and level: IMO this is one place that the GM should override the rules and put a limit on the number of ranks the PC can learn. IMO about 8 levels is a good place to limit it but that is juts me.
 Also who is teaching them the spell lists? Will they teach them if they can not control the power of the spell? Or are they trying to indanger the spell caster?

 In US law there is a statment "breaking the spirit of the law using the letter of the law". Basicly, you use the words of the law to get around the law itself. IMO that is what is hapening when a 1st level PC has 10+ ranks in a spell list. But that is just my game.

MDC

[Joshua24601]

I'm in agreement with Markc... in the end the rules are just a guideline for GMs and players.  When a player wants to abuse the system the GM should step in and stop it... just like when the player wants to do something that is outside the rules the GM should asses it and, if it's fair and balanced, allow it.

Sure there are plenty of ways to manipulate the system... that is intentional.  It's an open system, allowing for creativity on behalf of the players and the GM...
However, any good GM should stand in the way of a PC who's obviously trying to abuse that freedom.