REDDIT: School is in session!

[ripx187]

There is an interesting discussion in the AD&D Subreddit. A player says that his DM is using the 1e training rules and the original poster can't figure out how to make the money required to level up. What results is an amazing thread well worth the read.

I have never played with the training rules option, but have thought about doing it for a fantasy world that I'm designing. Now I'm not so sure, this rule changes more than it appears at first glance.

link

[bravewolf]

Thanks, ripx187. I am running an AD&D-Arduin Grimoire campaign & use Hargrave's XP conventions in addition to AD&D's. I found that PCs were eligible for leveling before having the funds, after many sessions. I chalk this up to the addition of Arduin's XP awards, but because my players like the awards, I opted to slash training costs tenfold. Instead of following Gygax's advice on determining the number of weeks spent in training (if PCs are getting XP awards off the Arduin table, it is probable that those PCs are playing to class), I roll randomly (1d4 weeks). So far it is working well. We'll see in a few levels.

[Mighty Darci]

I don't understand the point of the training rules, if you want to slow down advancement, that is easy to do by being stingy with treasure or increasing the the XP required to advance, or both which is essentially what is being down in the example. There are plenty of things to spend money on after all.

[ripx187]

Mighty Darci

I think that there has been a growing interest in the game of resources, and definitely a desire to experience how the game had been played in the past. I also liked the thread itself as it was a very productive one that exemplified the very essence of group play-testing.

The fact that it definately changes how the economy works is kind of a deterrent, isn't it? It's too Capitalistic, but I do like the idea of stepping outside of your comfort zone. We've come to just expect to be rewarded with higher levels . . . what if this wasn't the case? Figuring out how to save the money to afford the level, adventuring to find someone who can actually train you. It changes how we explore the world that we are building. 

[Mighty Darci]

The resource management part I like, but the rest of it sounds like an overreaction and a very slow moving game with few rewards. It seems to me that making the levels 1-3 take forever is not a good thing. If you are going to slow people way down, I would do that around 4th or 5th level and up.

[bravewolf]

Dec 22, 2017 23:06:03 GMT -5 Mighty Darci said:

The resource management part I like, but the rest of it sounds like an overreaction and a very slow moving game with few rewards. It seems to me that making the levels 1-3 take forever is not a good thing. If you are going to slow people way down, I would do that around 4th or 5th level and up.

Truthfully, after a certain point in my gaming experience, I didn't (and don't) understand systems where one levels up or otherwise improves without training. There are exceptions - Call of Cthulhu and Troika! are two - where improvement is based on skill use in the game. I also accept that all games are imperfect simulations. The real trick is finding conventions & mechanics that make it actually work. That is where AD&D can become overly metagamey for ref & player alike. You know, calculating appropriate levels of reward & all that rot. 

Why train, besides making a design choice? The referee can use training as an opportunity to open other quests & relationships in the game. That was hit on earlier in this thread. It can be an opportunity for PCs to engage with factions as well. 

I felt that my group was advancing a little slowly & advised them on a few occasions how they might speed it up, but then realized that I had introduced something in my XP award practices that caused earned XP to outpace wealth accumulation & retention, even when the PCs did a good job of hauling loot home. I talked it over with the group & we agreed that an adjustment would be welcome. My group actually likes the training, how some PCs drop out of the action for a bit while others are still hungrily adventuring. 

I would happily play play in a game that didn't require training, though. Just cos I think it's sort of funny doesn't mean it isn't fun! 

[ripx187]

Like I said, I've never used the training rules, but I do like the idea of struggling at low levels to get by. My current game, players gain a level pretty much every game until around 4th level, yet our favorite games are those early ones. Not because they are rewarding but because they are difficult. I've got players that ditch magic items just because they make the game too easy, and I don't give many out.

[Admin Pete]

Dec 23, 2017 8:14:45 GMT -5 ripx187 said:

Like I said, I've never used the training rules, but I do like the idea of struggling at low levels to get by. My current game, players gain a level pretty much every game until around 4th level, yet our favorite games are those early ones. Not because they are rewarding but because they are difficult. I've got players that ditch magic items just because they make the game too easy, and I don't give many out.

I have never had a player ditch a magic item or ever say the game was too easy. Now more recently when we played once per month they leveled up faster but still not every game. Bitd when we played twice per week it took many games jjust to go from level one to level two. On the other hand a party size of 12 and up PCs (one per player) plus hirelings soaks up a lot of treasure and experience. I am curious to see how this goes with my pbp.  Bitd a 10-12 hour game would cover anywhere from 1-4 months of game time. I have never used the AD&D training thing in my OD&D. One of the reasons is that in my world I cannot wrap my head around adventurers training to be adventurers, I see it as you go out and learn by doing and surviving and that leveling up occurs as a natural function of the world (in the pbp I am using the spending of treasure (coin) and the gathering of and not necessarily spending other treasure as the way of counting this up).

[bravewolf]

@the Perilous Dreamer, I didn't think that the LBBs had training rules in them. I was going to check the books this morning. If I was playing in the implied OD&D setting, using OD&D rules, I wouldn't import AD&D's training rules. The economics of the two games strike me as very different.

[Admin Pete]

Dec 23, 2017 12:04:10 GMT -5 bravewolf said:

@the Perilous Dreamer, I didn't think that the LBBs had training rules in them. I was going to check the books this morning. If I was playing in the implied OD&D setting, using OD&D rules, I wouldn't import AD&D's training rules. The economics of the two games strike me as very different.

OD&D doesn't have those rules, but if I were reffing AD&D I would do it the same way I do in OD&D.

[robkuntz]

We never used these rules in AD&D. The problem is is that Gary threw in the kitchen sink into these and should have made a lot of these optional.

[bravewolf]

Dec 24, 2017 15:46:37 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

We never used these rules in AD&D. The problem is is that Gary threw in the kitchen sink into these and should have made a lot of these optional.

I had wondered whether that was the case. Thanks for sharing, Robert.

[ripx187]

Dec 23, 2017 9:02:45 GMT -5 Admin Pete said:

I have never had a player ditch a magic item or ever say the game was too easy.

It was never insulting to me, we play a peculiar game of gothic monster-hunting. The players love researching monsters and finding ways to harm them in the game. I had given them + weapons which would always do the trick, but they hated the idea. I'm with them.


robkuntz

We never used these rules in AD&D. The problem is is that Gary threw in the kitchen sink into these and should have made a lot of these optional.

I've never felt that any of the AD&D rules were anything but optional. One can play the game for years completely misunderstanding a rule and be just fine. As hard as they claimed that AD&D unified the rules, I don't think that they ever did. I know that I use a different ruleset every time I get behind the screen. Perhaps I got this sensibility from 2e that clearly marked many advanced rules as totally optional.

Course, I learned a lot from Mr. Kuntz telling me about the advanced games of Arneson. Since then I have been even more relaxed about following RULES.