Because game balance = nothing to do with any reasonable reality = not in my game, as I'm a simulationist.
Do what you want for your table. But if you come to mine, don't bring your Dwarf.
I'm amazed at the extent that people will kick and scream and beat their feet on the floor to defend the rules, even when they make no logical sense. None.
As I've been saying a lot of late - the rules aren't Holy Writ. They exist for a purpose. When they fail at purpose ( made even more likely because your purpose and my purpose appear to be different - which is OK ), then change the rules.
That really pisses off some people - but they're not at my table, I'm not at theirs.
Game balance can be preserved in homebrew rules, with a little forethought - without committing howling violations of common sense about how reality works.
I gave you an example of such: 40 year old Dwarf vs. 200 year old Dwarf - without assuming individuals are lobotomized when they become adventurers. if you're so attached to the 200 year old aspect of that character, to the point that you're willing to accept rules which have little bearing on how reality works - well, that's fine. Again, not my game.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
You can do the same thing for 50 years and not get appreciably better at it. You can also get good at something, stop doing it, and lose your skills. How long you've been doing something isn't nearly as important as how big a priority being #1 at that thing is in your life, actively pushing your limits, thinking critically about your mistakes, and being exposed to people that are better than you at that skill.
I don't think it's far-fetched for an old character to have been doing the same job for decades without being a master, and then for whatever reason deciding to become an adventurer.
The way 5e handles skills is an oversimplification anyways. Getting better at fighting dragons and dungeon delving shouldn't make you better at your skills, but it does.
Speak for yourself :p
However - humor aside - there's a difference between "an old character to have been doing the same job for decades without being a master, and then for whatever reason deciding to become an adventurer" and an old character never having acquired any appreciable skills in their life.
Again - that's not any part of any reality I've ever seen. Having grown up in a rural community, I've seen "old farmers" with little to no education, who have become extremely skilled at some aspects of their lives, merely through everyday practice.
Does that mean they can pick up a sword and fight Orcs? Of course not - they're not adventurers. But if they became adventurers, they would not suddenly forget the skills they had learned.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
However - humor aside - there's a difference between "an old character to have been doing the same job for decades without being a master, and then for whatever reason deciding to become an adventurer" and an old character never having acquired any appreciable skills in their life.
Any 1st level PC has appreciable skills. Honestly, a lot of them. Having proficiency in a skill means you're good at it, by definition. Having proficiency in a tool implies you've learned a trade. Even fighters are going to start with 2 skills from their class and presumably 1 skill and 1 tool proficiency from their background. Plus the actual training that goes into that 1st class level - weapon and armor training, learning magic, etc.
It doesn't matter how old you are, you still only have 24 hours in a day, you still have friends and family, you still need to eat, drink, and rest, and that puts a practical limit on how many skills you can keep sharp at any given moment. There's some advantages to having lived longer, but they're not pronounced enough when it comes to how many things you can be good at simultaneously.
So, your assertion is that - to use the Dwarf example - 200 years of practice of day to day life, lends no edge, no Bardic 1/2 jack-of-all trade edges, no boosts to proficiency, no extra proficiency, nothing. Same for that Elf who has lived over a millennia? OK ....
Personally, I don't think people are that dense and stupid that they learn nothing of significance to their career as adventurers, over centuries of life- and I have an astoundingly low opinion of people's ability and willingness to learn, so that's saying something.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
So, your assertion is that - to use the Dwarf example - 200 years of practice of day to day life, lends no edge, no Bardic 1/2 jack-of-all trade edges, no boosts to proficiency, no extra proficiency, nothing. Same for that Elf who has lived over a millennia? OK ....
In terms of number of skills that they've kept proficient? Not enough of a difference to fuss over it. Highlight the relevant differences through background features and roleplaying. If someone wants to play a 200-year-old dwarf in a 1st level group, I'm not going to tell them no, but I'm also not going to give them any special treatment besides possibly making a custom background.
FWIW, I might also not have any problem allowing that Dwarf to have some proficiency, perhaps even expertise, in Farming. Make a new skill or skill subset (of Nature for example), and call it Farming. Give him proficiency. Any checks that come up during the campaign that have to do with crop growth, crop rotation, annual rainfall, fertilizing, and being in debt up to your eyeballs, that dwarf has a bonus to the roll.
So long as the player doesn't say "My dwarf spend 200 years as a priest, I want expertise in Religion". No, that's a balance problem. But you can have Accounting! Wheelwrighting! Coopering! Sail-making! Sure thing. If your player can dominate any sail-making challenges I throw at you, it's a small price to pay for your happiness with your backstory :D
I find it interesting that this started with feats, but is now about is more about the the reasonable ages to play as.
Yeah, I think that was partly my fault because of a counter argument I used against long lived races being overpowered (and being able to use centuries of downtime before the campaign begins...).
Every once in awhile I wonder if Dr. Who is really learning from their past and developing new skills, despite multiple personalities and seemingly endless adventures.
I personally feel like the only feat that makes sense to Learn with downtime is Linguist. But like you would gain it in reverse. As in if your character spends to time to learn 3 new languages, you gain the other aspects of the feat.
I skew the other way - I allow EVERYONE in the party equal access to downtime so that just one party member doesn't outshine the others. I also only count in between games as downtime. I do not count the 600 years an elf has lived before becoming an adventurer as "downtime." Basically, real-time between games = downtime in-game so 30 weeks of DT is more than half a year of real-time. I have no problem giving someone a Feat if they have done NOTHING ELSE with their downtime for 6 months.
And I agree with advancement being the fun part, but I think using Downtime to earn boons allows MORE exciting advancement, rather than less. Levels only come so often, and once you hit 20, you are done.... if I can extend the time it takes to get to 20, while still allowing cool incremental advances (via feats, skill increases, custom abilities, etc.) then we get to do more cool stuff over a longer period of time. And the cooler stuff my players can do, the cooler challenges I can throw at them!
Page 231 of the 5e DMG under "Training" says that a DM can offer special training in lieu of a financial reward. Special training can include gaining a feat. So like most things it is certainly an option available for a DM to use. Id reward a player with a the option to learn a feat and require them to use downtime and spend money to gain it. Feats can be game changing for a character and should not come as easy as a character choosing to gain one via downtime. They should be seen more as story rewards, given out very very sparingly as special boons for completing a campaign or doing something truly epic and heroic. Or like times when you advance from one tier of play to the next but honestly having this happen more than once to a character in its whole life feels like too much.
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
My DM allowed it. It took time, came at a cost, and required a master in the feat to train us in it. If we were away for a bit, time to learn it was added on. .sort of like learning a subject at school but not having revised it in a while, it takes some relearning.
He planned out his ish quite a bit though. A lot of events to do with our back stories were moving forward along with us, so there were consequences we would suffer if we spent too much time training.
Like the war that broke out between my country and the country of one of my party members. . .but that was more to do with us going on a pub crawl looking for mysterious taverns we had found when we should've been dealing with stuff we were made aware of but didn't take seriously, rather than us training. . .priorities right lol
Anyway. .I'm no DM yet, so what do I know. .but we enjoyed the game, and we always had a blast, which I think in the end (at least is what sold me on it), is the essence of the game.
Back in college, a roommate started a Middle Earth campaign (in Rolemaster). I wanted to be an elf. Elves in Middle Earth are immortal--they can be killed, but they don't die of old age.
So I asked if I could be 13,000 years old.
The DM was going to allow it, but then we realized that this would make me older than literally all of creation. So we revised my character's age to 1,300 years old.
It was a fun campaign, but it was always a little awkward to explain how I'd been alive for 1,300 years and was 1st level, with all and only the skills of a 1st level character. Really--what exactly had I been doing for 1,300 years? Apparently...not a whole lot. I said that most of that time I'd been a sailor. But I really wasn't all that great at sailing. Just '1st level with a skill' competent. Not '1,300 years competent'.
The lesson I took away from that is to try to minimize 'off camera' time for the characters as much as possible. And if you can't...just realize you'll have to choose between OP characters on the other side of the downtime, or mildly awkward answers to the question "So, what have you been up to all these years?"
Yeah, I find the whole "these species live for centuries" to be untenable for both PCs and NPCs. In my games, elves typically live for up to about 150 years, and remain vigorous and healthy bodied until they reach about 135 after which the aging comes upon them rapidly. They might reach 180, comparable to 100 years old for humans.
If you do play the thousand year old elf idea, then it makes no sense that elves don't rule the entire world, and any legends, lore or basically anything can be easily discovered just by asking the local 500 year old elf. There's a character in a recently published module who specifically has this knowledge because of her age, but she's also a pretty weak character - just what has she been doing all those years? Why doesn't she speak all languages?
Why don't elves run all the banks? How come they don't have vast business empires and just live easily off the proceeds? It's too immersion breaking for me to allow it.
Because game balance = nothing to do with any reasonable reality = not in my game, as I'm a simulationist.
Do what you want for your table. But if you come to mine, don't bring your Dwarf.
I'm amazed at the extent that people will kick and scream and beat their feet on the floor to defend the rules, even when they make no logical sense. None.
As I've been saying a lot of late - the rules aren't Holy Writ. They exist for a purpose. When they fail at purpose ( made even more likely because your purpose and my purpose appear to be different - which is OK ), then change the rules.
That really pisses off some people - but they're not at my table, I'm not at theirs.
Game balance can be preserved in homebrew rules, with a little forethought - without committing howling violations of common sense about how reality works.
I gave you an example of such: 40 year old Dwarf vs. 200 year old Dwarf - without assuming individuals are lobotomized when they become adventurers. if you're so attached to the 200 year old aspect of that character, to the point that you're willing to accept rules which have little bearing on how reality works - well, that's fine. Again, not my game.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Speak for yourself :p
However - humor aside - there's a difference between "an old character to have been doing the same job for decades without being a master, and then for whatever reason deciding to become an adventurer" and an old character never having acquired any appreciable skills in their life.
Again - that's not any part of any reality I've ever seen. Having grown up in a rural community, I've seen "old farmers" with little to no education, who have become extremely skilled at some aspects of their lives, merely through everyday practice.
Does that mean they can pick up a sword and fight Orcs? Of course not - they're not adventurers. But if they became adventurers, they would not suddenly forget the skills they had learned.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Any 1st level PC has appreciable skills. Honestly, a lot of them. Having proficiency in a skill means you're good at it, by definition. Having proficiency in a tool implies you've learned a trade. Even fighters are going to start with 2 skills from their class and presumably 1 skill and 1 tool proficiency from their background. Plus the actual training that goes into that 1st class level - weapon and armor training, learning magic, etc.
It doesn't matter how old you are, you still only have 24 hours in a day, you still have friends and family, you still need to eat, drink, and rest, and that puts a practical limit on how many skills you can keep sharp at any given moment. There's some advantages to having lived longer, but they're not pronounced enough when it comes to how many things you can be good at simultaneously.
So, your assertion is that - to use the Dwarf example - 200 years of practice of day to day life, lends no edge, no Bardic 1/2 jack-of-all trade edges, no boosts to proficiency, no extra proficiency, nothing. Same for that Elf who has lived over a millennia? OK ....
Personally, I don't think people are that dense and stupid that they learn nothing of significance to their career as adventurers, over centuries of life - and I have an astoundingly low opinion of people's ability and willingness to learn, so that's saying something.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
In terms of number of skills that they've kept proficient? Not enough of a difference to fuss over it. Highlight the relevant differences through background features and roleplaying. If someone wants to play a 200-year-old dwarf in a 1st level group, I'm not going to tell them no, but I'm also not going to give them any special treatment besides possibly making a custom background.
FWIW, I might also not have any problem allowing that Dwarf to have some proficiency, perhaps even expertise, in Farming. Make a new skill or skill subset (of Nature for example), and call it Farming. Give him proficiency. Any checks that come up during the campaign that have to do with crop growth, crop rotation, annual rainfall, fertilizing, and being in debt up to your eyeballs, that dwarf has a bonus to the roll.
So long as the player doesn't say "My dwarf spend 200 years as a priest, I want expertise in Religion". No, that's a balance problem. But you can have Accounting! Wheelwrighting! Coopering! Sail-making! Sure thing. If your player can dominate any sail-making challenges I throw at you, it's a small price to pay for your happiness with your backstory :D
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
I find it interesting that this started with feats, but is now about is more about the the reasonable ages to play as.
Yeah, I think that was partly my fault because of a counter argument I used against long lived races being overpowered (and being able to use centuries of downtime before the campaign begins...).
Every once in awhile I wonder if Dr. Who is really learning from their past and developing new skills, despite multiple personalities and seemingly endless adventures.
I personally feel like the only feat that makes sense to Learn with downtime is Linguist. But like you would gain it in reverse. As in if your character spends to time to learn 3 new languages, you gain the other aspects of the feat.
I skew the other way - I allow EVERYONE in the party equal access to downtime so that just one party member doesn't outshine the others. I also only count in between games as downtime. I do not count the 600 years an elf has lived before becoming an adventurer as "downtime." Basically, real-time between games = downtime in-game so 30 weeks of DT is more than half a year of real-time. I have no problem giving someone a Feat if they have done NOTHING ELSE with their downtime for 6 months.
And I agree with advancement being the fun part, but I think using Downtime to earn boons allows MORE exciting advancement, rather than less. Levels only come so often, and once you hit 20, you are done.... if I can extend the time it takes to get to 20, while still allowing cool incremental advances (via feats, skill increases, custom abilities, etc.) then we get to do more cool stuff over a longer period of time. And the cooler stuff my players can do, the cooler challenges I can throw at them!
Page 231 of the 5e DMG under "Training" says that a DM can offer special training in lieu of a financial reward. Special training can include gaining a feat. So like most things it is certainly an option available for a DM to use. Id reward a player with a the option to learn a feat and require them to use downtime and spend money to gain it. Feats can be game changing for a character and should not come as easy as a character choosing to gain one via downtime. They should be seen more as story rewards, given out very very sparingly as special boons for completing a campaign or doing something truly epic and heroic. Or like times when you advance from one tier of play to the next but honestly having this happen more than once to a character in its whole life feels like too much.
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPPmyTI0tZ6nM-bzY0IG3ww
My DM allowed it. It took time, came at a cost, and required a master in the feat to train us in it. If we were away for a bit, time to learn it was added on. .sort of like learning a subject at school but not having revised it in a while, it takes some relearning.
He planned out his ish quite a bit though. A lot of events to do with our back stories were moving forward along with us, so there were consequences we would suffer if we spent too much time training.
Like the war that broke out between my country and the country of one of my party members. . .but that was more to do with us going on a pub crawl looking for mysterious taverns we had found when we should've been dealing with stuff we were made aware of but didn't take seriously, rather than us training. . .priorities right lol
Anyway. .I'm no DM yet, so what do I know. .but we enjoyed the game, and we always had a blast, which I think in the end (at least is what sold me on it), is the essence of the game.
Just realizing now that I'm two years late for this lol
Doing some research for my first one shot as DM
Yeah, I find the whole "these species live for centuries" to be untenable for both PCs and NPCs. In my games, elves typically live for up to about 150 years, and remain vigorous and healthy bodied until they reach about 135 after which the aging comes upon them rapidly. They might reach 180, comparable to 100 years old for humans.
If you do play the thousand year old elf idea, then it makes no sense that elves don't rule the entire world, and any legends, lore or basically anything can be easily discovered just by asking the local 500 year old elf. There's a character in a recently published module who specifically has this knowledge because of her age, but she's also a pretty weak character - just what has she been doing all those years? Why doesn't she speak all languages?
Why don't elves run all the banks? How come they don't have vast business empires and just live easily off the proceeds? It's too immersion breaking for me to allow it.
For the OP, I'd not allow it unless the PC spent the 30 weeks of downtime, and I don't run campaigns with things like that so nope. No free feats.
I would just level up. 40 days and 80 gp max. Same as getting a feat in some situations.