Teaching and scholar feat

[Eltsac]

01Alright, I open here an old debate about teaching :p

I see teaching as the spell teaching.
I know skills area differents, but there area many more spells than skills in game and I guess they are more affected by the teaching.

For now, you need the scholar feat (even twice) to be able to teach high level spells
BUT
if you know whatever spell as inept, you can scribe it as a scroll, give the scroll away and the other learn the spell writing the scroll in his spellbook, learning it as inept.

So most teaching rp ends as... you do all the rp, then scribe the scroll and give it....
And I guess that in most case, the share of magical knowledge in fk is some scroll sold or given away with no rp around, which is IC but is sad to me
What point is there in the scholar feat to prevent to use the right teaching commands to do the same things ?

I completely agree on the teacher feat, allowing you to teach better (as it requires some abilities to be a good teacher).
But as spells are as simple to learn (for the basics) as cooking recipes (you copy the recipe in your book, follow it, and you know the basics), it should be possible for anyone knowing a spell to teach it as inept and (for me) the scholar feat could be removed from the game.

It would only help in inciting for more rp in game rather than scrolls given away, I don't really see downsides in that.

El

[Bellayana]

Is it possible to RP out the teaching process of the spell so that the student understands the scroll "better"? I do not have a wizard with the teacher feat, and the way you described how easy it is to learn a spell from a scroll then I would agree. Part of the reason I took the teacher feat on Valence was to be able to RP teaching younger adventurers and skills are not exactly like spells.

So overall I would say if a wizard wanted to learn X spell, you could always RP teaching them and then reward them with a scroll that they could learn from and RP wise would understand it more because of the RP lessons that you gave them.

[Eltsac]

Well of course you can still rp the teaching and give the scroll (which I do) but then isn't it as good to remove the scholar feat at all? As the only point of the Scholar feat is to limit the level of the spells you can teach without the feat.

Teacher feat is still very useful as it makes you a better teacher, allowing you to teach to a higher 'skill level'.

El

[Lathander]

Here are some brain dump suggestions on making the feats more valuable compared to just passing on a scroll:

1. Increase the chance of failure when scribing a scroll. The higher the spell, the greater the chance.
2. Increase the chance of failure when copying a scribed scroll or learning from it. ECL, Int could be modifiers.
3. Increase the time it takes to scribe a scroll. When making armor from leathermaking, one has to log off in a particular spot and return to that spot after considerable time has elapsed. Only then does the leathermaker learn of the success/failure of the item. The same could be done with scrolls. They're not like letters to a loved one after all; they need to be precise magical documents. One incorrect syntax and the scroll goes poof! That takes time.

I think that if scrolls took a long time to produce, experienced an increased failure risk at creation and ran a similar risk during copying/learning, the scales would be more balanced. It seems to be a risk/reward situation where there is very little risk involved in learning from a scroll and the reward is that it takes less time than learning from a PC through engaging RP. If the risk of failure with the scroll method is increased, the teacher concept should be more appealing.

[Brar]

Err..boss I don't want to play devil's advocate but...

1. Increase the chance of failure when scribing a scroll. The higher the spell, the greater the chance.

It is already in place...

2. Increase the chance of failure when copying a scribed scroll or learning from it. ECL, Int could be modifiers.

That is what the spellcraft DC is for when trying to learn from a scroll...

3. Increase the time it takes to scribe a scroll. When making armor from leathermaking, one has to log off in a particular spot and return to that spot after considerable time has elapsed. Only then does the leathermaker learn of the success/failure of the item. The same could be done with scrolls. They're not like letters to a loved one after all; they need to be precise magical documents. One incorrect syntax and the scroll goes poof! That takes time.

That one, I'm all up for it.
There is actual rules in DnD reguarding scribing scrolls, excatly like there is for crafting
It takes 1day per 1k gp of worth, the cost of the scroll being 25gp x spell level x caster level with a minimum of 1 day.
So for example, a level 9 spell would take (9x20x25 = 4500gp and 5 days). Of course, the cost is not realistic in FK because adventurers are far poorer in FK than in FR but it could be used to takes the time frame needed to scribe.

I think that if scrolls took a long time to produce, experienced an increased failure risk at creation and ran a similar risk during copying/learning, the scales would be more balanced. It seems to be a risk/reward situation where there is very little risk involved in learning from a scroll and the reward is that it takes less time than learning from a PC through engaging RP. If the risk of failure with the scroll method is increased, the teacher concept should be more appealing.

It is already the case, except for the long time. Now do not forget that right now, scribing a scroll requires 3 memorization of a spell and 3 times the components as well, that is already a big limitation in term of time spent meditating to scribe scrolls.

But I don't think it is the concern Eltsac had at all.

Her problem is with the facts that the scholar feats brings absolutly nothing positive to the game but leasening roleplay opportunities and spells distributions among casters.

I would more likely see the scholar feat to actually highen your own learning curve (as in you learn more when typing train or being teached), this sounds more coherent with the idea I have of a scholar (which is someone with good learning and working methods).

I don't think making scrolls more difficult / long to make (even if I think it is a good idea) will adress the fact that most players will never be able to teach the higher level spells and will just make scrolls, it only means they have to plan ahead and create the scrolls before hand.
As it will not change the fact that there is no other option available to them than doing so, it will just takes more time...

I think the real questions are: "Should being able to teach and do roleplay is something you have to pay for?"
"Is it normal that you have to spend 2 feats to be able to create roleplays you do not have a single benefits from ?"
If you think it is normal then, "How could an older character who have a long standing roleplay of teaching (back when it costed you xp to teach... edit: oh yeah it costed glory too..) and have took his feats far before scholar existed, suddenly become unable to teach and can't even be true to his character personality ?"

Brar

[Eltsac]

As Brar says...

to be a confirmed teacher in game (which means you are not more powerful or wathever, it only helps you in your rp with apprenticeship rather than using the scroll system or givint money away to go train to NPC trainer X, that's all... ) .. it costs you 4 feats points (2 teachers and 2 scholars).

So my point is more... are those 2 scholars really bringing anything good?
Wouldn't it be better to remove it all and allows the teach command to be used for all spell levels (like the scroll system already does) ? And keep the teacher feat for better teaching? 2 feat points only for rp purpose isn't that bad.

Making the scroll system longer and all (so making teaching less attractive) would only end to the situation before the teaching system : the teacher would give to his apprentice the address of the NPC teacher for the spell... loosing all rp opportunities.

We should not forget that teaching brings nothing to game but rp, as such, I think it should incite players to teach each other, which is always better than the always possible and easy solution to point to the NPC teacher who will teach for a few coins in less than a minute.

Well it's my point

El

[Lathander]

Err..boss I don't want to play devil's advocate but...

Nothing wrong with a courteously executed devil's argument. I don't use the teacher system myself, so was not completely aware of what was already in the game. I appreciate the detailed breakdown.

I'm still struggling understanding exactly what it is you want. From what I can discern, you think the number of feat points required for teacher-2/scholar-2 are excessive compared to the benefit. Also, you believe that teacher-2/scholar-2 is less effective than learning via scroll. Am I correct?

If those are your concerns, what is your specifically proposed solution.

[Eltsac]

Sorry, I'm not always good at finding the good words for what I want to say in English

So yes, I tend to think that 4 feat points for rp purpose only is a little too much (though it was not the main point of my post)

I have nothing against the teaching feat, which has some benefits for the points you put in it. You can teach without that feat, but you are a better teacher with it

My problem is on the scholar feat itself, which aim is to "unlock" the PC teaching of higher spell levels ... without the feat, you can't teach 2/3 of your spells.
Knowing all high level spells are learnable via NPC for some money and a very short time, or through the scroll system (which clearly shows that ICly the basics of any spells can easily be tought by any spellcaster as they are as easy to learn as to read the "recipe"), is there any point forcing PC to use 2 feat points to be able to teach those high level spells using the PC teaching system?

I would rather see the scholar feat to be removed from the game, all spell levels being teachable without feat
And keep the teacher feat that allows to teach to a higher "skill level" for specialized teachers.

Am I more clear like that?

El

[Lathander]

Basically, you are saying that you would do away with the "teaching" feat and allow everyone that ability without needing a feat. The scholar feat would remain the same, allowing for the teaching of higher level spells should one want to spend the 2 feat points.

Is this correct?

[Brar]

It is the other way...

She wants to get the scholar feats removed and keep the teacher feats

[Eltsac]

I would rather see the scholar feat to be removed from the game, all spell levels being teachable without feat
And keep the teacher feat that allows to teach to a higher "skill level" for specialized teachers.

But there is another thread started by Enig after mine, about removing both teacher and scholar feats...

El

[Bellayana]

So I have been thinking, can we have remove the teacher and scholar feat to allow this as an ability that everyone has? I think that is what was up for discussion, and I know there have been other hot topics up for discussion? Where does everyone really stand on this? I really would like to know other people's thoughts, and how it should be implemented. Is there a way to run a poll?