|
I would allow it at my games but you have to know few simple facts; knowledge includes a wide area of skills including structure stability and such while profession is more limited and focused on single thing. In your case, engineer (by my standards at least which I don't claim to be 100% correct) would be person that focuses on engines, machines and such but wouldn't cover the infrastructure of a building.
In similar example, Profession (pickpocketer (which I probably failed to write properly)) is similar to Sleight of Hand check but includes only picking pockets of nearby strangers but not every other thing.
At least, this is how I understood it.
Is there a difference between these two skills?
Yes. One is doing a job, the other is knowing stuff.
As a GM, would you allow either roll if a knowledge (engineering) check was called for? At the same or higher DC?
No. They're not the same thing. They're not even similar things; one cannot substitute for the other.
What if you have Profession but not Knowledge?
Then you're a bit of a "savant" in your chosen trade: you know what to do, but couldn't explain why you're doing what you're doing, or what it's called, or what would happen if you did it any other way.
Profession earns you a living. Being a know-it-alls doesn't earn you anything. Not anything most people want anyways.
And if you're an engineer who is in charge of things like building bridges, it would probably be a good idea to be good at both aspects :)
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Heh, I'd list it as:
profession: engineer: get hired as an engineer, make a decent wage, regardless of your actual competence at engineering.
knowledge: engineering: actually knowing stuff.
A true professional engineer would have both, just as a doctor would have both heal and profession:doctor. The guy with just the profession skill is that incompetent person who gets hired anyway and somehow never manages to screw up enough to get fired despite knowing nothing about their job. The character with just the knowledge skill knows their stuff but is bad at getting someone to pay them to do it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the book,
Profession: "You are skilled at a specific job."
Knowledge: "You are educated in a field of study and can answer both simple and complex questions."
I see it as Profession deals with the practical and Knowledge deals with the theoretical.
A professor of engineering would have a high Knowledge(engineering) skill. A general contractor would have a high Profession(engineer) skill.
I would allow the skill to be interchanged but with a penalty. For example if the question was to identify dangerous construction normally a DC10 task, I would allow someone with Profession(engineer) to make the check but with a -5 penalty, so DC15.
Someone with knowledge of a bridge would be able to calculate the loads on it. While someone who built bridges would be able to note deficiencies in the construction.
If you were trying to build a bridge while an engineer would know how to design one he wouldn't necessarily know about "how to use the tools of [the] trade, how to perform the profession's daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems."
In a Kingmaker campaign, I had a dwarven wizard that had Know(engineering), Prof(engineer), AND Prof(architect). I didn't know at the time how little skills played a part (officially), but the DM did allow me to make prof checks as the magister to get bonus BPs every now and then. I had a dream of dwarven roads connecting the entire empire... The Roman roads can't compare to good old-fashioned dwarvencraft :)
|
I would say that one that has only the profession skill knows what they need to know about their job, while one that has the knowledge skill knows about all kinds of engineering related stuff.
Same thing with a healer and a doctor. A healer can heal all kinds of ails, but one that has the profession only knows what they need to know, like a dentist.
One is specific and one is broad.
For certain issues, both skills could be used to answer questions (possibly with penalties for one of them), but in other cases only one or the other could be used.
For instance, one with only the knowledge may know all of the theory (like which style of bridge would suit this particular location, and which materials should be used), but not have the ability to actually perform the job (actually building the bridge).
One with only the profession would be able to perform the job, but not necessarily know more than the basics in terms of theory (so they would be able to build the bridge, but not necessarily have the knowledge to determine if style A, B, or C would be the best).
By the rules profession only allows you to make money. It is not to be used like a knowledge check.
|
By the rules profession only allows you to make money. It is not to be used like a knowledge check.
By the rules craft only allows you to make items, but it's used all the time for taste-testing potions to identify them.
You are skilled at a specific job. Like Craft, Knowledge, and Perform, Profession is actually a number of separate skills. You could have several Profession skills, each with its own ranks. While a Craft skill represents ability in creating an item, a Profession skill represents an aptitude in a vocation requiring a broader range of less specific knowledge. The most common Profession skills are architect, baker, barrister, brewer, butcher, clerk, cook, courtesan, driver, engineer, farmer, fisherman, gambler, gardener, herbalist, innkeeper, librarian, merchant, midwife, miller, miner, porter, sailor, scribe, shepherd, stable master, soldier, tanner, trapper, and woodcutter.
Check: You can earn half your Profession check result in gold pieces per week of dedicated work. You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession's daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems. You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher.
The parts I've highlighted support that you're able to do similar things you can do with a knowledge check.
I had never seen that before, even after questioning someone about it so I just thought they made it up.
I guess the skill is more useful than I though. I agree that a -5 penalty is fair then.
I've had this come up. A player took Profession: Dragonhunter, and wanted to use the skill like a Knowledge check against Dragons (only). According to the skill, that's reasonable. [Before you start taking potshots at this example, he was level 10 or so, and yes, there are CR 1 dragons. A character could do that professionally.]
From a balance point of view, it would be weird if a Profession skill (let's say, Profession: Healer) allowed everything the Knowledge skill allows, as well as the ability to make money. One skill shouldn't simply be better than the other.
However, a character with a knowledge skill could also theoretically make money as a sage. Pathfinder hasn't mentioned much of this that I know of, but previous settlement-based 3.5 publications mentioned the ability to hire and consult sages. And why not? Information is valuable.
So either the skills should have differences, or there should only be one skill.
Hypothetically, Profession: Dragonhunter is mechanically balanced against Knowledge: Arcana because, even though it may allow Knowledge checks against Dragons, it can also be used to make money. You've traded the breadth of the Knowledge skill for specificity and the ability to earn money.
But that's only balanced if the skills really are unequal. Take the example of Profession: Healer and Heal. Unlike the above example, Profession: Healer would logically be able to do everything Heal does, as well as make money. That's a superior option and thus bad design.
A GM could enforce differences between the skills, I suppose. A GM could only allow one skill for certain situations; or a GM could allow skill checks from either skill and raise or lower the DCs to reflect whether it's more practical or scholastic. But that could be tedious work to insert into APs, which just assume you'll have Handle Animal and not Profession: Animal Handler.
I will say that although different DCs appeals to my sense of distinction, I dislike the idea as a player. If I have 20 ranks of Heal, I want to feel like the world's best healer. I don't want a character to enter play with 20 ranks of Heal and Profession: Healer and suddenly feel like I'm only built to do the job halfway.
Hmmm. Something to mull over.
This is actually a rather interesting question due to the overlap.
I wonder what would the input of James Jacobs and Sean K Reynolds would be like.
I think the system is a real mess, and it fails to stand up to scrutiny.
Perhaps, but that is why people make houserules on many tables.
However, it is not a solution. The devs need to solve the game's flaws...
Yeah, I have 100 ranks in Profession:Blacksmith.
Cannot forge a horseshoe.
I have 100 ranks in Craft:Horseshoes.
Despite it being the most epic horseshoe ever forged by a mortal, can only sell it at 50% street value of a similar one made by an apprentice.
Get a rank in Perform:Dance.
Can immediately not only use skill, but can ALSO shake daddy's little moneymaker down at the tavern to get me through college.
Working as intended.
I think 3.5e had a system for skill overlap that actually allowed that.
Can't confirm it, but I do know they had skill synergy bonuses which are similar.
Perform is untrained, which you can see by all the starving artists trying to make a living reading poetry or playing a guitar in big city clubs.
For the blacksmith example -- well, PCs don't really ever get to sell things at full value. The 'problem' is there, not necessarily in where to draw the distinction between Profession and Craft
However, the difference is that with 0 ranks in Craft, the Profession guy can make a great living without being able to do so much as craft a nail.
The Craft guy...not so much.
I can swallow that without much difficulty. A person unable to craft being unable to make money off of crafting is fine to me, and I can still think of ways somebody can make money off of the blacksmithing profession without actually being the guy hitting the anvil.
A blacksmith may be teaching an apprentice, or he may have employees to sell the articles, scrub rust off of products or move them around a warehouse. The world needs ditch-diggers too ...
But yeah, that sound sound like untrained labor, which earns less money.
Profession -
I'm changing the oil so the engine doesn't blow up.
Why will it blow up?
Because it needs oil!
Why does it need oil?
So it won't blow up!Knowledge -
If we don't put oil in the engine the pistons will generate too much heat from friction that would lead to catastrophic system failure.
Where do we put the oil in?
I'm not sure, let's see if its labeled.
An engineer is not clueless. He is going to know why his engine needs oil and what will happen to his engine if it doesn’t get it.
What he won’t know is why the engine works the way it does. Why exactly the engine is able to go 150 mph, how are the brakes constructed to allow him to stop ‘x’ distance from the station.
An engineer can run the engine (and that includes rudimentary knowledge on how it works), but he won’t be able to design and build one.
|
|
Does anybody see a problem with the fact that one skill uses Intellect and the other Wisdom? Somebody can dump their intellect and act like they know everything from experience. Knowledge is preparation from reading up before you see something off the page. If you fail the check, you either didn't read that or you don't remember it.
Why can't we just let that be that. Why would profession, with a constant class bonus and a wisdom modifier, be considered a fair substitution.
And if it can, why not say Profession (Pathfinder) and use it for every skill.
Is there a difference between these two skills?
As a GM, would you allow either roll if a knowledge (engineering) check was called for? At the same or higher DC?
What if you have Profession but not Knowledge?
It's the difference between being the designer and the foreman of the construction gang.
On the other hand, you can't design well if you do not know how the workers are going to build what you are designing, and you cannot build it well if you don't have at least a rough grasp of the principals.
I would allow one to substitute another in certain circumstances at a +5 to the DC they have to make. The Foreman may be baffled by a complex engineering diagram, but he can tell if something has an inherent structural weakness. The designer is at sea if he has to tell a team of craftsman what to do and motivate them to do it, but he can see at a glance if they are building it wrong.
An example I use to help keep my head in the game is the difference between Profession (Baker) and Craft (baking). Or at least the difference as I perceive it, based in part on a number of friends I have.
Someone with Craft (baking) can make very good cakes and pies at home. But he can't necessarily sell them, or make them at scale, or deal with supply issues, or any of the rest of the reasons that small bakeries have such a huge failure rate.
Someone with Profession (baker) can run a bakery and make a living selling really tasteless stale cakes and pies.
I think you'd get a similar thing going with engineering; just because you can tinker with your hands doesn't mean you can act as a professional engineer, and just because you can convince someone to pay you to put up a toolshed doesn't mean that it's very well-built.
Well, let's see:
Knowledge: "Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions)."
Profession: "You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher."
So, by pure RAW, the Profession should have a DC of about 5 lower (basic questions 10 versus 15), right?
The real difference to my view is that with Profession: Engineering, you're answering questions about how to do engineering. Let's look at the Knowledge Engineering example checks:
1) Identify dangerous construction: DC 10
2) Determine a structure's style or age: DC 15
3) Determine a structure's weakness: DC 20
The first there is definitely a "do" question, and it's definitely basic; you're not much of a practical engineer if you can't tell what's a bridge at risk of collapse. The third, similarly; it's arguably only a DC 15 Profession check to figure out what the weakness of the bridge is.
But the second? You don't need to know who made the bridge or when to do bridge engineering. The fact that it's "obviously" a duergar-made bridge while the older neighboring construction is all svirfneblin work isn't something you need to know to build, maintain, or destroy it. The Profession-only character is going to miss the hint that there are a bunch of invisible poison-wielding sadistic bastards in the cave ahead.
In a perfect world, nobody would have Profession ranks without some Knowledge ranks in the same field. Comments like "wouldn't someone who builds bridges benefit by knowing what makes a good bridge" are true, but in the real world, not really applicable since bridge builders always have that knowledge (I'm not talking about the guy with a rivet gun putting rivets where he's told to - his profession is not bridge builder).
It's incomprehensible to think that anyone can be successful in a profession without having knowledge of the skill(s) relevant to the profession.
On the other hand, the reverse is not necessarily true. Someone could understand a thing on a theoretical level without having any real ability to apply that knowledge professionally.
Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
When it comes to PCs, we often just pick and choose skills we think we will find useful without worrying too much about practical applications, so the abstract model works well enough.
If you want to model a realistic NPC tradesman, he probably needs all three. Knowledge (blacksmithing) to figure out new items to make, to understand his trade, to analyze the workmanship of others. Craft (blacksmithing) to make a specific item upon request, especially useful for a masterwork request but still applicable even to making a simple horseshoe. And Profession (blacksmithing) to earn a lifetime of wages at his trade.
Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about the profession; that is, know something. Your approach might make a good house-rule, but it's not how skills actually work in Pathfinder.
There's no way that professions should be de-linked from craft skills.
No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about the profession; that is, know something. Your approach might make a good house-rule, but it's not how skills actually work in Pathfinder.Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
Yes, yes, you're quite right.
So obviously, we don't need Knowledge (nature) because someone with Profession (naturalist) can answer exactly the same questions, right? We don't need Knowledge (Religion) because someone with Profession (religion) can answer exactly the same questions, right? And we don't need Knowledge (History) because someone with Profession (historian) can answer exactly the same questions.
Oh, wait, we DO have those knowledge skills. Why is that?
Profession skill states: "You can also answer questions about your Profession."
So what is a profession?
Profession skill states: "You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the profession's daily tasks, how to supervise helpers, and how to handle common problems."
So, a naturalist might know how to farm, how to harvest, how to milk a cow, how to catch a beaver or a rabbit, how to collect healthy berries and avoid poisonous ones, how to market his food and furs, how to supervise his employees, and how to deal with problems like bad crops, pests, infertile fields, maybe even how to birth a calf. But he isn't going to be exceptionally good at identifying natural hazards or unnatural weather phenomena, or distinguishing between natural or artificial features, or knowing specific details about animals, fey, giants, monstrous humanoids, plants, or vermin - all this stuff is more specific knowledge available to someone with Knowledge (nature) but not available to Profession (naturalist).
A historian would know how to conduct research and find out answers, might even have a whole lot basic historical knowledge, would know his way around a library, know how to find out important details, how to sell his information to earn a living, how to supervise his employees, and deal with problems like protecting his books from dampness and rot, or convincing a wealthy benefactor not to reduce funding of his library. but he isn't going to be exceptionally good at knowing, off the top of his head, recent or historically significant events, determining the approximate date of an event, or knowing about obscure or ancient historical events - all this stuff is more specific knowledge available to someone with Knowledge (history) but not available to Profession (historian).
Etc.
So I stand by what I said, and so does the RAW. It's not a house rule at all.
TL;dr: By RAW, the profession skills only grant knowledge about the profession (not the entire Body of Knowledge related to the profession), more specialized (and more useful to adventurers) knowledge requires the related Knowledge skill.
Profession: (engineer) does not allow you to build anything. That would be the Craft skill.
Knowledge: Engineering lets you come up with something.
Craft lets you build that thing you came up with.
Profession lets you get paid for building those things you come up with.
Having only the Knowledge means you can make a blueprint but don't have the expertise necessary to actually build your idea.
Having just the Craft skill means you can build from other people's blueprints, but aren't very good at innovating.
Having just the Profession means you have managed to convince people that you know what you're doing, and can muddle along (usually riding the coattails of actual professionals) but you don't really have a grasp of how to build or innovate anything.
Some real-life examples:
DaVinci had all three skills at high ranks.
Archimedes had high Knowledge and Profession, but no Craft.
Tesla had Knowledge and Craft, but no Profession.
Edison had Profession, and some Craft, but no Knowledge.
In closing: This is an example of how Pathfinder's skill system could really use an overhaul.
Okay, so give me some practical examples where one could be used where the other couldn't be, and vice versa, or where either could be used for the same thing.
Some people here are over complicating this, when it could be broken down best by giving the two most common uses of the skills.
When your character is NOT adventuring, and he needs to make money for the two months he and the party had off, you roll a Profession (Engineer) check to see how much money he made from various odd jobs given to him by people in town. No details about what he has done are necessary. It is a blind roll to see if he made money.
When your character IS adventuring, and he and his party come to a wide chasm underground, and he needs to build or repair an old bridge that is spanning a chasm, or needs to determine if the bridge is still safe, he rolls his Knowledge (Engineering) skill to see if he can make good with his skill. He very much is concerned with a specific object or area in this case.
You CAN'T use them for the same thing, per se. But your GM might allow a synergy bonus between them, or he may rule that you could retry one or the other, if he is a generous and nice guy. Like me!
Yes, yes, you're quite right.No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about the profession; that is, know something. Your approach might make a good house-rule, but it's not how skills actually work in Pathfinder.Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
Thank you.
So, a naturalist might know how to farm, how to harvest, how to milk a cow, how to catch a beaver or a rabbit, how to collect healthy berries and avoid poisonous ones, how to market his food and furs, how to supervise his employees, and how to deal with problems like bad crops, pests, infertile fields, maybe even how to birth a calf.
Right, exactly. Which is to say, your earlier three-sentence bit was an oversimplification. After all, the naturalist can't avoid poisonous berries unless he can tell which ones are poisonous. If you need to know, "Hey, are these berries poisonous?" ranks in the appropriate Profession will give you an answer.
So I stand by what I said,
You mean the oversimplification which was directly contradicted by what you just said?
As to the reason your oversimplification was a problem (as opposed to your properly nuanced response), it leads to people posting things like this:
When your character IS adventuring, and he and his party come to a wide chasm underground, and he needs to build or repair an old bridge that is spanning a chasm, or needs to determine if the bridge is still safe, he rolls his Knowledge (Engineering) skill to see if he can make good with his skill. He very much is concerned with a specific object or area in this case.
"So, is this bridge safe?"
"Don't ask me, I just build and repair bridges for a living. Can't tell a thing by looking at this one in particular."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is an age-old argument between those who DO and those who run-the-numbers up in the shop.
An old pro engineer is going to be smart, and have decades of experience (Wisdom).
A young college graduate egg-head is going to be whip-smart and be full of innovations and ideas and all the latest thinking. (Intelligence)
Think how this plays out.
BUT...Pathfinder isn't that deep. I'd allow either profession or skill to solve the problem.
|
|
Okay, so give me some practical examples where one could be used where the other couldn't be, and vice versa, or where either could be used for the same thing.Some people here are over complicating this, when it could be broken down best by giving the two most common uses of the skills.
When your character is NOT adventuring, and he needs to make money for the two months he and the party had off, you roll a Profession (Engineer) check to see how much money he made from various odd jobs given to him by people in town. No details about what he has done are necessary. It is a blind roll to see if he made money.
When your character IS adventuring, and he and his party come to a wide chasm underground, and he needs to build or repair an old bridge that is spanning a chasm, or needs to determine if the bridge is still safe, he rolls his Knowledge (Engineering) skill to see if he can make good with his skill. He very much is concerned with a specific object or area in this case.
You CAN'T use them for the same thing, per se. But your GM might allow a synergy bonus between them, or he may rule that you could retry one or the other, if he is a generous and nice guy. Like me!
That solution isn't taking into account the parts of the rules I highlighted earlier, which contradict this line of thinking.
|
|
I think part of the problem here is that because people know there is a Knowledge (engineering) skill, they think that Profession (engineering) without any ranks in Knowledge (engineering) must mean they can't do engineering properly.
But there's also a Profession (sailor) skill which lets you know about and do all types of sailing, and there's no Sailing skill, so that's okay.
This to me is the best answer:
An old pro engineer is going to be smart, and have decades of experience (Wisdom).
A young college graduate egg-head is going to be whip-smart and be full of innovations and ideas and all the latest thinking. (Intelligence)
End of the day, it's knowing the same kind of information by either experience/"I don't need to know why it works, it just makes sense" (wisdom) or research/"it's logical it works that way because" (intelligence).
However you come to the conclusion, the result is the same.
I have a house rule where the profession skill is added to the broader skill when a person is conducting a skill associated with the profession.
I have a whole different mechanic for earning money that's tied up with an economic system.