Effectively, the new skill rules discourage “dabbling.” It seems very unlikely that anyone will ever take Profession now. I can’t speak for everyone, but I used to put some points into it for roll playing reasons, reflecting the character’s livelihood before becoming and adventurer. Now, skill points are a premium and if you take Profession, it will be as highly ranked as any other skill, increasing as the character progresses in level. As if you are becoming a better seamstress or blacksmith because you killed some monsters.
How about this?: Profession is a bonus skill everyone gets at first level – you just have to specify what the profession is. Further, it is a cross-classed skill, because you don’t focus on it anymore (Now you are an adventurer).
What do you all think?
|
Effectively, the new skill rules discourage “dabbling.” It seems very unlikely that anyone will ever take Profession now. I can’t speak for everyone, but I used to put some points into it for roll playing reasons, reflecting the character’s livelihood before becoming and adventurer. Now, skill points are a premium and if you take Profession, it will be as highly ranked as any other skill, increasing as the character progresses in level. As if you are becoming a better seamstress or blacksmith because you killed some monsters.
How about this?: Profession is a bonus skill everyone gets at first level – you just have to specify what the profession is. Further, it is a cross-classed skill, because you don’t focus on it anymore (Now you are an adventurer).
What do you all think?
this change doesn't affect me... before the only skills I had higher than profession and/or craft was search and spot
|
Thinking about professions. A player of mine once told me you shouldnt spend points professions but gain skill points for being in a profession. It starts making sense to me now. Few people ever takes profession skills and they get little to nothing in return.
Professions can be instead made into feats or something similar, and give benefits instead of using up resources. For example as a Scribe you can have a +3 in linguistics, as an Armorsmith, you could have Armor Training for free, and so on. It's more interesting from the player point of view and it encourages role playing.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Professions can be instead made into feats or something similar, and give benefits instead of using up resources.... It's more interesting from the player point of view and it encourages role playing.
Hi, Darien.
I disagree on both points, but that may just be the way I play my characters.
One of my characters has two points in Profession: brewer. It's a hobby he once had before he went adventuring, and he might have something intelligent to say to an innkeep or to a mage having trouble getting a potion to simmer without breaking its bottles.
Another has 4 points in Heal and another 4 in Profession: dentist.
I didn't take these for in-game mechanical benefits. I took them to help flesh out the character. That's what I consider "encouraging role-playing".
If players took Profession in order to get some bonus to skills, I suspect they'd see Profession as just a reason for those skill bonuses --in the save way people see feats like Streetwise or Country-bred as the reasons for skill bonuses now.
A numerical boost to a skill or two doesn't strike me as interesting, nor as much of a role-playing opportunity, as does a morbid curiosity in the dentation patterns of ethereal maulers. Heck, I once managed to get a band of hobgoblins to brush regularly.
|
What I find interesting is that, using the Alpha skill system, a character ends up with more 'skill points' by about 6th or 7th level. But they are set up in such a way as to discourage 1st level characters from taking the 'flavor' skills until they are higher in levels.
Two fixes - make at least one 'flavor' skill mandatory (ugh) for 1st level characters or else give 1st level characters one free craft or profession skill. Third fix would be to go back to skill points.
I didn't take these for in-game mechanical benefits. I took them to help flesh out the character. That's what I consider "encouraging role-playing".
My whole point in a nutshell. Especially at a low level, nobody can “afford” to “waste” a skill slot on “role playing” the way the 3P is set up right now. Actually, thieves might, but most everyone else, no.
What I find interesting is that, using the Alpha skill system, a character ends up with more 'skill points' by about 6th or 7th level. But they are set up in such a way as to discourage 1st level characters from taking the 'flavor' skills until they are higher in levels.
Right. And it doesn’t make a lot of sense to take “Profession” at 7th level and say it’s because you were a brewer or basket weaver before picking up a sword to go dungeon crawling.
Two fixes - make at least one 'flavor' skill mandatory (ugh) for 1st level characters or else give 1st level characters one free craft or profession skill. Third fix would be to go back to skill points.
Yeah, I’m not too fired up about mandating anything. One bonus craft or profession at character creation sounds great to me. Going back to skill points would be the second option.
|
|
but not everyone has done a craft or profession - some are lifelong thieves or lifelong fighters ect...Yeah, I’m not too fired up about mandating anything. One bonus craft or profession at character creation sounds great to me. Going back to skill points would be the second option.
My houserule has been that 1st level characters can take one of the following free: Craft (any), Profession (any), Knowledge (choose from local, geography, history, religion). Even lifelong thieves or fighters might know a little about geography, local gossip or religion.
My houserule has been that 1st level characters can take one of the following free: Craft (any), Profession (any), Knowledge (choose from local, geography, history, religion). Even lifelong thieves or fighters might know a little about geography, local gossip or religion.
Welcome back to 1st edition's secondary skill chart.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
but not everyone has done a craft or profession - some are lifelong thieves or lifelong fighters ect...
And they starve during winters, or when the caravans stop running, or whenever their 'poke with sharp stick' skills don't pay the bills.
I agree it is an issue, but I'd rather look at profession as a specialzied set of 'other' skills.
Take Profession (Gambler) It gives you (in essence) a skill to bluff, sense motive, spot, intimidate, sleight of hand, but only in the context of gaming. Taking it farther I'd allow it to substitute for gather information to find out if a game is known to be rigged, or if there's a ringer at the table.
Likewise, Profession (Cook), in my games, can be used to substitute for perception to notice poison in food. can be used for spot to notice detals "Why is the alleged muslim eating sausage?" Gather information in the field, substitute for survival to know if the meat is edible, etc.
This can reward the player for his character having an unusual, some might say suboptimal, skill.
I don't know how to suggest people take those skills when you use the 'poof, I am Iron Chef' method in Pathfinder
Proposal:
----
Background Skill
At creation, a character may take Handle Animal or any one Craft, Knowledge, Perform, or Profession skill as a background skill. Your bonus on the skill check in this one skill equals 2 + the skill's ability score modifier. (If you later take this skill as one of your regular skill choices, you may take a replacement background skill.)
----
So, a free secondary skill for flavor, at the level of a first-level cross class skill, which (representing pre-class training) never improves.
|
I agree that the new skill-selection sans points seems to kill some of the flavor you could add to stock 3.x characters.
Of course, I appreciate the lack of inane number crunching with the new system, but I don't think this is quite the solution that's needed.
I like having a rogue or ranger who focuses on certain areas of their class and then has modest training in other areas. Of course, there's the knowledge skill problem too. At least in my group, players splash a point in half a dozen knowledge skills just so they can make sure they can always make a "trained" check to figure something out or get information on a monster they're fighting.
And, of course, there's always that 5-point collection of synergy only skills you see in 3.5 now.
Perhaps a blend could work, where players could select skills as "cross class" on purpose.
Maybe this is a bad idea, but let me sort of flesh it out here:
Let's take, say, a Monk, with 4 skill selections. Each selection could purchase a class skill at full, or a cross class that will be at half.
What if you could take one of those skill selections and pick a class skill but cap it at the cross class value, and have it cost 1/2 a slot?
So the Monk could take, say, Acrobatics, Perception, and Climb for one slot each maxed out, but then take their fourth pick and select two class skills at the cross class value: Perhaps Swim and *drum roll* a Profession for flavor.
You could keep cross-class skills at one full slot for the cross-class value.
This might work; it avoids the time-consuming crunch and single point splashing, but gives enough versatility to pick up some less key flavor skills like professions or knowledges.
|
|
Perhaps a blend could work, where players could select skills as "cross class" on purpose.
[...]
What if you could take one of those skill selections and pick a class skill but cap it at the cross class value, and have it cost 1/2 a slot?
[...]
You could keep cross-class skills at one full slot for the cross-class value.This might work; it avoids the time-consuming crunch and single point splashing, but gives enough versatility to pick up some less key flavor skills like professions or knowledges.
I LOVE this idea! A great compromise between those who want "generalist" characters and those who like the simplicity of the "saga" system.
And of course, should you ever want to bump up one of those skills to a full class skill level, you could put 1/2 a skill selection into it, and either gain another class skill at the cc level, or bump up your other lesser skill as well.I highly recommend keeping the current alpha skill system, and adding this rule as a sidebar.
|
|
Perhaps a blend could work, where players could select skills as "cross class" on purpose.
[...]
What if you could take one of those skill selections and pick a class skill but cap it at the cross class value, and have it cost 1/2 a slot?
[...]
You could keep cross-class skills at one full slot for the cross-class value.This might work; it avoids the time-consuming crunch and single point splashing, but gives enough versatility to pick up some less key flavor skills like professions or knowledges.
I LOVE this idea! A great compromise between those who want "generalist" characters and those who like the simplicity of the "saga" system.
And of course, should you ever want to bump up one of those skills to a full class skill level, you could put 1/2 a skill selection into it, and either gain another class skill at the cc level, or bump up your other lesser skill as well.I highly recommend keeping the current alpha skill system, and adding this rule as a sidebar.
Yeah, I thought that was pretty slick. I've been poking around and it turns out someone else thought of it before me and posted it here in the big Skill Brainstorm mega-thread, but clearly it's a solid option if multiple people came up with it independantly.
Check this out. It's a thread suggesting new Skill Synergy rules. You could use Profession to give bonuses to related skills.
Perhaps a blend could work, where players could select skills as "cross class" on purpose.
[...]
What if you could take one of those skill selections and pick a class skill but cap it at the cross class value, and have it cost 1/2 a slot?
[...]
You could keep cross-class skills at one full slot for the cross-class value.This might work; it avoids the time-consuming crunch and single point splashing, but gives enough versatility to pick up some less key flavor skills like professions or knowledges.
I LOVE this idea! A great compromise between those who want "generalist" characters and those who like the simplicity of the "saga" system.
And of course, should you ever want to bump up one of those skills to a full class skill level, you could put 1/2 a skill selection into it, and either gain another class skill at the cc level, or bump up your other lesser skill as well.I highly recommend keeping the current alpha skill system, and adding this rule as a sidebar.
I second this recommendation, but I'd go so far as to make it a real part of the rules. I think this really goes a long way towards solving the min/maxing problem for skills in PFRPG.
Profession or Craft are both skills that I don't take. DnD has skills that do actual things(ex. Tumble makes you better at combat, UMD gets you new powers, perception skills keep you from being surprised). Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
You could give them away for free and no one would care. They might even forget to take them.
Profession or Craft are both skills that I don't take. DnD has skills that do actual things(ex. Tumble makes you better at combat, UMD gets you new powers, perception skills keep you from being surprised). Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
You could give them away for free and no one would care. They might even forget to take them.
This, again, proves my point.
My question is this - why should the rules be revised to fit your style of play only when the rules are as easily made to fit both your and my style of play equally?
The problem is that the Pathfinder system now forces people to do the equivalent of maximizing ranks in the skills they choose. There is no dabbling.
So the rules have to choose: do you allow people to dabble in the money-making skills (Profession, Craft, Perform) so that people can dabble, do you eliminate the skills altogether and relegate non-adventuring professions to fluff (which is the approach 4th edition has taken), or do you force people who want these skills to maximize it just like any other skill?
Right now, one of these three approaches will be chosen. Why indeed should any one of the three take precedence over the others.
|
|
Almost all of my favorite characters have some sort of Profession skill. It's not like I play Wolverine, purged of any part of his memory that doesn't involve more efficiently killin' folk.
My Barbarian likes to take trophies from beasties he kills. Profession: Butcher helps with that.
My Cleric likes to end the day with a warm meal. Profession: Cook allows him to do so. (He also carries an assortment of spices in his Handy Haversack. Never know what you'll be eating out in the field, and some of it takes some serious spicing before it's palatable...)
Fighter with a few ranks of Craft: Armorsmithing and / or Weaponsmithing just makes sense, if he's ever going to pick up a sword and say, "Hm, masterwork. This might be worth holding on to!"
For that matter, the Druid in my current game picked up ranks in several Craft skills. He makes his own weapons and armor, as a point of pride, being a self-reliancy buff, scornful of 'soft city-folk' who can't feed and take care of themselves.
But none of these examples *mastered* their skills. The Cleric spent more focus on Heal, Knowledge: Religion and Spellcraft and the Druid has maxed out Handle Animal and Survival.
The Fighter, on the other hand, isn't a big fan of horses, so no Ride skill, and isn't an American Gladiator, so he's spent most of his points in fluff skills, since he's a professional mercenary with less need to master skills like Climb, Jump and Swim that are so important to archetypal Fighters like Tarzan the Ape-Man. :/
[sarcasm]Cheer up! There will always be the pain-in-the-ass players that take Profession (hooker) regardless of the skill changes. [/sarcasm]
Not as bad as the spelling error a bard once made making him have Perform (oral) instead of oratory.
Honestly I have found Profession utterly useless in a game unless it was one very urban based where things were run very episodic, so that in days between "adventures" you were working at your profession or craft.
Overall, profession doesn't have any benefit for a player to take it. I've had my PCs take craft for different reasons, but never Profession. And I can't think of anyone in my games that has bothered to take either.
Profession really is just another "class" in a way with its own class skills.
I like the idea of a Professional feat that gives bonuses on different skills. It could be very interesting.
Or perhaps not bonuses but actually expand you class skills. You take Professional (sailor) and Climb, Swim, and Acrobatics are added to your class skills.
It has a lot of potential
|
|
Honestly I have found Profession utterly useless in a game unless it was one very urban based where things were run very episodic, so that in days between "adventures" you were working at your profession or craft.
So you don't use it. That's cool. I don't use Knowledge (nobility) much, if ever. Should that skill be removed from the game, just because I've never had a use for it?
I've used Profession quite a bit, and almost every character has a few ranks in some Craft skill, with Craft (alchemy) being the most popular.
The beauty of it is that you don't have to take it. But consider leaving these skills in for those of us who do find them useful.
No you miss understand, Craft is useful. Profession isn't. It doesn't actually do anything, except make money. Unless you house rule it.
No you miss understand, Craft is useful. Profession isn't. It doesn't actually do anything, except make money. Unless you house rule it.
Let's see... we need to talk to Magistrate Holierthanthou; we are a bunch of adventures and in his mind there is no need to talk to us riffraff... but wait, the Bard has Proffesion (Lawyer)... Magistrate Holierthanthanthou wont talk to adventurers per say but Bard esq. is a fellow barrister so he can make time...
Just because in the campaigns you're in, Profession only functions to make money doesnt mean that others don't see roleplaying opportunities in it...
Your example is easily solved by Deception and Diplomacy, and actually doesn't prove the usefulness of Profession.
I could just as easily say I'm a lawyer as apart of my background and save the ranks or skill selection.
Knowledge (local), Diplomacy, and Deception (with Bluff and SM mushed together) would be the main skills needed to be a lawyer. These skills all have other gameplay uses, and each essentially represent what a lawyer does. Would it not be better if selection of Profession (lawyer) either made these class skills always for you or gave a bonus to the skill checks.
Apothecary: Craft (alchemy), Heal, knowledge (nature)
Hunter: Knowledge (nature), Perception, Survival
Sailor: Swim, Climb, Acrobatics
Herder: Knowledge (nature), Survival, Handle Animal
Merchant: Appraise, Diplomacy, Decption
Apothecary: Craft (alchemy), Heal, knowledge (nature)
Hunter: Knowledge (nature), Perception, Survival
Sailor: Swim, Climb, Acrobatics
Herder: Knowledge (nature), Survival, Handle Animal
Merchant: Appraise, Diplomacy, Decption
So, under 3P, if I have a character who was a merchant by profession but has now received the calling to go into the clergy, I don’t even have enough skill slots to take all three of the skills listed above to make up the profession, let alone Heal or Knowledge: Religion. That’s a problem.
The DMG cleric doesn't have Knowledge (religion) and he's 5th level.
And even if you were a merchant prior, so your trained skills are Appraise, Diplomacy, and Deception. At 2nd level you can gain your new skill and gain Knowledge (religion). You may not be able to ID undead, or no the high rituals for your religion, but you'll know the prayers, dogma, and so forth.
In your example of Merchant all those skills can be done untrained, so you don't even neccessarily need to be "trained" in them to be effective.
The idea I was really tossing out was the idea of making Profession a feat, we could even combine the two ideas, the feat makes 3 ascociated skills class skills for you always, and if they are already class skills for you receive a +1 bonus for them.
And I'm just throwing out ideas, Profession still only gets rolled currently to make money it hasn't changed. Which means unless you got a week of game time to dedicate to your profession the "skill" isn't very effective game wise. You would be better off being trained in ascociated skills of a profession than being trained with the actual Profession skill. Each skill I listed has a different use outside of your "profession" and therefore is more useful than the profession skill itself.
|
|
The idea I was really tossing out was the idea of making Profession a feat, we could even combine the two ideas, the feat makes 3 ascociated skills class skills for you always, and if they are already class skills for you receive a +1 bonus for them.
This idea is better, turning this 'Profession feat' idea into a version of the lame 'pick to two skills and get +2' feats.
But I don't feel that the game needs yet another class of Feats added just to remove the Profession skill (cause that sounds like a losing proposition, if the object is to cut down on stuff, adding yet more stuff to replace the stuff that we're cutting!).
Similarly, I'm not fond of the idea of telling someone, 'yeah, if you want to have done anything before becoming a wizard or fighter, you'll be sub-optimal and sacrificing an entire Feat *and* some skill ranks, instead of just some skill ranks in your hobbies / backstory stuff.'
It's like, 'oh, you want to roleplay a character that didn't pop fully armored out of his mamma's womb, knowing that he was going to be a Fighter? You must be *punished!* Lose a Feat! And no dessert, icky goth role-player! Go LARP or something!'
|
|
Maybe something like Starting Occupations in d20 Modern.
You have a minimum age for each occupation and get a few skills as permanent class skills or +1 to those skills if they are already class skills for you, a bonus feat from a list appropriate to that occupation, and varying bonuses to Wealth (= starting gold).
Plus you get a whole lot of depth and role-playing potential.
I think it would work well in Pathfinder. Call it Background and you could work a few non-professional things in there like Dandy or Street Urchin. And best of all, it's completely modular so if you don't like it, skip it.
Easiest way to fix Profession, just have it as Backstory. It has been and will be a waste of a skill.
See, that's the point. Some people actually like to roleplay.Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
Then is there a point to having those as skills?
|
|
Then is there a point to having those as skills?See, that's the point. Some people actually like to roleplay.Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
Because even the most skilled tradespeople fail once and a while, and those of us who roleplay would like a way to recognize when we suceed in making something and when we fail
Edit: I know that sounds snarky, but its not meant to be, and I couldn't think of a better wording for it.
Well Craft is already tied, at least in part, to item creation (mundane and magical). Recently I got the idea to look at applying Profession to the same process.
First, PCs haul back redonkulous amounts of coins from their adventures. Profession could be a useful vehicle for explaining the transition of that coin into item (made or bought) that the PCs need/want.
Second, one of the elements of Profession is handling helpers. This seems a good excuse to include other PC characters in the item creation process (mundane or magical) as a way to reduce down time. It seems rather silly that Wizard can't have flunkies who help prepare and gather materials for the items he makes and speed up the process. Particularly at higher levels when items that are of a utility nature take days to make. Bag of Holding I vs Bag of Holding IV, 3 days vs 10 days. Craft can already be used to reduce the cost of item creation, have Profession help reduce the time.
Then is there a point to having those as skills?See, that's the point. Some people actually like to roleplay.Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
Because even the most skilled tradespeople fail once and a while, and those of us who roleplay would like a way to recognize when we suceed in making something and when we fail
Edit: I know that sounds snarky, but its not meant to be, and I couldn't think of a better wording for it.
1d20 with ability mod check, done.
I an stand snarky, its no big deal.
See, that's the point. Some people actually like to roleplay.Craft and Profession are just fun roleplaying things.
Which is why they should be free. People who care to minmax even a little don't pick Profession or Craft or Perform. After they get all the things they need to function in their class, they'll cross-class a useful skill like Spot or a new ability like UMD.
Give people four or five Professions or Crafts or Perform Skills for free, then see how much it doesn't change your game. Its just fun roleplaying stuff, and trying to price it the same as something as essential to the game like the new Perception skill or Use Magic Device is just illogical on first principles.
The suggestion of making it a feat is a way to give it more utility overall. Because currently as a skill Profession has little to none to justify it be a skill requiring the expenditure of character resources. If its just there for ascetic background fluff and that's its only use, then it should just go there. Into the background.
Because like I said you don't need to have the Profession skill to be good at the professions listed.
The problem with making it a feat is it now has to compete with current feats in both utility and power. We also have examples in the current pathfinder setup of combining skill usage feats. Track being added into Survival.
It would be better to take whatever thoughts you have for a Feat based Profession and apply it as an advanced use for Profession as a skill. That should hopefully increase Profession's utility and value as a skill.
*edit* You know thinking about there is a KISS answer to boost both Craft and Profession. Why not just merge them into a single skill?
Well, I don't have any thoughts on the Profession skill that would translate into higher level functions of the skill. I don't even find its current functions useful. The simple matter is that the professions can be handled better by other skills. And the other skills have a wider scope of usage outside of the profession.
|
Which is why they should be free. People who care to minmax even a little don't pick Profession or Craft or Perform. After they get all the things they need to function in their class, they'll cross-class a useful skill like Spot or a new ability like UMD.Give people four or five Professions or Crafts or Perform Skills for free, then see how much it doesn't change your game. Its just fun roleplaying stuff, and trying to price it the same as something as essential to the game like the new Perception skill or Use Magic Device is just illogical on first principles.
You forgot those who actually play bards, since you have to have perform to use any of the bardic song abilities.
*edit* You know thinking about there is a KISS answer to boost both Craft and Profession. Why not just merge them into a single skill?
Well, that's essentially saying "Let's just scrap Profession altogether" because Craft already does what Profession does with a check. "You can practice your trade and make a decent living earning about half your check result in gold pieces per week of dedicated work..." Profession says the exact same thing.
*edit* You know thinking about there is a KISS answer to boost both Craft and Profession. Why not just merge them into a single skill?
There’s a certain logic there. What is the difference between a “Profession” and a “Craft?” On the one hand, you could be an Armorsmith by profession, but someone else might just enjoy making nice armor in his spare time (i.e. craft). Both might be equally skilled. So, sure, I can dig the combining of these two.
I think skill points are still necessary, tough. Why should I continue to be at maxed out on “Craft: Basket Weaving” after first level if I’m no longer practicing my craft? I’m not weaving a lot of baskets in the dungeon.