I don't think Profession should be an untrained skill


Skills & Feats


Looking on the skills chart on page 54 of alpha 3, it shows that Profession is an untrained skill. Unless this is undergoing a drastic overhaul as part of beta, I don' think that Profession should be an untrained skill.

The SRD/PHB shows Profession as a Trained only skill. My PHB says "You are trained in a livelihood or a professional role ...". Even with the wording it says that it is a trained skill. Are you changing this skill or was this just an oversight?

Thanks,

-Danny

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

I forgot what it was in but it could be because of an example with Sailors. I forget what it was, but here's the gist..

Profession (Sailor) was used in place of Use Rope. Why? Because Use Rope is a cross class skill for just about everyone. But that doesn't make sense! Sailors need to have rope skills to make those fancy knots for big boats with big sails and LOTS of rope. Use Rope is a LIVE OR DIE skill for these guys, who the f#@! cares about class.

So why do I think Profession has been untrained? So that characters can attempt to do things with that kinda check if the DM (and game designer) finds a Profession check reasonable.

Of course if someone says they were a blacksmith and never puts skill points in blacksmith, I'd smack them as DM. :)

However, maybe that character wasn't a blacksmith. Maybe is Pa was a blacksmith! Maybe the character "helped" (by sweeping the floor) his Pa. Well then it could be argued that the character knows something about blacksmith and could try to do something related to it... even if he's likely to fail. :)

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
sciencephile wrote:
Are you changing this skill or was this just an oversight?

I hope it is still trained use only.

Personally I think it's way too easy for adventurer types (who spend all their time in dungeons and galavanting around the world) to also be supposedly pursuing a profession and be as good or better at it than people who do nothing but practice it. IMHO, Profession ought to be a non-class skill for everyone except Experts.

Grand Lodge

A character can go adventuring down in a dungeon for a day and return with his own weight in platinum pieces, or use Profession for a day and earn coppers. I just don't see a potential for abuse.

For Profession checks that do have consequences in adventuring situations, such as Use Rope as mentioned, or applying your professional contacts to get information, you can increase the DC if you want untrained characters to have little chance to succeed.

I agree with the suggestion that Profession should be cross-class for most classes, specifically adventuring classes and Aristocrats. If a character had the aptitude to earn a living in a proper trade, he wouldn't be wandering the lands risking his neck adventuring.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I don't know where profession(sailor) was used but I think it should be trained for several reasons.

We all go through orientation whenever we get a job. There's some basic instruction about anything we do for a living. I'd argue that whatever module asked for profession sailor should have included "If no one has that make a Use Rope check with -5 penalty" or something. Its the module's fault for not conforming to the system, or the players fault for not conforming to the module. Either case, the system was made with assumptions that it expected both modules and players to follow.

One drastic instance of why I'd want profession to be trained would be profession(siege engineer). We all dream of our heroes turning a ballista around and using it but the actions of loading it and winding it up are a lot more complex than a crossbow. Aiming a catapult would be impossible to anyone who hadn't spent a lifetime training in it.

Grand Lodge

Brit O wrote:
One drastic instance of why I'd want profession to be trained would be profession(siege engineer). We all dream of our heroes turning a ballista around and using it but the actions of loading it and winding it up are a lot more complex than a crossbow. Aiming a catapult would be impossible to anyone who hadn't spent a lifetime training in it.

Yup. To me, that's an obvious Exotic Weapon Proficiency - if you want Experts to have it, just make an Expert class variant that, for example, gets it as a bonus feat and only has six class skills. Profession (siege engineer) should make you really good at digging ditches and estimating bowshot lengths from the ramparts.


SirUrza wrote:


I forgot what it was in but it could be because of an example with Sailors. I forget what it was, but here's the gist..

Profession (Sailor) was used in place of Use Rope. Why? Because Use Rope is a cross class skill for just about everyone. But that doesn't make sense! Sailors need to have rope skills to make those fancy knots for big boats with big sails and LOTS of rope. Use Rope is a LIVE OR DIE skill for these guys, who the f#@! cares about class.

All real sailors (not cabin-boys) would be Experts, and thus would have Use Rope as one of their 10 class skills.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Umm, to clarify one of the rules but I'm pretty sure no character can use weapon proficiency to fire a siege weapon. Siege weapons are purely skill based.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
modus0 wrote:
All real sailors (not cabin-boys) would be Experts, and thus would have Use Rope as one of their 10 class skills.

That so? Because I would build them as fighters or rogues that go swashbuckler.


SirUrza wrote:
modus0 wrote:
All real sailors (not cabin-boys) would be Experts, and thus would have Use Rope as one of their 10 class skills.
That so? Because I would build them as fighters or rogues that go swashbuckler.

@SirUrza: Well, if you think of sailors as PCs and "adventuring fighting men" your point is valid - they would be warriors or fighters/rogues. But, honestly, MOST sailors are just normal guys manning a ship or boat. Therefore I would go with Modus0 and reason that they be experts. Makes sense to me.

As for the original topic: Profession should not necessarily be a class skill. It would be reasonable to assume that most characters pursued a job (which can also be a craft, mind you) before turning to a life of adventure. But ever since adopting a character class they would likely not have the time or drive to follow their original profession anymore.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Argamae wrote:
@SirUrza: Well, if you think of sailors as PCs and "adventuring fighting men" your point is valid - they would be warriors or fighters/rogues. But, honestly, MOST sailors are just normal guys manning a ship or boat. Therefore I would go with Modus0 and reason that they be experts. Makes sense to me.

If they're regular guys manning a boat they don't need stats at all.


SirUrza wrote:
modus0 wrote:
All real sailors (not cabin-boys) would be Experts, and thus would have Use Rope as one of their 10 class skills.
That so? Because I would build them as fighters or rogues that go swashbuckler.

Sailor /= Swashbuckler.

I know the modern US Navy is almost nothing like the days of pirates sailing the seven seas in wooden sailing ships with actual sails, but I can guarantee with a fair degree of certainty that your average sailor wouldn't be as skilled with a heavy blade as a fighter is, wouldn't wear any armor heavier than leather (full-plate wearers sink in the ocean in the real world), and the only thing that rogue grants that a sailor would need is 2 more skill points and possibly evasion/improved evasion. Sure, sneak attack is nice, but not every sailor would be knowledgeable enough in anatomy to have that, so it doesn't fit for the average sailor thematically.

SirUrza wrote:
If they're regular guys manning a boat they don't need stats at all.

Unless their pirates (I'd make anyone on a pirate ship not the First Mate or Captain an Expert) attacking a ship the PCs are on, or the crew of the ship the PCs are on that's getting attacked, sure.


sciencephile wrote:

Looking on the skills chart on page 54 of alpha 3, it shows that Profession is an untrained skill. Unless this is undergoing a drastic overhaul as part of beta, I don' think that Profession should be an untrained skill.

The SRD/PHB shows Profession as a Trained only skill. My PHB says "You are trained in a livelihood or a professional role ...". Even with the wording it says that it is a trained skill. Are you changing this skill or was this just an oversight?

Thanks,

-Danny

*Fighting off a strong sense of apathy regarding any kind of mundane profession mechanic*

I can't see this as a problem. The way I see it, anyone's first day at any job is "untrained".

*Apathy wins out, SHRUG*

TS


I think that the point has been lost. My point in pointing this out was that the list of skills chart listed Profession as an untrained skill. The Pathfinder book does not detail Profession so we must take what is in the SRD. The SRD lists that it is a trained only skill.

The problem is a consistency issue - do we take what the feat describes or what the chart says. Either way it needs to be clarified upon the Beta, I believe. This is the main issue.

As to which way this goes, I don't think it matters too much as long as the chart and the description are consistent. Personally, I think it should still be trained. Otherwise, you can say that you can take on any profession without having ANY trained skill in that profession. Er ... that doesn't make a lot of sense. How many people are proficient at accounting, bowmaking, sailoring, etc., etc. (includes every profession out there).

Just because you show up for a job the first day doesn't mean that you are trained in it. After you have worked it for a while, then you would gain your rank to represent the knowledge in the profession you have gained.

Ultimately it is not a gamebreaker, just a minor issue.


sciencephile wrote:
How many people are proficient at accounting, bowmaking, sailoring, etc., etc. (includes every profession out there).

Bowmaking is a Craft, which is untrained. :)

Seriously - I never even noticed that Profession was trained only. If you don't have ranks in it, you're going to suck at it, unless you have a phenomenal Wisdom score.

For those *with* phenomenal Wisdom scores, I'd say that shows in a very cool way how they can pick up anything with ease. Think the Pretender perhaps.


SirUrza wrote:
Argamae wrote:
@SirUrza: Well, if you think of sailors as PCs and "adventuring fighting men" your point is valid - they would be warriors or fighters/rogues. But, honestly, MOST sailors are just normal guys manning a ship or boat. Therefore I would go with Modus0 and reason that they be experts. Makes sense to me.

If they're regular guys manning a boat they don't need stats at all.

Sure they do if they get into conflict/contact with the PCs. ;)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Argamae wrote:
SirUrza wrote:
Argamae wrote:
@SirUrza: Well, if you think of sailors as PCs and "adventuring fighting men" your point is valid - they would be warriors or fighters/rogues. But, honestly, MOST sailors are just normal guys manning a ship or boat. Therefore I would go with Modus0 and reason that they be experts. Makes sense to me.

If they're regular guys manning a boat they don't need stats at all.

Sure they do if they get into conflict/contact with the PCs. ;)

And if that were the case.. being that they're the Expert class.. seems to be an aweful waste of time to stat them beyond HP, BAB, Saves, and Feats.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 3 / Skills & Feats / I don't think Profession should be an untrained skill All Messageboards
Recent threads in Skills & Feats