Or, it means the OP has just decided not to budge on his/her position for any reason.
From what I've seen, not many posters have budged from ANY position in this thread, which is why so many have left it already and why Captain suggest, perhaps with some wisdom, just to leave the subject alone...
Yet if forced me to reconsider my conception of the Barbarian, which it seems, wasn't that of Paizo's. It forced me to reconsider what was the Profession Skill as intended (being disciplined businessman), and how some people seem to use it differently (being knowledgeable about a narrow field of tasks).
Basically, it forced me to reconsider what is important for me, for my game and for my group. These considerations are often done after a discussion on the Paizo messageboard, and my games, my gameplay and my relation to the world of RPG are only better because of them.
'findel
Or, it means the OP has just decided not to budge on his/her position for any reason.
Still, when a thread reaches 6 pages, it usually means that the OP struck a sensible chord.
i.e., the OP did not drink the kool-aid.
|
Here's the deal, plain and simple:
1.) You don't need to have something as a class skill to be skilled in it.
2.) Not everyone in a "barbarian horde" (for lack of a better word) is in fact, a "Barbarian" in terms of class. Among all those savages and nomads you've got commoners, experts, warriors, even adepts. Just because Barbarians as a class are survivalist berserkers suited to wilderness living, it doesn't mean everyone like that is a Barbarian. Not everyone who steals or likes to fight dirty is a rogue.
3.) The Barbarian class characterizes someone who's priorities are decidedly NOT in the area of anything that does not directly aid them in just getting by. A Barbarian's priorities are: "not getting killed", "breathing", "drinking", and "eating". At best, they associate money with buying food and drink, but even that is a stretch. The concept of doing work that does not matter to them directly so that someone else can essentially provide their needs does not bode well for these guys. As for the whatever-job-that-needs-to-be-done in the horde or caravan or whatever, they would probably point some youngster out, "Hey you, herd these goats"-style.
That's my take.
What this boils down to is a judgement call and one which is easily rectified. Now, there have been a lot of good, solid arguments about why the Barbarian should not have profession as a class skill - arguments ranging from "the class is described as being a primal raging fury (hardly compatible with a profession") to "cultures which aren't agriculturalists don't have professions" - and there have been some good, solid arguments about why the Barbarian should have profession - some people just want the class to have the skill.
The fact that you can't see others viewpoints past the "some people just want the class to have the skill", just demonstrates your lack of open-mindedness on this issue.
So the ball is in the other court.
Which ball, and what court?
As Laurefindel aptly summed up near the end of the previous page, people have different ideas of what the Profession skill covers, and what classes are supposed to represent.
For some, the Professions skill is just an abstract rule to represent a way for a character to make a living that isn't covered by Craft, or Perform. For others, it represents the ability for the character to handle itself in a professional, businesslike manner (and a more modernized version at that).
Some think the classes should simply be a group of thematic mechanics that a group can incorporate into their game any way they see fit, and others think the classes should be based around some theme/fluff ideal and that the mechanics should reflect that.
Given that Pathfinder removes the illiteracy "ability" of Barbarians, and other changes that stray from old themes/fluff, it can be easily believed that classes and skills should be seen strictly as mechanics. (I'm not trying to pass this off as the correct way. Just pointing out it is easy to see why people can think that way.)
But then in this thread, James Jacobs stated it "felt right" (semi-paraphrased) to leave the Profession skill off the Barbarian class skill list.
And that could very well be why this thread has gone on so long.
Some think the classes should simply be a group of thematic mechanicsNotice the key word there - "thematic"? It's very important. The Barbarian class isn't just a random assortment of character abilities, it has a theme.
And that theme (whether it is a raging primal fury or a special type of warrior from a simple society) does not support a profession.
And you know this by studying life on Golarion? Or maybe you spoke to someone who lived on Golarion?
Or how about Toril?
Or any other fictional world that doesn't have to conform to your understanding of what our history is?
Of all the arguments you could have made to support your position, I have no idea why you chose one that is so easy to knock down.
What is my position?
I mean other than neither side can agree to the common ground to work with? And that the best "official" reason is based on feelings of the class, and no particular mechanical or fluff reason?
The Barbarian class isn't just a random assortment of character abilities, it has a theme.
And that theme (whether it is a raging primal fury or a special type of warrior from a simple society) does not support a profession.
True, the theme is very berserker inclined.
Yet the class has been granted the ability to read and write, and is capable to distinguish itself as a prime jeweler, carpenter, blacksmith or tailor (since Paizo left the Craft skill as part of the barbarian class skills).
The assumption that a Barbarian can be more than a berserker is well founded even if, perhaps, it is not meant to be as intended.
At this point, I'm not arguing that the Barbarian should have the Profession skill as one of its class skills. Only that the reasons as of why the Barbarian should have the skills are just as valid as why they shouldn't.
Through James Jacob, Paizo has given its thoughts on what the Barbarian is according to their book. I may not agree with it, but now I can't disagree that according to Paizo, the Barbarian is meant to be a berserker. So when discussion about the Barbarian happens on the Paizo message board, I should respect the fact that "their" Barbarian is not "mine".
The Barbarian class isn't just a random assortment of character abilities, it has a theme.
And that theme (whether it is a raging primal fury or a special type of warrior from a simple society) does not support a profession.True, the theme is very berserker inclined.
Yet the class has been granted the ability to read and write, and is capable to distinguish itself as a prime jeweler, carpenter, blacksmith or tailor (since Paizo left the Craft skill as part of the barbarian class skills).
The assumption that a Barbarian can be more than a berserker is well founded even if, perhaps, it is not meant to be as intended.
At this point, I'm not arguing that the Barbarian should have the Profession skill as one of its class skills. Only that the reasons as of why the Barbarian should have the skills are just as valid as why they shouldn't.
Through James Jacob, Paizo has given its thoughts on what the Barbarian is according to their book. I may not agree with it, but now I can't disagree that according to Paizo, the Barbarian is meant to be a berserker. So when discussion about the Barbarian happens on the Paizo message board, I should respect the fact that "their" Barbarian is not "mine".
I agree.
As per Wikipedia, a profession is "a vocation founded upon specialized educational training, the purpose of which is to supply disinterested counsel and service to others, for a direct and definite compensation, wholly apart from expectation of other business gain".
<sarcasm>Yeah, I -totally- see a pure raging primal fighting machine doing that!</sarcasm>I should respect the fact that "their" Barbarian is not "mine".And, as I've said thoughout this discussion, I totally respect and encourage GMs to exercise rule 0.
And yet at every opportunity, you attempt to nit-pick any statement, even one acknowledging the counter points (ie: yours) in favor of continued badgering with no purpose, it seems, other than to continue nay-saying.
"Sarcasm" tags, progress nothing in response to a level, even, and fair statement of summary like Laurefindel's.
Mining wikipedia for a definition of convenience to your argument, likewise progress nothing. There are multiple definitions of that word - check any dictionary and you'll find both "profession" and "craft" use virtually identical definitions and have several entries (in the 5-7 range or so) attempting to define both terms.
Having asked me earlier for where I stood - go to the dictionary and look where both words nearly overlap to see where I stand on what a "profession" means.
All of this, however, I've given over as irrelevant since the GAME definition, as pointed out by Mirror, Mirror is NOT a dictionary definition at all - it has a mechanic to generate GP's, and that's really about all the skill does. Point given, acknowledged, and conceded, and you guys are STILL not dropping it.
This isn't *discussion* at all - not with comments like the ones you've been making (collective "you" more than LT directly) IN THE FACE of an acknowledgment of the RAW/RAI interpretation favoring your argument from the get.
If you continue on, even in the face of such things - there's no term I'm even familiar with to describe what's happening. Some mental exercise in shadow-boxing? There's no one there anymore to argue against.
Now you're jumping down people's throats that are just trying to give some sort of lens through which to examine things in a more calm manner ... completely out of line to attack someone with such a post.
Rule 0 support? ... not if YOU keep attacking like you do.
{I tried so hard to NOT come back here ... *sighs*)
If you want to play that game, that's fine. The people who are the experts on Golarian (Paizo) and Toril (WotC) have said the Barbarian shouldn't have the profession skill.
And here I thought Pathfinder RPG was setting-neutral? I thought Golarion material was seperate from the RPG line.
If the argument is "That's how Barbarians in Golarion are!" then that makes no sense.
Do you all ever actually bother to read posts you're responding to?
Let's backtrack a sec, kid.
What exactly does anyone's expertise on a Campaign Setting have to do with a class in a setting-neutral RPG?
You're attempting to qualify your statement of why the Barbarian shouldn't have the profession skill with said expertise.
Or is there something else I missed?
Creative Director
|
Okay folks.
Let's try to ease back on the snark and the vitrol a little here. I understand that some folks think we made the wrong choice to keep 3.5's decision to not have Profession be a class skill for barbarians, but we're not going to change that decision in this edition of Pathfinder.
If you want to continue discussing the merits of granting this skill as a class skill to barbarians, by all means do so, but try not to be jerks to each other about it. :-)
If you'll look back, you'll see that I wasn't the one who focused on Toril and Golarian. Disenchanter did. I just said, "if you want to play that game..".
And if you look back at what I, and Brian E. Harris continued with, was saying you will see that we pointing out that you have no basis for claiming the themes do not uphold Profession as a class skill when the games are played on fictional worlds that do not have to conform to your understanding of our own history.
"James Jacobs said so" is valid enough (Even if based on questionable logic - Profession requires civilization, where literacy is usually a marker for civilization). "What I see as a 'berserker,' or 'rager,' doesn't hold up" doesn't work. Even if it is based on what we are told of human history.
"Barbarians" are not the sole class of their communities, you also have Warriors/Adepts/Commoners/Experts who all gain Profession as a class skill...
The community functions fine, and as for 'Barbarians' they arent just a random assortment of abilities, the Core Rulebook describes them as battle hungry rage machines that live for the moment. Barbarians fill their own 'niche' in society by living by their own rules, they dont need to do menial day-to-day jobs to supplement their income, there are countless other people taking care of that....they just take care of anything requiring hunting, fighting, and so on.
This isnt so much a cultural issue (the fact Commoners, Warriors and so on in ANY tribe have Profession as a class skill), its down to the mindset of the class itself (nobody becomes a Barbarian overnight, its assumed reasonably that a reasonable length of downtime would facilitate learning the abilities of the class ).
Barbarians 'could' take Profession as a skill, but they are not inclined to pursue it because...
1.) its tedious, boring and repetitive
2.) if your working for a buisness or an employer it means taking orders 'because the boss says so', barbarians dont take kindly to these sorts in general
3.) unlike Craft, your making something or performing a task over and over ad nauseum day after day with a defined 'work week'. People who use Craft frequently work for themselves or privately, and can take breaks between jobs as neccisary
4.) the barbarian is a 'live for the moment' kind of character, they cannot be bothered with something as boring as a day job
...thats not to say they 'cant' do it, of course they can, theyre just not inclined to be enthusiastic about it (hence why its not a class skill).
"James Jacobs said so" is valid enough (Even if based on questionable logic - Profession requires civilization, where literacy is usually a marker for civilization). "What I see as a 'berserker,' or 'rager,' doesn't hold up" doesn't work. Even if it is based on what we are told of human history.Incas did not have a formal writing system, and were certainly civilized. Khazaks did have a formal system, but would be considered steppe barbarians for centuries.
Literacy =/= civilization.
I wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.
That is why I used "usually a marker." Just as language is usually a marker for sentience, but isn't universally excepted.
Barbarians don't get profession for the same reason you can't be a lawful barbarian. For some reason the sterotype of all barbarians being idiots from tribes is semi-enforced as rules, despite the fact that their are jobs and roles in tribes, and a member of the barbarian class doesn't have to be tribal at all and can be completely civilized.
The idea behind a professional skill is to cover what other skill do not. Since just about any professional skill a barbarian is likely to take is covered by another skill it makes since that they don’t have professional skills as a class skill. Keep in mind the professional skill only gives the ability to make money with the skill. It does not actually give you any other abilities. So professional skill goat herder would not give you the ability to herd goats that would require animal handler which the barbarian does have
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea behind a professional skill is to cover what other skill do not. Since just about any professional skill a barbarian is likely to take is covered by another skill it makes since that they don’t have professional skills as a class skill. Keep in mind the professional skill only gives the ability to make money with the skill. It does not actually give you any other abilities. So professional skill goat herder would not give you the ability to herd goats that would require animal handler which the barbarian does have
Bull.
Why would my brute character not take something like Profession (Butcher, Bodyguard, Cook, Innkeeper, Miner, Guard, Sailor, Porter, Woodcutter, or Soldier) just because his classes name is barbarian?| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For some, there is only rage. In the ways of their people, in the fury of their passion, in the howl of battle, conflict is all these brutal souls know. Savages, hired muscle, masters of vicious martial techniques, they are not soldiers or professional warriors—they are the battle possessed, creatures of slaughter and spirits of war. Known as barbarians, these warmongers know little of training, preparation, or the rules of warfare; for them, only the moment exists, with the foes that stand before them and the knowledge that the next moment might hold their death. They possess a sixth sense in regard to danger and the endurance to weather all that might entail. These brutal warriors might rise from all walks of life, both civilized and savage, though whole societies embracing such philosophies roam the wild places of the world. Within barbarians storms the primal spirit of battle, and woe to those who face their rage.(PF, almost word-for-word identical to 3.5)
The only job of a barbarian is killer, and if there are roles they are based on how the killing is done. While barbarians may hail from civilization, to call them civilized seems a bit of a stretch.
Show me where in the mechanics where it says that has to be your character's flavour.
Barbarians don't get profession for the same reason you can't be a lawful barbarian. For some reason the sterotype of all barbarians being idiots from tribes is semi-enforced as rules, despite the fact that their are jobs and roles in tribes, and a member of the barbarian class doesn't have to be tribal at all and can be completely civilized.
Except that "barbarian" is a job and a role, just as aristocrat, expert or adept is a job and a role. The people who become "adepts" may live in the same village as the people who become experts or the people who become commoners, but they're not the same people. You don't expect the village (expert) blacksmith to develop spellcasting skills.
And similarly, even if the Bear Clan has librarians -- which it may or may not, depending up on the local technology level -- those librarians are likely to be different people from the berzerkers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only job of a barbarian is killer, and if there are roles they are based on how the killing is done. While barbarians may hail from civilization, to call them civilized seems a bit of a stretch.Show me where in the mechanics where it says that has to be your character's flavour.
I'd start by looking at the class skills list. For example, you don't get Profession as a class skill, by design.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Which is probably a good thing for those who return library books late.those librarians are likely to be different people from the berzerkers.
Agreed. A simple fine I can handle, but it takes a while for bones to knit without magical healing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, I apologize in advance for all the groans, winces, and flinches to come, but you know that SOMEONE has to say it. It's inevitable.
Seriously, what barbarian tribe has a library?Meet... Conan the Librarian.
.....