|
Really, it's quite simple. Under the right GM, profession can stand in for other skills, such as appraise, knowledge and so forth.
For example, my alchemist is a "forensic investigator". This overlaps with a whole bunch of knowledge for specific information that could help me crack a case.
My monk/cavalier is a ransomer, meaning that he captures prisoners of war and he sells them back to his enemies in exchange for better standing and money. That stands in for diplomacy, appraise and so forth.
Basically, if you are taking the profession skill, you get to A). Save skill points, B). use your Wisdom modifier for those skills and C). earn money.
Side quests are a thing, or include a part of the game where you have to swipe some keys off a guard before breaking into a dungeon or something.
There's ways to incite better role playing than 'I am thief, I steal the things'.
This really flabbergasts me, that someone would be mad at a player who has their thief-built rogue try and steal things from people? Is there opportunity for more heroic uses of the Sleight of Hand skill? Sure, but I don't see how you can be upset with somebody because they spent skill points in Sleight of Hand and actually want to pick pockets? Also, "I am a thief, I steal the things..."
noun, plural thieves.
1. a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force; one guilty of theft or larceny.
I mean... that's the first definition of what a thief does?!
There can't really be that many people angry at a player playing a thief-built rogue who steals things, can there?
Side quests are a thing, or include a part of the game where you have to swipe some keys off a guard before breaking into a dungeon or something.
There's ways to incite better role playing than 'I am thief, I steal the things'.
This really flabbergasts me, that someone would be mad at a player who has their thief-built rogue try and steal things from people? Is there opportunity for more heroic uses of the Sleight of Hand skill? Sure, but I don't see how you can be upset with somebody because they spent skill points in Sleight of Hand and actually want to pick pockets? Also, "I am a thief, I steal the things..."
noun, plural thieves.
1. a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force; one guilty of theft or larceny.I mean... that's the first definition of what a thief does?!
There can't really be that many people angry at a player playing a thief-built rogue who steals things, can there?
I can see it in a game that doesn't have a lot of tangent time, since most of the time in my experience the rogue running off usually derails the entire group and only includes one player (the rogue).
Intrigue has some fun with this idea, if you really wanna get an interesting dynamic going for the entire party look into the section on heists.
Side quests are a thing, or include a part of the game where you have to swipe some keys off a guard before breaking into a dungeon or something.
There's ways to incite better role playing than 'I am thief, I steal the things'.
This really flabbergasts me, that someone would be mad at a player who has their thief-built rogue try and steal things from people? Is there opportunity for more heroic uses of the Sleight of Hand skill? Sure, but I don't see how you can be upset with somebody because they spent skill points in Sleight of Hand and actually want to pick pockets? Also, "I am a thief, I steal the things..."
noun, plural thieves.
1. a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force; one guilty of theft or larceny.I mean... that's the first definition of what a thief does?!
There can't really be that many people angry at a player playing a thief-built rogue who steals things, can there?
What he is saying is that kind of character is bad for a group (sometimes) and less conducive to fun for the whole table.
And for what it's worth, their isn't really a thief built rogue. Rogues have slight of hand as a skill, and that's about the only "thieving" thing they get, besides disable device. Any character who has disable device and slight of hand as class skills and invest 1 rank per level will be just as good as a rogue a being thief. None of which is justification for making a character that is a pain in the ass to everyone else at the table.
I am not saying that all such characters are groan inducing at all tables, but certainly that at some such tables they will be met with resistance and drag down the enjoyment at the table. Feel out your group to know what does and doesn't work.
That said, KILL THE KENDER!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That said, KILL THE KENDER!
I've got torches! Go genocide!
To MendedWall12: "You can also use Sleight of Hand to entertain an audience as though you were using the Perform skill." So someone that's "wanting to actually use the skill to their character's monetary advantage" can do so without causing trouble for the other party members.
SO to be clear, nothing in the rogue class or the Sleight of Hand skill means you are a thief.
And to why people would be mad, ask yourself this. If I make an pyromaniac-built rogue with profession arsonist and set every building the group walks into on fire because I put points in the skill would you be upset? Pretty much the same with a kleptomaniac thief pickpocketing...
Back in AD&D days, secondary skills were in addition to class skills.
With the transition to 3E, the vague profession (and craft) skills were included because not doing so would send the message that RP is less important than game mechanics.
Personally, i could easily houserule that certain background traits gave free profession skill points.
For one-shot intrigue campaigns, profession skills could also be used to find clues, infiltrate enemy cities etc. But that is extremely circumstantial.
Yeah, its kind of funny when you think about one of the bigger criticisms of 4ed was that there was no roleplaying in it (which I personally disagree with, but that's beside the point for this thread). One of the things people have pointed to in that argument is that the Rules don't do much to facilitate roleplaying. Personally, I don't think the rules in earlier editions did much of that either, unless you consider some of the broader skill choices that were there.
Back to the OP, personally I would disagree with the contention that Acrobatics, Climb and Geography can replace Profession Sailor. Sure, they can help you climb the rigging, keep from falling, and figure out just where in the sam heck you are, but they don't really teach you how to actually control the ship. Plus, you are still investing in three skills to replace one.
Skills don't add to role playing in my opinion. I'd say skills take role playing out of the game by allowing a dice roll. You can still role play and roll the skill but it's easier to roll the dice and beat the DC to say you intimate the person. No role playing required.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Skills don't add to role playing in my opinion.
They don't add to it, but they allow you to back up your role-playing with mechanics. You can role-play a former fisherman but when someone from the desert that's never seen water before can make better rolls than you...
As to rolls, well they mean as much or as little as your group wants them too. If "skills take role playing out of the game", that's on your group not the game.
I'm seriously wondering why we're still having this discussion. Don't Background Skills essentialy solve the issue? Profession skills actually are picked up rather than left behind in favor of, say, Perception, regardless of their functionality.
The secondary question of the actual capabilities, limits and subsequent value of the skill is another matter entirely. Even though I agree that it should have mechanical applications beyond earning a measly allowance and answering questions its varied nature keeps this from happening as the skill doesn't have internal consistency. Some of the (joking) examples given in this thread show that one profession would quite simply be better than another which obviously isn't fair.
So, either Profession shouldn't do more than give an allowance and allow you to answer questions, exactly as it is, or Profession should be dumped and all professions are built through the other skills, or the additional functionality should be tied into other resources, such as other skills or feats; Finally, professions could be handled by backgrounds or traits or somesuch.
Damn it, I have to go and I'm not done with this post...
To MendedWall12: "You can also use Sleight of Hand to entertain an audience as though you were using the Perform skill." So someone that's "wanting to actually use the skill to their character's monetary advantage" can do so without causing trouble for the other party members.
Terrible
i) Perform DC 30 - In a prosperous city, you can earn 3d6 gp/day. Sleight of Hand - standard action, gains as per target.
ii) Why do the other players feel REQUIRED to say "Yes officer, i know this man and i am his accomplice"?
iia) The entire scenerio depends on the other players allowing it. If the players know what is coming and allow the thief to spam sleight of hand without reaction then they are implicitly giving permission and its a PARTY CHOICE, in which case the DM HAS NO SAY IN THE PARTY'S CHOICE. He only has to respond to the choice.
iib) If the thief player spams the skill without informing the party or being noticed by them, then the OTHER PLAYERS WILL HANDLE THE SITUATION. He only has to remain the neutral judge and to meditate between OOC conflicts
iic) if the other players allow the thief player to spam the skill and even aid another on it because they get a share of the stuff, then again its a PARTY CHOICE and the DM HAS NO SAY IN THE PARTY'S CHOICE.
And to why people would be mad, ask yourself this. If I make an pyromaniac-built rogue with profession arsonist and set every building the group walks into on fire because I put points in the skill would you be upset? Pretty much the same with a kleptomaniac thief pickpocketing...
As for "causing trouble for other party members", apparently asking questions via profession RULES is now equivalent to "causing trouble". Players should talk only when the DM allows it. Players can only use whichever skills the DM allows. Profession rules? What's that? The DM has Rule 0.
Also, all skills must be banned. They all cause trouble
DM, whats the upcoming weather? DM, whats the nearby geography? DM, where's north? DM, is that plant usable for anything? (tons and tons more)
DM, i use sense motive on the guard saying its 1 sp to enter. DM, i sense motive on the bartender saying his inn is clean. DM, i sense motive on the man saying he needs help. DM i sense motive etc etc
DM, i appraise the chair. DM i appraise the vase. DM i appraise the bed. DM i appraise the chest. DM i appraise the etc etc
DM, i bluff that i am a god. DM i bluff that i am his father. DM i bluff that i am his superior officer. DM i bluff etc etc.
Frankly if the DM has such an attitude, its not a problem about the profession skill, its not even a problem about the player. Its the problem about the DM.
One of the many reasons why i convinced my party to use the unchained "Background skills" system.
In general too many of the classes have way too bad base skillpoints to do anything amazing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Glob: MendedWall12 said "you'd expect them to want to get the most out of the expenditure of precious skill points, wouldn't you?" He's pretty much saying if you put points in sleight of hand, you'll pickpocket everyone. It's pretty much the same excuse the players of kenders use. "Well I HAVE to pick everyone's pockets..."
As to your bullet points, Perform usually doesn't involve jail time, chases and attacks. The same can't be said with picking pockets.
1) Every check is another chance for problems that varies by the mark. If you target people that'll add up to more than you can make as a perform check, they are MUCH more likely to notice the attempt. Picking people that are unlikely to notice also means you have a good chance of doing worse than perform.
2) EVERY check allows a perception check that someone without ANY ranks in the skill or stat bonus can make. It's not the other player that are the issue, it's his victims.
2a-c) it's more of an issue that the thief becomes a liability as they become unable to help the group as they are in jail, start a fight as they drag the angry mark back to them, brings the guard's attention on them, ect. If the party allows it, that's fine but that usually isn't the case from my experience.
As to your other points, picking pockets is NOT a "asking questions via profession RULES". Baking a pie usually doesn't get you thrown in jail... Equating picking pockets and craft/profession skills is VERY disingenuous.
He's pretty much saying if you put points in sleight of hand, you'll pickpocket everyone.
I mean I get it if the party rogue is picking everyone's pockets, that would get annoying, but if they see an easy mark, and want to take a little easy loot, what's the problem with that?
You actually either didn't read all my posts or are trying to make me sound like an extremist. I actually, expressly, clearly, and I thought pretty concisely said, if a rogue pickpocketed everyone it would be annoying, ergo: don't do that. But that doesn't mean that picking the pockets of some choice individuals somehow ruins the game for everyone.
He's pretty much saying if you put points in sleight of hand, you'll pickpocket everyone.I mean I get it if the party rogue is picking everyone's pockets, that would get annoying, but if they see an easy mark, and want to take a little easy loot, what's the problem with that?You actually either didn't read all my posts or are trying to make me sound like an extremist. I actually, expressly, clearly, and I thought pretty concisely said, if a rogue pickpocketed everyone it would be annoying, ergo: don't do that. But that doesn't mean that picking the pockets of some choice individuals somehow ruins the game for everyone.
I read all your posts, but they don't have a consistent logic so I have to make some educated guesses at what you mean.
You SAY "if they see an easy mark, and want to take a little easy loot, what's the problem with that?" but then you aren't getting more [on average] than is you just used your skill as perform. [Do easy targets carry more than cp?]
Secondly, there REALLY isn't such a thing as an easy target because of how the skill works. Any target without a negative wisdom can sense your attempt. So the difference between picking everyone and 'easy' targets is how many often you're caught, not that you're going to avoid attracting attention with 'easy' prey.
So, the only reason to pick pockets ends up being to be "annoying". The simple act of even attempting pick pockets once is enough to bring unwanted trouble to the party for an unknown 'reward'. It's right up there with sapping people in public and turning out their pockets...
I read all your posts, but they don't have a consistent logic so I have to make some educated guesses at what you mean.
And your educated guess directly disregards something I flat out stated? That sounds like a rather uneducated guess to me.
So, the only reason to pick pockets ends up being to be "annoying". The simple act of even attempting pick pockets once is enough to bring unwanted trouble to the party for an unknown 'reward'. It's right up there with sapping people in public and turning out their pockets...
That argument stinks of fait accompli. You would have me believe that the only reason that any person, ever, picked any pocket was "to be annoying." Come come now, we need not resort to such tactics.
I agree that picking pockets definitely comes with risk, depending on the situation, but then the situation definitely plays a factor, and would need to be addressed as a real component of any argument for or against using the skill in question to pick pockets.
I'd also like to point out that the very first phrase in the rulebook description of the skill is "to pick pockets."
Sleight of Hand
(Dex; Armor Check Penalty; Trained Only)
Your training allows you to pick pockets, draw hidden weapons, and take a variety of actions without being noticed.
So clearly those people that created the game didn't think that the only reason to pick pockets was "to be annoying."
That you feel picking pockets is an annoyance to your game is clear, but certainly you cannot claim to know that is the truth for all tables everywhere. Can you not fathom the table in which players actually have fun watching the party rogue filch a bag of coins from a wealthy merchant who's well into his cups?
Can you not fathom the table in which players actually have fun watching the party rogue filch a bag of coins from a wealthy merchant who's well into his cups?
I've BEEN in that group/game and for every bag of coins gained, there's another time it's a fight, jail time or other distraction from what we are meant to be doing in the game: having fun. Balancing the risk/reward, it's not worth it based on time taken, gp gained or just about any other factor you wish to look at.
The party that enjoys you picking pockets either hasn't seen the skill go terribly wrong or doesn't care if you get beaten, de-handed, jailed or otherwise punished for being a criminal.
So clearly those people that created the game didn't think that the only reason to pick pockets was "to be annoying."
PC's aren't the only people with skills. Your opponents try to rob, steal and kill you. As such, the inclusion of pick pockets in the skill means nothing in your point. I know I find someone else's hand in my pocket "annoying"...
I agree that picking pockets definitely comes with risk.
And you need to FULL stop there. There are ALWAYS a risk. For me, that risk is rarely worth reward or the drawbacks of failure.
And your educated guess directly disregards something I flat out stated?
"Sure, but I don't see how you can be upset with somebody because they spent skill points in Sleight of Hand and actually want to pick pockets? Also, "I am a thief, I steal the things...""
"Right, but when they are and do, you'd expect them to want to get the most out of the expenditure of precious skill points, wouldn't you?"
"Again, if a player used the precious resource of skill points in the Sleight of Hand skill, wouldn't you expect them to then want to get the most out of that expenditure, and actually do one of the most useful things that skill can do, pick pockets? I can't be mad at a player for putting skill points in Sleight of Hand, and then wanting to actually use the skill to their character's monetary advantage."
So in the above quotes, you say you expect the 'thief' to use his skills to pick pockets. You expect them to get the most out of their skill points. There are a thief and they steal things. Pick pockets is useful.
Sounds like I listened to you just fine and it sounds like you'd expect someone to pick pockets on a regular basis: All the time... You aren't advocating the "opportunity for more heroic uses of the Sleight of Hand skill" that might come up once in a while. You want to "use the skill to their character's monetary advantage" and that requires multiple attempts, so as to beat using the skill as a performance. Either that are you're going after richer people that likely have a MUCH better chance to notice the attempt.
"I am a thief, I steal the things..."
Lets circle back to this... This here is the start of my coming to the conclusion it's "to be annoying." This is just trying to justify disruptive behavior...
PS: If you want to continue debating this, you should start another thread. Picking pockets has strayed away from the theme of the thread and we shouldn't derail it anymore.
You correctly ascertain that we should no longer derail this thread, but I doubt a new thread is warranted. You continue to take my words and turn them into whatever you want them to be. At no point did I use the words "all the time," or "on a regular basis." For whatever reason you came to that conclusion because I continue to advocate that using the SoH skill to pick pockets is actually a viable application of the mechanic in game. At this point we'll just have to agree to disagree. You think there is no place in a game for PC's to pick pockets, ever. I think there is absolutely a time and place in game for PC's to pick pockets, yes, perhaps even more than once. One of the most wonderful aspects of this game is that you can find a table that suits your needs, and I can find a table that suits mine; obviously that won't be the same table. Happy gaming! :)