Profession skills and 4th ed

[valeren]

Just wanted to bring this up to the community. I have been playing spelljammer for the last two (two and a half) editions of D&D and one of the main skills in the games which we frequently use are the Sailor secondary skill (2nd ed) and the Profession(Sailor) skill (for 3.0 and 3.5 ed) in running the player's ships.

Was just browsing thru the forums and have not found anything that would be equivalent to this in the new edition. (Current skills I've found for 4th ed include: Acrobatics, Arcana, Athletics, Bluff, Diplomacy, Dungeoneering, Endurance, Heal, History, Insight, Intimidate, Nature, Perception, Religion, Stealth, Streetwise, Thievery)

This would be a big problem if my group is to likewise play Spelljammer in 4th ed. (or possibly some other game which would need the characters to be at least proficient in the old Crafts or Profession skills)

Any thoughts on how this can be handled in the new edition?

 

[theskyfullofdust]

Don't use a skill for it. Make it part of the characters background instead, and if rolls are needed just use Ability checks.

Otherwise, make it a feat, or just make a new skill.

Any of those could work.

 

[KevinF]

I would think that Sailing is to Spelljammer, what Dungeoneering is to traditional DnD. Why not simply house rule in a skill called Sailing?

I thought I heard that WOTC was planning a 4E update for SPelljammer, so eventually they'll address that. Until then, is adding one new skill to the list of available skills in 4E a big deal?

 

[Torchlyte]

Don't use a skill for it. Make it part of the characters background instead, and if rolls are needed just use Ability checks.

Otherwise, make it a feat, or just make a new skill.

Any of those could work.

Agreed. Professions might work better as feats.

 

[Deadstop]

Agreed. Professions might work better as feats.

The feat could even give the same bonus as a trained skill (+5), only in an area of endeavor not covered by a standard "adventuring skill."

That would keep the math for such rolls on par with standard skill rolls.

Further reflection might reveal something terribly wrong with that notion, but it looks good to me ATM.

Deadstop

 

[hong]

In a sense, everyone has Sailing as a skill. Their bonus is (level/2) + (stat/2).

The question is who should get the extra +5 bonus of skill training. You could just say everyone has it, for a Spelljammer game.

 

[FourthBear]

I think that in this case, you should consider simply creating a new skill: Sailing. I believe that this and several other skills were removed from the core list because it was felt that in the average campaign, they would not be used to overcome the challenges facing the adventurers often enough to justify keeping them on the list. So in a standard campaign, you could have a PC with the background of being a sailor and this would come into play in the presumably infrequent occasions when this would be useful (presumably you would use the appropriate attribute check with a +5 for training and a DC set on the fly by the DM). Otherwise, you are asking a PC to spend character resources on a skill that you know is likely to only come up infrequently.

However, if you are planning a campaign that is centered around sailing and sailing challenges will be regular (at least once every other session, I would say), then I think it's appropriate to create a new skill. You may want to define what being trained as a sailor means for game mechanical purposes and what standard challenges are worth setting target numbers for in the text of the skill.

The same thing would apply to a campaign where poetry contests are integral to many of the challenges in the game. In that case, I think it would be worth creating a specific Poetry skill. I feel quite certain that the Sailing skill will be one of the most commonly added skills to the list. I would caution over skill list bloat, as every time you define a skill you are implicitly claiming that a character should devote resources to that skill in order to be competent. I found this to be a significant problem with the non-weapon proficiencies in 2e, where abilities I always thought were more appropriate tracked "off the sheet" were added over time, thus implying that characters weren't actually able without those proficiencies. I just ignored them, but I think DMs and writers should be careful at just creating large lists of every skill imaginable.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yes, you will have to House Rule it.

Best way might be, as mentioned, to make it a new skill that everyone has Trained.

Or to have it replace the Dungeoneering skill.

 

[Larrin]

while most profession skills are pretty ignorable, and can be folded neatly into fluff (cook for example), Sailing has enough of a game impact and IS in fact a skill (not just a profession) that there is no reason it doesn't fit in with the other skills. Just add it in, it doesn't seem like it will be under/overpowered or feel out of place on the list. I'd say anyone with dungeoneering and maybe streetwise and athletics should have it as a class skill. Or whichever classes make the most sense in spelljammer.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Call me crazy (yeah, just do it!) but I would love to see a skill called Manual Labor. See, manual labor isn't as easy as it sounds and it makes a great skill to have and to use. If you are trying to convince an old crone living in a cottage to help out, you can chop her wood. If you need to bypass a cave-in, you just roll up the sleeves and get to work.

Now, some might say manual labor isn't really much of a "skill" but I beg to differ. I have the hands of a priest and it's evident that I haven't done an honest day's work in my life (although I actually have). Pit me against a real blue collar worker in a race to carry bags of flour up to the mouth of a mill, and I wouldn't stand a chance.

Or is this Endurance?