D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Craft (Alchemy)

[Brown Jenkin]

We have been informed that Alchemy would be replaced by Craft (Alchemy) in 3.5. I am wondering if this change was fully thought through. Creating PCGen files for personal use I have noted that very few classes have the Alchemy skill while at least half of all classes have Craft (Any) as class skills. This means that all of those classes now have Alchemy as a class skill.

Was this intentional to make Alchemy so broad based? Seems like another bad 3.5 idea that will require lots of errata from everyone to deal with this problem or does everyone think that Alchemy should be so broad based?

 

[Dash Dannigan]

Don't jump to conclusions so quickly. For all we know, the Craft(alchemy) may only be allowed by certain classes in 3.5, so who knows?

So eager to jump on the "3.5 screwed us" bandwagon? Take a number and join the crowd. I won't, I'm gonna wait and see...

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Don't jump to conclusions so quickly. For all we know, the Craft(alchemy) may only be allowed by certain classes in 3.5, so who knows?

So eager to jump on the "3.5 screwed us" bandwagon? Take a number and join the crowd. I won't, I'm gonna wait and see...

I am talking about all the other books besides the core three which are not being revised, both WotC and other companies. Sure the can rewrite the skill list for everyone to now read Craft (Any except for Alchemy) but that seems silly and doesn't change all of the other books.

I didn't say 3.5 screwed us with my comment, but pointed out what seems to be a logical flaw with what they are proposing in respects to backwards compatibility.

 

[Li Shenron]

I didn't say 3.5 screwed us with my comment, but pointed out what seems to be a logical flaw with what they are proposing in respects to backwards compatibility.

I think it's going to be "incompatible" only from the point of view you have mentioned, that is just the line Craft(any) which would seem to include always Alchemy and 99% of the time it does not. There won't be any other problems IMHO.

OTOH, I have absolutely no idea what was the need to change it; there was no doubt about Alchemy being a skill which lets you craft/construct something, apart the fact that you don't really craft "objects" as with the other Craft and you also use Alchemy for purposes different from crafting. The only similarity was that Alchemy used the same Craft rules in skill checks, but frankly I think very few players in the world was longing for such a change.

 

[MerakSpielman]

So maybe they're going to let any class take ranks in Craft: Alchemy.
So what?
Is that really unbalanced? It's not THAT useful of a skill.

Minor change. Why gripe?

 

[Tzarevitch]

So maybe they're going to let any class take ranks in Craft: Alchemy.
So what?
Is that really unbalanced? It's not THAT useful of a skill.

Minor change. Why gripe?

Thank God. A voice of reason.

Tzarevitch

 

[bret]

Might be amusing. Now a fighter has a chance to be the best Alchemist via Skill Focus. Few wizards would use a feat on that, while fighters have so many that it wouldn't be as big a deal.

 

[Crothian]

I think it could be really easy to do even going back to things prior to 3.5 The simple think is for Wizards just to make a nore not allowing classes to get Craft (Alchemy) unless they previously had the Alchemy skill. Personally, I don't see any problem with it and even if we open the Alchemy skill up to every single class, I doubt you'll see more then a few people actually use it.

 

[orbitalfreak]

Maybe Craft (and Profession too?) skills will follow a format similar to Knowledge skills. Some skills would be predefined, for example: Knowledge(The Planes; Religion; Arcana; etc..), coupled with Craft(weaponsmithing; woodworking; alchemy; etc...). Some classes would get each of these as class skills, some would be cross-class.

Like Clerics now have Knowledge(Religion) as class and Knowledge(Geography, for instance) as cross-class, maybe Wizards will have Craft(Alchemy) as class, while it's cross-class for Fighters. Fighters could have Craft(armorsmith) as class, while it would be cross-class for wizards.

Just speculation off the top of my head.

 

[Li Shenron]

So maybe they're going to let any class take ranks in Craft: Alchemy.
So what?
Is that really unbalanced? It's not THAT useful of a skill.

Minor change. Why gripe?

A part the fact that anyone CAN take ranks in Alchemy, it just costs double to a Ftr than a Wiz... also we know only that the name is changed, not necessarily the skill lists.

Anyway I would not like them to make Spellcraft a class-skill for Fighters just because no Fighters are going to take it. I want the class skills lists to make sense for the class, and to be distinctive, not to be just a balance tool. Craft and Profession skills have been chosen to be part of everybody's list probably because they mostly represent jobs and professions and didn't want to rule out them to anyone. You can make Alchemy a common profession in your campaign, just as well as you could decide that Shoemaking is forgotten lore and becomes exclusive to a specific guild's prestige class, but I think that in the general case Alchemy should be class skill for its current characters.