Am I completely off base?

[Wicht]

If you create a backstory where your character is a blacksmith for 10 years and want at 1st level to be good at it, in my campaign I would let you provided you were willing to use all your feats that way.

4 skill ranks
+3 from skill focus/emphasis (that +2 is out as far as I am concerned and makes no sense to stick with in light of every book released since the 1st 3e PG)
+2 from a smithing feat (say +2 to blacksmith/+2 to weapon smithing)
+1 from MW tools (you are spending all your starting money on this right)
+2 circumstance bonus if you work in your own place)

Total in my campaign +12 at first level (not counting bonus from Intelligence which could put it at +13 to +16). But you had better be willing to put your feats and your money where your backstory is. Otherwise its just whining IMO in an attempt to gain something for nothing.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Hmmm...well, I have a very detailed campaign, and I have developed a system of detailing background skills and abilities for characters of whatever age or background. I don't think I agree with the idea that a "1st level" expert can't really make anything good, because he just does enough to get by. That assumption doesn't really make sense. I have friends who are real-life weaponsmiths, some have been doing it for 5 years, and some have been doing it for 20 years. Though different, they both make excellent stuff. Likewise, I have friends in other skilled trades, and after five years of apprenticeship, they are consumate and knowledgable professionals, fully capable of taking on any task in their field. The Union system grew out of professional guild organizations of the Middle Ages, and I don't really see why a craftsman who is a professional with five or ten years of experience in the Middle Ages would be much different from a professional craftsman of today.

If you have an Expert Weaponsmith, Armourer, or Stonemason, or whatever, they should be pretty damn good at what they do. Their absolute skill of course would be influenced by their natural talent, or stats, and their work ethic. But whether or not they have a good work ethic, or a lot of natural skill, they will, by virtue of training, have the technical skill and knowledge to make good work. In the game, an expert with a (+2) stat bonus, a good work ethic, and five years of training, should be quite capable of making master-work whatever, and making a good living, and developing a good reputation.

I suppose I'm not getting where most "experts" are supposed to be so thoroughly mediocre, and just "getting by." That seems more like a half-skilled Commoner who is filling the job because there aren't any professional experts around.

Having said all of that, "expert" levels aside, there is a need for a richer, more meaningful background development for different characters. It isn't limited to just professional skills, either. It's History, Singing, Wilderness Lore, Cooking, what have you.

The idea of "Well, just make your character a 5th level character then!" isn't really useful because it adds huge areas of comabt ability that you don't want, and it also abbreviates the character's adventuring career for adventuring classes, and that isn't really desirable. It also isn't necessarily accurate to what some people want to achieve.

Part of the problem is that the game assumes that 1st level adventurers are 16-22 years old, with virtually no professional or life skills beyond combat. That assumption doesn't necessarily articulate the different background and experiences that a particular 1st level character could have. Does that make any sense?

I hope so!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[WizarDru]

I don't think I agree with the idea that a "1st level" expert can't really make anything good, because he just does enough to get by. That assumption doesn't really make sense. I have friends who are real-life weaponsmiths, some have been doing it for 5 years, and some have been doing it for 20 years.

I think you're forgetting the fact that we're talking about a small village blacksmith, Shark. He creates horshoes, barrel hoops, tools for the field, nails, door-handles, hinges and the occasional weapon. He's not a weaponsmith, nor does he need to be. Creating a masterwork weapon is not beyond a 1st-level smith, but it's not something he's spent his life on. Everyone except Joe Adventurer will find a normal broadsword to work just fine, thank you kindly. They're not shoddilly-made, they're just not Masamune or Muramasa blades.

Further, we already know that the d20 system wasn't really designed to handle this kind of a situation. I agree that simply making him a 5th-level expert is a poor patch to the problem, but I honestly don't see it as great enough problem to worry about. Keep in mind that your weaponsmith friends are members of a rich society with access to much higher quality materials than a typical D&D smith has, even an expert weaponsmaker. Better and purer metals, higher quality tools, more precision forges, kilns, and so forth. Even replicating the old equipment, there are tons of differing factors that invalidate comparing your friends to our mystery smith. Not the least of which is that D&D isn't design to accurately or correctly simulate blacksmithing...it's a game for smacking the tar out of some beasties and taking their loot.

 

[Limper]

Thank You SHARK! You have for the nounce saved me from having to reply to a thread which when I went to bed looked to be nearly off to oblivion.... yah just never know.


I realy do wonder why after all these years D+D still hadn't addressed the whole issue of people having a background which didn't consist of being 16.... From looking a SHARKs stuff and working on my own angle on similar stuff it IS possible.

Anyway thanks for the input folks... and I'll depart on two comments 1) Wiz and Sorc take a good con and a toad NOT toughness. 2) Is HERO any good?

 

[Alhandra]

I think you're forgetting the fact that we're talking about a small village blacksmith, Shark. [/B]

That's not what SHARK is talking about, I'd imagine.

SHARK's campaign world is a HUGE, barely-medeival society.
It seems more like a modern-day society, if it was dominated by a patriotic, quasi-religious Roman-type government and used magic as technology and had no ACLU.

If you imagine that this blacksmith is a small village commoner that only has to be slightly above average to make a living, than that is a big limiting factor.

Is that the most realistic approach?

In real life, people who make a living at their craft have to be VERY good.
Not only have they had to work their whole life to hone thier skill, but they will have had to have been born with innate talent at it.

This approach is predicated on one important world-fact:
That your cities are not tiny villages.

In a small-population world (think medieval), craftsmen would only have to be competent in their trade to make a living.

the larger the population sample, the better and more skilled they must be to make a living, and to distinguish themselves from Joe Blow Craftsman down the street.

If you're the only blacksmith in 100 miles, and all you make are horseshoes and nails, why would you be any good?

 

[bwgwl]

2) Is HERO any good?

yep!

the 5th Edition HERO System Rulebook (FREd) was just published a few months ago, and it's great.

HERO is easily my second favorite ruleset (after d20). if it hadn't been for 3e, i'd be doing all my campaigns in HERO.

(there's still a few genres, like supers, that i'd rather do in HERO than any other system.)

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Wizarddru, true enough. I can see your point about village blacksmiths as opposed to a weaponsmith. In larger areas though, I think the proficiency and professionalism would increase, you know? I also agree that there are problems in detailing diverse and interesting backgrounds within the standard rules as provided. While it is true that you may not see the need for it, that may only be temporary. Others, like myself and Limper, have seen a need. At some future time, with a particular character, you too, may desire a background system that is more detailed. Or not, which is ok too, but it would have been nice I think if the rulebooks had detailed a significantly more detailed and robust system for determining such diverse and rich backgrounds. Thus, we are left to figure much of these things out for ourselves!

Alhandra wrote:
____________________________________________________
"SHARK's campaign world is a HUGE, barely-medeival society.
It seems more like a modern-day society, if it was dominated by a patriotic, quasi-religious Roman-type government and used magic as technology and had no ACLU."
____________________________________________________
End Quote.

Alhandra, your post put me in tears! Very funny! It's great to have you here. I haven't seen you in quite a stretch. I agree with your post, too, about the blacksmith needing to be good at what he does. The larger the community, the better they will have to be, because mediocrity will show up starkly against more professional craftsmen, and before long, the mediocre craftsman would be lucky to be in charge of making nails!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[WizarDru]

Greetings!

Wizarddru, true enough. I can see your point about village blacksmiths as opposed to a weaponsmith. In larger areas though, I think the proficiency and professionalism would increase, you know?

Agreed. I was only speaking about a small village blacksmith, which is what the discussion started with. In a large city, where there would potentially be a set of guilds (Farriers, Coopers, Weaponsmiths, etc.) which may consist of specialized smiths, or even just a single guild...quality and experience would HAVE to be higher.

I certainly agree that NPCs (and to a lesser degree, PCs) are lacking outside of being given a few simple statistics. I usually just fudge it and move on, but I certainly don't begrudge anyone who wants more out of the system. That's how excellent variant rules are born.

 

[Aaron2]

In the game, an expert with a (+2) stat bonus, a good work ethic, and five years of training, should be quite capable of making master-work whatever, and making a good living, and developing a good reputation.

A masterwork item is supposed to be created by a "master", not some schmuck who has only been working for 5 to 10 years.

I suppose I'm not getting where most "experts" are supposed to be so thoroughly mediocre, and just "getting by." That seems more like a half-skilled Commoner who is filling the job because there aren't any professional experts around.

A first level smith with a +5 bonus can make a High-Quality item! How is that "mediocre"?!

Part of the problem is that the game assumes that 1st level adventurers are 16-22 years old, with virtually no professional or life skills beyond combat. That assumption doesn't necessarily articulate the different background and experiences that a particular 1st level character could have. Does that make any sense?

You are the one assuming that first level characters have no professional skills when it can easily be shown that they do (or at least, can).


Aaron

 

[hong]

Re: Re: I'm sorry ...

The smith with a total skill mod of +5 probably has all the skill he needs to make the stuff a common village uses, and can Take 10 to do it. Thus, the usual smith can very easily be 1st level.

There's no reason they couldn't even take 10 and make masterwork full plate, if they had the necessary materials.

Expert 1
14 Int
4 ranks Craft (blacksmith)
Skill Focus (blacksmith)
masterwork tools, or an apprentice
= +10 bonus