craft as non-magic "ritual"

[kalyptein]

This occurred to me as a quick-and-dirty way to put some of those non-adventuring skills back into the game, assuming they haven't already done so and not told us. I'm making certain assumptions about the way rituals work, but they seem reasonable given what we know.

Craft takes time and money (raw materials) and produces a result. Rituals take time and money (components) and produce a result. Why not model the former with the later?

Weaponsmithing
cost: half weapon cost
time: 1 week (or varying time with weapon, whatever you like)
requirements: forge
result: produces a mundane weapon

The DM can grant access to this in a variety of ways, depending on his campaign preferences. This could include taking "Crafting" as a feat, or it could simply be granted as a result of game play or downtime practice. Gaining further craft "rituals" could cost time and training rather than gold. The crafting feat might grant access to the magic item-making rituals as well, if your campaign includes craftsman-made magic items rather than only caster-made items.

Since these things are rituals, rather than skills, you don't run into the issue of trading adventuring effectiveness for non-adventuring things. The issue of how broad to make a field of crafting is also not a big deal (wait, I need ironwork and leatherwork to make studden leather?) since you can freely learn more crafts with just time/gold/effort.

I can imagine other kinds of non-magic rituals as well:

Dress to Kill
cost: X gp (being fashionable is expensive)
time: 1 hour
result: grants +2 on diplomacy and bluff checks for the next day

Naturally the king has people to handle this for him every day, so your +2 and his +2 cancel out (assuming diplomacy vs diplomacy) when you get your audience with him. So maybe you need the higher level (and more expensive) version that gives +4. And if you don't have it, you're at -2 effectively. This could be a simple way to model social status without inventing a new stat to track.

 

[Stalker0]

Depending on how the "ritual" thing works, it could be possible to do crafting this way. The big thing is will there be a skill check involved? If so, since there is no craft skill, what will characters use?

 

[kalyptein]

I've been assuming there won't be a check, but you're right, we don't know that. Why not grant a trained craft skill along with the crafting feat? (however that feat is obtained) Based off Int probably. Since the fields of craft you're trained in depend on what rituals you have, you don't need a bunch of different craft skills.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I've been assuming there won't be a check, but you're right, we don't know that. Why not grant a trained craft skill along with the crafting feat? (however that feat is obtained) Based off Int probably. Since the fields of craft you're trained in depend on what rituals you have, you don't need a bunch of different craft skills.

Probably no reason to have a skill at all. Arguably, background skills should be an entirely separate resource from adventuring skills, and also arguably, they should effectively be available to PCs at zero cost if the player wants them.

If that's not already how it works in 4e, I will probably just do this. Basically, crafting items works similarly to rituals (and vice versa), and merely requires that the player decide that his PC has the appropriate "crafting skill." No actual resource investment (in terms of trained skills or feats) required.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

First Off: Get out of my head, kalyptein. I pondered with this idea for some time now... (Pondering here means: "If rituals can create magical items, they could also be used to create mundane items, bypassing the need for craft skills... Oh, look, another shiny hit point / diagonal movementn / exception based monster design / powers vs. generic combat options discussion ... Uh, Where was I?")

I think skills have become a special type of skills in 4E already, at least if skill acquirement after 1st level is similar to Starwars Saga Edition.
Normally, all skills checks are just ability checks (similar to 3E already). Beginning with Saga, you always add 1/2 your level to such checks.
To get a skill as a class skill after 1st level, you need to spend a feat for "Skill Training". This nets you a +5 bonus to the skill, and you can now attempt a few tricks you couldn't do before (trained only stuff).

So, if you want to introduce a new skill in 4E, you just state its name and ability required, and then work the mechanics around the idea of making checks based on 1/2 level + base ability modifier. Done. You could have done something similar in 3E, except that getting to a "reasonable" skill level if the skill was introduced late into the game, you need to spend tons of skill points which might take you several levels. In 4E, it takes you only one feat (probably 2 levels), and you can already try with reasonable success from the get-go.

So, if you really want to have a black smith character, spend your feat or convince the DM to give it too you for free, and elsewise use the Ritual rules for crafting your mundande item.

What I really hope is that even non-spellcasters can now create magical items (the stuff on godplate armor and feyleave or what-you-have implies at least that anything mastercraft is also magic) by spending a feat on it. I always liked the idea of a skilled black smiths being able to create a magical sword due to his determination and "artsy" qualities...

 

[JohnSnow]

Probably no reason to have a skill at all. Arguably, background skills should be an entirely separate resource from adventuring skills, and also arguably, they should effectively be available to PCs at zero cost if the player wants them.

If that's not already how it works in 4e, I will probably just do this. Basically, crafting items works similarly to rituals (and vice versa), and merely requires that the player decide that his PC has the appropriate "crafting skill." No actual resource investment (in terms of trained skills or feats) required.

I thought of what I think is a cool way to handle PC crafting.

Firstly, every PC can start with 1 or 2 professional skills that have next to nothing to do with adventuring. These are the skills they learned before they were adventurers (the basics of farming, merchanting, blacksmithing, or whatever). In a medieval society, the only way anyone can learn a skill is by becoming an apprentice and learning it "on the job." PCs who so desire can devote their "spare time" to acquiring a skill, and after some amount of game time, they can be considered to be trained in it. It would work like any other trained skill, with the proviso that since these are non-adventuring skills, bonuses from "heroic levels" just don't apply. Since this is "part-time study," it should take at least a year (probably longer) to simply become trained.

Alternatively, I might allow heroes to take a "fast-track apprenticeship" for some cost in gold pieces. This basically represents taking a "crash course" by actually paying someone to teach you a skill full-time. Since most master craftsmen are too busy making a living to spend all their time teaching, this makes a certain degree of sense. But a PC certainly has enough gold to make up the "lost income" for his teacher actually giving him full-time instruction. Honestly, a month of training ought to do for most non-adventuring skills. At the basic level of course.

Beyond that, only experience matters. A PC fighter who learns the basics of weaponsmithing, but never does it much will never become a master smith, no matter how many orcs he kills. He might learn the ritual for making magic swords...but his swords just wouldn't be "master pieces."

As a side note, if any skill became "campaign important," I'd add it to the skill list. For instance, in a seafaring piratical campaign, there's probably space for a "Seamanship" skill which covers tying knots, steering, piloting or navigating, basic maintenance, and generally getting along aboard ship.

Some noncombat skills are obvious. Fighters should know the basics of how to maintain their equipment, for example.

 

[ruleslawyer]

My initial conception was based off the idea that master smiths, sages, and what have you would basically just be "monsters"; within the parameters established by their needed function, they'd just have the ability to do x slapped on. If the PCs wanted to replicate that, the DM could offer a feat-chain option, but it'd probably be one that would be prohibitive for a character focused on successful adventuring to take.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I think making the crafting of magical and mundane items a "ritual" (and therefore having on neat mechanic for "making stuff") is a really good idea.

The DM can grant access to this in a variety of ways, depending on his campaign preferences. This could include taking "Crafting" as a feat, or it could simply be granted as a result of game play or downtime practice.

I'd go with the latter so that you don't "don't run into the issue of trading adventuring effectiveness for non-adventuring things." The Craft Feats have been removed from 4E for good reason.

Arguably, background skills should be an entirely separate resource from adventuring skills, and also arguably, they should effectively be available to PCs at zero cost if the player wants them.

I'm still looking for a good mechanic to do this that doesn't allow PCs to "abuse" the system too badly by trying to be good at crafting every possible item he wants but doesn't find while adventuring.

Rather than waste time thinking about it now though I plan on waiting to see how 4E handles acquiring new Rituals and let that inform me.

A PC fighter who learns the basics of weaponsmithing, but never does it much will never become a master smith, no matter how many orcs he kills. He might learn the ritual for making magic swords...but his swords just wouldn't be "master pieces."

This is certainly realistic. But unless the Player says "OK, I spend the next 10 years in the forges of the Dwarven Stronghold.", it effectively means he can never make these "Masterpieces". If that's the intent, cool. It's a good way to control access to these items. But if you actually intend PCs to make this stuff one day, I'm not sure this is the best path.

 

[JohnSnow]

This is certainly realistic. But unless the Player says "OK, I spend the next 10 years in the forges of the Dwarven Stronghold.", it effectively means he can never make these "Masterpieces". If that's the intent, cool. It's a good way to control access to these items. But if you actually intend PCs to make this stuff one day, I'm not sure this is the best path.

Well, I suppose that's true. But consider a few things:

One: Historically, a "master piece" is the piece that a craftsman had to make to be accepted as a "master" within his guild. Acquiring the necessary skill usually required one to work in their chosen field for 10 years or longer. And some people never achieved the status of "master craftsman." Think of it like the sword Inigo carries in The Princess Bride.

Two: Just because a PC can't make a "masterpiece" doesn't mean he can't make a fully functional, even superior blade. It just won't have quite the esthetic beauty of one made by a master craftsman.

Three: Any PC could ask to be trained in a particular trade as part of his background. Combined with his innate ability (Int or Wis bonus?), he'd have a pretty good bonus to his crafting skill. I have no problem with this.

Four: By allowing a PC who so chooses to gain training in a particular skill rapidly, but charging for the privilege of doing it later in his career, you make it a non-trivial thing to acquire the skill. That actually lets you give benefits to PCs who are trained.

And of course, any PC who wants to invest non-trivial character resources, such as a feat, would of course be able to bypass the time requirements. Such a character would be devoting much more time to learning the skill than I theorize above. It's like saying that Bob worked in a Smithy growing up, and has been devoting his spare moments to improving his skill. I doubt most PCs would do this.

Finally, if we establish that being "Trained" in a skill gives a +5 to checks and allows you to do certain things that one can't do untrained, we have a base number for DCs. In addition, figure your skill bonus in non-adventuring skills improves every so often due to experience.

A logical rate would be something like +1 per year for the first five, +1 per 2 years for the next 10, +1 per 5 years for the next 25, and +1 per 10 years for the next 50. Of course, you'd have to constantly keep in practice, and constantly be attempting tasks that are "difficult" for you (requiring a 15+ on a d20?).

Under this theory, the bonus tops out at something like +25, not counting the relevant attribute bonus. Of course, that requires 90 years of experience, something most humans would never achieve (but dwarves and elves might). The best most humans would manage before retiring is +20 or so.

The bonus from experience also tapers off because, realistically, you should only be able to get so good at something.

And no, craft rules like this would never see PCs becoming master craftsmen in their 20s. And you know what? I'm fine with that. Some things just take time.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I'm still looking for a good mechanic to do this that doesn't allow PCs to "abuse" the system too badly by trying to be good at crafting every possible item he wants but doesn't find while adventuring.

Two things will do this automatically: 1) limiting whatever the hypothetical separate resource pool is; and 2) applying a cost for crafting "rituals."

JohnSnow: The framework you propose is a good one, but TBH, I'd rather just handwave this sort of thing. I'd just give any PC whose player wants one a bonus craft or profession "ability" of some kind. Each PC can know how to sail a boat, make pottery, or whatever. You're already limiting the resource, since a PC can only have one of these. If someone wants more than one skill or profession, I guess spending a "real" feat would suffice, although then you're crossing back over between the adventuring and non-adventuring resource pools.

As for learning: I'd just allow a PC to pick up basic blacksmithing, basket-weaving, or whatever if he spends the requisite time and effort. You could basically never become a master craftsman unless you took out a truly enormous amount of time (not really an option in most D&D campaigns), so you'd still need to seek those people out for valuable items.