Craft/Profession

[hong]

You first.

Are you angry?

Right now I could go for a drink. I'll pass on the killin' dudes.

See, this is where you go on about catharsis.

I knew you were just a figment of my imagination.

And this is where you insert the o rly owl.

 

[GnomeWorks]

True, but there's plenty of middle ground between the automatic success and the automatic failure where there is tension because the outcome is uncertain, and where luck and player choices can make a difference. And in D&D, the perfect tool just grants you a small equipment bonus.

And that is a good place to be, sure.

My beef with the craft and profession skills is that rules for them are too much effort for too little payoff. Perhaps it's just the way that I run my games, but in all my years of playing 3e, a PC's craft and profession skills made about as much difference to the game as the fact that his hair was black or that his eyes were blue. It simply wasn't an issue that we focused on, in-game (we did have some rules for how they would translate into extra equipment or wealth for the PC, but that happened out-of-game). And if my experience is typcial of most gaming groups, it's not surprising that they are left out of the PH.

Your problem, then, is not the concept of crafting, but the implementation in 3.5.

So better implementation would improve the odds of it being used, because it would be a better subsystem.

 

[GnomeWorks]

Stick to the polysyllabic essays, kid.

I thought I'd cut it back so you wouldn't strain your eyes reading them.

Precisely. The game does not exist unless there are both players and DMs.

Not all players need to play characters deific in power to be entertained.

Protagonisation is a new technology that purifies the air around you, leading to fewer allergens and bacteriae that can cause harmful ailments. Order your protagoniser today!

Only if I can sue for false advertising.

You say this like it's a negative thing.

You act like it's not.

 

[hong]

I thought I'd cut it back so you wouldn't strain your eyes reading them.

Yes, yes, that's what they all say.

Not all players need to play characters deific in power to be entertained.

Of course, noone said anything about "deific in power".

Only if I can sue for false advertising.

While you're at it, sue for false claims. OH WAIT, THAT'S MY CUE.

You act like it's not.

And indeed it's not. Only people who think elves are real believe otherwise.

 

[FireLance]

Nothing wrong with minigames.

If the process that went into blacksmithing were as involved and involving (in the sense that everyone gets involved) as combat, would it be as interesting? Surely that is possible.

Smithing is only as mundane as you make it out to be. Same with brewing.

The other aspect to this is how often smithing and brewing challenges can show up in-game without it starting to look contrived.

Of course, the rarity of occasions where craft and profession skills will be useful ties in nicely with the idea of siloing it into a separate category from "adventuring" skills, but rules for using such skills to play "mini-games" seem more suited for a magazine article, and not a core rulebook.

 

[GnomeWorks]

Are you angry?

Nope.

See, this is where you go on about catharsis.

I think I said I'm good.

And this is where you insert the o rly owl.

O RLY?

 

[hong]

Nope.

Good. Now start killing things.

I think I said I'm good.

So are you going to start killing things?

O RLY?

Indeed.

 

[GnomeWorks]

Yes, yes, that's what they all say.

Truth hurts, don't it.

Of course, noone said anything about "deific in power".

Compare first-level fighter to commoner in 4e. Might as well be a deity.

And indeed it's not. Only people who think elves are real believe otherwise.

You failed logic, didn't you.

 

[GnomeWorks]

The other aspect to this is how often smithing and brewing challenges can show up in-game without it starting to look contrived.

And the degree to which combat shows up in-game isn't contrived?

Of course, the rarity of occasions where craft and profession skills will be useful ties in nicely with the idea of siloing it into a separate category from "adventuring" skills, but rules for using such skills to play "mini-games" seem more suited for a magazine article, and not a core rulebook.

The page count should be relative, in that case, sure. But something should be said somewhere in the core about it.

 

[hong]

Truth hurts, don't it.

Yes, that's what they say too.

Compare first-level fighter to commoner in 4e. Might as well be a deity.

If you are fighting commoners, you are doing it wrong. Compare 1st level fighter to 1st level goblin skirmisher or 1st level human guard. You know, like in every D&D edition ever.

You failed logic, didn't you.

So, when did you start believing elves are real?