D&D 5E Crafting Items - Expert Craftsman vs Adventurers

[Beleriphon]

It's something some of us feel is missing from 5e (even though/especially because tool proficiencies that at least imply crafting are present), and when you add it back in, BA messes with it on a conceptual level. 5e crafting as a check when it matters in an adventure, and as a mechanically dissimilar downtime activity when it doesn't, makes sense and is perfectly workable, but it doesn't deliver the same feel as 3.5, with it's Experts and Commoners having levels & skills just like PCs.

Its part of the weirdness that produced a 20th level commoner classed character in Sharn: City of Towers. I think they kind of bodged things by giving the character the minimum possible hit-die result from levels 2 through 20, but it still had like 40+ hit points.

In a lot of way it makes sense in 3.x D&D where the rules simulate the world to a large degree (at least in so far as the PC interact with the world), rather than the actions of PCs interacting with adventures and dungeons and monsters like you get 5E.

 

[Geeknamese]

While I agree with the basic premise, that adventurers and non-adventurers should use different rules for how their skills improve over time, the big problem is that we have no idea what Bob's bonus should be. We have very detailed formulas for how good an adventurer with smithing proficiency should be, and we have nothing for how good a non-adventuring smith should be. So does Bob get a +5 to checks? Or a +10 to checks? Is he simply unbeatable by anyone who isn't also an NPC?

For the amount of detail given over to PC advancement, they really could have spent a bit more effort on defining what NPCs can do, since they are the majority of the people in the world. Whether an expert NPC has +5 or +15, in general, is an important detail in figuring out how the world works.

The bonus for an NPC smith should be as good as you narratively want it to be. Just set it.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The bonus for an NPC smith should be as good as you narratively want it to be. Just set it.

My job as the DM is to remain impartial and unbiased. I don't want anything. I have no preference for whether the NPC has +7 or +17.

I only interpret the rules provided by the game. The rules are supposed say whether an expert smith has a +7, or some other number.

 

[77IM]

I was thinking about this more, and I really think it comes down to the fact that there are no good crafting options for PCs. Like there's no "Master Artisan" feat that lets you craft the outta everything. If there were, then the modifier doesn't matter as much, and the NPC stat block could have the same abilities as the feat.

 

[DND_Reborn]

My job as the DM is to remain impartial and unbiased. I don't want anything. I have no preference for whether the NPC has +7 or +17.

I only interpret the rules provided by the game. The rules are supposed say whether an expert smith has a +7, or some other number.

While you might want to remain impartial, apparently in 5E the "rules" that are "supposed to say whether an expert smith has a +7, or some other number" don't exist. This was intentionally done to allow the DM to decide what that number should be.

As a general guideline, I like to think of the modifiers as representing a standard deviation or the "next level of ability" for each +1. For example, in academics I might rate:

Intelligence:
10-11 = IQ 100
12-13 (+1) = IQ 115
14-15 (+2) = IQ 130
16-17 (+3) = IQ 145 ("Genius" level)
18-19 (+4) = IQ 160
20 (+5) = IQ 175+

Proficiency:
+0 = Middle school or less (what you know or can do is based solely on your ability score)
+2 = High school
+3 = Associate's degree (2-years in college)
+4 = Bachelor's degree (4-years)
+5 = Master's degree (6-years)
+6 = Doctorate degree (8+ years)

I am sure others might scale this differently, but it is really all subjective.

So, if I combine the general knowledge about a subject along with increased reasoning, understanding, recall speed, etc. from a high IQ (say 150) then I would have an INT 16. Add to that a decade of studying "higher" levels of the topic, such as a Master's or PHD, and the total skill modifier might be +3 and + 5 for a +8 total. If you want someone to be truly exceptional, grant that NPC the Expertise feature, for a +13 total.

Think about what +13 means... A DC 20 "Hard" task would be routine. You could not even have to make the roll (assume 10) unless there is the potential for horrible consequences if you fail. And it means 1 out of 5 times you are likely to complete a DC 30 "Nearly Impossible" task (17 or higher or 20% chance).

It is said with about 10,000 hours of study/practice/use comes "mastery". I would normally rate a master's proficiency at +4 to +6, and add Expertise if I want to REALLY make the NPC exceptional, with a very good ability mod of +3 or higher, hopefully putting the NPC in the +10 to +15 range.

 

[bedir than]

My job as the DM is to remain impartial and unbiased. I don't want anything. I have no preference for whether the NPC has +7 or +17.

I only interpret the rules provided by the game. The rules are supposed say whether an expert smith has a +7, or some other number.

As a DM you never introduce your party to a master craftsman, or just a schmuckle, or anyone with any level of skill?

 

[S'mon]

As a general rule, 5e crafting does not require 'crafting checks' and ability does not depend on the size of a skill roll bonus. I generally treat exceptional smithing ability as a 'boon' type reward, eg Hakeem the Barbarian trained with Aeanor the legendary wizard-smith to be able to reforge the legendary Sword of Bondorr. This did not involve any dice rolls, neither the training nor the reforging.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

As a DM you never introduce your party to a master craftsman, or just a schmuckle, or anyone with any level of skill?

When I'm acting as world-builder, one of the jobs is to populate the world with NPCs. One town might have a smith of moderate skill, but nothing special. The big city probably has one or more experts. If it's the capital city of the dwarven empire, then they probably have some of the best smiths in the world. If the PCs go to one of these places, then they will find the people who are there.

The problem is that, from reading the books, I have no idea what an expert smith looks like in terms of game mechanics. I can extrapolate, based on the rules that do exist, to say that they might have a proficiency bonus as high as +6 and an ability modifier of +5. If that's the case, then I can compare them to a starting PC, with a proficiency bonus of +2 and an ability modifier of +3. If it's not the case, though, then I don't know what their bonus should be. (And looking at the NPCs in the Monster Manual, it's highly unlikely that an NPC has a proficiency bonus of +6, unless they can also take a Balor in a fist fight.) For whatever reason, with all of the pages available to them, the designers never explain what the other 99.99 percent of the world population looks like.

 

[LordEntrails]

As a DM you never introduce your party to a master craftsman, or just a schmuckle, or anyone with any level of skill?

Of course. But why does s/he need a mechanical value to some skill? Can they craft a shoe horse? Sure, can they craft a sword? Yep, can they fix Dawn Breaker? Hmm, well since I placed them in my world to do exactly that, then the answer is yes. Is it automatic? How long does it take? Well, what do I want it to be? Is is just a delay for the party? Or perhaps I want to send the party on a quest for special metals or elemental fires or a MacGuffin. So then that's what it takes. No rule is going to, or should, tell me any of that. It's the primary function of the DM to set out the bounds for the story.

As others have said, you are too caught up in the 3E philosophy that rules should tell you how to do everything. Most RPGs don't force the GM to narrate a certain result or require a fixed solution to a story line plot/issue. Don't restrict yourself

 

[MarkB]

When I'm acting as world-builder, one of the jobs is to populate the world with NPCs. One town might have a smith of moderate skill, but nothing special. The big city probably has one or more experts. If it's the capital city of the dwarven empire, then they probably have some of the best smiths in the world. If the PCs go to one of these places, then they will find the people who are there.

The problem is that, from reading the books, I have no idea what an expert smith looks like in terms of game mechanics. I can extrapolate, based on the rules that do exist, to say that they might have a proficiency bonus as high as +6 and an ability modifier of +5. If that's the case, then I can compare them to a starting PC, with a proficiency bonus of +2 and an ability modifier of +3. If it's not the case, though, then I don't know what their bonus should be. (And looking at the NPCs in the Monster Manual, it's highly unlikely that an NPC has a proficiency bonus of +6, unless they can also take a Balor in a fist fight.) For whatever reason, with all of the pages available to them, the designers never explain what the other 99.99 percent of the world population looks like.

If you did have those numbers, what would you do with them? How would your expert smith deploy their talents that would require a die roll on your part to adjudicate?