Profession/Craft Skills

[darjr]

I like the ideas here.

For simplicity's sake, I'd let the player choose a skill right out of the 3.5e players handbook and charge them the 'skill training' feat for it. They would have it at +5 plus 1/2 level plus attribute.

I'm even of thinking it would be a nice idea to have players make up a skill, free form like, if they wish. Though it'd have to pass the smell test with me first.

 

[Ouronos]

Greetings...

For simplicity's sake, I'd let the player choose a skill right out of the 3.5e players handbook and charge them the 'skill training' feat for it. They would have it at +5 plus 1/2 level plus attribute.

I guess that for simplicities sake, this would work find. It is pretty much what I do with the complex version of skill sets that I use. Since I have detailed the Craft skill, I actually give certain races specific Crafts (or choice of Crafts) as a starting trained skill. Of course, it is still up to the player to put points into the skill for it to be effective.

When I decide to actually detail the other skills (Performance, Knowledge, Profession), it is quite possible that characters of certain races (or even classes) may start out with one or more of these skills as "trained".

The thing I like best about my system is that it makes every character more unique, as skill point allocation rarely exactly matches another character. Add to the mix new skills (such as Craft), and character development between two otherwise unique characters diverges even further.

"Non-Adventuring Skills" helps characters when developing backgrounds, which helps with the overall story. (I give players bonuses for generating backgrounds - these bonuses can come in the form of experience, skill points, skill ranks, items, or any combination of the above).

Thanks for listening.

Until that time...

 

[mattdm]

For simplicity's sake, I'd let the player choose a skill right out of the 3.5e players handbook and charge them the 'skill training' feat for it. They would have it at +5 plus 1/2 level plus attribute.

I don't think charging a feat is a good idea. You're giving a mechanical drawback (usually a combat drawback) as a penalty for adding role-playing flavor to a character. These things should come out of different pools — and since it's unlikely to upset balance, might as well make the "soft" skills free.

Here's what I do in my game:

Everyone picks any three (mix and match as desired) specific craft, profession, or perform skills — craft(woodworking), profession(fishmonger), perform(keyboards), and the like. You're considered trained in these skills. The relevant attributes are as in 3E: intelligence for craft, wisdom for profession, and charisma for perform.

You'll be able to use these skills in skill challenges, in role-playing situations, or whenever else you think they might be relevant, although they can't be used to cheat the system: that is, profession(olympic athlete) doesn't get you out of athletics checks. (But if you are trained in the athletics skill and that, you may be able to get a circumstance bonus when it's specifically appropriate.)

You could also do intelligence-based knowledge(foo) skills to represent book-learning on a specific subject. These would be more specific than the 3.5E categories, and would generally supplement the more general 4E knowledge skills (Arcana, Dungeoneering, History, Nature, and Religion).

 

[darjr]

I don't think charging a feat is a good idea. You're giving a mechanical drawback (usually a combat drawback) as a penalty for adding role-playing flavor to a character. These things should come out of different pools — and since it's unlikely to upset balance, might as well make the "soft" skills free.

I get that, and I agree to a point. However, I wouldn't want the skill to be 'soft'. I'd expect the character to use said skill in the course of the game. Skill challenges and even some actions in combat or items created or modified would all depend on the skill and have very real 'hard' effects on the game. Any combat events or actions or artifacts that depend on the results or products of the skill would also count.

 

[Apoplexies]

good idea

I like this idea, especially since I use these skills more than other players in my group.

Greetings...



I guess that for simplicities sake, this would work find. It is pretty much what I do with the complex version of skill sets that I use. Since I have detailed the Craft skill, I actually give certain races specific Crafts (or choice of Crafts) as a starting trained skill. Of course, it is still up to the player to put points into the skill for it to be effective.

When I decide to actually detail the other skills (Performance, Knowledge, Profession), it is quite possible that characters of certain races (or even classes) may start out with one or more of these skills as "trained".

The thing I like best about my system is that it makes every character more unique, as skill point allocation rarely exactly matches another character. Add to the mix new skills (such as Craft), and character development between two otherwise unique characters diverges even further.

"Non-Adventuring Skills" helps characters when developing backgrounds, which helps with the overall story. (I give players bonuses for generating backgrounds - these bonuses can come in the form of experience, skill points, skill ranks, items, or any combination of the above).

Thanks for listening.

Until that time...