Profession/Crafting skills: Why?

[roguerouge]

I'll be honest. As much as I like the concept of Profession and Craft... I don't use them when I have an option not to.

For example, I'm running a campaign with a good deal of merchanting in it. Do I use Profession: Merchant? No. Because my player (in a one PC game) was reluctant to invest skill points into that mechanic when she was already investing ranks in Perform. So, when she buys supplies, I don't have opposed P: Merchant checks. I use a three step system: Bluff vs. Sense Motive (winner gets +2 on final check), Sense Motive vs. Bluff (winner gets +2 on final check), then Diplomacy vs. Diplomacy (or Profession: Merchant).

That campaign does a lot of sailing. And yes, Profession: Sailor does get used to determine the quality of the crew and checks for who gets the advantage in naval combat maneuvering. But I made Knowledge: Geography the skill for piloting the vessel, because using both it and P: navigator would have made piloting require two narrow skills (which is too big a cost) and just using Profession would have made the K: geography skill worthless.

 

[roguerouge]

"No one needs the sailor profession, you've got an entire set of skills right there that determine how good you are as a sailor, use them."

Yes, I could resolve a naval maneuvering scenario by a lengthy series of rolls of bluff, sense motive, spot, knowledge: nature, knowledge: history, climb, balance, and use rope. Every round.

Or I could use Profession: sailor opposed rolls to determine the advantage and get to the ballista shots and boarding actions.

Which promotes more immersion in an action-packed story and leads to a faster pace?

And it's not like I can't turn to that lengthy list of skills for when my player says that she wants to try a special maneuver.

And, note, that the use of K: geography for navigation and P: sailor for captaining a ship is from Stormwrack.

 

[roguerouge]

This concept has come up a couple of times: "How do you pretend to be a waiter at the ball if you don't know the etiquette? The answer is badly. Regardless of your diplomacy or balance checks. The diplomacy might get you out of trouble after you've upset someone, but it won't keep you from being detected as a spy."

Guys: it's called the disguise and/or Perform (acting) skills. Profession is not the way to handle that scene.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don't recall if this has come up or not...

In a significant subset of stories of myth, legend, and modern fiction, the making of magic items must involve the end user in the creation process.

IOW, if you want to have a magic weapon, you may have to do the hammering of the metal yourself; a mage may have to choose, cut and polish the wood for his staff.

And since, by D&D terms at least, a magic item must be masterwork, a maker of magic items in such a setting must also be a master craftsman...or at least have 1 rank in a relevant craft so that he has a reasonable chance of acing his craft roll.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

For that matter...

http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...69-does-your-party-have-cook.html#post4504392

It may have been intended as a humor thread, but apparently, there are a number of people who actually play party's cook. If played fully, those skill rolls could have real, in-game consequences.

Especially if someone accidentally used the poisonous part of a plant or some such...

 

[GlaziusF]

But combat mechanics have no express game-world effects. This is an example of the division in 4e between mechanics and effects. That division is between "game" and "story," between the dice you roll and the effect that happens in the "real world." If a power lets you trip someone, you can use it to "trip" an ooze, because the mechanics don't relate to the the story (they are separated by the wrought iron fence made of tigers).

So you use the same swing you'd use to knock a goblin flat to squash an ooze flat. The difference is that the ooze can still move around just fine (using its move action on shifting form) but it'll be easier to hit and harder for it to hit you until it squirps back up to its full height.

I do agree that this is mostly for game reasons, so people don't have to memorize a list of status exceptions based on creature type, but really it takes 10 seconds to paper a plausible story on top. People are good at stories. That's why you remember dreams as having their own weird narrative even though they were just your brain picking random bits out of a bag.

The suggestions down there aren't bad (though they're a lot lighter than 3e's system, which might mean they're not "enough" for some), but they're not something 4e gave us. A lot of this thread has just been people debating about whether or not it was OK that 4e didn't give us anything,

4e gave us page 42, which is part of a nice little "this is the way you bend the rules" discussion in the DMG.

Craft and Profession and the other explicit-hook skills needed DM intervention to work anyway, so it just knocked down the facade that putting points in Craft and Profession was somehow a guarantee of in-game returns the way putting them in Hide and Jump was. If crafting and profession are important to you and your DM, you can find a way.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I do agree that this is mostly for game reasons

So the wrought iron fence made of tigers is appropriate.

People are good at stories.

I like it when my story is supported by the mechanics (and also when my story supports the mechanics). When this doesn't happen in a tabletop game, it's very annoying to me, because the mechanics are the primary lens through which I see the story being told. If they don't support each other, for me, there may as well not be a story, since it's just an excuse for the mechanics (or, vice-versa, there may as well not be any dice rolling, because we can do whatever we want anyway).

If there's no mechanical support for my story, I'll just go put on a play. If there's no story support for my mechanics, I'll just go play videogames. When they work together, I'm playing a role-playing game in the most fantastically fun sense I can. Without that combo, I have other choices that do each side better.

4e gave us page 42, which is part of a nice little "this is the way you bend the rules" discussion in the DMG.

But they didn't give us a craft or profession system, which is my criticism (and not just mine, from the looks of it). Any bigger points can be made in other threads.

Craft and Profession and the other explicit-hook skills needed DM intervention to work anyway, so it just knocked down the facade that putting points in Craft and Profession was somehow a guarantee of in-game returns the way putting them in Hide and Jump was. If crafting and profession are important to you and your DM, you can find a way.

But there wasn't a way that was given. That is a problem. It is a failing for those who value those things coming into 4e. For some, it'll be THE most important thing. For others, it'll be one thing among many. For some, it'll just be something they need to shore up with a house rule. For others, it'll actually be a good thing because the only people who ever used that system ended up not enjoying themselves. There is a continuum. Not everyone can be happy with the division.

If you didn't like 3e's craft or profession system, there were not only several alternate systems, there was also the option of ignoring it completely by simply not taking those skills. So in this respect, 4e has failed to improve. Which isn't surprising, since there is no 4e craft or profession system.

I didn't say (nor would I say) that 4e cannot have a craft or profession system. I'm just saying that it doesn't have one by default, and that is a valid problem for some players. "But they can house rule it in!" isn't really a defense of 4e on this point. It's admitting that 4e has failed, but that a DM can make up for that failure.

No kidding. A DM can make up for any failure, in any edition, in a variety of ways. That's not really the point. The point is that for some people, it is a failure. If we can accept that, we can accept that other games or editions might be preferable to people, and we can accept that, when 4e comes out with its inevitable craft/profession system, it will be of immense use to some players and DMs.

And if we can all accept that, then there isn't really much of a debate on this point anymore. We all agree!

 

[MichaelSomething]

If there is such a huge demand for a good profession/craft skill system, why hasn't a third party publisher put out material about it?

It's obvious that WOTC won't be putting out profession/craft rules anytime soon.

The thing is, who would want to create a profession/craft skill system? I never encountered any 3PP saying, "We MUST make rules about tailoring and cooking!"

Is there any material printed during 3rd Edition that focus on profession/craft stuff?

 

[Rel]

If there is such a huge demand for a good profession/craft skill system, why hasn't a third party publisher put out material about it?

It's obvious that WOTC won't be putting out profession/craft rules anytime soon.

The thing is, who would want to create a profession/craft skill system? I never encountered any 3PP saying, "We MUST make rules about tailoring and cooking!"

Um...they have. It's the Advanced Players Guide by XRP.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Um...they have. It's the Advanced Players Guide by XRP.

You mean this guide?

I must have missed that part in the disscussions about it. I stand corrected. Hopefully, those who want crafting rules will buy the book and be happy with it. Does that create a "put your money where your mouth is" situation?