Profession/Crafting skills: Why?

[WayneLigon]

What happened to 1) Speed of plot, or 2) What sounds reasonable.

What happened to them? Gamers happened to them. The people that you cannot give an inch to, lest they take a mile. They want a nailed-down system of some kind for doing the things that your common adventurer wants. And what he wants to know is 'how long until that magic sword is ready?'

 

[jgbrowning]

There are still requests for Crafting and profession-related skills, now that 4e has taken them out, and as I try to think about them... I can't come up with why they should be there.

Those who find them fun will use them while those who think they are foolish will hand-wave them away.

joe b.

 

[Starbuck_II]

I don't think adventurers should be using the profession skill to make money directly very often (though NPCs could probably use it like that?).

A profession skill after the "mundane tier" should become useless just like a magic missile becomes useless after the "heroic tier." Because you have entered a new epoch of skill, it's okay if it turns into something else (say, magic item crafting?).

Nah, I used Profession to make money every downtime (what else was I going to do withthe week oe two off?). Sure it is only 100 gp at most (at low levels), but free money is sweet.

 

[Remathilis]

I want to pose this question about the Profession skill. Has anyone taken the profession skill as a way to get around having to take a lot of cross class skills? Since the profession skill is a class skill for almost all of the classes (only cross class for barbarian and fighter) and can cover tasks that might be part of cross class skills, even if it is in a limited capacity?

The question then becomes: where does that end?

Can my sorcerer take Profession: Thief and get access to stealth and lockpicking skills?

Can a wizard take Profession: Solider and get training in weapons (or a reduced penalty?)

Can a fighter take Profession: Trapper and get access to trapmaking and woodland survival?

Can a barbarian take Profession: Witch Doctor and gain access to alchemy, healing, and nature skills?

You get my point. At some point, you could come up with any "profession" to justify free ranks in plenty of useful skills.

 

[Cadfan]

I feel like I should clarify my opinion on this.

I consider "just wing it" to be a valid profession/craft system. It was the only system I had when I first started gaming, and it worked just fine. I don't think you can rule out counting player/dm interaction as part of the game set- its what makes RPGs into RPGs, in a way, so it has to count for something.

So for me the question isn't "should D&D have craft and profession rules?" Because it always will, as long as there are DMs and character backstories. The question is more, "what sort of craft and profession rules should D&D have?" Or perhaps, "should D&D have 3e style craft and profession skills?"

And I think the answer to that is "no." I prefer winging it to using the 3e style system. I don't think this reflects a change in game focus, or really anything at all. I guess I can see how someone might feel that way, but since my first character ever was a rules cyclopedia wizard who was also a master blacksmith in a game system with no crafting rules, I don't feel much change.

To my mind, the failure of the 3e version of craft and profession rules was that:

1. Poor siloing. Having been raised as a blacksmith's apprentice shouldn't trade off as heavily as it did with things like learning to jump, swim, or climb trees.
2. Unclear outcomes. Not always true, but often true.
3a. Too precise. 5% increments aren't really necessary for most profession or craft skills. Is it really important that one character have a +12 at weaving, while another has +13 at fletchery? Probably not.
3b. Too precise. This is also related to number 2. Too much precision in statistics without much precision in outcome.
4. Take 10 and Take 20 made a lot of that precision pointless. This is related to 3a. Why differentiate between a +12 and a +13 if you're just going to Take 10 or 20 anyways and beat the DC by a mile?
5. Unclear overlap with a lot of other skills. The stereotypical example was Profession: Sailor, and how it affected all your other sailing related skills.

There are places in the game where bonuses spread across a d20 make sense, but I don't think its here. At least not for most skills and most campaigns. Winging it gets you through without all the rigmarole.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I consider "just wing it" to be a valid profession/craft system

That depends, as you admitted, on your style of game. It's okay for some styles, it's completely stupid for others. For instance, a more "fairy tale" style game would get a lot of awesome mileage out of a handy Farming skill or somesuch.

It depends, like everything, on where your focus is.

For some games, "just wing it" is a valid combat system, after all.

1. Poor siloing. Having been raised as a blacksmith's apprentice shouldn't trade off as heavily as it did with things like learning to jump, swim, or climb trees.
2. Unclear outcomes. Not always true, but often true.
3a. Too precise. 5% increments aren't really necessary for most profession or craft skills. Is it really important that one character have a +12 at weaving, while another has +13 at fletchery? Probably not.
3b. Too precise. This is also related to number 2. Too much precision in statistics without much precision in outcome.
4. Take 10 and Take 20 made a lot of that precision pointless. This is related to 3a. Why differentiate between a +12 and a +13 if you're just going to Take 10 or 20 anyways and beat the DC by a mile?
5. Unclear overlap with a lot of other skills. The stereotypical example was Profession: Sailor, and how it affected all your other sailing related skills.

I'll mostly agree with those failings, but that doesn't make craft/profession systems irrelevant holistically. It just means that 3e's model could use some adjustment. But, the argument goes, at least 3e has a model. 4e, not so much...

 

[Cadfan]

KM-

"Just wing it" is a model. Its a kind of sarcastic way of referring to "DM/Player backstory and interaction." You might be familiar with it- its the default way of adjudicating everything in the game that doesn't have an explicit rule covering it.

Whether it matches my "style of play" or whatever doesn't speak to that point. Style of play speaks to whether its a model that I like. It doesn't speak to whether its a model at all.

So given the two options, "winging it" (often known as "roleplaying) and "3e rules," I go for winging it.

I can't vote for some undefined hypothetical third system that is better than the two known possibilities because that doesn't seem honest.

 

[Hussar]

I retooled Profession skills in my current 3.5 game to become more of a catch-all skill that allows you to use them, with varying penalties, if you can justify their use. So, Profession Sailor allows you to make Balance or Climb checks. You would be better at climbing if you had the Climb skill, but, your check will be better than an untrained Climb check.

It works for us.

As far as "is it needed in D&D"? Not really. It comes up far too rarely to be honest. Yes, I know YOUR game uses them all the time, but, I'm going to say fairly confidently that the majority of games barely used the rules, if at all.

 

[I'm A Banana]

"Just wing it" is a model.

I'm not disputing that at all.

I mean, the thread is entitled: "Profession/Crafting skills: Why?"

Why? Because sometimes you need a model that is more robust than "just wing it."

When are those times?

When the style of game that you play asks for it.

That's why "just wing it" isn't always a good model.

So given the two options, "winging it" (often known as "roleplaying) and "3e rules," I go for winging it.

I can't vote for some undefined hypothetical third system that is better than the two known possibilities because that doesn't seem honest.

Those aren't your only two options, though. Not by a long shot.

And for those who need more than "winging it," 3e rules are at least better for them than 4e rules.

Because "wing it!" isn't always (or even often) a useful way to model something, but it can be useful for something you don't want to pay much attention to.

Sometimes, combat is modeled by "wing it!" because it's not something you want to pay much attention to, depending upon the focus of the game.

4e assumes you don't want to pay much attention to craft/profession, but thinks you'll want to pay a LOT of attention to combat.

Whether or not that suits you is largely dependent on your style of game.

Hope I'm not losing you, here?

 

[That One Guy]

I like crafting/profession skills. I never used the 3.x rules for them.

The most effective I ever found prof skills were when the PCs were a tactical espionage group (think Vagrant Story Riskbreaker - but works in a team) who needed day jobs.

I also once had a PC whose job 'back home' was bowsmithing (fletcher, but I liked bowsmith at the time). So, as he traveled he made bows and sent them home to his family at every major town.

But... those things do not need hard and fast mechanics in the books. I'd like to see them just to have a frame of reference, but I'd honestly promptly ignore them in all reality.

Tangent...
So, it would be sweet in 4e if alchemy was cheaper to make - esp. in regards to traps. It would also be rocking if people could take a feat to forge as if +2 levels higher on a specific item... like Heavy blade smith or Scale armor smith or something. Costs the same and everything, but can forge higher. I'd also dig something along the lines of if one goes and finds the physical materials for an uber armor or weapon an appropriate smith can forge something MW or pseudo-magical.

Edit: Seraph, I too like the corsair method.