Here's my thing on the Lore thing. And I heart your face Nathan, I do. I have 4 sets of lore already. I don't love the idea of spending down time to study it, simply because I NEED herbalism as a Ranger. I need to concentrate my downtime into that. Our monster lore takes a huge amount of time (if done properly) to memorize so it's useful PC knowledge to begin with. I'm no where close to agreement on this one. Now that being said, I may be one of the only PC's who actually tries to memorize three sets of monster types because I have rediculous amounts of crazy. But that's my argument :D
I love the production/skill advancement for the profession system however. The more you do, the better you get. I can dig it.
For the layout on the skill sets being mandated to choose from, I don't know how much of a fan I am of this. I feel it MAY take away from the whole reson we are doing this (being that we want PC's to have more customizeable characters). Now I agree with the Shield thing for fighters and whatnot, because that makes sense. I'd need to see an example layout of the skill options thing I think to be completely on board there.
Downtime seems like a much better way to learn lore simply because it's a "waste" of a skill choice otherwise. Why would you spend a skill on lore when you could become a better fighter or get more treasure? It just doesn't make a ton of sense. And since the idea is kind of currently to not use downtime to learn skills or actions, the ONLY thing you can do is a profession. The lore adds a little bit of variety than just queueing up a week of herbalism over and over for the rest of your character's existance. I'd also like the idea of adding yet another option to do during downtime, but I can't come up with anything just yet.
After talking to Thad about the professions idea, I kind of like it now. I do, however, support the idea of being able to improve a profession faster than others by dedicating yourself to studying instead of practice. I just don't want to see everyone always at the same profession rating just because they started queueing it at the same time 8 months ago and neither of them have stopped since...
I LOVE Nick's idea on this. I absolutely agree with it. Otherwise, we will have PC's running rampant. It makes NO sense for an Angori to be a Jewelcrafter or Scribe, I guess is what I'm saying. I do like the idea of keeping affinities for this, a WHOLE ton of a lot.
After hearing Thad's case on the lore in downtime, I'm a little more on board with it. I DO still think you'll find that people will avoid Lore completely now, however. Is it really worth it to spend downtime to learn ONE Monster Card? Nathan, I have 4 types of Lore. I have to spend actual REAL life time to learn everything I can access in my Lore categories so that Glimmer can know those things. Making someone do downtime for it (I know we talked about Grandfathering in Thad) is a little hectic in my honest opinion. I don't think you'll see character's using Lore at all. I really don't.
The only comprimise I could see for having to spend downtime to learn it would be printing off the monster cards for the monsters each PC leans and attaching them to their character sheet. Otherwise, it's taking away from the poduction ALL PC's want to do, and making them spend downtime on something else entirely. It severly cuts into the way the system works now. I do downtime to learn an entire Lore category. I don't think it will be worth it to do one Monster at a time.
Well, I suppose that's true Heather, but as it stands now, I don't want to spend SP on lore as it is. I have world lore, but the thought of spending more SP to learn any other lore severely hurts potential for my character. I can barely afford to put any SP into a production skill. And we don't necessarily have to do one monster at a time, do we?
I just don't want the PCs to get caught in doing nothing but production for the rest of their lives. If the lore doesn't work, I'd still like to see some other sort of variety.
As for the affinity thing, I very much disagree with that idea. Mostly because some production skills are naturally more valuable and useful than others. No one was a woodworker in the game because it wasn't really needed. I was only a tailor because it was the only thing I had an affinity for, but I have no use for tailoring anymore. Scribe, Jewelcrafting, Mining... those are the main, valuable productions because of their use in enchants. Making it so certain races are better at it makes it so certain races are naturally more useful. Plus, it once again helps limit players' choices. I thought we were going for variety here? Nothing is going to be stopping an Angori from becoming a learned Wizard, so why should we say that same Angori Wizard finds it extremely difficult to know how to write?
It's more the point that a Savage or Warrior wouldn't typically be a scribe. I don't think it's limiting, I think it's just fact. We are still going to have the same problem. People ae ONLY going to take Mining, Jewlecrafting, and Scribe. All the other productions will be put on hold, ESPECIALLY if we open them up to everyone for the same values.
It was my understanding that the downtime lore in the new system will allow you to spend downtime to view ONE monster or lore at a time. I think it's even more limiting than it already is. Yes, it's costly in the system we currently have, but it's also balancd because you gain access to the ENTIRE set. I spent the points for it because as a Ranger, it's something I feel is needed for the class. It just makes sense. I probably have over 1/4 of my skill points in Lore articles.
If people only want to pick those 3 professions, that must mean that they're better than the others. By limiting a character's professions, you're basically forcing some people to do the professions that no one wants to do. Either that, or they're just really bad at one of the good professions compared to other classes.
And if those 3 professions are the only good ones, that's a problem with balancing the professions. I don't want someone to pick a savage and then go... aww, I can't do any of the useful professions and make good money. Who wants to be really good at woodworking and then not be able to actually make anything particularly useful?
I can't understand why professions and classes are related anyway. In fact, the profession system doesn't make sense at all to people who spend their time training and fighting. If a savage is as wild and mindless as people seem to think it is, how could a savage have the patience to learn ANY profession? Classically, warriors are trained and typically spend a good amount of time in study. Why can't they scribe? What is it about a warrior that means they can't write? Why can't a wizard spend time in the mines?
And if you can learn each lore article in a day of downtime, then you could easily end up with more articles to read in less amount of time than you can currently. Plus, it might encourage Thad to add more Lore during the next season. If you really feel the lore is important to your character, then I don't see why spending some downtime on it is such a horrible sacrifice. Your character would be spending time to study it to learn it anyway, the knowledge wouldn't just fall into their head while they're hacking away at a piece of wood.
Listen here. Knowledge just rains down into my head daily :p. You have a valid point about those 3 professions being the most useful. I'm with you there. But when someone wants a shield or armor, all those fall to the wayside. The problem then arrisees that NO ONE in play has the skill to do what's needed for the other in play items.
I say this based on the issue that Ohren and I had. I have my 4 pieces of Daydrinker and he had his 4 pieces of Everwood. No one had enough Leatherworking skill or Woodworking to be useful. I took a level of woodworking to help him, and Jenn sent me Evangaline's production to help make his shield. It'll be next season before he has enough Leathrworking to make my armor. Now, granted it is Superior Quality, holding three enchants, but his shield does as well. So it should take time to do so.
On the lore thing, I think it's only one particular thing at a time. Not the whole Monster set anymore.
Just wanted to chime in and let you two know I'm enjoying the debate. I could go either way on the issue of race or class affinities for professions, which is why I prefer to let you two battle it out. /popcorn ;)
As for lore, yes, it will be one thing at a time, but I imagine most pieces of lore will only take a day (THS 7). To become an expert on, say, dragons, then, might require a week or two. The upside is that you'll be able to cherry pick which lores you care to know. If you want to become an expert in everything, that'll obviously take awhile, just like it will to master a profession. But if you want to have a passing knowledge of common lore or monsters, the time investment will be much less significant.
If articles are only taking a day of downtime a piece, I like the flexibility it creates. If I hear, for example, Scorch is coming to town, I can spend some time during the downtime to learn about the Red Dragon and some various Undead articles and be better prepared to face him the next month. I can go "study" and prepare myself for upcoming battles or things that are going on in town. After last month, I might have run off to learn who Muralakrum and Banekeril are and it would've only taken a couple of days and 0 Skill choices.
I just can't support the idea that we should highly encourage or force certain classes to do certain professions just because we might occasionally need that profession for something. And, since we can all do every profession, we don't need to worry that no one has woodworking. If someone wants to make some good money charging someone to make their wooden shield, they can just pick it up and start working on it whenever they want.
Again, all valid points my friend. BUT! Going to research things ahead of time that you think are coming takes some of the wifty away. I still feel like it should take some work. Dare I go against the THS7. I like the possibility of being able to do it quickly if you're that set on it. I can deal with that compromise and maintain the bitch dust :p I still think you'll find even less people using it due to trying to max out professions.
Going onto professions. I'm still not in agreement with you Nathan. Let's take it up a notch :) I still am at 100% agreement with Nick on affinities. I think they are valid and obvious. A mage should ABSOLUTELY BE BETTER at scribing or dealing with jewles for enchants. A dwarf should ABSOLUTELY be one of the best miners in game. I should, as a Ranger, ABSOLUTELY be an amazing woodworker to make my own bows. The only reason I have so much herbalism and not a lot of woodworking is because I came into Ranger from Disciple and already had it. If I could ditch out my herbs for wood, I absolutely would. A disciple or Druid should ABSOLUTELY be some of the best herbalist in game; as with Engineer. So maybe that'[s a compromise in it's own there. Give each class ONE high affinity for it's obvious choices based on actual facts of any pen and paper game. Give warrior and savage Blacksmithing and call it a day. The rest can be a free for all.
Ok, now let's have it Nathan! This is so fun, I must agree with you there Nate.
I'm willing to accept that some people won't use lore, Heather. Heck, a lot of folks don't as it is. It's there mostly for flavor; a meeting point for plot and players to collaborate on the story. It may occasionally be useful in play (e.g., lore jeopardy), but that's entirely up to plot to make it so. In the end, I doubt it will ever be considered as useful as, say, the ability to swing a sword, which is why I favor removing it as a skill and just letting everyone have it for a bit of downtime.
As for balancing lore against professions, it's the same deal. It's apples to oranges. Some people will stick to professions, while others will dip into lore. I'm fine with that since lore, again, is mostly flavor. It will be used as much or as little as people prefer. Like journal entries or audio blurbs you might pick up on an FPS or RPG, it's there for those who want it but non-intrusive for those who don't. The difference is that those who devote themselves to it won't have to sacrifice more useful in-play capabilities to do so. ;)
And so the battle rages on... =D
It makes sense that people would try to prepare for things they might see coming. Of course, plot could always throw something unexpected at us, in any situation. If I know I have a test coming up, I know the subject, and I choose to study that subject before the test arrives. If I know a certain enemy is trying to attack my city, I would study that enemy's tactics before it arrives, so I can be better prepared to deal with it. And if people choose to ditch lore for professions, fine, we do it already anyway with our skill choices. Just think, if you didn't have all that lore, you could be such a better woodworker (or herbalist)! It will be the same choice if we're choosing what to spend our downtime on instead of skills. My point is, people will choose lore over professions occasionally. You've done it yourself.
The professions though... While some choices make sense, like you've said, not all the chocies do. I mean, we let wizards learn how to use 2 handers or wield a large shield in this game. That doesn't make sense to me, yet we allow it. What is about being a savage, in all their wild abandon, that teaches them the extreme patience to craft a sword in a forge? Why do they make good blacksmiths? The logic, "they use the weapons, so obviously they should know how to make them," doesn't realyl work. Most fantasy novels will show that most warriors have no real skill in crafting weapons, even if they can identify a good quality sword (which is why they have that story action in Orn).
And what the heck is a human monk good at? =D
Any pen and paper game? The game Orn was based on, DnD, just has a blank labelled Profession where you can fill in ANY profession you want no matter what race or class you're playing. It has similar blanks for Craft. There's nothing in the rule book that limits your craft or profession choices for any race or class. It's similar for a lot of the D20 games.
I think what it really comes down to is what makes sense for your character to study. If you're a ranger and you want to make bows, obviously you should pick woodworking, so you can actually make them. The reason you'll be better at it than other classes is because you actually practice woodworking and they don't. You shouldn't need more of an incentive to do what you feel fits your character best. If you're a dwarf, go do mining! Then you'll be better than all the other people who don't do mining!
Kobolds get a racial bonus to Craft (Trapsmithing), but that's just being nitpicky. :P
I think there is a certain elegance to your logic, Nathan. Certain classes will be more likely to use certain kinds of equipment. Because of this, they'll be more likely to practice trade skills that make sense for them anyway. Mages will pick up Scribe to make enchanting reagents, fighters will pick up blacksmithing to make weapons and armor, scouts will pick up woodworking to make bows, etc. If I decide to resurrect item durability, that will reinforce the case even further, since you'll need to spend a bit of time maintaining equipment you use regularly.
Thus, there will be little need to incentivize certain choices, since people will be making them anyway to obtain the gear that suits their character. The only problem I see is that this logic suits class more than race, and we'd lose racial affinities as well. There is a certain appeal to saying dwarves are superior smiths and miners or elves are superior woodworkers. Just a thought.
Just a quick thought, and possible compromise on the issue (and only if you're dead set on making certain races better at certain professions, which I still don't support):
Note, the bonuses here are just examples, since I have no idea what values professions wil have after the revision.
What if we did the profession race/class bonuses WoW/DnD style? For example, a dwarf could start with +25 mining /blacksmithing, an elf would have +25 herbalism/woodworking, human +10 to all, Empyrean +25 jewelcrafting/scribing. That sort of thing. That way, you start with a small head start to a profession suited to your race, but other races/classes aren't doomed to be growing permanently at a slower rate.
I don't want to see a dwarf and an elf both pursue mining for a year and the dwarf is at a rating of 300, but the elf is only 100, even though they spent the same amount of time. With my idea, the dwarf would be at 225 and the elf would be at 200. The dwarf would still be better, but the elf wouldn't feel completely useless either.
So, a static bonus the kicks in at 1st-level and never gets higher. More like a head start than an ongoing bonus that gets better with time. It would be enough to encourage people to specialize in professions that suit their race without pigeonholing them along preset paths. I think I like it.
As for the numbers themselves, I wasn't sure how I was going to do that yet. It will be something similar to WoW like you're describing, with large values that allow people many small, incremental advancements, since the system is intended to give people something to feel good about during the long wait between levels and skill selections.
I like the idea of being able to cherry pick though the lore system. The downtime aspect of it makes more since to me then the way we currently have it (sry heather).
The static bonus is a great plan if you ask me it will allow character to choose another path without being extremly crippled and it is my understanding from the fireside discussion that professions were going to change to instead of just doing and them spend the mony value to make a sword that you were actully going to sit down and make a masterwork sword is this currect?
That's correct, Josh. You'll spend your downtime on the actual activity rather than just generating production and exchanging that for goods. It will show up in your queue as, "Create a superior quality longsword with blacksmithing," or something similar, with a number of days based on your level in the profession. Certain activities, like making masterwork items, will probably be restricted to characters above a certain profession level.
In that case, would the production rating improve based on just working on that production skill or based on actual completion of items? Like, will it be better to churn out lots of small items or will it not matter what you work on?
Also, is the merchantry thing still going to be a skill or will we be able to easily vend items we produce that we don't necessarily want to keep?
BAH! I can't win them all, and I can handle the Lore bit either way. Even though I'm still right in my head. No need for apologies Josh; it's not a competition to be won by a person, but as a whole group.
I can deal with your compromise Nathan. I think the static of it is fitting and fair. I'm still hardcore on affinities, but it does raise the question of ignoring certain problems with that.
So I can give in if I HAVE too. :)
I don't have the math worked out, but the current idea is that your profession rating increases at a slow rate as you use it to earn money, maintain equipment, create treasure, etc. This reflects "on the job" experience over time. However, you can also perform dedicated training that does nothing but increase it at a faster rate. (THS 6)
I'm up in the air on merchantry. It doesn't quite fit into the new setup of skills, lore, and professions, and was never really a defining character attribute for anyone. I may just drop it all together and let folks see treasure values and vend to their heart's content. (THS 2)
The more I think about static, one-time profession bonuses based on race, the more behind it I am. Providing incentives without pigeonholing seems to be the MO of the new system, whereas the old system pretty much saddled you with what I said you had to be good at. This should create freedom and variety while ensuring that the people who want to master a trade are more likely to play a member of an appropriate race. (THS 7)
There are a few skills, like Medicine, Treasure Hunter, and Class Secrets that are useful in play but don't constitute combat styles. I imagine those will remain as skills for folks to pick up. Again, the defining characteristic of a skill in the new lineup is only that it is directly useful in play. Everything else is downtime.
Too many mind!
I skimmed this so forgive me if this was already said.
Lets give free points to start or higher top end to certainraces or classes.
EX: Dwarf warrior gets 15 points in mining free at level 1. Or instead of a top end of 150 they can get to 165 and therefore be the most productive choice.
This sounds good so far. I like the idea of being able to use any and all trade skills. I just have one question how many skills are you able to by each level and how many skills are we planning on letting the players choose from?