Player Character Non-professional Skills

Time to pick this up again.

Page 12 of the original DMG proposed a simple rule that became structurally intrinsic to my campaign, remembering that for me, a "campaign" is a full-on functioning world, providing a deep, resonant setting and structured logic enabling the players to innovate and self-build their own milieu.  I appreciate that many DMs will argue that they just want to play a "game," that they don't want to spend that much time prepping their sessions or their campaign, and that they don't see the point in all this worldbuilding.  Contrary to their point of view, for the players to be thoroughly invested, the game's interface MUST include a means for the PLAYER to prep for the session, and for the PLAYER to prep the campaign, in ways that push the DM to respond to what the player makes and what the player wants, rather than the "traditional reverse", which is all we ever see in most campaigns.

In my previous steady rewrite of the DMG, the content has largely paralleled my own campaign.  There may be quibbling about when the dice are used, but my use of dice more or less remains close to the original game's intent.  I maintain the old rolling of ability scores; I can see the benefit of using battle maps and representations on those maps.  However, where it comes to "non-professional skills," the book and I totally depart company.  

For one thing, all of the "skills" listed here are professions.  All of them require considerable time to learn and excel at; no one can spend a few weeks learning how to become a miner or a tailor.  These professions take years to learn well enough that an individual can employ the many skills involved with each competently.  "Fisher" and "farmer" aren't "skills" ... they are occupations that incorporate hundreds of skills, none of which are listed in the DMG or even proposed.  That failing in particular was acutely felt by me and my players whenever we spoke about this list: what on earth was the point in saying that the player was an armourer, a gambler or a trader, without also providing applications to these labels?  Presumedly, Gygax did not think it worth the time; perhaps he felt that we could go to a library and look up what exactly a forester or a husbandman did.  Of course we could do that — but since no book would explain how these things would work IN GAME, it was entirely worthless to include any reference, period.

As such, none of the campaigns I played in used the list.  For a long time, not knowing what to do with it, I'd dutifully roll the result out with a wait and see approach — maybe, one day we'd figure it out.  Later on, I added more professions.  Steadily, I shaped in vague terms what a player could do ... and began to think on the problem, how do characters even get these skills, player and non-player alike?

What with things based on an historical period, we know that farmers gave birth to farmers and merchants gave birth to merchants.  Lateral movement between professions occurred when a boy was adopted by others, not because his farming father decided to become a merchant.  People were legally tied to the land, or to guilds, or deliberately kept out of organisations, much like you or I cannot join many associations or clubs because we don't have enough money in the bank, or we're just not the right kind of people.  The rules then were far more draconian; even if you had the money to buy products and carry them elsewhere, you would still be denied entry to a town because you didn't have permission to sell here, or because you did not belong to the baker's guild in this town, though you might belong to a baker's guild elsewhere.  These hoops were designed to force you to follow in the footsteps of your father, because the upper echelons didn't want competition.  That didn't change until so much land and opportunity became available, through the discovery of new worlds and new trade routes, that the wealthy couldn't maintain their hegemony.

Calling these skills non-professional implies that the character classes, "cleric," "fighter," "thief" and so on are professions, which they're not.  Religious persons do not self-identify as "religious persons," but as priests, friars, teachers, deacons and a host of other professions based on who manages, meets & greets, handles the money, performs what services within the religion's heirarchy and so on.  No one has ever put on their resume, "fighter."  Fighting is a set of skills, not a profession.  They think of themselves as soldiers, guards, lancers, marines and a long list of names associated with specific jobs.  Outsiders may think of a group of persons as thieves, assassins or monks, but that is not what they call themselves, as evidenced by names like "cutpurse," "burglar" or "forger," which are all about stealing but each having totally different skill-sets.  Monks do not call themselves "monks" ... they call themselves Buddhists, Jains, Cistercians, Franciscans ... in short, by the set of rules they personally accept as their path to enlightenment.  Paladins aren't "paladins."  They're knights, crusaders, peers ... AND soldiers, noblemen and such.  The word doesn't appear in English until 1592, and comes from the French word that means "of the palace."  It only means what we think it means when we speak of D&D; it is a convenient word picked by Gygax and crew that has become a convenience, but is not accurate to anything historical.

The heading, then, deliberately calls things that ARE professions "non-professional," and things that AREN'T professions "professional."  Gawd, is it any wonder we were soon immersed in people pulling words out of a thesaurus to make new D&D classes, since obviously a magic-user isn't a witch, a necromancer or a sorceror.  Shoot me, please.

We didn't need more classes, we needed a rational skills list that could be employed by players in the campaign ... as evidenced by 2nd Edition's decision to do exactly that, because the demand was there and needed addressing.  Unfortunately, while the skills list was fairly comprehensive, the scholarship behind them was utterly lacking, so that every skill was seen as a kind of saving throw determining success.  I do not need to roll a die to write this post.  Nor do I need to roll a die to make this sentence grammatically correct.  Astronomers very rarely fail to have perfect knowledge of pre-telescope astronomy; so what is the "check" for?  Gaming, obviously.  The designers, having no concept of how D&D worked or even how skills worked, turned them into a silly game that subverted any value they might have had ... and the pattern was picked up by 3rd Edition with glorious incomprehension.

It's self-evident why this didn't work, to me at least.  A game's random generating functions cannot overwhelm the predictability of the game.  Randomly rolling snake eyes or box cars playing Monopoly, though very different numbers, is mitigated by the relative slight difference in the effective results.  You're standing on Connecticut Avenue, and the full scope of results will land you anywhere between St. Charles Place and Kentucky.  The difference in price between those properties is only $80 (St. Charles, $140 and Kentucky, $220).  Unfortunately, D&D checks do not offer slivers of success, but total success vs. either total failure or partial failure.  The "greyer" the partial flavour, and the more kinds of partial flavour, the more practical the die roll becomes for a game.

Combat presumes that in most cases, you won't die in one round; low-level combats in my game typically last for no more than 8 or 9 rounds, and then only if the baddies don't go down more quickly.  Typically, it takes at least 8 to 9 rounds to kill a party; this gives them time to explore strategies and decide how much of their full strength they want to reserve for a later fight.  As turn 7 passes, with the players still doing poorly, the party stops counting on swings and starts going all-in with their magic and one-shot options.

2nd Edition and 3rd Edition systems didn't account for any greyness; and constant, inconsistent pass/fail results forced players not to rely on skills, except when failure didn't matter; and if it didn't matter, it didn't add to the game, so why have the system?  Only the fluff-lovers could embrace a system that worked inconsistently when it was really needed and didn't provide meaningful, trustworthy game play ... and it is always the fluff-lovers still who defend those systems (or similar systems found in later editions).

Full disclosure, I have similar checks in my game.  I also treat them as "saving throws" ... but as Pandred pointed out a couple of weeks ago, rolls against these things are rare, and CAN be avoided if the players take steps to protect themselves, or don't take risks.  This is different from a skill roll, such as Lore, that isn't actually needed for the game being presented.  Lore is frosting; and if we don't have it, meh.  We still have the cake, that being the actual campaign, and what we don't know about the lore and need to know, the DM will eventually provide.

A skill set that provides game flavour has to also be reliable ... as reliable as knowing that when you buy food to keep you from starving, there's no die roll to determine if it does.  Generally, games don't roll dice to see if the horse will carry you to the next town, or if the rope can be let down from a wall to help you up.  If we did roll for these things, we'd quickly see players stop using horses and ropes.  Players organize their strategies on things they don't have to roll dice to accomplish ... and while there is a sick conception that giving players skill sets that don't need rolls would make them "too powerful," truth is that the more consistent, reliable functions the game offers, the more opportunities and dimensions the game offers.

This post is long enough for the present; let's come around back to where the skills come from with the next post.

Secondary Skills Updated

Just a little fun.  My background generator as it stands offers 110 possible backgrounds from which the player character can derive.  Some are common, some are very rare.  These would represent the households in which the character grew up, so professions that a father, mother or other ancestor would have practiced, around which the character was raised.  This is how I define the origin of "secondary skills."  If your parents did it, then you have some skill at it.  These are bonus abilities and features that the character adds to their other trained class skills.

Alchemist: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points in the study of druidic alchemy, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Alchemist's apprentice: +1 damage when throwing acid, -1 damage per die from all chemical attacks.

Architect: able to read & write; can plan shape of wooden or stone structures.

Armorer: fashion armor. Party's armor saves at +2.

Artillerist: 10 knowledge points in the study of combat artillery, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Artist: 10 knowledge points as a bardic artist, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Baker: make breadstuffs; subtract 1 damage taken from heat.

Banker: character has access to credit, equal to 25 times the character's starting wealth.  Character can read & write, and possesses a writ of passage throughout the kingdom.

Baron: the character's elder sibling is the rightful heir of the land. The character is entitled to use the title 'Sir' and has been granted a manor estate as a member of the family. The character's manor includes 385 acres, with 77 landed tenants and servants. The land receives 50 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 20 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 32 g.p. per year, or 16 c.p. per acre. Able to read & write.

Blacksmith: ability to work a forge. Party's ironmongery saves at +1; character has +1 bonus to hit with hammer.

Boatman: navigate rivers, +2 to dexterity checks when aboard boats.

Bookbinder: lay our and design books, shape leather into book covers; character is able to read and write.

Bounty hunter: has amateur scouting knowledge (see Ranger), gains bonus proficiency in a hurled or fired weapon.

Brewer: brew beer; double resistance to alcohol.

Buccaneer: character has both sailing and swimming ability; and also possesses a writ promising the building of a single-masted vessel up to 2,000 g.p. value, at the character's behest.

Butcher: chop and preserve meat properly; add proficiency with cleaver (damage as dagger).

Carpenter: able to build wooden structures; +1 attacks against wooden defenses.

Chandler: reduce fats and tallow; subtract 1 damage taken from heat.

Cobbler: make and repair leather shoes; party's boots and shoes save at +3.

Confectioner: make candy and preserve meat and vegetables properly; subtract 1 damage taken from heat.

Cooper: make and repair barrels; party's wooden containers save at +3.

Count: the character's elder sibling is the rightful heir of the land. The character is entitled to use the title 'Sir' and has been granted a manor estate as a member of the family. The character's manor includes 385 acres, with 77 landed tenants and servants. The land receives 50 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 20 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 32 g.p. per year, or 16 c.p. per acre. Able to read & write.

Crusader: the character is entitled to use the title, 'Sir.' The character is also a member of a Knight-Order, and may make introduction of self to the Grand Wizard of that order, with whom correspondence can be sent or reasonable requests made. Gains a +2 bonus to the moral of any man-at-arms.

Curate: possesses a bonus 1st level cleric spell, regardless of class.

Diemaker: amateur bardic skill in dies and minting, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Dispossed Noble: the character is entitled to use the title 'Sir' when referring to oneself. The title carries no legitimate power or ownership. Gains a +2 bonus to the moral of any hireling from the character's realm. Able to read & write.

Draper: make and repair curtains, tents, cloth shelters; +1 bonus to constitution checks.

Engraver: amateur bardic skill in craft, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Explorer: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points of clerical history, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level. Character has pathfinder ability.

Farmer: can sow crops, +1 to strength checks in the outdoors.

Fence: character begins game with 161 g.p. in stolen

Fisherman: fishes as a full angler and is able to swim.

Fishmonger: has fishing ability; +3 save against nausea and odors.

Fuller: transform fibres to thread or yarn, with or without spinning wheel; +1 bonus to strength checks.

Furniture maker: make and repair furniture; party's wooden goods save at +2.

Furrier: make and repair fur clothing; party's fur goods save at +2.

Gambler: character possesses the thieving gambling ability, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Gameskeeper: has amateur scouting knowledge.

Gladiator: causes +1 damage when fighting mammals or mammal-like beasts.

Glassmaker: make and repair glass products; party's vials and other glass saves at +2 (or breaks with +2 bonus if desired). Subtract 1 damage taken from heat.

Glazier: make and repair glass windows; fabricate stained glass and mirrors with shop. Remove glass easily when using tools.

Graverobber: +1 armor class against undead.

Guardsman: +1 damage when using fists as a weapon or when grappling.

Guildmaster of the leather worker's guild: able to make and repair leather goods. Gains a +1 bonus to the moral of all artisan hirelings. Able to read & write.

Guildmaster thief: enjoys the recognition of the criminal faction in one's own realm, with freedom from infringement by all but ignorant wrongdoers. Reasonable requests can be made, with give & take expected. Gains a +2 bonus to the morale of all criminals. Able to read & write.

Gypsy: +1 saving throw against magic.

Herbalist: has 10 knowledge points in druidical studies of bushes & shrubs, flowers & sprigs, fungi or grasses & grains (player choice), with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Hermit: has foraging ability, applied to both rural and urban settings.

Husbandman: +2 morale bonus for all domestic animals; those owned by the character - or within 1 combat hex - receive a +2 save.

Innkeeper: owns a three-story merchant's house and yard, in 65% repair, with kitchen, hall, 2nd floor common room and 3 private rooms on the top floor, receiving 46 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 170 g.p. annually.

Instrument maker: make and repair musical instruments; complex items require a shop and much time. Party's instruments save at +2. Play instrument of choice.

Jeweller: amateur bardic jewellery designer, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Juggler: amateur bardic skill in craft, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level; +2 bonus to hit with sling or dart.

Killer: character adjusts their bonus for all rear attacks by +1 to hit.

King: the character's elder sibling is the rightful heir of the land. The character is entitled to use the title 'Sir' and has been granted a manor estate as a member of the family. The character's manor includes 385 acres, with 77 landed tenants and servants. The land receives 50 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 20 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 32 g.p. per year, or 16 c.p. per acre. Able to read & write.

Laborer: reduce degree of diseases contracted by 1-4 points.

Landed Knight: the character is entitled to use the title, 'Sir.' Owns 308 acres, with half-timbered hall-house, 54 landed tenants, receiving 40 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 11 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 22 g.p. per year, or 14 c.p. per acre. Gains a +1 bonus to the morale of all men-at-arms.

Landlord: owns land near their place of birth, inside town walls: an empty quarter-acre lot, inside town walls, without earnings. Taxes on the property equals 74 g.p. annually.

Lapidary: amateur bardic stone-setter and cutter, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Lawyer: able to read & write; has amateur knowledge of law and policy.

Leather worker: make and repair leather goods; party's leather goods save at +2.

Librarian: able to read & write; gain a +3 knowledge point bonus to all initial in-field studies.

Marshal: the character is entitled to use the title, 'Commander' or 'General.' Owns 385 acres, with manor house, 77 landed tenants and servants, receiving 50 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 20 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 32 g.p. per year, or 16 c.p. per acre. Gains a +1 bonus to the morale of all hirelings. Able to read & write.

Mason: able to build stone structures; +1 attacks against stone defenses.

Master-at-arms: gain two bonus proficiencies in weapons that can only be used hand-to-hand.

Medicant: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points in the study of clerical medicine, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Mercenary: gain bonus proficiency in any weapon that can be used by class.

Metallurgist: mix refined metal into special alloys; subtract 2 damage taken from heat.

Mine foreman: 10 knowledge points in druidical geology, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level; character has dwarven underground skills.

Miner: 10 knowledge points in the study of combat sapping, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Monk: character's natural armor class is permanently increased by 1 point.

Mortician: +1 bonus to saves, attacks and damage when fighting undead.

Outrider: gain 10 points horseback riding knowledge.

Papermaker: make paper, parchment or papyrus; reduce degree of disease by 1 to 4 points.

Political advisor: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points in the study of clerical politics, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Porter: double bonus to character's encumbrance limit.

Potter: make and repair clay vessels and products; party's flasks and other pottery saves at +3 (or breaks with +3 bonus if break is desired).

Priest: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points in the study of clerical dweomercraft, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Professor: able to read & write; gain a +4 knowledge point bonus to all initial in-field studies.

Prospector: has prospector ability, +1 morale bonus for donkeys and mules.

Puddler: transform rock ore to metal; subtract 2 damage taken from heat.

Rat catcher: +1 saving throw vs. poison.

Sailor: has sailing ability, +2 to dexterity checks when aboard ship.

Scribe: able to read & write.

Sculptor: amateur bardic sculptor, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Shipwright: make and repair ships and ship parts of all sizes. Give +2 bonus to rolls keeping ships from sinking.

Sinecure: able to read & write; has a writ of passage for the realm, exempt from paying tolls or fees; has the ear of the local nobility, with whom correspondence can be sent; permitted to dine at any of the realm's town halls at will, where the character was born.

Singer: 10 knowledge points in the study of bard's performance, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Squire: owns 283 acres, with timber-frame hall-house, 31 landed tenants, receiving 30 c.p. per tenant per month from each in taxes, tolls & goods, for a total income of 4 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 17 g.p. per year, or 12 c.p. per acre.

Steward: +1 moral bonus for all hirelings and followers.

Stonecutter: cut stone blocks or shapes from surface rock; +3 bonus to strength checks.

Surgeon: able to read & write; 10 knowledge points in the study of magical physiology, with the character gaining 1d4-1 per level.

Tailor: make and repair clothing; party's clothing saves at +2. 

Tanner: strip hides from animals and tan leather; party's leather goods save at +2.

Tavern keeper: near their place of birth, the character owns a one-floor village drinking house, with kitchen, hall, extensive pantry & outbuilding smokehouse., receiving 94 g.p. per month. Taxes on the property equals 153 g.p. annually.

Teamster: can drive a donkey, a team of oxen (four in hand) or draft horses (2 in hand).

Tobacconist: dry and prepare cigarillos; +3 save against nausea and odors.

Toll keeper: character possesses the thieving bribery ability, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level; +1 to ability checks in the outdoors.

Tomb robber: begin game with a magic item: a shield +1.

Toolmaker: make and repair tools; has amateur ability at thieves' setting and removing traps, regardless of class, with character gaining 1d6-1 points per level.

Trapper: +2 to dexterity checks when setting traps.

Tutor: able to read & write; gain a +2 knowledge point bonus to all initial in-field studies.

Usurer: character has access to credit, equal to 10 times the character's starting wealth. Character can read and write.

Veterinarian: has diagnose & treat farmyard disease ability.

Village witch: begin game with a bonus spell, regardless of class: dancing lights.

Vintner: ferment wine; double resistance to alcohol.

Wagoneer: make and repair wagons, axles and wheels; jury rig broken vehicles so that they may travel 5-20 miles before hopelessly breaking down.

Weaponsmith: fashion weapons. Party's armor saves at +2.

Weaver: transform thread or yarn into cloth, sew and repair cloth; party's cloth goods save at +2.

Witchhunter: +2 bonus to all saving throws vs. magic.

A few points.  The list is not intended to be "balanced."  You're lucky or you're not, and most are unlucky.  This works fine if your party is the sort that works together, as anyone becoming the offspring of a guildmaster thief or a banker becomes a benefit to the whole party, not just self.

Second, much of the list above swaps out for other details.  For example, since the actual background of the character is also generated, with family details, this adjusts what the status the character has with the king, count or baron appearing on the list.  As well, things like the "guildmaster of the leather workers" only shows the random generated artisan type for that guildmaster.  Anything that's a guild (vintner, baker, engraver) also has a chance of being generated.  I haven't included them all and I've left up the selected choice in the list to give an example.

There are different amounts of land that can be owned, different classes of vehicle and ship, different total taxes, different buildings, etcetera.  I've been expanding this for awhile, and not all of this is included on my free character generator, which I finished in 2012.  I'm hoping I can get an updated version in place this year.

Remember always that the character is not a "marshal" or a "guildmaster."  That was Dad and Mum's job.  But inheritance is possible, and it is possible to be born of the king and yet be the 4th or 5th sibling.  So just because you're royal or noble blood doesn't mean you'll be in charge of a kingdom or territory.  'Course, usurpation is always an option.

Still, everything after the title DOES apply directly to the character. So some players do start owning land, taverns, inns and boats.

Feels good to post some simple, pure rules for a change.

Limitations

Patience, there's a lot to mull over.

Is it fair that I claimed yesterday that XP rewards for non-combat begin with a reluctance to enter combat and kill things?

I don't think so.  It is usually presented that way.  Killing is boring, killing is munchkinism, killing doesn't require any special expertise, "We saved the kingdom and we didn't have to kill anything," etcetera.  I simply don't hear players say, "I wanted to use diplomacy and not my sword because I wanted greater skill at being a diplomat" or "because I felt the best way to get experience was to parley."

Getting experience from not fighting is always expressed in terms of what the party did not have to do - that is, roll dice, risk hit points, indulge in repetitive combat round syndrome (RCRS).  Once a discussion on the subject begins, then arguments about skills and character are invoked . . . but somehow, the subject is never led with these arguments.

But let's shelve that and talk about skills, since that is a legitimate argument.

Matt rightly pointed out that 3rd Edition did create skills that were not combat based but were tied to the combat mechanic of experience.  I won't argue the rationale of this, since I have also created non-combat mechanics and I have also connected these to experience.  So why?

A two-part answer.  First, in my world, gaining experience is something that happens slowly.  In the last four years, the highest levels of the party have only gained two levels.  For the most part, they have moved from 8th level to 10th; in some cases, from 7th level to 9th; and in the case of the ranger, Falun, from 7th level to only 8th.  Rangers in AD&D need a lot to reach 9th level.  They've been running for round about 8 years and they have reached an average of 250-300 thousand experience.  That's all.

For most campaigns, this is a brutally slow progression.  It happens in my world partly because I am cheap on treasure, particularly on magic, and partly because once players begin to mass three or more characters (main character and henchmen), the experience shared tends to get thinner and thinner.  The party knows this.  They would get more XP if they fought battles without their henchmen, but they love their henchmen; and anyway, while the main characters go up levels slowly, the henchmen move upwards in level regularly.

This slow progression helps encourage the ideal that, since it takes a long time to move upwards, it is reasonable to assume masses of knowledge are being acquired before the next level.  Thus the pacing of my game - not the actual rules, but the pacing - helps the functional rationale of my sage system.

The second answer is more applicable to the general audience.  We attach things to experience for a number of sound reasons.  First of all, like hit points and coin, X.P. is measurable against activity.  While yes, there are numerous methods for calculating X.P., once a DM settles on a calculation, it is predictable and rational, for the most part, where it comes to combat.  The orc has a settled X.P. value - it doesn't matter who kills the orc, what level they are, what weapon or spell they use or ultimately how difficult it was to achieve the killing given the circumstances . . . that's what the orc is worth.

Of course, Gygax tried to fuck with this, rating player role-playing ability according to how he felt a fighter should act or how 'tough' the orc was in comparison to the character, but virtually everyone ignored p.85-86 of the Dungeon Master's Guide because it's so obviously written by a frikkin' idiot.

How can I say that?

Imagine a rule in Monopoly that said that a property's value increased or decreased according to how much money the player had.  Or how about a rule in RISK that adjusted the value of Africa depending on whether you also controlled Europe?

Of course, now that I think about it, there is a rule in Bridge where if you win, you're 'vulnerable' . . . but I always thought that rule was silly, too.  Not every Bridge convention uses it.

But I digress.

The benefit of a universal measuring system based on firm, non-opinion based actions in a game are vital to that game's structure and ultimately the behaviour of those participating in the game.  Once the rules are known, perfectly, then the challenge in the game is in playing through the functionality of the game according to it's limitations.  Movement is limitation.  Attempted actions are limited by the available dice the player can roll in the given situation.  Success is uncertain and therefore failure is very definitely a probability that the player can mitigate but not eliminate!

Wealth limits how much the player can buy.  Hit points limit how long the player can survive an uncertain number of rolled dice.  Experience points limit how many options the player has according to the number of levels obtained.

Before I can produce another measurement for the game, I must know what that measurement is going to limit.

Let us say, for example, that we're going to make a limitation based on the player's 'diplomacy' skill.  What is that limitation going to be?  How are we going to define what limits 4 points in the skill against what limits 8 points?  How are these points going to be gained.  What is the value of convincing an orc to do . . . something.

Because that is now the world we're in.  We need to convince the orc to do something.  Could be anything.  Depends on the situation.  I'm at a loss to describe what, precisely, defines a 'win.'

Typically, this would be defined as the player getting what the player wants.  We know how this plays out in combat - the player makes a judgement call on his hit point reserve and his capabilities defined by level against what the player can guess about the orc, makes the decision to start the fight and hopes that he'll be tough enough to win.

Apply that to diplomacy.  What is the orc's diplomacy reserve?  What capabilities does the orc have?  Upon what basis can the player judge those capabilities before the diplomacy starts?  What are the negative effects if the player loses?

Incidentally, this is where my idea for Conflict Cards failed.  I created the reserve.  I defined the orc's capabilities.  I gave a structure that would allow the player to sort of judge the orc.  But there was no 'lose' scenario except 'failure to win.'  There was no consequence.  Thus the players could attempt to win repeatedly at no specific risk to themselves.  What was needed was some rule that stated, "If the player fails to convince the orc, the player must acquiesce to one demand made by the orc, hand over 50% of their cash on hand, agree to a proposition and then carry it out, etcetera."

Diplomacy and many of the other 'skills' in 3E suffer from the same nonsense.  There's no consequence.  Experience for combat has a consequence.  The player may not live to the next level, and therefore there's a chance that the player will never become a better diplomat because the player will be dead.

Incidentally, failed diplomacy in the real world has enormous consequences; jail time, for instance, merely for being in the wrong place at the wrong time; giving the wrong information (ie., too much) to the wrong people; making enemies; getting blacklisted; pissing your career away; public scandal. These are not consequences in a role-playing game, except for making enemies, which in the game only means having to fight when you'd rather talk.

Once the DM begins to give experience away for talking where no real consequence can result (no consequence that will matter to the player's character, at any rate, since the consequences of diplomacy don't measure themselves as a loss of freedom, like in the real world), then the value of the experience structure is compromised.  Now the player can very much count on living as long as the player chooses to gab rather than risk.

Thus everyone who has ever found themselves at a table with a player who tries to talk their way through every problem.  These are merely players who have found that they are able to hack the system, since they know DMs are a) impressed; and b) suckers for a schmott guy.  Who can blame them.  If the game is hackable, the hacker will surface.

Point in fact, the principles of the above argument is the basis for why my sage abilities are more about 'knowledge' than 'skill.'  I'm not trying to create a series of abilities that provide die rolls for overcoming problems.  I'm concentrating on what the character knows.

Occasionally, yes, this translates to skill.  If you 'know' how to swim, you can swim.  But 'diplomacy,' 'bluffing' and 'intimidation' are not knowledge-based contributions to your character - they are functional shortcuts to reduce the amount of gaming time necessary to deal with player-vs-npc interaction.  Of course we all know how to 'bluff.'  Doing it well is an entirely different thing than possessing the knowledge for how it works.  Moreover, who you bluff and upon what basis the bluff is carried forward is massively dependent on your personal experience.  You may find it easy to bluff your friends at poker; this may help you bluff strangers.  It does not help in 'bluffing' your way onto a military test base as a nuclear physicist (though, of course, television would have us believe these are the same thing).

Skills like bluffing, diplomacy and intimidation are not actually skills, they are composite skill sets acquired through familiarity and experience with specific circumstances, where the character will have probably spent most of their lives.  Where my sage abilities are concerned, I am struggling to stay away from such short cuts and skill sets in the hopes of promoting the character's decision-making process.

I haven't succeeded entirely at this.  Influence, for example, is a very definite short-cut.  Thankfully, it has an extremely limited application for the game structure I'm augmenting.  It would not, for example, be of any value to a character attempting to influence a bartender into offering a free drink, or any other similar tactic.  It is a short cut designed to limit what job a player can obtain - without in turn guaranteeing any success at that job.

I learned through the Conflict Card fiasco the errors in player mechanics that don't include negative consequences.  Similarly, I chose with that fiasco to embrace the principles of players receiving rewards that were NOT experienced-based where it came to talking themselves out of trouble.  If the players want to stop a war in my world, great!  Will it get them rewards?  Yes!  Status, power, perhaps a bit more land, credit, friends, opportunities, contributions and gifts.

But experience?  No.

I think part of the reason why experience IS given for diplomacy, talking, getting out of scrapes without fighting and so on comes from the DM's inability to make any other reward matter.  If I were to run a world where any of the things I just named would offer no meaningful change in terms of what the player was empowered to do in the campaign, then yes, I suppose I would have to give experience for talking, too.

Just think about it.  If the campaign is ALL adventures and modules, ALL quests and story arcs, then what good does status do, except as a series of empty titles?  What good is influence, since the only power that helps the player is in getting to the end of the next mission?  What good is land if it has to be left behind for another dungeon?  What good does credit do the player if there's no reason to borrow money?  What use do the players have for friends that aren't part of the adventure they're on?  What do they need with opportunities since the narrative provides that anyway?  What good are contributions or gifts if the treasure offered is three times as much?

None.  None at all.  Which leaves nothing for the DM to give except experience.  Everything else has an extremely limited appeal.

Sermonizing

Since I am working on the cleric class, tweaking and adjusting the elements of the class within my game, I find myself faced one more with the question, one that came up before on this blog (not that I can find the post).

What effect does a cleric's preaching have?

There certainly should be an effect.  A cleric preaching to a crowd is a highly symbolic act, one which defines the very nature of clericism - the pronouncement of 'truth,' carrying it to the people so that they may hear the spoken word, this is definitive.  The word is the embodiment of the cleric's religion; the practice of speaking it is an exhibition of bravery and resolution, the statement that say "This I believe, and that belief shall not be hidden!"

Many of us believe things; we secretly hold something to be true, but we dare not say that thing out loud for fear that it will lose us friends, respect, even our jobs or our freedom.  The boss is an idiot.  I do not love my wife.  I wish my best friend would stop going with that bitch/bastard.  When a cleric stands up and says, "I believe in an invisible force that says YOU must live your life differently," this takes guts.  An audience may not like it.  Prostelytizers have been killed before.

So somehow, the power of sermonizing must embody these characteristics.  It must be empowering; it must influence; it must be something practical for the cleric to do, but it should  be something potentially dangerous, too.  It must be useful.  It must be practical.  And while it can be magical, it can't step on pre-existing magic.

For many campaigns, the problem is already solved by the enthrall spell.  When a cleric wishes to sermonize, he or she need only employ this spell:

"Enchants creatures who fail to make save vs. magic. Creatures less than 4 hit dice suffer a –4 penalty to their saving throws. Creatures that are neither human nor demi-human enjoy a +4 modifier to their saving throw.  The cleric’s charisma is temporarily raised to 21. Listeners who fail their save will, in any event, continue to listen so long as the cleric continues speaking."

Somehow, this doesn't suit me.  To begin with, I don't allow my clerics to change their spells from day to day - which is my means of reducing the power of spellcasting (damn, can't find that post either).  Briefly explained, you pick your spells and those are your spells.  No changing.

It's a cheap fix anyway.  People don't get up and walk out of a temple when the priest starts speaking.  It isn't a "saving throw" problem.  The cleric ought to be able to affect everyone, but to a much lesser degree ... so that, in a slightly upgraded manner, people still leave the church or the circle feeling enlightened, invigorated ... and even intrigued with some matter about their lives.

It's difficult to manage a magical effect in D&D that isn't bold and forthright.  Magic missile ... now that is simple.  Bang, hits automatically, causes damage.  No gray areas.  How do you run a magical effect that "enlightens" but does not flat out affect the listener like a suggestion spell?

I've been building a straw man here, because the answer is actually easy.

D&D has so many ways to moderately push the numbers that there's always something that can be done.  Another problem I've been working on has been the 'sage abilities,' which I think I mentioned last week ... but if I forgot, here's a link to what they've been for about three years.

I am enormously unhappy with these - primarily because of the lack of use players have put them to.  The mage in the online campaign, played by 'Lukas' or Oddbit as he is called, has employed his architecture knowledge a fair bit; everyone who has taken "beasts" in the cleric list has definitely made use of that to know more about what's attacking them.  There has been dabbling on a few other topics.  But its not giving the guts I need to make the talents work, and I know that's because they're far too vague.  My fault, not the player's.

So I am working through the lists to make them more concrete, which I know is going to be a year-long job, requiring a lot of brain hemorrages and imaginative effort.  Mostly, I'm looking to enhance these things so that they can be played very simply.  A set % per level chance at success, and very definite results that can be expected, which offer a wide range of talents and abilities - even some magic.

For example, a knowledge of Aesthetics, knowing better how performance and art has the potential to influence, could mean moderately greater effects for some spells (duration, area of effect, range), or an improvement in the use of physical tools ranging from weapons to mountain climbing equipment, or an increase in the value of property and equipment.

Let's break down Metaphysics ... which, if there was ever a topic that seemed impractical for a D&D player, this would seem to be it.  But metaphysics is, after all, a greater comprehension of reality, and how to live within that reality.  So we can presume that an advanced knowledge of "reality" might offer the following special abilities (still limited by a set % chance of success per level of the character):

Perception:  a deeper comprehension of the nature of time enables the player to grasp more deeply its passage, so that if the % is rolled, time can be slowed so that the player is able to experience two rounds where others would only experience one - however, this can only be accomplished for a limited period, so long as the % is rolled and no more than 5 (possibly 10, needs gameplay) 'rounds' per day.

An alternate to the above would be to shorten distances to be crossed by half, so that while time remains the same players are able to step two spaces where they were ordinarily move one.  Another alternate might be that the player could perceive distances visually, so that their vision was magnified 30x (equivalent of binoculars).

Asceticism:  The body's natural functions can be overcome so that the player would be less dependent upon food or sleep, reducing the requirement for either by 50%, with this having no effect upon the player's combat or other abilities, when the % is rolled.

Sustained Life:  The character is able to keep themselves alive even though their body has technically been "killed", to as far as -15 hit points, for a period of 1 to 4 minutes, giving time for the player to be healed by ordinary means, if the % is rolled.

I perceive a lot of differing rules like this, somewhat similar in some ways to the skills that pop up in a lot of games, but based on knowledge and not skill.  In a sense, there's no difference, except that in the above it would also be taken for granted that the player knew just about everything there was to know about metaphysics, to even have a chance at performing these strange abilities.

So back to the sermon.  I think an elegant solution is suggested by the ceremony found in the Unearthed Arcana, that gives a +1 to any roll for an individual when they are first baptized into a religion.  This is a pretty crappy effect for a ceremony like that, but it would be marvelous for a congregation as they left the local temple.  Everyone in the neighborhood gets a +1 modifier to one thing, probably to be used up that day?  Marvelous.

It probably won't mean much to many the gentle reader, but I remember Sundays where the morning was screwed by church ... and the afternoon seemed strangely special afterwards.  I think, subject to certain other conditions (done on holy ground, affecting only believers, that sort of thing) that this would be a great talent to allow a cleric to perform.

Scrollmaking

My players in the Online campaign are interested in writing their own scrolls, and as I haven't written about magic creation on this blog before, I'd best do so now.

This is my solution to the problem of scroll creation - it addresses no other magic.  I should probably write those rules at a later time.  First, I want to say something about the possession of magic by players.

I don't feel excessive magic does anything for the game.  What would "excessive" be?  If the players are solving more than a fifth of their problems with the use of a magic item, then there's too much magic.  I don't mind the occasional use of a fireball wand or such - but the players should be aware that there isn't another fireball wand waiting in the next treasure.  That sucker should be precious ... and therefore, not to be used until the player's backs really are against the wall.

If you're running a world where the fireball wand is the first thing the mage uses, that is a sign that you are giving your player too much magic.  Why?  Because they don't need to think, that's why.  They don't need to be careful.  They have their deux ex machina in hand, and the dramatic relevance of your world is suspect.  Of course, if you just want to run a bunch of people slaughtering things, without experiencing real threat, that's fine ... but you and your buddies are morons, and you have no business reading this blog.

I like the party to have magic.  My parties soon learn that magic cannot be bought, and that if they cannot find it, they'll have to make do without.  Even when they do find it, knowing it may not get replaced at once tends to make parties appreciate magic.  Thus, when considering the creation of scrolls by mages, difficulty has to be the watchword.

Not all casters should be able to create all scrolls.  The higher the mage, the easier it should be ... but every level of spell requires new challenges, and while an 8th level caster may have little trouble with 1st level spells, 4th level spells should be a considerable challenge, and 7th level spells impossible.

I like a base % chance of success.  This is equal to the caster's level above that needed to cast the spell, multiplied by either the caster's wisdom or intelligence.  Thus, a 4th level mage with a 17 intelligence would have a 51% success chance to create a 1st level scroll, and a 17% chance to create a 2nd level scroll.  Mage and Illusionist cantrips are considered zero-level for the purpose of this calculation.

To have any real chance of scroll creation, the caster would need to obtain three rare books - none of them unique, but somewhat difficult to find.  They would be large, 14 in. high and 10 in. wide, with around 480 pages, costing upwards of 1,000 g.p.  They would be massive tomes, which would be made of delicate parchment, sensitive to damp and dryness, and therefore difficult to transport.  I conceived of these books last night, and I think they would begin a whole list of books I'd like to eventually add to my Printer's equipment list.  The rarity would mean that the three books were hard to find, and once found, hard to replace.  The titles would be,

Tobin's Materials & Measures - including the list of what was needed, how to recognize good material from bad, and what considerations must be noted depending on the time of year and location of the effort.  Thus, without this book, a caster would likely choose the wrong toad's liver for the spell, or pick a sparrow's wing that had lost its potency, for failing to know what is it that makes a good pick.

Six Degrees of Ink: A Master Mixer's Manual - there's more to using magical ink in a scroll than purchasing a bottle at the apothecary's.  Inks must be mixed and managed according to precise specifications, depending on the spell and the quality of paper - which itself can ruin a good scroll.  Here are the rules to choosing how to remix ink in order to precisely create the results a caster desires.

Leomund's Incantations of the Written Word: Unexpigated - a thousand symbols, chants, guidelines and methodologies for infusing the spoken word into permanent written form, in order to freeze magic so that any able to verbalize the written word thereafter can release it into the world.  If the spell is to work when anyone reads it, there must be a code that is followed, or the power of the spell is locked into the word so that it cannot be released.

A caster could create scrolls without the above books, but for calculating success the caster's intelligence or wisdom is reduced 4 points for every book not possessed.  Thus, a mage with a 17 intelligence who possesed only Leomund's Incantations would have a 9% chance per level of success.  Still possible, but the difficulty of remembering so many details would make the matter less likely.

This brings us to the ingredients, and the means to manage the ingredients.  I don't insist on mages using "material components" in casting spells ... but said components are convenient for scroll creation.  I have included some spell components in my Apothecaries' list, pricing the described items in the Player's handbook.  Every material component that was to be used would require a metal cage for living items, a bowl for liquids (wooden if harmless to consume, metal if otherwise) and a glass container for anything either animal, vegetable or mineral.  A glass rod would also be required for each item, a mortar and pestle, a brazier, chalk and paint for drawing symbols (one oz. per spell level), a blank scroll of parchment 12 in. wide and 14 in. long (per spell level), plus 2 ounces of magical ink (per spell level).

I may add more to this at a later time.  For now it seems an adequate description.

The actual writing of the scroll will require 1 week per spell level, which must be accomplished in a completely quiet and undisturbed place, indoors, where there is both natural light and continued provided light (a candle or torch or lantern per spell level must be kept burning continuously).  The caster cannot pause to cast other spells during this time, nor can he or she take time to investigate other matters, leaving the scroll creation to wait.  Others must be on hand to keep candles or otherwise lit and provide food, and an apprentice must be on hand to keep materials clean and rid the laboratory of the smallest vermin that might ruin the creation.  Excessive noise, such as a battle or even someone shouting, increases the chance of failure by 1% per round of distraction.

Only when all this has been managed is the chance for success rolled ... and if it fails, all material components, paper and ink have been ruined.