PDA

View Full Version : Craft (Everything)



KingEridani
2007-02-26, 01:41 AM
ahh the skill of Macguyvers everywhere.

no really.

okay you're sitting there thinking i'm and idiot right now because it sounds stupid

well allow me to explain

craft skills are cheaty and don't really make any sence, but then again how is the player suposed to know what these two plants do anyway. well the character knows which is alright. so normal craft skills are okay.

now craft (everything) is very different becuase its not just I roll craft everthing for this trap, and now for this potion.

with craft (everything) you must justify you're creation, like bits of wood and string for a bind, or a shirt and a large creature's bone to make a torch, or even a bottle of beer inside a quiver of arrows, with a rag of some kind sticking out the end with a buckler or wood to brace it, and voala a bozoka! based on your roll and the logic of your creation your DM will determine how well it'll work!

so If you wanna agure about it,
or explain your own creations,
this is the place.

oriong
2007-02-26, 01:49 AM
How are craft skills cheaty, or senseless?

Honestly I don't think it's a good idea, it seems like it'll just result in abuse (such as the bazooka) or a lot of arguements over what it's possible to do with what.

Zincorium
2007-02-26, 01:57 AM
Alright, well, first of all, craft skills only let you craft masterwork or low-level effect alchemical items at the very best, and by the time you can do that with a significant success rate, you're probably making more money just doing adventuring stuff.

Second, you're forcing the use of player knowledge instead of character knowledge, which frankly is a bad idea each and every time it gets brought up. I don't know how to accurately hit a moving, armored target six times in six seconds and hit it's internal organs each time. A high level rogue that I play can. I don't know how to wave my fingers and say words in such a way that a fireball appears out of thin air, but a wizard can.

So what could the logic possibly be behind making a skill useless unless the player can state exactly what goes into what?

Dhavaer
2007-02-26, 02:30 AM
The Repair skill in d20 Modern allows you to do something like this, as does the Field Scientist's Scientific Improvisation.

Zincorium
2007-02-26, 03:04 AM
The Repair skill in d20 Modern allows you to do something like this, as does the Field Scientist's Scientific Improvisation.

Not particularly. Repair does not allow you to actually create anything, only restore a broken object to it's original usefullness. Scientific Improvisation still requires you to use the appropriate craft skill and succeed. Both are useful for what they do. It's just that what they do and what KingEridani is suggesting don't have much in common.

Dhavaer
2007-02-26, 03:11 AM
Not particularly. Repair does not allow you to actually create anything, only restore a broken object to it's original usefullness. Scientific Improvisation still requires you to use the appropriate craft skill and succeed. Both are useful for what they do. It's just that what they do and what KingEridani is suggesting don't have much in common.

I misremembered the 'jury-rig' use of Repair. Scientific Improvisation sounds exactly like what he's describing, though.

Zincorium
2007-02-26, 03:49 AM
I misremembered the 'jury-rig' use of Repair. Scientific Improvisation sounds exactly like what he's describing, though.

Possibly I'm misinterpreting what he's saying, but to me at least he's saying that you don't actually make any sort of craft check, which he thinks are cheaty, don't make any sense, yet are perfectly okay. Instead, you tell the DM what you're doing, and this theoretical DM will let you make anything if you describe it well enough and roll well on a d20.

Maybe it's just my 2nd ed background, but if something seems like an untrained person, with no specific knowledge, could do, I let it happen. I don't make a game mechanic out of it. Thus, I'm hoping it's all satire.

Scientific improvisation is making a slightly difficult craft check, using the appropriate skill, to create things without the proper materials, tools, or workplace. You still have to know how to build a gun properly (read, Craft: Mechanical) to make one out of a pipe, a rubber band, and a thumbtack and have it work correctly. It's very MacGuyver.

What KingEridani is suggesting is a lot more like Ash from Army of Darkness. I can see why you'd want it, I just don't think it's a good thing to put into D&D.

Dhavaer
2007-02-26, 04:50 AM
Possibly I'm misinterpreting what he's saying, but to me at least he's saying that you don't actually make any sort of craft check, which he thinks are cheaty, don't make any sense, yet are perfectly okay. Instead, you tell the DM what you're doing, and this theoretical DM will let you make anything if you describe it well enough and roll well on a d20.

Maybe it's just my 2nd ed background, but if something seems like an untrained person, with no specific knowledge, could do, I let it happen. I don't make a game mechanic out of it. Thus, I'm hoping it's all satire.

Scientific improvisation is making a slightly difficult craft check, using the appropriate skill, to create things without the proper materials, tools, or workplace. You still have to know how to build a gun properly (read, Craft: Mechanical) to make one out of a pipe, a rubber band, and a thumbtack and have it work correctly. It's very MacGuyver.

What KingEridani is suggesting is a lot more like Ash from Army of Darkness. I can see why you'd want it, I just don't think it's a good thing to put into D&D.

It is very MacGuyver (or at least so I understand, I've never seen the show), and since he mentioned MacGuyver, it's at least plausible that it's what he wants. It's hard to tell, though.

Falrin
2007-02-26, 05:03 AM
Craft (Thinkering).


This is what I file all weird/improvised craftes under.

Also I might just go with it (Roll int check) or get you going with another Craft Check.