Class and Level Geekery XIX - Nobody Cares about that Stuff Anymore

[InvisibleBison]

I think that in the absence of a specific spell name being mentioned it would be premature to assume what spell Serini is referencing here. It may well be prestidigitation, though given how versatile that spell is it's a bit odd she'd refer to it as "a cleaning spell", but it may be something else, including custom spells.

[Ephemera]

Given the strong likelihood this is a one-off joke, I'd vote for something like "wand of cleaning (unknown what spell exactly). We can always revise if it comes up again, but I'd be mildly surprised if it Chekov's wand of cleaning and not just a random item.

[Jasdoif]

I'm not sure if there are cleaning spells besides Prestidigitation, frankly.

Farmhand comes to mind.

[tyckspoon]

I'm not sure if there are cleaning spells besides Prestidigitation, frankly.

Heat Metal could be used to sanitize a metal surface, although the cauldron itself probably has that effect built in as the base of its 'self-heating'; may have the equivalent of an oven-clean cycle it can run. Purify Food And Drink can detoxify 'poisonous' foods and liquids and could turn leftover contamination from the poison into non-toxic water.. although it explicitly does not affect potions, so would depend on if Serini's amnesia brew actually is an alchemical/mundane poison or if it's properly a magical potion.

.. but probably Prestidigitation, as 'cleaning stuff so your adventurer still looks pristine even after two weeks of travelling through dirt, mud, blood, dungeon slime, and unknowable ichor' is by far the best known usage.

[RobertaME]

3.5 doesn't have a knowledge astronomy. From Complete Arcana we do have Profession (astrologer).

...

Crochet is not mentioned as a skill anywhere. I can find tailor, which is profession, but crochet feels more a craft. Not an official skill.

Blowing smoke rings also not a official skill. Feels like a preform, but preform is mostly instrument and acting. Not an official skill.

Soap making is mentioned in the Dungeon Master 2 guide as a Craftsman Specialty. Which is an chapter about rolling random professions for NPCs and city building, but is literally called a craft. Not an official skill.

Beekeeping isn't mentioned as a separate skills, but is generally governed by Handle Animal. However the specific mention of "experienced" could mean an ability, feat or skills with a higher bonus than other animals. But that could also be fluff. Tentatively I would agree with Handle Animal if others agree.

So sadly from a strict RAW perspective we cannot add a lot. But we do got a chance to list Craft (Basketweaving).

Per the SRD and PHB, there are no "official" Craft, Knowledge, or Profession skills. The closest you get are the examples given in the PHB, which aren't even reflected in the SRD. (except for some of the Knowledge skills)

In each case, the language used is, "Below are listed typical fields of study." (emphasis mine) in the SRD and PHB for Knowledge skills. Craft and Profession don't even list examples in the SRD. The PHB, which does include examples, also includes the language, "You are trained in a {craft, trade, or art}/{livelihood or a professional role}, such as". Adding "such as" means that the list that follows is an incomplete list. (Profession even adds "or the like" at the end of the list, further emphasizing that the list is incomplete)

As for blowing smoke rings, I agree that it might fall under a Perform check. Since Perform in 3.5 is limited to one of the 9 categories, but what each category does is up to the individual DM, the closest match I could figure would be Perform: Comedy or Perform: Act.

In addition, settings can add their own skills under 3.5. Oriental Adventures added the skill "Iaijutsu Focus". In fact, the Rokugan Campaign Setting sourcebook specifically added the skill "Knowledge: Astronomy" on Pg 210, so there's precedent for adding skills not in the normal list as appropriate for a setting. Admitedly, these aren't "core", but that doesn't invalidate the core rules that state that Craft, Knowledge, Perform, and Profession themselves have basically unlimited variety.

Just my 2¢. YMMV. :)

[danielxcutter]

I think the ones explicitly used for class or feat requirements count as "official", yes. And at least most of the Knowledge checks.

But yeah Profession and Craft tend to be vague, intentionally I assume. And even some of the options used for prereqs can get pretty out there. Fatespinner has Profession(gambler) as a requirement for starters.

[Tzardok]

Per the SRD and PHB, there are no "official" Craft, Knowledge, or Profession skills. The closest you get are the examples given in the PHB, which aren't even reflected in the SRD. (except for some of the Knowledge skills)

In 3.0, Knowledge was like Craft and Profession in that you could make up your own things as much and as specialized as you wanted. 3.5 condensed Knowledge into the subskills found in the PHB, and except for Knowledge (Psionics) no 1st party 3.5 book uses other Knowledge subskills. 3rd party books sometimes add Knowledge subskills that they consider important (the D20 adaption of WoW for example has a Knowledge (Warcraft) skill), but generally in 3.5 there's only the ones in the PHB plus Psionics.

[Metastachydium]

In 3.0, Knowledge was like Craft and Profession in that you could make up your own things as much and as specialized as you wanted. 3.5 condensed Knowledge into the subskills found in the PHB, and except for Knowledge (Psionics) no 1st party 3.5 book uses other Knowledge subskills. 3rd party books sometimes add Knowledge subskills that they consider important (the D20 adaption of WoW for example has a Knowledge (Warcraft) skill), but generally in 3.5 there's only the ones in the PHB plus Psionics.

Is the Forgotten Realms deal with "Knowledge (local) is actually several skills to purchase separately" a 3.0 thing only?

[Tzardok]

Is the Forgotten Realms deal with "Knowledge (local) is actually several skills to purchase separately" a 3.0 thing only?

The book Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (3.0) rules that Knowledge (Local) is not a thing and should be replaced by Knowledge ([whatever region]). Player's Guide to Faerûn (the conversion to 3.5) wanted to keep that while at the same time following the condensation of the Knowledge subskills and did it by dividing Knowledge (Local) in sub-subskills (so Knowledge (Local [Halrua]) or whatever). So it's not a 3.0 thing only, but I don't think it's contradictory to my claim before.

[Metastachydium]

The book Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (3.0) rules that Knowledge (Local) is not a thing and should be replaced by Knowledge ([whatever region]). Player's Guide to Faerûn (the conversion to 3.5) wanted to keep that while at the same time following the condensation of the Knowledge subskills and did it by dividing Knowledge (Local) in sub-subskills (so Knowledge (Local [Halrua]) or whatever). So it's not a 3.0 thing only, but I don't think it's contradictory to my claim before.

Of course not. Thanks for the clarification! (And man, was the 3.0 skill system stupid!)

[Yanisa]

Per the SRD and PHB, there are no "official" Craft, Knowledge, or Profession skills. The closest you get are the examples given in the PHB, which aren't even reflected in the SRD. (except for some of the Knowledge skills)

Problem is, without a DM or a mention in the rule books we cannot really add information to a character sheet. So there is something we in this thread consider "official", even though it sort off goes against the spirit of the rule.

Besides, I spend some time in collecting all skill mentions across 3.5, so I loved the chance to compare it.

But yeah Profession and Craft tend to be vague, intentionally I assume. And even some of the options used for prereqs can get pretty out there. Fatespinner has Profession(gambler) as a requirement for starters.

My favorite is still Profession (silkmaker) to construct web golems (from the third Monster Manual).

The book Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (3.0) rules that Knowledge (Local) is not a thing and should be replaced by Knowledge ([whatever region]). Player's Guide to Faerûn (the conversion to 3.5) wanted to keep that while at the same time following the condensation of the Knowledge subskills and did it by dividing Knowledge (Local) in sub-subskills (so Knowledge (Local [Halrua]) or whatever). So it's not a 3.0 thing only, but I don't think it's contradictory to my claim before.

Wow, that is amazing. You just found a few dozen new skill checks for my list.

Edit: The Underdark has sub-sub regions!
Knowledge (Underdark (Great Bhaerynden) Local)

[Tzardok]

Wow, that is amazing. You just found a few dozen new skill checks for my list.

Edit: The Underdark has sub-sub regions!
Knowledge (Underdark (Great Bhaerynden) Local)

You're very welcome.

And, yes it has five sub-regions. I mean, it's a continent spanning subterranean cave system. Did you think one sub-sub skill would be enough to cover it all?

[RobertaME]

Problem is, without a DM or a mention in the rule books we cannot really add information to a character sheet. So there is something we in this thread consider "official", even though it sort off goes against the spirit of the rule.

Besides, I spend some time in collecting all skill mentions across 3.5, so I loved the chance to compare it.

Apologies for misunderstanding. When "official" was mentioned I assumed that meant "3.5 official". I read through most of the threads of this discussion chain, but I guess I missed that part. My bad! ::blush::

In a way though, OotS does have a DM... Rich Burlew. It could be said that by mentioning these in the comic that he was permitting those characters to have ranks in the appropriate Craft, Knowledge, or Profession skills... but I guess a line had to be drawn somewhere between what is seriously provable under 3.5 rules and what are one-off joke stats, skills, feats, etc.

My favorite is still Profession (silkmaker) to construct web golems (from the third Monster Manual).

That one always bothered me since the difference, per the SRD and PHB, between a Craft and a Profession is whether or not you create something from the labor; silk-making produces a salable end-product and should really be a Craft, not a Profession. (same with Profession: Brewer, Tailor, and Taxidermy)

BTW, I looked at your sheet of skills. Very nice! If you like knowing new ones though, I saw some missing, notably from Oriental Adventures:

(all from pg 57 of OA)
Craft: Brewing*
Craft: Explosives
Craft: Flower Arranging
Craft: Landscape Gardening
Craft: Origami
Craft: Papermaking
Craft: Silkmaking*
Craft: Tailoring*

(all from pg 58 of OA)
Knowledge: Shadowlands or Spirits (replaces Knowledge: The Planes)
Knowledge: Barbarian Lore
Knowledge: War

Perform: Acrobatics
Perform: Noh/Kabuki (separate from Act or Dance)
Perform: Poetry (separate from Oratory)
Perform: Rhetoric (separate from Oratory)
Perform: Storytelling (separate from Oratory)
Perform: Tea Ceremony

Profession: Masseur
Profession: Merchant (separate from Shopkeeper)
Profession: Mortician
Profession: Mountaineer
Profession: Pearl Bed Diver
Profession: Torturer

* These Craft skills may be considered different from their Profession counterparts in the same way that Craft: Blacksmithing is different from Profession: Blacksmith)

Hope that helps! :)

[MultitudeMan]

#1271 just got me thinking, are there any rules about eating in 3.5? Would whether or not Roy and the others eat a meal have a mechanical effect on any upcoming battle?

[InvisibleBison]

#1271 just got me thinking, are there any rules about eating in 3.5? Would whether or not Roy and the others eat a meal have a mechanical effect on any upcoming battle?

There are rules about starvation, and there are some magical effects that create food that does things to people who eat them, but I don't think either of those are coming into play here.

[Psyren]

Remembering a bit of information about a mimic is a DC 17. Belkar might have just rolled well, and only requires a single skill point (or half a rank) to make the check in the first place.

He was also savvy about Serini's monster placement.

1 rank is fine by me

[Gurgeh]

1273 identifies Oona as a Ranger (via Minrah, so obviously it's fallible). But y'know, it's a perfect fit for her combat style and build.

[MultitudeMan]

1273 identifies Oona as a Ranger (via Minrah, so obviously it's fallible). But y'know, it's a perfect fit for her combat style and build.

Yeah, and the FAQ for this thread states "We assume that when a character says something about another character's (or their own) ability scores, build, feats, and so forth, they are speaking the truth, except where this contradicts with other evidence or is clearly not possible within the rules." Oona's a Ranger 3+/Beast Heart Adept 9+. By the way, how did we get to Oona needing 3 class levels before taking Beast Heart Adept?

[Gurgeh]

I have no idea why it's listed as 3+ levels. Beast Heart Adept needs 8 ranks in Handle Animal, which means you've got to have at least five HD before you can qualify for it - but Oona's got three racial HD so it should be 2+ levels, not 3+.

[InvisibleBison]

Yeah, and the FAQ for this thread states "We assume that when a character says something about another character's (or their own) ability scores, build, feats, and so forth, they are speaking the truth, except where this contradicts with other evidence or is clearly not possible within the rules." Oona's a Ranger 3+/Beast Heart Adept 9+. By the way, how did we get to Oona needing 3 class levels before taking Beast Heart Adept?

In this particular instance, the principle behind that FAQ quote does not apply. We assume characters are correct when they say things about each other because most of the time they are speaking about someone they are familiar with and can be assumed to have information we do not. It makes sense that, for example, Roy would know how Haley has spent her skill ranks. However, this assumption does not hold in the case of Minrah talking about Oona. Minrah is not familiar with Oona and has no information about her that we do not. When Minrah says that Oona is a ranger, she's just making an assumption based on what she's seen, which should not be assumed to be correct.

I also don't think there's any evidence that Oona is a Beast Heart Adept. While it is true that being a Beast Heart Adept could explain some of what she's done, there is nothing that she has done that requires her to be a Beast Heart Adept. Both worgs and yrthak are sentient creatures capable of being convinced to work for someone without any class features getting involved.

[Jasdoif]

I have no idea why it's listed as 3+ levels. Beast Heart Adept needs 8 ranks in Handle Animal, which means you've got to have at least five HD before you can qualify for it - but Oona's got three racial HD so it should be 2+ levels, not 3+.

I believe this was a case of "no wiring as permanent as temporary wiring": The first posted draft for Oona was intended to start discussion and treated the bugbear monster block as immutable for simplicity, and thus all sixteen ranks of Beast Heart Adept skill prerequisites needed to be taken via class levels with the listed Int 10; and in the absence of an obvious 8-per-level class that has all three as class skills, a third class level was needed.

Of course, there's no serious evidence for the big claim that Oona has any Beast Heart Adept levels in the first place, much less nine; it's hardly surprising that the minutiae haven't been touched.

[Tzardok]

Say, would the thread also be interested in gathering stats for the deities? I don't mean like abilities, but at least the things important for clerics, like alignment, granted domains and favoured weapons.
If yes, I got small write-up of the Dark One:

The Dark One
Alignment: Lawful evil
Known granted domains: Destruction, Evil, Law
Possible other domains granted: War (his afterlife is described as a giant army)
Favoured Weapon: Unknown, possibly battleaxe (none of his clerics that have appeared wield weapons, but he's depicted in SoD with an axe)

[Jasdoif]

Say, would the thread also be interested in gathering stats for the deities? I don't mean like abilities, but at least the things important for clerics, like alignment, granted domains and favoured weapons.

A new curated thread could be neat.

[Metastachydium]

Say, would the thread also be interested in gathering stats for the deities? I don't mean like abilities, but at least the things important for clerics, like alignment, granted domains and favoured weapons.
If yes, I got small write-up of the Dark One:

The Dark One
Alignment: Lawful evil
Known granted domains: Destruction, Evil, Law
Possible other domains granted: War (his afterlife is described as a giant army)
Favoured Weapon: Unknown, possibly battleaxe (none of his clerics that have appeared wield weapons, but he's depicted in SoD with an axe)

A new curated thread could be neat.

Yeah. Still, do we have enough insight into a sufficient number of deities to warrant that?

[Jasdoif]

Yeah. Still, do we have enough insight into a sufficient number of deities to warrant that?

To warrant not diluting this thread with subject matter that calls for a different presentation format? Yes; your own post quotes insight into a sufficient number of deities for that. (Full disclosure, the Index of the Giant's Comments lugging around the Geekademia interview transcript has not become less annoying over the last nine years; I may be biased)

Whether it's worth the effort, on the part of either the hypothetical thread I'm hinting Tzardok towards or the extant thread Kurald Galain is well into already, is a question for the curator (potential or present).

[Metastachydium]

To warrant not diluting this thread with subject matter that calls for a different presentation format? Yes

Of course. That's nothing I'll debate. What I'm not sure is that exploring the viability of the project, most likely outside the bounds of this one, wouldn't serve its interests better than jumping straight to designing a whole new curated thread with all that sort of thing entails.

[dancrilis]

Bit odd to start a discussion when I kindof don't think it should go anywhere - but for the sack of discussion think this should likely be mentioned.

Roy here, panel 9 indicated through Telepathic Bond that it has been ~189 minutes (27*7) or more - Telepathic Bond has a duration of caster level *10 minutes implying a casting level of 19+.

Given that Vaarsuivus needed a caster level of 21 to cast on everyone at the same time and that such is possible at level 16 I don't think this new information needs to change anything for any stats - also Roy may be off by some minutes so it might not be that high, but ultimately I think at this point we should just ignore the rules listed for Telepathic Bond and assume it is 'Vaarsuvius's custom Telepathic Bond' or whatever rather then assuming Pious Spellsurge or similiar caster level boosts.

[danielxcutter]

Yeah, that's clearly not strict RAW for Telepathic Bond. Not like Rich has been doing so for quite a while, but still.

[b_jonas]

Oh great! So we finally have proof that Vaarsuvius got his Metamagic Extending Rod back, the one that Belkar borrowed from her and misunderstood its exact magical nature (#244 last panel).

Update: before you say that the rod is Belkar's and he never stole it, obviously no, #123 9th panel Vaarsuvius clearly says that she has her pair of balls, so clearly she must have a rod to go with them.

[danielxcutter]

A Rod of Lordly Might doesn't have any metamagic abilities, silly.