Topic: Making Profession in Area Stand Out from Other Areas

[markc]

  I was wondering if anyone had a good idea on how to make a Profession be more likely to be chosen for a specific world area?
  I was thinking about:
1) Altering some base skill costs
2) Additional TP
3) Additional Skill ranks at Adol and App
4) Decreased cost and time for TP's


  My goal is to try and model the idea that in specific areas it is much more likely to be a specific profession. Any help or ideas would be greatly appreciated by me and my group.
Thanks
MDC

[rdanhenry]

I think that's a non-game-mechanical feature, unless you outright make it unavailable. PC choice rates may not change, but I think anyone will allow for that much exceptionalism in PCs. The urbanized Imperial Core won't produce many Rangers, because outdoor skills are less needed and young people get less chance to develop the interests. The Sycla nomads produce more Healers than the Jinkmen of the Dire Hills because the Sycla culture glorifies those who give while the Jinkmen glorify self-interest. The Plarken clans produce more Magicians because they have a strong tradition of the six-element theory, while Illusionists are less common because deception is considered dishonorable. The Orcland Border produces a lot of Fighters and Rogues, because even if ones daily labor is farming or herding, you must be ready to fend off orcish raiders on short notice.

[GrumpyOldFart]

This is one of the reasons why I try to make the game mechanics as "professionless" as possible. That way as GM I can say okay, this particular nomadic culture doesn't have _____ ranks of _____ skills like it says in the adolescent skill ranks table for nomads, instead I swapped them out for _____ ranks of _____ skills, which fit this particular culture better. In addition, _____ professions are flatly unavailable, and the skill costs of _____ professions are tweaked in such-and-such fashion to better fit the logic of what you'd expect people from that culture to find universally available to learn. As a simple example, fighters find it really easy to learn swords and armor, right?

But not if the fighters in question are Comanches. Long blades would be one of their worst weapon skills, and the entire concept of armor would be alien to them.

In short, by having a "professionless" system, or more accurately a "build your own profession" system, you can construct the professions according to the logic inherent in the culture, background, environment, etc.

As for professions that, while possible, are really unlikely in a given culture, I put the burden on the player wanting to have one. You want a dwarf druid? Fine then. Explain to me the back story that made this possible. If you can make it sensible enough, I'll allow it. If you merely make it possible, but only by accepting a big long string of "no you didn't" unlikelihoods, I may decide you can still have it.... but only if you can roll me a natural 251+ on an open ended percentile. Or depending on just how "no you didn't" the back story is, maybe even higher. Want something that unlikely? Fine, make me a roll that's that unlikely.

Note: The distinction I'm making above between "professionless" and "build your own profession" is that, unlike GURPS or VtM, not all players can learn all skills with equal ease, so it's not truly "professionless". It's "build your own profession" in the sense that there is no assumption that all "fighters" (or whatever profession) have the same ease and the same difficulty learning all skills. You have some skills that are easy, some that are medium, some that are difficult, but you get a certain amount of choice as to which skills fall into which cost category. The Parisi Celt warrior, the Solomon Islands headhunter, the Teutonic knight and the Alsatian grenadier aren't assumed to learn the same skills the same way at the same cost.

[markc]

rdanhenry;
 I think I can do some social Talents for such professions in the specific areas as well as maybe some more $.


GrumpOldFart;
 I agree that professions in the books should be modified by the area in which they are "grown up in". I think of the Professions more as "genetic" templates than set in stone numbers.
 I also like your American Indian example as it provides a great contrast to European Fighters as well as Eastern Fighters.
MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

Personally I think RPGs tend to do character creation in the wrong order (although in fairness it's not as if I have come up with a workable system to do it in what I consider the *correct* order, either.)

1. Figure out your personality, your race, and your local environment.

2. From race and environment you can derive your culture.

3. From culture and personality you can derive your profession.

Trying to choose a profession without knowing race/environment/personality is seriously putting the cart before the horse IMO. One of the major flaws in pretty much every RPG I've ever seen is how little guidance they give you in how to create (and map out, and play) a personality, a mindset, a worldview. Without a defined personality, I feel like attempting to roleplay is like having a boxing match with one foot in a bucket of concrete.

That's why I always start new players by asking them who their character is, rather than what he is.

I also like your American Indian example as it provides a great contrast to European Fighters as well as Eastern Fighters.

I think it was Teddy Roosevelt who described the Comanche as "the finest light cavalry on the face of the earth." If you fail to consider them (and other American tribes) I feel like you're being blind to a big part of the potential inherent in the concept of "fighter".

[intothatdarkness]

My world system more or less worked that way. Players rolled for area of origin first, and then we went over the culture(s) found in that area. I had divided out the professions based on both culture and social class, so that created some limits. Each culture also had some background skill ranks that characters got in addition to their normal DP stuff (my nomads get riding and bow, for example) and some weapons are culture-specific (only my nomads have composite bows). Once the origin and social class stuff was sorted out, they moved on to rolling stats and the like.

I found this worked really well. It could push players out of their comfort zones (no parties composed entirely of elves and halflings, for example), and associated professions with cultures and social status (which is also reasonably accurate). As I'd also gone through and adjusted all DP costs for skills (and reworked level bonuses, which I always hated in RM) there was another level of linkage.

[providence13]

Lot's of good ideas here have been posted.

If you felt it was necessary, you could make a chart and have them roll for a chance to be of that profession. The chart could be modded closer to their choice by Talents.
I would still allow a 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice. They would get the 3rd choice if they didn't roll good enough for 1-2.

To second what has already been said;
Mages aren't common for the Plains People, but they do have "barbaric" demon summoners..

A magocracy might have channelers be rare..

[intothatdarkness]

I handled some of those limitations through social class. For example, you had to be at least middle middle class to be a mage (based on the training costs and such), and various cultures also restricted this based on different considerations (the example you gave is one such restriction).

It's been my experience that if you couple an origin system with social class you can both limit some professions without 'artificial' rules and also create more balanced parties (in my system, it's very difficult to have a party composed exclusively of High Elf magicians or Wood Elf rangers, for example).

[markc]

intothatdarkness;
 How did you manage Social Classes? Did you have it be a random roll? Or use some sort of Talent Points to buy Social Classes?
Thanks
MDC

[intothatdarkness]

I use RM2, so there's nothing like Talent Points.

Typically I use the social class table from RMC III. It works pretty well, and if a player really wants to be upper class, they can use one of the background options (subject to GM approval, of course). I did tweek the tables a bit for my world, though. I like the idea of keeping it somewhat random so that you don't end up with a party of all nobles.

[markc]

I use RM2, so there's nothing like Talent Points.

Typically I use the social class table from RMC III. It works pretty well, and if a player really wants to be upper class, they can use one of the background options (subject to GM approval, of course). I did tweek the tables a bit for my world, though. I like the idea of keeping it somewhat random so that you don't end up with a party of all nobles.

 I agree that random factors and tables can be great in some games but there are players that do not like them also. I think I am going to have the players buy Social Classes but also have a random table or roll they need to get over to be able to overcome those class "problems" or "restrictions'.
 I will look at my RoCo III and see what the table looks like.
Thanks a lot, intothatdarkness
MDC

[intothatdarkness]

No problem. Of course, another solution is to saddle someone who insists on a particular social class with some sort of "issue" from his background. For example, a noble could have a rival family that periodically comes after him (usually at the worst possible time).

I know some players don't like tables, but I also got really tired of impossible parties (all elves or halflings or whatever race happened to be most beneficial in terms of stats). Mine were also set up so the restrictions weren't too horrible.

Here's my class/profession table. Note that the indicated class is the minimum a character has to be in order to select that profession. I also included some NPC-only professions on the list so players could see that limits also applied to NPCs as well.

Lower Lower Class
Assassin, Barbarian, Bounty Hunter, Dancer, Fighter, Gypsy, Rogue, Sailor, Thief, Warrior Monk, Beastmaster, Monk, Montebanc, Anamist, Seer, Witch

Middle Lower Class
Bashkar, Farmer, High Warrior Monk, Dervish, Astrologer, Lay Healer, Warlock

Upper Lower Class
Burglar, Trader, Bard, Nightblade, Ranger, Sleuth, Archmage, Cleric, Druid, Healer, Illusionist,  Mentalist, Mystic, Necromancer

Lower Middle Class
Scholar, Alchemist

Middle Middle Class
Magician, Sorceror

Upper Middle Class
Cavalier, Noble Warrior, Paladin

Lower Upper Class
Duelist, Chaos Hunter

[Cory Magel]

I think a lot of this would be done simply though background info.  Meaning, a "Ranger of the North" is, in Tolkienese, kinda where Rangers come from in the first place and you just wouldn't see them elsewhere.

However, if try to make professions themselves work differently mechanics-wise...

Change out Profession Bonuses.
Change out Base Spell Lists.
Change out Everyman/Occupational Skills (if being used).
Create specific Talents/Flaws for the Profession.

This is where the Ranger example comes in again.  A Ranger from a desert might be very different than a Ranger from a Forest, but in mechanics terms it's the spell lists that reflected that.  Rangers in our games are rarely played as presented in RM (and, really, this is where the initial theory behind Priests in the Chan Comp came from - we used it with Rangers before we used it with what were Clerics).

[rdanhenry]

I know some players don't like tables, but I also got really tired of impossible parties (all elves or halflings or whatever race happened to be most beneficial in terms of stats).

I can understand how you might not like this, but I don't see why you call them "impossible". A group of individuals from the same race/culture is much more likely than a mix of several different origins.

[intothatdarkness]

I know some players don't like tables, but I also got really tired of impossible parties (all elves or halflings or whatever race happened to be most beneficial in terms of stats).

I can understand how you might not like this, but I don't see why you call them "impossible". A group of individuals from the same race/culture is much more likely than a mix of several different origins.

When you're adventuring in a realm that has a 98% human population and the entire party (six members) are High Elves I tend to consider that pretty improbable...especially when there's no good reason for them to be there and the nearest elven realm is over 500 miles away. This didn't happen in my game, but I was in a game where the majority of the party were Halfings and Elves (picked because of their stat bonuses...and the players admitted that)...both very rare races in the area.

I always felt that you should take world norms and population into account in some sense during character creation. May not be for everyone, but there it is. That also carries over to a majority human party in a setting where humans are in a distinct minority.

[RandalThor]

When you're adventuring in a realm that has a 98% human population and the entire party (six members) are High Elves I tend to consider that pretty improbable...especially when there's no good reason for them to be there and the nearest elven realm is over 500 miles away.

But it can easily still be more probable for multiple members of the same species (or 2 species that can be linked easily) to be together in that situation, except for your caveat. If there is no good reason, then there is no good reason, but I can make up several reasons for such a group to be together in the human lands. (Can make for some fun roleplaying opportunities, too.)

(picked because of their stat bonuses...and the players admitted that)...

Well, there you go. Roll-playing over Role-playing. Not good in my book, and something I like to discourage as much as possible. Though you can't entirely blame them for wanting to have a character that is good at what they do, can you?

I always felt that you should take world norms and population into account in some sense during character creation. May not be for everyone, but there it is. That also carries over to a majority human party in a setting where humans are in a distinct minority.

Taking population norms is all well and good, provided you don't force the players to play something they don't want to play, it is their game also. Instead, do what occurs in pretty-much every human culture ever: Have prejudice be a part of the scene. So, if they insist on all of them being non-human, but the campaign is set primarily in human lands,they can suffer some serious social disadvantages. ("Damn dirty wood elves can't shop here! They hog all the good hunting grounds in the Woods of Dark Renown" Nope, get out!" Or, less rough, you could just have negative mods for several types of social interaction in human society, though not by all.)

Also, I wanted to comment on how this is sort of like going back to Basic D&D, where all elves where also mages and halflings had thief abilities. Obviously, not that far, but sort of like that. I get it, and like to do something like that as well, but I just don't tend to make hard/fast rules so much as use my imagination and *gasp* common sense in such matters. (No, sorry you cannot be a half-orc, noble/mage of the line of kings in the human nation of Kill all Orcs.)

[GrumpyOldFart]

When you're adventuring in a realm that has a 98% human population and the entire party (six members) are High Elves I tend to consider that pretty improbable...especially when there's no good reason for them to be there and the nearest elven realm is over 500 miles away.

True, but

Instead, do what occurs in pretty-much every human culture ever: Have prejudice be a part of the scene. So, if they insist on all of them being non-human, but the campaign is set primarily in human lands,they can suffer some serious social disadvantages. ("Damn dirty wood elves can't shop here! They hog all the good hunting grounds in the Woods of Dark Renown" Nope, get out!" Or, less rough, you could just have negative mods for several types of social interaction in human society, though not by all.)

Yeah, that. "You want to all be elves? No problem... but you'll take a -25 to any roll concerning any social interaction of any kind, the base numbers for trading will be 1/2 value when selling and 1 1/2 value when buying (in addition to the -25 to trading rolls), and if any kind of crime at all is committed in the area, the local sheriffs will always, automatically be seeking you out as suspects first. That's the way it's going to be unless a clear majority of the party is humans, and you won't be entirely free of social penalties unless they're all humans. Still want to be all elves?"

 

[RandalThor]

When you're adventuring in a realm that has a 98% human population and the entire party (six members) are High Elves I tend to consider that pretty improbable...especially when there's no good reason for them to be there and the nearest elven realm is over 500 miles away.

True, but

Instead, do what occurs in pretty-much every human culture ever: Have prejudice be a part of the scene. So, if they insist on all of them being non-human, but the campaign is set primarily in human lands,they can suffer some serious social disadvantages. ("Damn dirty wood elves can't shop here! They hog all the good hunting grounds in the Woods of Dark Renown" Nope, get out!" Or, less rough, you could just have negative mods for several types of social interaction in human society, though not by all.)

Yeah, that. "You want to all be elves? No problem... but you'll take a -25 to any roll concerning any social interaction of any kind, the base numbers for trading will be 1/2 value when selling and 1 1/2 value when buying (in addition to the -25 to trading rolls), and if any kind of crime at all is committed in the area, the local sheriffs will always, automatically be seeking you out as suspects first. That's the way it's going to be unless a clear majority of the party is humans, and you won't be entirely free of social penalties unless they're all humans. Still want to be all elves?"

 

You definitely went into the more "harsh" realm there...

[GrumpyOldFart]

You definitely went into the more "harsh" realm there...

That's as may be... but I think I still stayed well within what you could reasonably expect a near universally human culture to act like, no? I mean sure, you wouldn't expect all human cultures everywhere to act like that, but finding out that such-and-such individual human culture acted like that would hardly be surprising, would it?

In a group of comparatively low-literacy cultures, where the majorities only "learn new things" to the extent their mostly literate social superiors tell them, you could pretty much count on at least one culture being like that on any given continent at any given moment in history, no?

Beyond that, it's just a matter of how high a price you want players to pay for the privilege of being power gamers who don't care if the background logic to the scenario makes any sense. And it's pretty easy to justify, as your penalties bring it back to the point where it does make sense.

My typical starting country has a population made up almost entirely of "mutts". Crossbreeds are very much the rule, not the exception. And because of that, half-orcs tend to be looked on with less suspicion that a purebred of almost any race at all. The country was founded by the remains of a slave army that successfully revolted, so purebreds tend to be associated with either the race they were fighting against or the race that enslaved them.

[arakish]

But not if the fighters in question are Comanches. Long blades would be one of their worst weapon skills, and the entire concept of armor would be alien to them.

When I first read this, I had the vision of plate armored Authurian knights charging against a horde of unarmored American Indian warriors.  That would be a massacre.

rmfr