Topic: Changing Professions in Rolemaster (any version)

[Dark Schneider]

Finally (as all in a game) is dependant about the GM or group view, so if you want to allow it, allow it (the objective is enjoy the game so adapt it as you wise), so I think the question is search for a balanced rule to allow this.

My opinion or rule could be something like:

- To change profession, character sacrifice 1 entire level. Sacrifice is that character spends all the DPs in changing profession, but its level is added. So a level 9 character can sacrifice its level 10 for change profession, and it will be now a level 10 character of the new profession, but with the current skills (as it can't develop any with the 'change' level).

- For magic, the change is gradual, so you need pass through semi-spell user if want to change from non-spell user to pure-or-hybrid-spell user, or viceversa. That semi-spell user IS NOT able to learn spells until it changes totally to the pure-or-hybrid-spell user profession.
See that you can change to semi-spell user in 1 step always, so a change fighter-ranger can be made with 1 sacrifice level.
That virtual semi-spell profession has bonuses based on averages of the 2 involved, but always inside the +50 limit (so a fighter-magician will have +10 to weapons).
For skill costs, you can use other semi-spell users as templates, so if you are changing from fighter to cleric, you can use the paladin costs. It s not 100% precise but it saves too much work and is very valid.
This is an important rule for avoid the case of a fighter that changes to lay-healer, learn the interested lists (powerfull as it is a pure-spell user) and changes again to fighter with relative low cost. With this rule, this change will take 4 levels instead 2, and 2 of them the character develops skills as semi-spell user (more expensive) and can't develop spells (as you need a pure-spell user knowledge).

[markc]

 Have you decided anything?

 Or has anyone provided you with and idea on how to accomplish profession changing?

MDC

[fac]

In my game I decided to allow slight changes, they do not change profession but add. I use RM2.

So that does not mean a fighter becoming a mage, it's a fighter that learns magic after a long time and effor and can become a warrior mage. This is discussed with me and based on background.

The way I use is to make the average of the costs, the character keeps the bonus levels until that level as "special bonus" and I allow them to redistribute +8 bonuses per level starting as if was level 1.

It's almost impossible to do it while playing, so a player can retire his character for 1-2 years of playing time and come back as something new.

E.g. Vlad is a 6th level thief that is stucked in an isolated island for two years after a shipwreck, he knows some tribesmen and lives with them for a long time. The player decides to become a ranger, so he will be a ranger/thief and after that time he's a 7th level ranger/thief with costs that are the average.

[thrud]

Yes, multiclassing is of course an option. Perhaps the word multiclass is misleading but I can see your version working. That way you never really become "a new person", you always keep some of the old you.
I would propose making some changes though. Averaging the spell cost for a Fighter/Magician would make it 10 but I would change it to 4/* to be on par with other semis...

[fac]

It's what I do, if a fighter wants to learn magic it would take a long long time but he would end as warrior/mage with costs similar to warrior mage from RC2, the lists would be different and he should be far better in arms than in magic.

E.g. A Warrior/Mage could have a cost for spell lists of 6/* and arms cost of 2/7 for first 3 groups and 5 for the other groups.

[windmarkbob]

House rule here...to change your learning aptitude template (not called profession) you pay all available DP upon reaching a new level and gain nothing, next level you advance as a layman, then again you pay all available DP earned upon reaching the next level and gain nothing, you are now free to choose the learning aptitude template of your choice.

Bob

[ToM]

I always used an house rule for it.
I will copy/paste what I said on it on another topic some time ago...

[...] we always adopted some sort of flexibility to allow some tasty story-driven switches like the one I said above. [...] So we had Fighters turned Noble Warrios, or Paladins, or Thieves turned Dabblers, and even a Warrior Monk turned Witch Hunter.

The base mechanic is simple: you only let the character switch sideways "one step" of profession aptitude. I'd try to be more clear: a non-spell user focused on fighting may become a semi spell user combat profession (such as Fighter or Rogue to Paladin or Warrior Mage or Armsmaster); a non-spell user subterfuge profession may turn to a spell-using semi-subterfuge profession (Thief or Rogue to Dabbler or Magent or Mythic), and an outdoor profession can also turn to semi (Outrider to Ranger). Non-spell using "scholar" professions may become semi or pure spell users. A pure spell user can sometimes become hybrid.

This obviously only if it's a story-driven switch, and only if the original character's realm match with the new profession, and, most of all, only under SEVERE control by the GM (me ).

This said, this swith isn't that difficult to implement in game rules. Simply switch one profession to another, maybe with minor tweakings (like custom base lists, restricted access to spells, and the like). We always liked it this way and never had any problem.

[mibsweden]

Page 10-11 in Rolemaster Companion II has some suggestions on how to handle characters changing professions.

I do not have time to explain any of it at the moment. If anyone has RoCo II, please feel free to explain , otherwise I will get to this later tonight (CET).

[Temujin]

Would be cool to know how RM2 handles it, as there's not much about it in RMSS/FRP...

[mibsweden]

I will explain the different options available in RoCo II for characters that wants to change their professions:

0. Should only be allowed if the character already has a 90 score in all of the new profession's primary stats.

1. Average the skill costs between the new professions.

2. Gradually average in the new profession's cost to the old profession's cost.

3. Separate multiple professions. For example Fighter 5/Alchemist 5. Various options on how to split experience points and development points are available under this option, too many to list here.

4. Keep 1 set of XP, and split them between all the character's profession. When enough XP is reached in a profession, that profession advances a level.

5. Keep only 1 set of XP. When a new level is reached (the Fighter 5/Alchemist 5 would be considered level 10 for example), development points are split between the character's professions.

6. Freeze the old profession.

7. Freeze the old profession, but start developing it again at a later time. My note: why did this option exist?

8. The old prefession decreases in experience as the new profession advances in level. My note: interesting option, but time consuming to handle.

9. Only allow the addition of a new profession when the character reaches a certain level in his or her old profession.

[TomOBedlam]

We do allow changes in professions, after consulting with the GM.

No cost, no negative side effect. (Well, we do keep track of levels as "spell caster" and use that as level in spell law)
Unbalanced? Sure.
Easy to abuse? Heck yes.

We handle those problems in group. As long as the group is ok with it it's not a problem. No one is really using it for min-maxing, but for instance we use the mechanism to create paladins. You start out as a fighter or rogue, and through play you find religion... The GM will throw a few nasty tests your way, and if successful you can start buying as a Paladin instead.
This gives better paladins, but we are ok with that.

For us, Archmage is not so much a profession as a title - You need to master lists in all three realms, and then, perhaps, will you gain access to Arcane lists.

[thrud]

Balanced and bulletproof aren't always needed as long as you have fun.
Somethng that I think everyone is forgetting, previous levels matter for magic users as well.
So, we have a level 10 fighter who want to convert to Archmage... Cool, let him.
The other Archmage in the group already have a gazillion more spell lists. The new convert might be better with a sword but he'll always be second best when it comes down to magic.

[Skarsgard]

In our group we approach it differently.

For us it is story driven, you cannot change classes whilst actively "adventring", however, the characters can have several years between adventures and within reason the GM allows us to re-design our characters. But the change has to be story driven, I did a simple change from Rogue to Barbarian with one of my characters since I felt the Barbarian profession suited him better in the way he was playing out. One of the other guys went from Ranger to Paladin, because his character had more of a Paladin feel.

When you think about it, in real life many people will have many different jobs that require totally different skill sets. A plumber can go to University for a few years and become a doctor. Is he a worse doctor than the person who started uni straight after school? Of course not. He's just older.

[Ecthelion]

When you think about it, in real life many people will have many different jobs that require totally different skill sets. A plumber can go to University for a few years and become a doctor. Is he a worse doctor than the person who started uni straight after school? Of course not. He's just older.

Don't mix up the RM term "profession" with its meaning in real life. The Rolemaster meaning of "profession" is not job but rather it refers to the aptitudes of a character. So the 'characters' in your above example might in RM terms both be e.g. a Healer, but the first one developed his healing skills from the start, while the other, the plumber, developed some craft skills during his early levels. But both pick up healing skills easily and therefore can become good doctors.

Of course RM is quite extreme with many of its aptitudes. E.g. a Fighter must be a person absolutely untalented for anything magical while a Magician for some reason is almost unable to pick up a weapon. In the real world we are probably much more flexible and can pick up most skills more or less quickly. Especially for the extreme professions a switch in the skills to be learned is often only theoretically possible (e.g. the switch from Fighter to Paladin, which the Fighter's costly magical skills more or less prevent, at least if the Paladin is to learn spells).

In an FRP game we often desire the PCs for form a group and then it is quite nice to have different specialists come together. A group of PCs where everyone, at least at some later level, has picked up the most important skills to a level of reasonable competency is probably less interesting than one where you need e.g. a dedicated Healer, a Thief and a Fighter to solve the adventures - at least IMHO.

Still many see the need for being able to change professions and perhaps a next RM revision will add the required flexibility in this area.

[markc]

 Right RM profession is not jobs but genetic aptitude's, IMO.

 In may game most of the people are laymen from RMSS/FRP [50%] and the other 50% are from the other professions. So if you are a layman in RMSS you have decent skill cost for a lot of things. Now from RM2 you almost have to be a spell casting profession to get spells but later editions [RoCo's] may have provided a complete skill cost list like in RMSS so you could spend your DP to get other professions niche abilities.

MDC

[Skarsgard]

I never equated Professions as an inherent quality of a person. I understand the aptitude idea but to my mind that comes down to training.

In your example it would mean that people are pre-determined from birth to be a certain "profession" but that doesn't wash as that would mean that if our plumber had a son, that child would be shoehorned into being a plumber.

Hmm, it seems to be comming down to the old nature vs nurture arguement.

[markc]

Skarsgard;
 Just because you parents do something it does not mean you are going to do it. Also people can do anything if most people are Laymen as they all have the some cost for skills. So IMO you cannot use the nurture vs nature argument in a word in which 50% or more are all Laymen as "professions" are the minority.

MDC

[Skarsgard]

MDC

Ahhh, I see the issue I am having. In our current gaming world most of the NPC's are "professions" for example, we are playing a neolithic culture where most of the people are Barbarians, Rogues, Thieves, Fighters and Laymen (with semi-spell and pure-spell being rarer).

If however you have a distribution of 50% Laymen then I guess it is different.

[markc]

MDC

Ahhh, I see the issue I am having. In our current gaming world most of the NPC's are "professions" for example, we are playing a neolithic culture where most of the people are Barbarians, Rogues, Thieves, Fighters and Laymen (with semi-spell and pure-spell being rarer).

If however you have a distribution of 50% Laymen then I guess it is different.

 You can even make a case for the % to be higher than 50%. I have thought about having PC's pay Talent Points [TP] to take a profession besides Laymen. Also I have heard of games that require PC's to play a Layman. If every one is layman then the players can go anyway they want as in RMSS spell lists and psionics from Space Master are not required to have a specific profession like in RMC/2/X. Some like that fact and some like the RMC/2/X method but IMO the RMSS/FRP way makes more sense to me but again others views may differ.

MDC

[Skarsgard]

MDC

Ahhh, I see the issue I am having. In our current gaming world most of the NPC's are "professions" for example, we are playing a neolithic culture where most of the people are Barbarians, Rogues, Thieves, Fighters and Laymen (with semi-spell and pure-spell being rarer).

If however you have a distribution of 50% Laymen then I guess it is different.

 You can even make a case for the % to be higher than 50%. I have thought about having PC's pay Talent Points [TP] to take a profession besides Laymen. Also I have heard of games that require PC's to play a Layman. If every one is layman then the players can go anyway they want as in RMSS spell lists and psionics from Space Master are not required to have a specific profession like in RMC/2/X. Some like that fact and some like the RMC/2/X method but IMO the RMSS/FRP way makes more sense to me but again others views may differ.

MDC

Sorry for the thread hijack. That's an interesting idea and I might put it to my GM to try sometime.