In spite of it’s many foibles I and many others very much enjoy the Dungeons & Dragons game, especially in it’s d20 system iteration. Perhaps one of the major reasons for game’s popularity both in it’s current form and historically is the evocative, tone setting, and somewhat customizable character archtypes it offers in the form of mythic races and heroic classes.
Character classes range from the simple (ie. Fighters) to the extravagantly abilitied (ie. Bards, Druids, Rangers), covering a wide range of occupational and lifestyle choices. However, one potential drawback of this sytem is that each sort of class is very much focused in a particular area of magical and/or mundane expertise. And this can be fine if you simply want warriors who kill things and magicians who sling spells about…
But what if you’re interested in playing a different sort of warrior: a cavalry man with who has studied history a bit and has better strategic, diplomatic, and leadership skills? Or a wizard who’s not just a walking toolbox of magical effects, rather a wise man who has studied up on arcane lore of all sorts, strange creatures, alchemy, poisons, spirits, and the planes beyond?
To accomplish either of these ends using the standard classes the characters would need a pretty darn high intelligence since neither of the classes in question get many points to spend in buying skills. The only standard classes with a significant numbers of skill points are the barbarian (6 + Intelligence modifier), ranger (6 + Intelligence modifier), and rogue (8 + Intelligence modifier). And given their specialties it seems out of place in many cases to foist one of these classes on a character just to expand their skill base.
Also, what about all the NPCs (non-player characters) who work in cities and countrysides doing things like baking bread, collecting taxes, and plowing fields? Need they all become rangers and rogues in order to learn the appropriate job skills?
Wizards of the Coast has applied a couple of official and optional patches to this derth of occupations for mundane experts and ordinary guys since the 3rd Edition came out. The first attempt at a fix to provide NPC classes in the Dungeon Master’s Guide (DMG) for various non-adventuring occupations. These NPC classes included: the Noble (a modestly skilled fighting type), Expert (generally similar to a rogue but with a couple fewer skills and no roguish abilities), Warrior (basically a feat-less fighter), Laborer (a sad, sad little class a bit like a wizard without the magic or mystique), and Adept (an underpowered cross between sorcerers and clerics). Of all the NPC classes the Expert came the closest to being useful as a PC (player character) class, but still was much less talented than the a rogue in both skill and special abilities.
Later, after Edition 3.5 arrived, the new Unearthed Arcana book of optional rules updated the expert as a “generic class” playable as a PC. The update gave experts access to additional feats, though still not as many as a fighter; and skills, though similarly: not as many as the rogue. So again a class was created which shortchanged characters in comparison to other similar classes.
Also the newly updated expert’s attack bonuses and proficiencies, while appropriate for a person of action, were somewhat out of place for studious or otherwise sedintary sorts of characters.
To remedy these deficiencies among the mundanely skilled I’ve come up with a couple new classes. Outlined below are the tradesman (an average citizen and competent practitioner of their given occupation) and the sage (a broader expert on many subjects, though less experienced in combat and similar worldly concerns).
Alignment: Any.
Hit Die: d6.
Class Skills
- The tradesperson may choose any 10 skills as class skills.
- Skill Points at 1st Level: (8 + Int modifier) x 4.
- Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 8 + Int modifier.
Table: The Tradesman
| Level | Base Attack Bonus | Fort. Save | Ref. Save | Will. Save | Special |
| 1 | +0 | +0* | +2* | +0* | Bonus Feat |
| 2 | +1 | +0 | +3 | +0 | |
| 3 | +2 | +1 | +3 | +1 | |
| 4 | +3 | +1 | +4 | +1 | |
| 5 | +3 | +1 | +4 | +1 | Bonus Feat |
| 6 | +4 | +2 | +5 | +2 | |
| 7 | +5 | +2 | +5 | +2 | |
| 8 | +6/+1 | +2 | +6 | +2 | |
| 9 | +6/+1 | +3 | +6 | +3 | |
| 10 | +7/+2 | +3 | +7 | +3 | Bonus Feat |
| 11 | +8/+3 | +3 | +7 | +3 | |
| 12 | +9/+4 | +4 | +8 | +4 | |
| 13 | +9/+4 | +4 | +8 | +4 | |
| 14 | +10/+5 | +4 | +9 | +4 | |
| 15 | +11/+6/+1 | +5 | +9 | +5 | Bonus Feat |
| 16 | +12/+7/+2 | +5 | +10 | +5 | |
| 17 | +12/+7/+2 | +5 | +10 | +5 | |
| 18 | +13/+8/+3 | +6 | +11 | +6 | |
| 19 | +14/+9/+4 | +6 | +11 | +6 | |
| 20 | +15/+10/+5 | +6 | +12 | +6 | Bonus Feat |
Class Features
All of the following are class features of the tradesman.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Tradesmen are proficient with all simple weapons, plus the hand crossbow, all light martial melee weapons as well as light armor. Note: If the tradesman is a hunter or some other occupation which would require the use of weapons (such as long bows) they should take the appropriate weapons proficiency feat (ie. Martial Weapons Proficiency) at first level to allow for their use.
Bonus Feats: Only feats which relate to the tradesman’s current profession may be taken as bonus feats. If the player can make an argument for the feat’s appropriateness, even if the justification is tenuous, the feat can be allowed. (ie. a bartender who takes the Dodge feat because he’s always having to duck thrown objects in bar fights)
Saving Throws: Although above the Reflex saving throw is indicated as “good†and the Fortitude and Will saves are “badâ€, in reality the player may choose any one saving throw to be “good†at first character level and the other two to be “badâ€.
Multiclassing: A character may start out as one sort of tradesman and later on become another sort. When a tradesperson switches from one profession or area of training to another she may choose different skills as class skills for the new occupation and a new “good†saving throw, if she so desires. In all other regards she treats the two different tradesperson occupations as if they were different classes and follows the standard rules with regard to multiclassing.
…
Alignment: Any.
Hit Die: d4.
Class Skills
- The tradesperson may choose any 15 skills as class skills.
- Skill Points at 1st Level: (10 + Int. modifier) x 4.
- Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 10 + Int. modifier.
Table: The Sage
| Level | Base Attack Bonus | Fort. Save | Ref. Save | Will. Save | Special |
| 1 | +0 | +0* | +2* | +0* | Bonus Feat |
| 2 | +1 | +0 | +3 | +0 | Bonus Feat |
| 3 | +1 | +1 | +3 | +1 | |
| 4 | +2 | +1 | +4 | +1 | Bonus Feat |
| 5 | +2 | +1 | +4 | +1 | |
| 6 | +3 | +2 | +5 | +2 | Bonus Feat |
| 7 | +3 | +2 | +5 | +2 | |
| 8 | +4 | +2 | +6 | +2 | Bonus Feat |
| 9 | +4 | +3 | +6 | +3 | |
| 10 | +5 | +3 | +7 | +3 | Bonus Feat |
| 11 | +5 | +3 | +7 | +3 | |
| 12 | +6/+1 | +4 | +8 | +4 | Bonus Feat |
| 13 | +6/+1 | +4 | +8 | +4 | |
| 14 | +7/+1 | +4 | +9 | +4 | Bonus Feat |
| 15 | +7/+1 | +5 | +9 | +5 | |
| 16 | +8/+1 | +5 | +10 | +5 | Bonus Feat |
| 17 | +8/+1 | +5 | +10 | +5 | |
| 18 | +9/+1 | +6 | +11 | +6 | Bonus Feat |
| 19 | +9/+1 | +6 | +11 | +6 | |
| 20 | +10/+1 | +6 | +12 | +6 | Bonus Feat |
Class Features
All of the following are class features of the sage.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Sages are proficient with the club, dagger, hand crossbow, light crossbow, and quarterstaff, but not with any type of armor or shield.
Bonus Feats: Sages may choose any feats as bonus feats as long as they have the appropriate prerequisites.
Saving Throws: Although above the Reflex saving throw is indicated as “good†and the Fortitude and Will saves are “badâ€, in reality the player may choose any one saving throw to be “good†at first character level and the other two to be “badâ€.
Multiclassing: A character may start out as one sort of sage and later on become another sort. When a sage switches from one course of study to another she may choose different skills as class skills for the new area of expertise and a new “good†saving throw, if she so desires. In all other regards she treats the two different sage occupations as if they were different classes and follows the standard rules with regard to multiclassing.
I like the tradesman class a lot and think that it would be a good addition to the Dungeons and Dragons gaming system. The tradesman class also addresses a beef I always had with the Bard class. The Bard class has always been sold as a jack-of-all-trades class, when in reality, the Bard is just a muddle of all the classic D&D classes. The tradesman on the other hand really is a jack-of-all-trades.
I did have a question(s) though – somewhat related. The other week Tim and I were discussing how we’d always felt the proficiency system felt tacked onto the larger D&D game. Even though it was there, the game itself was never really set up to use any of it.
I’d be curious to know what your thoughts on the D&D proficiency system in general are. Does it work? In your experience, do players and GMs actually use it? If not, what would be a method (or incentive) for having players and GMs actually using it during game play?
In the old (A)D&D game I’d agree with you. It was basically a fighting+magic game, then someone probably was frustrated because their ranger had no idea how to build a fire and thus Gygax of someone invented the proficiency system. And to make things more annoying the thief abilities system worked in a different way than the proficiency system.
Also the old system was kind of “wonky” for lack of a better word. You didn’t get alot of skills to start out with (unless you used the set of alternate secondary occupations rules, which no one I know did) and it was expensive to improve or buy new skills later on.
However, with the 3+ editions of the game I think the system works alot better. The skill system is basically the same as the combat system in a way. For both you roll:
1d20 + attribute modifier + skill ranks + other modifiers (if applicable)
If that’s > or = a difficulty level set by the DM then you succeed at the check. (Compare with attack rolls.)
And to answer your other question: Yes. I think that players and GMs actually use it a fair amount, in my experience.
Back when I played with a group under the old system we used it, cause there was always someone who wanted to try and forage in the wilderness for food, or handle animals or something.
Under the more recent D&D editions I think we use the system even more. Before (IIRC) you basically always tried to roll under a specific target number. But now the system is specifically designed so that the difficulty ratings for skill checks can be scaled up or down, making tasks more or less difficult.
Although rogues have an easier time buying ranks in thief-skills than a fighter would, both fighters and thieves could theoretically buy ranks in stealth and subtrifuge related skills. And those skills would generally work the same way for either character.
The funny thing I find is though that at lower levels I think we end up using our skills more since they’re all we’ve got. But at higher levels, even though the skills are really effective, we don’t use most of them as much since we have so many spells, automatic-success class abilities, and cool magic devices, that a skill roll is unnecessary.
To make them use the skill system more you should probably to give them problems and challenges that can most easily be solved using the skills they have, rather than other automatic abilities.
As mentioned earlier I think the irrelevance of abilities gained earlier in play is a shortfall of the high level games. But at the same time low level games don’t let players get to use any of the cool stuff available at higher levels.
It occurs to me that one of my emerging redesign goals is to keep the lower powered and incrimental increase abilities (like skills) relevant, but allow characters to use a few potent (and just plain cool) effects even at lower levels.