Guild Skills Restriction

[Voxumo]

That's actually a wonderful way to explain why the restriction needed to be in place Puciek. Someone should not have a Jack of all Trades character, as that does more harm than good and is really just unrealistic for the timeframe TI is based around. People typically specialized in one or two fields, not any field they could get their hands on. And that is mostly because they did not live long enough to have time to mess around with multiple skills. "Ah-ha! I have become a master blacksmith, now to Master Jewelry making... oops died of the plague halfway through." I mean this singular trade focus is why so many old family names represented their chosen trade.

And I agree, if so many of the various guildskills did not have useful items or recipe, or even effects, without going above 36, I do not imagine there would be this big of an outcry.

[Rabek]

Tomatoes was an example. Don't be pedantic.

I take herbalism so I can grow a garden. Potatoes, common herbs, all that. I'd still want herbalism if medicine herbs were above 36, and you could only grow food and teas lower. The knowledge to bandage a wound is fairly common, and slathering on salve is something honestly anyone should be able to do; if that's all low-level Medicine did, I'd still want medicine. Whittling is a common hobby for outdoorsy types; I'd still want it if all low-level woodworking could do is little carved trinkets. Embroidery is expected education for Vavardi gentry and others; I would still want tailoring if all it could make is simple embroidery art and repairing clothes. Hunters probably want to preserve the pelts of animals they kill; I'd take leatherworking if that's all it did below 36.

The "people didn't live that long to master all these" argument doesn't make any sense whatsoever when a Merchant character can grandmaster three skills that took real life people a lifetime to master one, and there's plenty of non-guildskills that would take a lifetime, too. If that's your argument, we should just limit grandmaster slots to one.

[Puciek]

But you are missing the point I've made before, so let me reiterate. You can have all those hobbies, and you will not get into any trouble for faking them. But what you ask for is the advantages, and that was reduced, as that is the only difference between roleplaying a field of tomatoes and having that field icly as an actual row of items. And unless you want to convert those tomatoes into food, which you will then convert into silver/hp/mv, there is absolutely zero difference between the made up and actually icly one. They roleplay value is exactly the same each way.

And within the limit, you can absolutely have the trade skills, with actual advantages, that your character would realistically know, like leatherwork for hunters, or tailoring for Vavardi gentry person. And still, leave you with a slot for singing, playing an instrument, or maybe even a secondary trade, like medicine. And you can just fine roleplay any other hobbies you want, just without having the advantage that comes from also being able to craft your own clad of metal armour.

Limit of skill distribution among merchants is controlled internally, as there are only that many masters for each trade and someone hogging all the spots would be highly frowned upon, and I don't think it ever actually happened (or simple I've never seen it). Even though in theory, they all could master all of them, but that makes very little sense roleplay wise. And yet, for people outside of merchants guild, who have very little actual means to learn all those trades (if people really want I will happily dig into how hard/expensive/painful [usually all of the above] it was to actually learn a trade in medieval times) it makes sense to be pretty darn proficient at many of them?

I just don't buy that. And I still don't see how that removes RP avenues, but I do see how it brings back the importance of merchants, medics and maybe even musicians. Heck, maybe even enough to do some under-the-merchants trading with those who can't enter city walls?

[Voxumo]

Also important to point out, nothing's stopping you from learning all those skills... You just can't start off with them all, but if you rp a bit, you can have as many skills as you want. You just have to rp/interact with others to get those skills.

At least TI doesn't make you choose a "Class" at the start, and based on what class you chose, you are limited to skills under that class, and can't learn any other skills outside of that class.

[Zeita]

This seems like a sensible change to me.

I could potentially see justifying other guildskills (beyond 2) being purchasable in chargen at an expense of QP.

If there are common sense/knowledge abilities (such as the salve slathering example given previously- don't know personally) that aren't possible without having the skill, I can certainly see a need to review the ability to use those commands.

Another side but related issue that I recall having as merchant GL was merchants picking up a lot of skills, rather than specialising, and cutting into the already slender markets of other merchants. Granted, that was several years ago now, so no idea on current practices.

[Delphine]

My only thoughts on this were what was already mentioned: that of the typical education of a Vavardi gentry. Playing one myself, I had to pick up a lot of the Troub skills in chargen so as to be thematic (well, I suppose no one MADE me pick them up. But I wanted to stick to theme). But wanting to start out with a merchant character, I also started out with my character's two trade skills.

BUT. Having said that, I understand why the limit has been put in place. And so long as a person could still submit an app to staff for a workaround in the case of needing to take more than 2 guildskills to be themely (as so long as they have good reason) and new, incoming players are made aware that they can submit an app to staff for this, I'm fine with the change myself.

As for current merchant trade practices: everybody and their grandma is a chandler these days. Stop making chandlers. Go for leatherworking! It's sexy! (This message was brought to you by a mostly teasing GM).

[Rabek]

But you are missing the point I've made before, so let me reiterate. You can have all those hobbies, and you will not get into any trouble for faking them. But what you ask for is the advantages, and that was reduced, as that is the only difference between roleplaying a field of tomatoes and having that field icly as an actual row of items. And unless you want to convert those tomatoes into food, which you will then convert into silver/hp/mv, there is absolutely zero difference between the made up and actually icly one. They roleplay value is exactly the same each way.

And within the limit, you can absolutely have the trade skills, with actual advantages, that your character would realistically know, like leatherwork for hunters, or tailoring for Vavardi gentry person. And still, leave you with a slot for singing, playing an instrument, or maybe even a secondary trade, like medicine. And you can just fine roleplay any other hobbies you want, just without having the advantage that comes from also being able to craft your own clad of metal armour.

Limit of skill distribution among merchants is controlled internally, as there are only that many masters for each trade and someone hogging all the spots would be highly frowned upon, and I don't think it ever actually happened (or simple I've never seen it). Even though in theory, they all could master all of them, but that makes very little sense roleplay wise. And yet, for people outside of merchants guild, who have very little actual means to learn all those trades (if people really want I will happily dig into how hard/expensive/painful [usually all of the above] it was to actually learn a trade in medieval times) it makes sense to be pretty darn proficient at many of them?

I just don't buy that. And I still don't see how that removes RP avenues, but I do see how it brings back the importance of merchants, medics and maybe even musicians. Heck, maybe even enough to do some under-the-merchants trading with those who can't enter city walls?

First and foremost, you're advocating cheating. If you don't have the code to back up the ability to do something, you don't roleplay doing it. You don't RP fencing a vnpc and winning with zero sword skill. You don't RP having kohl-lined eyes if you didn't buy kohl to wear. You don't RP a beautiful singing voice if you have no investment in the singing skill. This is why you can attach your skill ranks to your emotes. While policy does allow for ignoring code if everyone involved agrees to it, you can't assume as default that everyone is okay with that.

Secondly, your arguments are not internally consistent. You argue for this limitation because players will abuse it if not, but you argue that Merchants are exempt from your reasoning because there's no way merchant players will abuse it (when they have, historically).

Removing the ability to back up backstory with code (at least partially) removes RP avenues by removing the ability to (legitimately) take those backstories. That's pretty simple logic. And you say "bring back the importance" like it ever left. They're still as important as they ever were.

What this change will actually do is fill the Merchants with witches again, thanks to the joys of Magecrafting. I'll bet you that 90% of the people taking all the crafts in chargen are doing it for Magecrafting, not because they actually use those crafts in day-to-day RP. I don't like the idea of these sort of character choices being made necessary due to arbitrary design restrictions.

[Voxumo]

What this change will actually do is fill the Merchants with witches again, thanks to the joys of Magecrafting. I'll bet you that 90% of the people taking all the crafts in chargen are doing it for Magecrafting, not because they actually use those crafts in day-to-day RP. I don't like the idea of these sort of character choices being made necessary due to arbitrary design restrictions.

So you admit there's an issue? if you truly believe 90% of the people taking more than 2 guildskills are doing so just to avoid getting their items for magecrafting from others, then this change helps to nullify that issue. As if a bunch of people suddenly join the merchants and take on multiple trade-skills, then that is something that can be dealt icly.

Also for those whose claim this limits backstories... maybe your backstory shouldn't be a jack of all trades, as that's just not realistic. Admittingly having read the vavardi helpfile for education, the players who play Vavardi at least have a leg to stand on, though honestly that helpfile should be reworked or reworded to emphasize it's not mandatory, as that is what it sounds like people are assuming or believing when choosing to play a vavardi, and I doubt that was staff's intention upon writing it.

[Temi]

Admittingly having read the vavardi helpfile for education, the players who play Vavardi at least have a leg to stand on, though honestly that helpfile should be reworked or reworded to emphasize it's not mandatory, as that is what it sounds like people are assuming or believing when choosing to play a vavardi, and I doubt that was staff's intention upon writing it.

The Vavardi helpfiles are not intended to suggest people need a ton of guildskills to be a properly educated Vavardi. Two totally cuts it - a music skill and a craft, for example. Learning music shouldn't imply all musical instruments. Learning art shouldn't imply learning all trades (in fact, artwork is now not a guildskill). If there's phrasing that is suggesting this to people, we could rephrase to make it more friendly. Let us know what's making it seem that way!

[Delphine]

Admittingly having read the vavardi helpfile for education, the players who play Vavardi at least have a leg to stand on, though honestly that helpfile should be reworked or reworded to emphasize it's not mandatory, as that is what it sounds like people are assuming or believing when choosing to play a vavardi, and I doubt that was staff's intention upon writing it.

The Vavardi helpfiles are not intended to suggest people need a ton of guildskills to be a properly educated Vavardi. Two totally cuts it - a music skill and a craft, for example. Learning music shouldn't imply all musical instruments. Learning art shouldn't imply learning all trades (in fact, artwork is now not a guildskill). If there's phrasing that is suggesting this to people, we could rephrase to make it more friendly. Let us know what's making it seem that way!

I don't think those of us who have pointed to "Vavardi education" in this thread were implying we think we're meant to be Jacks or Jills of all trades. At least I wasn't when I pointed it out! And there are certainly IC workarounds for why you wouldn't know something you probably should (for example, my character can't play an instrument and I have an IC reason for why she never learned when she was younger). But I did pick up singing and dancing for her as it made sense with her backstory (and was themely) along with two trade crafts (which fit with her backstory).

But as I said before, I'm fine with the change as I can see how the system could have been abused before. I was merely bringing up the lore for the education expected of Vavardi gentry as an example of when I could someone wanting to take more than two guildskills in order to help fashion a backstory which fits with that lore.