1st new class major issue I see.

[Heade]

I don't know...on the flip side of that, there are classes that aren't great at hunting that have high skinning caps, and those piles are one of the few ways to work on their skinning skill. Like Dune Traders.

[Hauwke]

This change would make it so that they would not need their high skinning cap, it would be forage based so they would have very little need to raise skinning.

Their is however an arguement to be made for: Why give a class a skill if they have no need of it. But if this change goes in, their skinning skill could be removed entirely, they are traders, not hunters.

[Heade]

This change would make it so that they would not need their high skinning cap, it would be forage based so they would have very little need to raise skinning.

Their is however an arguement to be made for: Why give a class a skill if they have no need of it. But if this change goes in, their skinning skill could be removed entirely, they are traders, not hunters.

Not exactly. They get advanced riding, and jman archery/spear use/shield use, so they can hunt a bit if they grind it up. I wouldn't want to see them lose skinning.

It would just be difficult for them to grind up skinning, which they currently need in order to branch like half their skills, without being a pseudo hunter for a long time if they didn't get skinning through bone piles and such. I like the class. I like that they can be a passable hunter with a lot of work, and I wouldn't want to see that element change. But currently, for anyone choosing that class an NOT being a hunter, those bone piles are pretty crucial to their branching.

[Brokkr]

Not going to wholesale change everything to forage.  Forage breaks down stuff that is foraged.  Skinning breaks down stuff that is skinning.  Sort of makes sense.

I can think of one item, a pile of bones, where this is probably an issue.  Is this an issue with other common items?

[Delirium]

Breaking bone into smaller pieces of bone.

Separating piles of scrab legs & scrab heads.

That sort of stuff could probably be swapped to either forage or cooking.

Salvaging sinews and stuff like that should probably remain under skinning.

[Brokkr]

You use the scrab stuff for crafting a lot?  If it is just to sell stuff, disinclined to change it, more interested in where this is impacting crafters.

[Heade]

You use the scrab stuff for crafting a lot?  If it is just to sell stuff, disinclined to change it, more interested in where this is impacting crafters.

Scrab stuff is necessary to make a particularly common item in the south, and is one of the few sources to practice that particular crafting skill.

[solera]

Bones to cooking. Yes please! Though I do see newbie skinners wanting to keep it as is.

[MeTekillot]

I find your forthright statements of consideration on player recommendations very refreshing, Brokkr.

[Brokkr]

You use the scrab stuff for crafting a lot?  If it is just to sell stuff, disinclined to change it, more interested in where this is impacting crafters.

Scrab stuff is necessary to make a particularly common item in the south, and is one of the few sources to practice that particular crafting skill.

I took a look and don't see anything that would be needed to practice a particular skill.  The only thing I think it might be has multiple other options.

[Brokkr]

Crafting types might find they can break down "a pile of bone lengths".  Folks will find they can break down long and short lengths of bone.  These are all sort of ubiquitous in their usefulness.

None of these people will find they can do so as efficiently as someone with knowledge of skinning.

[Heade]

Crafting types might find they can break down "a pile of bone lengths".  Folks will find they can break down long and short lengths of bone.  These are all sort of ubiquitous in their usefulness.

None of these people will find they can do so as efficiently as someone with knowledge of skinning.

I think this is a perfectly acceptable outcome. Thanks Brokkr!

[crymerci]

It doesn't make sense to me that only 2 classes get riposte, and one of them is a light combat class. Can't really see any IC justification. Feels like this was just thrown in to give the city combat classes an additional skill, since their skill list was probably pretty meager without either criminal or wilderness skills. But if you look at Soldier, light combat, they (eventually) get 9! crafting skills, in addition to every single non-thiefy combat skill. As a light combat class.

Soldier is just wonky anyway...Jman subdue but Master slings?

[Brokkr]

Riposte was developed specifically to give fighters and soldiers a unique skill that other fighter types didn't get, since all their skills pretty much overlapped in their area of expertise, as was hack.  If it wasn't riposte, it would be a different combat skill, that would still be only available to a fighter or soldier.

We've addressed the subdue thing.  A class that isn't normally playable is the only class with master subdue.  Due to this an a compressed skill value range, the best skill level a playable class gets is advanced and the fall off is quick.

[Hauwke]

Why cant we have a playable class that has master subdue? There isnt really a reason, so far as I can see, not to simply let soldier have master subdue.

[mansa]

Riposte was developed specifically to give fighters and soldiers a unique skill that other fighter types didn't get, since all their skills pretty much overlapped in their area of expertise, as was hack.  If it wasn't riposte, it would be a different combat skill, that would still be only available to a fighter or soldier.

We've addressed the subdue thing.  A class that isn't normally playable is the only class with master subdue.  Due to this an a compressed skill value range, the best skill level a playable class gets is advanced and the fall off is quick.

Why cant we have a playable class that has master subdue? There isnt really a reason, so far as I can see, not to simply let soldier have master subdue.

I thought the displayed skill levels (master, journeyman, etc) were in reference to the highest possible cap available to player classes.
Aka - If max subdue was 40, then 40 was master, 30 was advanced, 20 was journeyman, etc.

Brokkr, is there a player class that is taking up the spot for 'master' subdue that isn't available to players anymore?

[Brokkr]

Riposte was developed specifically to give fighters and soldiers a unique skill that other fighter types didn't get, since all their skills pretty much overlapped in their area of expertise, as was hack.  If it wasn't riposte, it would be a different combat skill, that would still be only available to a fighter or soldier.

We've addressed the subdue thing.  A class that isn't normally playable is the only class with master subdue.  Due to this an a compressed skill value range, the best skill level a playable class gets is advanced and the fall off is quick.

Why cant we have a playable class that has master subdue? There isnt really a reason, so far as I can see, not to simply let soldier have master subdue.

I thought the displayed skill levels (master, journeyman, etc) were in reference to the highest possible cap available to player classes.
Aka - If max subdue was 40, then 40 was master, 30 was advanced, 20 was journeyman, etc.

Brokkr, is there a player class that is taking up the spot for 'master' subdue that isn't available to players anymore?

You are correct.  Apparently folks are forgetting that the templar classes are player classes.

The way I would make normally playable classes have master subdue would not be to increase the level that the normal classes get it, it would be to lower the level that the current class that gets it to master level gets it.  So sort of pointless to ask for master subdue, you aren't losing anything (warriors never got subdue to master either), it is really just a perception thing. I'm really sort of uninterested in "fixing" something when the core of the issue is that some people can't exercise some mental flexibility.