Hey All,

So, (in my 1st post here) I play a Tech-Priest and I was wondering.....for Trade (Smith)...that skill does not get a skill advancement of +10 or +20. Was this an ommision or on purpose considering the Tech-Priest are the only ones to use this skill (at least according to the Class Advancements)?

Oversight OR Intended please explain...

LOVE the game,

Confused at 2 in the morning

All the trade skills are oversites if you ask me. Smith doesn't get any +10's or 20's but neither dose Agri, Artist, Cartiographer, Embalmer, Mason, Merchant, Minor, Prospector, Scrimshawer, and Valette. I think the designers decided that the Trade Skills weren't all that important and, for the most part, unless it benefited combat (by modifying guns, repairing armour, etc) then it really didn't need a +10 or a +20. Ask you GM for an elite advance for Smith... you prety much have to with any of the trade skills. After all, if you want you character to be an artist of some sort, the only way to get it without an elite advance is to be an 8th rank psyker ('cause you have to be psychic to make a living at art!), all farmers are psykers, only tech priests know how to stack and cut stone, and the only people out there who know how to preserve the dead are tech-priests (really, they got almost all the trade skills...) and psykers ('cause if your not a cyborg or psychic, you would have no clue how to embalm a body in the dark future), and as far as trading and selling merchandise, yup, the cyborg with the abysmal Fel score and the psyker who you probably shouldn't be entering into busniness negotiations with in the first place are the only ones who can learn the fine art of selling stuff to folks...

So ya, the trade skills were regulated to last class citizens of the skill tree. Just talk to your GM and I'm sure he or she wouldn't mind offering the advances to Trade (Smith) for your character.

Arnisador001 said:

It seems to me like it was intended. If you were allowed to get the +10 or +20 advancements that is saying your character is a master smith. Even for a tech priest that would take decades to accomplish. Now if you did train for years then you could ask your GM for the advancement.

They also limited the amount of trade skills classes could take for the purpose of making them elite advances. They most likely felt that an assassin wouldnt be an artist and if he was then it is part of his background and he could ask his GM for that skill. That would be why only the Tech-Priest can take Trade (Smith) a Tech-Priest would probably learn how to Smith. However, in the normal line of career for everybody else it doesnt make sense for them to learn it.

Graver said:

This puts me in mind of LuciusT's post about classless/levelless Dark Heresy. The system seems partcularly ridiculous in this area.

I wonder if the solution is to allow some limited pool of skills which sit outside the skill tree? You could allow 1 skill or talent per level to be taken that would not normally be allowed for the character class in question (prerequisites apply normally). The difficulty would be that it would mostly be exploited to get extra combat talents rather than the kind of flavour-adding skills under discussion. Perhaps an alternative approach would be to create a list of skills and talents available in this way, and exclude things like lightning attack which would otherwise be taken by all and sundry, and things like psy levels which just shouldn't be handled in this way for obvious reasons.

It seems to me like it was intended. If you were allowed to get the +10 or +20 advancements that is saying your character is a master smith. Even for a tech priest that would take decades to accomplish. Now if you did train for years then you could ask your GM for the advancement.

And becoming a master smith is more difficult than becoming a master armourer, a master technomat or a master wright how?

Arnisador001 said:

Imho iwould say that the game designers thought that you wanted to rp acolytes of the inquisistion (i.e. investigatuve and/or combat oriented) and not bob the builder types.

Can we investigate it? Yes we can!

Cardinalsin said:

Well you never had to deal with the players I have!

It seems to me like it was intended. If you were allowed to get the +10 or +20 advancements that is saying your character is a master smith. Even for a tech priest that would take decades to accomplish. Now if you did train for years then you could ask your GM for the advancement.

And becoming a master smith is more difficult than becoming a master armourer, a master technomat or a master wright how?

No it isn't necessarily harder. However, do you actually expect a tech-priest to be taught how to be a master smith as opposed to a master wright, armorer, or technomat. The last three are necessary skills that all tech-priests should master over time. Now what tech-priests do after that is up to them.

No it isn't necessarily harder. However, do you actually expect a tech-priest to be taught how to be a master smith as opposed to a master wright, armorer, or technomat. The last three are necessary skills that all tech-priests should master over time. Now what tech-priests do after that is up to them.

Well... yes and no. The last three are not necessary skills. There's nothing requiring you to take them. Considering that the AdMech has a rather schizophrenic outlook on tech, I fail to see why you wouldn't have master blacksmiths in there as well - certainly, some machinery requires properly hand-forged elements in their minds.