Talk:Profession

New Tables
I would like to create new standered tables for professions, one for gathering and one for crafting. Will use this space for design and discussion.--Scyth02 15:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Proposed gathering table:

Proposed crafting table:

Can anyone confirm what minimum character level is needed for the Master skill levels in TBC ? Athan 13:24, 27 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Master level requires skill level 275. I haven't confirmed character level because all my characters able to enter the portal are level 60, but I could provide screenshots of "Requires: [profession] (275)" if requested. Equiraptor 17:07, 16 January 2007 (EST)


 * There is a post on Allakhazam indicating the minimum level is probably 45, not 50. Thermalnoise 09:14, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
 * i changed it to 45, i know some people ingame who got it at 46 Masshuu - Talk/Work 13:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the statement of recipes greening out thirty points above the learned skill. This is patently untrue for most of the subcomponent crafted parts (Primal Mooncloth and Dense Blasting Powder gray out at ten points after). Woggy222 13:45, 8 Feb 2007 (EST)

"all trainers in Outland"
under "level requirement" in Proficiency Levels, it says "all trainers in Outland". this on its own does not make much sence. Soulden't that go somewere else, like a note column, or removed?
 * i just changed it my self Masshuu - Talk/Work 13:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

service proficiencies
I've never heard the term "service proficiency" before. It makes some sense for enchanting, I guess, although I think enchanting is better thought of as both a gathering and crafting profession. As for first aid, that's pretty obviously a crafting professions in my opinion – turning cloth into bandages is no different from turning it into bolts. I'm moving FA to the Crafting list.--Scrotch 23:26, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Fishing
Someone might like to rewrite this section now that 2.4 has come out, or tell me how it's changed and I'll do it myself.--Rorthron 09:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Foregoing Professions
I notice that discussion of foregoing professions was removed on 21:21, 6 May 2008, by Tekkub. I wonder if any thought was put into this.

Here is the section in question that was removed:


 * Not taking any professions at all - why would you forgo something so lucrative that requires such little investment?


 * It all comes down to time - if you are running through the world leveling like crazy, stopping to skin, mine, return to a vendor or auction house, sell, ... it all slows you down.


 * You can get good enough gear just from drops and quests.


 * You can get better gear than you can buy if you do instances with groups.


 * Even then, taking enchant to disenchant green items you don't want can help manage your bag space.

Here is what it was replaced with:

Why bother?
Why not? Even if you do not want to invest the time in leveling a craft or investing money to do so, you can take two gathering skills while leveling and have some supplementary income by simply gathering the items you come across.

Why not?
What is troubling is that the removed section directly addresses the lead question of the new paragraph. I find it odd that the author deleted the answer to his question.

'Why not?' is because a profession takes time. It slows down leveling. You really don't need one.

Even just gathering takes time. Even selling the gathered items takes time. ... Running in to town with the good. Putting up the auctions. Re-auctioning.

... Which would provide more cash, skinning while you are leveling, or leveling to 40 and then skinning? I don't know the answer, but I know it's not a trivial question.

Anyway, this was intended to be an unconventional point of view, an option to consider. I'll point out that it is a valid option; many people do it, whether by choice or by default, whether it is a good option or not. Does it make sense to suppress this point of view?

I have never tried not taking a profession, but I bet it would be very productive.

Madkaugh (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Choosing Your Primary Professions
The professions article size exceeded the recommended limit, and WoWWiki recommended breaking out sections. I made "Choosing Your Primary Professions" a separate article - that section was more like a guide and had more opinion content, whereas the rest of the article is a detailing of the facts about professions. When I did this, I also addressed the disagreement above by presenting both points of view in juxtaposition, with a bit of supporting material (link to power leveling) thrown in for good measure.

Currently, the only link to the new page is at the bottom in the 'see also' section of the profession article.

Madkaugh (talk) 02:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Poisons
There is a small section covering Lockpicking for rogues but was Poisons forgotten?--Azbulldog (talk) 18:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

rule of thumb
I am missing the point of the complex formula for max skill points under 'Proficiency levels'. The formula which has no variance is level of skill * 75.

Also skills with Mining material requirements only require 60th level to train to GM where the other crafting skills take 65th level.

Here is a table --WoWWiki-Dga (talk) 00:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * GM Levels
 * 65
 * Tailoring
 * Leatherworking
 * Inscription
 * Alchemy
 * 60
 * Engineering
 * Blacksmithing
 * Jewelcrafting
 * None
 * Herbalism
 * Skinning
 * Mining


 * What about journeyman, expert, artisan and master training, is the table accurate for non-gathering professions at those levels? Also, is there truly no level requirement for gathering profession requirements? Could a character theoretically train to grand master herbalism, mining or skinning at level 1? (edit: 02:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC) - Never mind, I ignored the text above the table.) -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * They added minimum level requirements for gathering professions in a recent hotfix. They now require level 10 for Expert, level 25 for Artisan and 40 for Master. I'm not sure about the level requirements for Grand Master. The page has been updated. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's 55 for grand master gathering. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I just checked the trainers in Dalaran. All primary non-gathering professions currently require level 65 for grarnd master training. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:14, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Add Reforging to the Cata expansion, note that it is a Secondary

 * I'm going to go ahead and add the Reforging profession to the list of added professions coming in Cata, but I will clearly mark it as a new Secondary prof... Any objections? Larsiam (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I moved Reforging to Primary with a note as to which skills can get it because secondary skills means everyone can learn it, which is not the case. -- 22:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent point! I took a look at what you did and it looks good to me! TY! Larsiam (talk) 00:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Reforging is not a profession in and of itself, but something which multiple professions will be able to do (Jewelcrafting for rings, Blacksmithing for plate and mail, Leatherworking for leather, etc.). -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we sorted that out and put it in to "Not really a profession". Thanks though! Larsiam (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * On the template Professions it is listed as a NOTE on the Primaries because it is not a true Secondary profession.-- 20:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had added it to the template originally as a secondary, then someone came along and changed it to the "*" and added the notes, which I think is a MUCH better idea! Larsiam (talk) 17:29, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Inscription

 * I am removing Inscription from the Wrath expansion (As well as cleaning up other references to it)as Wrath is NOT NEEDED to take up Inscription. Inscription was introduced in a patch BEFORE Wrath was released.  Any objections? Larsiam (talk) 03:55, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Inscription has once again been changed to have a Wrath icon next to it, but this time with a ref note mentioning that you need BC to learn it, then Wrath to max it out, along with the fact that it was released in a patch. The note is pointless since getting BC and Wrath is needed to max out any professions to the various levels.  I'm going to change them back unless someone can give me a compelling reason for its current state? Larsiam (talk) 12:57, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I prefer the icon of Inscription to be changed back into . I prefer the note to be: Added in Patch 3.0.2 and trainable up to 375 with and 450 with.
 * I prefer (no surprise here) what I had originally put up, which was JC with, Inscription with a link to the Patch 3.0.2 etc, since the point of the heading is that further professions have been and will be added in expansions AND patches. Larsiam (talk) 15:26, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and changed it back to reflect that it came out in Patch 3.0.2 and NOT WotLK since there was no objections. Larsiam (talk) 01:16, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Seeing the edit warring going on, I have changed the battleground. The table now reflects the expansion which introduced (or will introduce) the skill. The paragraph beneath describes the requirements to train. I hope that will settle both camps.

And guys? I'd like to see confirmation that a WoW-only account can STILL not train JC. The reference was from possibly before the opening of BC. Blizzard may have changed their minds. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 00:04, October 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Eirik, I don't mean to be "that" guy, but I don't care for the change you implemented. Using the Wrath Icon next to the Inscription profession is simply wrong. It was not released with Wrath nor is Wrath needed to be played.  Just to be totally clear, the Inscription Profession was released during a Patch, not an expansion.


 * Further, you have noted that Wrath is not required, which, to my thinking is a direct contradiction to having the Wrath Icon next to the Inscription link. Also, you've noted that it was released in Patch 3.0.2, released October 14, 2009 and then have a link to Wrath next to that, which was released November 13, 2009 marked as Patch 3.0.  I think this pretty well categorically proves that Inscription is NOT part of the Wrath Expansion and Wrath is not required for it.  I realize there is an argument to be made that Patch 3.0.2 was a content patch FOR Wrath, thus having the Inscription link is appropriate, but I think given the nature of a Wiki and striving for the most accurate information to be presented, the current information, is, frankly, inaccurate.


 * As for the JC question, I have no direct information that a WoW only account can not still gain access to JC, but the current FAQ on Blizz's WoW site still specifically says that BC is required for JC. http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade/faq.html  Larsiam (talk) 15:53, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Specialization tradeskill icons?
Shouldn't there be made specialization tradeskill icons like regular? TherasTaneel (talk) 19:11, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't have a lot of use for the tradeskill icons we have now, even. I suppose that "xxx specialization" can be ripped from the Spellbook, though. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:49, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Profession
Hey umm I'm not sure if this where I'm supposed to put this but idk....anyways I just made a dk on the horde side so I can have more pvp fun lol@ alli....anyways I'm havin dificulty thinkin of which prof to go with that could either help me....or at the least Make me good money....I've got al lvl 80 and a few more alts but I've nvr lvled profs cuz I didnt see the use in wastin my time....but now I want to make money lol....Can anyone help me?>


 * Um... Im not sure but your question should be under Talk:Profession and not be rude but... you need your sign your username. Its a rule. Just giving you a heads-up. Rimor Conscientia (talk) 06:49, July 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * On WoWwiki, it would be better to make your post as a topic under Forum:World_of_Warcraft. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:08, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

Queer -> unconventional?

 * sigh* Attempts at political correctness? Failure of vocabulary?  Casual google definition search, for those who didn't get issued the full thesarus in school:  curious: beyond or deviating from the usual or expected; "a curious hybrid accent"; "her speech has a funny twang"; "they have some funny ideas about war"; "had an odd name"; "the peculiar aromatic odor of cloves"; "something definitely queer about this town"; "what a rum fellow"; "singular ... --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:12, July 9, 2010 (UTC)

4.0.1 change?
I was just on my lvl49 alt leveling my enchanting, used [Enchant 2H Weapon - Greater Impact], my skill is 241 so the spell is Orange & should give a skill-up, but after 4 or 5 casts on an ilvl 15 Claymore I didn't get any skill-ups. Jaymz6 (talk) 04:42, October 16, 2010 (UTC)