General In 'Field' inductions

[gchuck]

In my campaign, (kind of DS9 meets Manpower Inc. from the Honorverse) the player has had a consistent problem crewing ships for missions. As ref, I let him start doing 'field' inductions. Basic training (PT) is handled by several Sol-Confed Army instructors(numbers are generally in the mid-single digits). Advanced training is handled by IISS personnel. Basic scout skills, Pilot, Nav, vacc suit ratings awarded at the end of the first term, using the IISS Academy table I think I found here on CoTI.

Curious if anyone else has tried anything similar?

 

[Grav_Moped]

I think what you're describing is hiring novice personnel and doing what would normally be the game's chargen (career path) activities "in-house" (onboard OJT, sort of). Interesting from a role-playing and character development angle, if so.

 

[kilemall]

I think what you're describing is hiring novice personnel and doing what would normally be the game's chargen (career path) activities "in-house" (onboard OJT, sort of). Interesting from a role-playing and character development angle, if so.

I’d say a fair portion of the rule set introduced in LBB4 was about in play chargen and force building, including Recruiting and Instruction skills and pay structure.

 

[Straybow]

The training model in CT and MT doesn't allow for the training at the pace that chargen models. In chargen you could get two ranks of a skill in one term. The CT training model would take 16 years...

 

[kilemall]

The training model in CT and MT doesn't allow for the training at the pace that chargen models. In chargen you could get two ranks of a skill in one term. The CT training model would take 16 years...

I don’t find them incongruous.

The two skill paradigm is more continuous practice/use, the Instruction fast training mode has an inherent limit in that say getting a CT player to skill-2 quickly involves a trainer with Instruction-3 and Skill-3. That is a rare bird, regular instruction training is more like getting large groups of people to Skill-1 quickly.

What is incongruous is LBB1 skill numbers/gen vs LBB4-7. Do you prefer the greater number of finely differentiated/cascade skills or large wide skills? The instruction training supports the former. It needs answering.

My answer was to stick with LBB1/S4 gen, go wider skill, substitute several LBB4-7 and MgT people skills, add in an Advanced Ed table with those skills, go base 3 skill rolls and first skill is Skill-0, allow die roll first/table selection, and allow enlisted promotion after failed commission roll.

Seems like effort, but easier to me then making LBB4+ for all careers.

Side effect is Skill-0 is pretty easy to get, Instruction-1 Skill-1 teachers should be very common, the functional equivalent of continuing ed class.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Training in MgT2 is a bit different since computer software can train now. If you have Intelligent Interface with a Personal Trainer of Expert/3 on a Data Wafer, you don't need to look for an Instructor, I believe. But you have to buy a new Personal Trainer for each skill.

Plus, with Cybernetics, you can just jack-in a Data Wafer with Expert/3 and it's automatically useable.

 

[Straybow]

...involves a trainer with Instruction-3 and Skill-3. That is a rare bird, regular instruction training is more like getting large groups of people to Skill-1 quickly.

...Side effect is Skill-0 is pretty easy to get, Instruction-1 Skill-1 teachers should be very common, the functional equivalent of continuing ed class.

I'm thinking that virtual or other high-tech training methods we can't as yet conceive should be common. Anyone could by a rank-1 skill for a minor cost and training an hour a day for a month or less. Rank-2 might require a higher cost and time. Rank-3 might require some sort of licensing agreement with a guild or some such.

 

[aramis]

In my campaign, (kind of DS9 meets Manpower Inc. from the Honorverse) the player has had a consistent problem crewing ships for missions. As ref, I let him start doing 'field' inductions. Basic training (PT) is handled by several Sol-Confed Army instructors(numbers are generally in the mid-single digits). Advanced training is handled by IISS personnel. Basic scout skills, Pilot, Nav, vacc suit ratings awarded at the end of the first term, using the IISS Academy table I think I found here on CoTI.

Curious if anyone else has tried anything similar?

I let players buy instruction tapes; I set the cost of a course is Cr1000 × (Instructor's Skill) × (Skill Level instructed). Use the Instruction rules out of CT Bk4 (usually adapted to MT tasks)

 

[mike wightman]

The good old Instruction skill - looks good at first glance:

Players with lnstructional expertise are capable of training recruits to carry out basic military functions. A player must have at least Instruction-1 to conduct any training at all. The more involved effects of training large bodies of men and the effects of differing levels of lnstructional expertise are covered in the recruiting section of the book.
In addition to general training functions, players with instructional expertise may impart knowledge of certain well understood skills to other players.
Players may impart skills to other players up to a level of one less than their instructional skill and one less than their own skill level in the skill being taught. Thus, a player with Instruction-4, Recon-5 and Demolitions-2 could teach another player Recon -3 and Demolitions-1.

But then comes the bit people overlook, the skill gain is not automatic:

Each level of each skill taught requires six weeks of instruction during which the referee should severely curtail both players'
activities, or a six month course with other activities somewhat less curtailed. At the conclusion of the course, the learning player must roll 9+ on two dice to achieve the skill, with a DM of +1 for lntel 8+ and +2 for lntel 10+.

Not that you can build a training robot with Instruction 4 and then plug in the skill level 4 skill of your choice and learn up to level 3 in that skill, if you use loaded dice

 

[kilemall]

The good old Instruction skill - looks good at first glance:

But then comes the bit people overlook, the skill gain is not automatic:

Not that you can build a training robot with Instruction 4 and then plug in the skill level 4 skill of your choice and learn up to level 3 in that skill, if you use loaded dice

Sure it’s not automatic, should plan on two passes with it. Some get one, others take three.

Another overlooked part is the concentrated training vs ‘correspondence course’ style. The weeks long version is appropriate to a service training camp, the months version is more what would happen out on the merc ticket or ship operations.

Yes one could do the robot thing, I would tend to alter the die roll for higher skills, just cause I don’t want a robot sensei world.

Note the maximum off the shelf level LBB8 robots can impart is teaching skill-3 since the robot can only buy Instruction-4/Skill-4. Higher skills have to be learned by the teachbot, or find a sophont who has done so.

Costs of software are similar to Aramis’ structure, but don’t count the cost of the bot itself. Should be pretty easy to put in with the Ship Robot Server, one expensive immobile ship power brain and dozens of cheap remote dumbots to interact in.

 

[Condottiere]

The problem isn't really obtaining knowledge, it's anchoring it inside the brain.

 

[coliver988]

The problem isn't really obtaining knowledge, it's anchoring it inside the brain.

that and actual implementation and practice. I read a lot but the actual application of what I read would not be great. Until I do it enough times. This particularly applies to physical things I would think: while you get a Pistol-3 and can take it apart and clean it readily enough, the blind-folded part will take physical practice as does the actual shooting part. Muscle memory and all that stuff. Assuming that is part of the training and all would be good.

It is the wafer stuff that I think would be more problematic in getting it to anchoring in the brain (as apparently it does not as you lose the skill w/o the wafer). But that is an entirely different, though related, discussion.

 

[Condottiere]

Well, it could be proprietary information, so there might be deliberately a barrier to that transferring over, as if it's a read only memory card with digital rights management.