2300 character generation skill issues

[Fritz_Brown]

OK, I ran a search and didn't find this topic covered, so I have to ask.

What the heck is up with the 2300 skill-buying? It makes no sense to me. It appears that the rules text says you have to buy the same skill ranks over again if you want to advance the skill at the next opportunity. So, if you have, say Melee-4, to get to Melee-5 you have to expend points for all 5 ranks - even though you already bought the first 4. Or am I reading this wrong?

Each skill level costs one half its rating in background skill points (round fractions up). For example, to go from Melee-4 to Melee-5 costs three points (five divided by two equals two and a half, rounded up to three). Rounding up also means that skill level 0 costs 1 skill point.

Also, the sidebar example fails to incorporate the 1/2-1-1 1/2 entirely, it appears, simply expending one point per skill level. It also appears to not follow the above quote. Then it makes reference to some limit on points that makes no sense to me:

3 points in Melee (raising it to level 2-the last point is not enough to raise it higher, so it is lost

Yeah, I haven't picked up 2300 in 20+ years, and didn't play it much back then, either. Can anyone explain this?

 

[PFVA63]

Hi

Its been awhile since I've messed around with 2300AD but its my understanding that the authors intended that it would be progressively harder to increase your skill level. As such, for a Background skill it would cost 1 pt to go to Level 0 (since the rules specifically state that 0/2 is rounded up to 1), 1 pt to go to Level 1 (since 1/2 rounded up equals 1), and another 1 pt to got to Level 2 (since 2/2 rounded up is 1).

Thus, from the example in the sidebar on pg 8 the 5 background skills are spent as follows:

• 1pt to give a Combat Rifleman skill of 0
• 1pt to give a Melee skill of 0, and
• 3pts to give a P-suit skill of 2 (as described above)

From the Sidebar on pg 9, since the character in question selects Troubleshooter as his career he is given

• 1pt Combat Rifleman, which is enough to raise his Combat Rifleman Skill level from 0 to 1
• 1pt of Side Arm, which gives him a total Side Arm skill Level of 0, since he didn't have any skill level in that area yet
• 3pts in Melee, since he already had a Level 0 in this area the 1st new point raises this from 0 to 1 (since 1/2 rounded up equals 1), the next point is enough to raise this from 1 to 2 (since 2/2 equals 1), and the last point is lost, since to raise the skill level from 2 to 3 would have cost 3/2 rounded up which would equal 2 additional points instead of the 1 available.
• 2pts in Streetwise, 1pt of which gives him his 0 Level in this area with the 2nd point being enough to take him from 0 to 1 (since 1/2 rounded up equals 1
• 1pt in Survival which takes him to Level 0 in this skill
• 1pt in Stealth, also taking him to Level 0 in this skill
• 2pts in P-suit, which is enough to go from Level 2 to Level 3, since 3/2 rounded up equals 2

I don't know if this helps or not.

Regards

PF

[Edit] PS. I think that maybe part of the reason the authors made it cost more as you try and raise a skill that you already have to higher levels is meant to reflect that it would likely be harder to become highly proficient in a given skill as opposed to just picking up a rough familiarity with a new skill, or converting a rough familiarity to a basic level of ability in that skill.

Or to put that in terms of numbers, the authors set it up so that going from a skill level 2 to a skill level 3 would cost 3/2 rounded up to 2 (and similarly going from Level 4 to Level 5 would cost 5/2 rounded up equals 3), whereas just taking a 0 Level in a different skill would only cost 1 pt (0/2 which the authors define as being rounded up to 1) or going from 0 to 1 would cost an additional 1pt (1/2 rounded up), etc [/Edit]

 

[Fritz_Brown]

OK, PFVA63, that is what was beginning to dawn on me. It's still a bit crazy, especially when you only have 10 points maximum (12 if you're super-smart and edumacated) in a "term". (And, that's the equivalent of 2 1/2 terms in regular Traveller.)

 

[aramis]

Note that 2300 also halved the cost of primary skills for the current career, and doubled the costs for outside skills for the career... and yes, PVA is correct about the rising costs.

And yes, skill points for a given term have to be spent within the term...

But the background skills are for characters to age of enlistment, and are all at primary skill (+1 for NewLevel x0.5) costs... your quoted text, Fritz, is JUST for background skills.... covered just fine in the sidebar on page 8...

Of his 5 BG points.
CRM...
to get to 0: 0x0.5=0, minimum 1 point
Total=1
P-Suit...
To 0: 0x0.5=0, minimum 1
To 1: 1x0.5=0.5 rounds up to 1
To 2: 2x0.5=1
sub total: 3 points, level 2
Total = 4
Melee:
to 0: 0x0.5=0, minimum 1

Initial Training:
CRM 0, gets 1 point
To level 1: 1x0.5=0.5, round up to 1
Sidearm gets 1 point
To 0: 1 point minimum.
Melee (at 0) gets 3
To 1: 1x0.5=0.5 rounds to 1
To 2: 2x0.5=1
To 3: 3x0.5=1.5, rounds up to 2, but not enough †
Streetwise:
to 0: 1 (minimum)
To 1: 1 (rounded up)
etc...
† Some GM's houserule and let the 1st term keep the point, but the rules explicitly disallow this...

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Yeah, Aramis, I see how I was confused by the example. It gets to be a pretty outrageous cost, even considering the 1/2-1-1 1/2 rule. That idea works if your max skill rank is 6 (as in regular Traveller), but not so well when it's 10. (IMHO, of course)

 

[aramis]

Yeah, Aramis, I see how I was confused by the example. It gets to be a pretty outrageous cost, even considering the 1/2-1-1 1/2 rule. That idea works if your max skill rank is 6 (as in regular Traveller), but not so well when it's 10. (IMHO, of course)

Of the 30 or so PC's I've had people play over the decades, I've never seen a PC exceed skill 5 in 2300.

Also, despite the attribute difference, the skill levels mean almost exactly the same as in MT.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi

While the method used in 2300AD kind of made rolling up a character a bit more difficult for me than in other games, I did kind of like the final results.

Basically to get to a level of 5 for background skill you'd have to spend a total of 10pts overall (1pt to get to level 0, another 1pt to get to level 1, another 1pt to get to level 2, 2 additional pts to get to level 3, 2 more points to get to level 4, and finally an additional 3 pts to finally get to level 5).

Conversely, you could in theory spend those 10pts to get 10 Level 0 skills, 5 Level 1 skills, 3 Level 2 skills (plus one further Level 0 skill), 2 Level 3 skills, or 1 Level 4 skill plus 1 Level 2 skills, etc (if I did the math right).

To me that kind of makes for some interesting decisions when rolling up a character.

 

[aramis]

Doing the math for skill levels... maximum turning point is 12 points

And the theoretical maximum skill is higher ... (The system doesn't state an absolute prohibition on skills above 10... tho it strongly implies one with the wording "... skills are represented by a number from 0 to 10..." (AG, p. 8)

And maximum turning points is Determination based... max DM+5. So... Max roll 15.
Career
1st Sim 2+
2nd Sim 2+
3rd Rout 6+
4th Dif 10+
5th Form 14+
6th Imp 18+ (No chance).
So...
1st TP:
Max free: Lv 2
So, 12 pts.
2(Lv 3)+2(Lv 4)+3(Lv5)+3(Lv6) 10...

2nd TP
4(L 7)+4 (L 8)=8 (L 8)

3rd TP
5(L 9) + 5 (L10) = 10

4th TP
6 (L 11)+6 (l 12)= 12

5th TP
7 (13)

6th TP
7 (14)

So it's theoretically possible to hit level 14 in a career skill

Background can really mess it up if someone is obsessive enough.
Max 10pts in BG:
TP0: 1(L0)+1(L1)+1(L2)+2(L3)+2(L4)+3(L5)
and then 12 per TP
TP1: 3(L6)+4(L7)+4(L7)
TP2: 4(L8)+5(L9)
TP3: 5(L10)+6(L 11)
TP4: 6(L 12)
TP5: 7(L 13)
TP6: 7(L 14)

In a secondary skill...
1: 3+4+5 = lv 5
2: 6 = Lv 6
3: 7 = Lv 7
4: 8 = Lv 8
5: 9 = Lv 9
6: 10 = Lv 10

In an outside skill, starting at nil (because background always count as career)
TP1: 1 (L 0)+2(L1)+3(L2)+5(L3)
TP2: 6 (L4)
TP3: 8 (L5)
TP4: 9 (L6)
TP5: 11 (L7)
TP6: 12 (L8)

So, the maximums by type:
BG or Career: 14
Secondary: 10
Outside: 8

Interesting...

Oh, and to get those points, you're looking at a (1*9*9*9*5*1)/(1296‡*1e6*(20†)*10*10*10*10*10)=3645/2592e12=3.645e3/2.592e15≅1.4e-12
̂† rough approximation for Int+Edu >30, as being about 5% of 8d6 for 35+... or about 1/20
‡ Odds of Det 20

So the theoretical maximum is about 1 in a trillion.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Some points (heh) about your munchkin, Aramis:

It's possible to have a Rank 2 skill coming into your first TP, but it severely restricts which skill we're talking about.

You mention the max points being a very small subset of characters. Better to use 10 as your max points.

Assuming the example has Int+Det=>30 (not Int+Educ), I'll subtract 2 from each of the above TPs, and get 8+6+8+10+5+5 = 42 years. This guy is close to fully retired (in the French arm he retired 10 years ago) and driving his Winnebago between planets, sitting on an inflatable donut. I know we've talked about playing older characters, but this guy is geriatric!

And, I understand about the ranks being pretty limited to 5ish.... Then why does it imply that 10 is the maximum? Mostly what it appears this system does is give you LOTs of rank 0 and rank 1 skills, so you have to hope your stats are high enough to make up for it when it comes time for task resolution. (There is that Stat/4 thing which gives a decent bonus.) Rounding down would have given a little nicer curve IMO, or not rounding at all, or starting skills at rank 1 in your career.

 

[McPerth]

Some points (heh) about your munchkin, Aramis:

It's possible to have a Rank 2 skill coming into your first TP, but it severely restricts which skill we're talking about.

You mention the max points being a very small subset of characters. Better to use 10 as your max points.

It's long ago since I read 2300AD rules, but IIRC skill 3 is a full profesional level, 4+ being good expert (more or less like in MT), so having some skills at 2-3 is being at profesional level, or near so, in several fields

Assuming the example has Int+Det=>30 (not Int+Educ), I'll subtract 2 from each of the above TPs, and get 8+6+8+10+5+5 = 42 years. This guy is close to fully retired (in the French arm he retired 10 years ago) and driving his Winnebago between planets, sitting on an inflatable donut. I know we've talked about playing older characters, but this guy is geriatric!

Hey, I'm older than that, and still nearly 20 years from retirement...are you hinting I'm ready for the geriatric :devil:?

And, I understand about the ranks being pretty limited to 5ish.... Then why does it imply that 10 is the maximum? Mostly what it appears this system does is give you LOTs of rank 0 and rank 1 skills, so you have to hope your stats are high enough to make up for it when it comes time for task resolution. (There is that Stat/4 thing which gives a decent bonus.) Rounding down would have given a little nicer curve IMO, or not rounding at all, or starting skills at rank 1 in your career.

I don't remember if 2300AD has a character developement system that can raise your skills with play.

 

[aramis]

Yeah, Skill 2 is what you come out of initial training with in the core skills. Skill 4 is very much an experienced professional... at least 3 years in field. Typically, 7 years.

 

[shaunhilburn]

OK, I ran a search and didn't find this topic covered, so I have to ask.

What the heck is up with the 2300 skill-buying? It makes no sense to me. It appears that the rules text says you have to buy the same skill ranks over again if you want to advance the skill at the next opportunity. So, if you have, say Melee-4, to get to Melee-5 you have to expend points for all 5 ranks - even though you already bought the first 4. Or am I reading this wrong?



Also, the sidebar example fails to incorporate the 1/2-1-1 1/2 entirely, it appears, simply expending one point per skill level. It also appears to not follow the above quote. Then it makes reference to some limit on points that makes no sense to me:



Yeah, I haven't picked up 2300 in 20+ years, and didn't play it much back then, either. Can anyone explain this?

The following is based on my interpretation T:2300 First Edition. 2300AD is very similar, if not identical.

Skills cost 1/2 their level (round fractions up) in skill points. I call them development points. Skill levels 0 and 1 cost 1 point each. Related skills cost double and Unrelated skills cost triple.
This results in the following matix:

   Skill Point Cost per Level
  
                       S K I L L   L E V E L
                   0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
     ---------------------------------------------
     Primary       1  1  1  2  2  3  3  4  4  5  5
     Related       2  2  2  4  4  6  6  8  8 10 10
     Unrelated     3  3  3  6  6  9  9 12 12 15 15

Because you must purchase each of the preceding levels for a skill, each level is progressively more difficult to acquire. For instance, to attain skill Level-3 in a Primary skill, you have to first invest in Level-0 (1 point), Level-1 (1 point), Level-2 (1 point) and finally Level-3 (2 points) for a total investment of 1+1+1+2 = 5 skill points.
This results in the following matix:

   Total Skill Point Investment

                       S K I L L   L E V E L
                   0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
     ---------------------------------------------
     Primary       1  2  3  5  7 10 13 17 21 26 31
     Related       2  4  6 10 14 20 26 34 42 52 62
     Unrelated     3  6  9 15 21 30 39 51 63 78 93

The rules further confuse the issue by using the same notation for initial training "skill" purchase points and for the final proficiency levels., e.g. initial training of Sidearm-1 is one skill point toward sidearm, and can (eventually) result in a final proficiency of Sidearm-3.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi

The following is based on my interpretation T:2300 First Edition. 2300AD is very similar, if not identical.

...
The rules further confuse the issue by using the same notation for initial training "skill" purchase points and for the final proficiency levels., e.g. initial training of Sidearm-1 is one skill point toward sidearm, and can (eventually) result in a final proficiency of Sidearm-3.

Hi,

Thanks for that info. I agree that the terminology the authors used, kind of mixing where they were talking about "points' and "levels" really through me off for a long time.

PF

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Hey, I'm older than that, and still nearly 20 years from retirement...are you hinting I'm ready for the geriatric :devil:?

That's 42 years on the job. Making the character 60. As far as you being geriatric, do you have to write instructions on your pill box so you know which colors to take with which meals?

The rules further confuse the issue by using the same notation for initial training "skill" purchase points and for the final proficiency levels., e.g. initial training of Sidearm-1 is one skill point toward sidearm, and can (eventually) result in a final proficiency of Sidearm-3.

Yeah, that was one of my difficulties, until PFVA63 gave me the clue I needed.

 

[shaunhilburn]

The following is based on my interpretation T:2300 First Edition. 2300AD is very similar, if not identical.

2300AD uses slightly different rules.

A skill costs 1/2 of the proficiency level, rounded up. Related skills cost the same as the proficiency level, Unrelated skills cost 1.5× the proficiency level. Levels 0 and 1 cost one point. The costs are a bit less than in the first edition.

    Point Cost Per Level

                S K I L L   L E V E L
                0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
  ---------------------------------------------
  Primary       1  1  1  2  2  3  3  4  4  5  5
  Related       1  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
  Unrelated     2  2  3  5  6  8  9 11 12 14 15

    Total Point Investment


                S K I L L   L E V E L
                0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
  ---------------------------------------------
  Primary       1  2  3  5  7 10 13 17 21 26 31
  Related       1  2  4  7 11 16 22 29 37 46 56
  Unrelated     2  4  7 12 18 26 35 46 58 72 87

 

[McPerth]

That's 42 years on the job. Making the character 60.

Oh, I read you wrong...

As far as you being geriatric, do you have to write instructions on your pill box so you know which colors to take with which meals?

No, I write (or read) instructions for others' pills...(I'm a nurse)

 

[Fritz_Brown]

No worries, McPerth. I got a few years on ya. And, no Winnebago in my future, as far as the eye can see.