Skill Bay

[kilemall]

Watching the Traveller Reddit subcommunity, I note one of the three items that come up over and over is how do I increase skills.

Plenty of other threads on the mechanics of that and options, but it occurred to me for merchants or other primary space occupations like Navy, Scouts, Pirates or Marines, that hitting the local gym/shooting range/online study/sim might be tough to do, and that there is all this free time on ships.

Ergo, I think a regular common area feature would be a skill bay.

It would be a smallish room, 2 dtons most of the time, a special closet almost, 1.5m x 6 m or 3m x 3m.

It would have one or more computer terminals, a lot of screens on the walls to display data/lectures/enviornments/targets, a fitness wall with fold down workout equipment, etc.

Essentially a self-contained multi-purpose training center.

I could see this as an absolute necessity for the Scout force even on Type S due to all that space time they do. Navy too.

Merchants can easily justify it with the additional common area space a typical passenger section brings even to Type As. Open it to the passengers, it becomes a part of the entertainment package.

I wouldn't really look to charge additionally for it, just comes out of the stateroom space/cost budget.

However, if one wanted to give pluses for equipment enhanced skill bays, it would be +1/whatever for gaining the skill, doing it faster if you want to make a task roll of it, and/or work like luxuries as a draw for getting more Medium /High Passengers.

I would go doubling with a base of 50,000 Cr per ton per plus- so a +1 2 ton skill bay costs 100,000 Cr, a +2 is 200,000 Cr, +3 is 400,000 Cr, etc.

As to percentages, I would think 1 Skill bay for every 20 people carried (assuming 50% take advantage of the facilities, common downtime so there are peak hours, etc.).

Most of the time I would make it multiple skill bays on the same size or so, but for a troopship that wants to work on tactics or team sports or long range shooting, it may be more one big skill bay and a few smaller ones for individual work.

 

[kilemall]

And no I don't mean holodecks dammit.

 

[flykiller]

And no I don't mean holodecks dammit.

a virtual reality simulator by any other name ....

 

[mike wightman]

I just have stuff like this as being pretty standard in common areas and staterooms.

Add VR headsets (better yet wafer jacks) and tactile feedback suits and just about anything can be simulated with the computer power available to a ship, and the right training programs of course

 

[Enoki]

Why a special compartment? It would seem to me if you wanted to increase your skills many could be done on a ship with a minimum of additional space or equipment. For example:

You want skills in engineering, mechanical, electronics, etc., you simply work with the crew that already does those jobs repairing, maintaining, and operating the equipment.

You want to learn piloting, navigation, etc., you stand watches on the bridge under instruction.

Gunnery? Do drills in a turret or such even possibly doing live practice fires.

Weapons skills? Swords and such with or without another crew member like you would in fencing. Guns and energy weapons maybe use a simulator of some sort set up in a little used passageway.

Vac suit. Go through putting it on and over procedures for emergencies and such.

I'd think you could get at least a level 1 in most skills this way. Where you want to go higher I'd say you need at least some instruction by someone with at least an equal skill level to the one you are trying to obtain along with some hands on time at a level of difficulty equal to that level.

Maybe a random chance (with appropriate mods) for natural talent that can substitute for skilled instruction could be allowed in some cases.

But, a need for a specialized classroom? That might work on larger ships or where there is sufficient crew being trained to warrant it, but not for the typical party I'd think.

 

[Whipsnade]

Watching the Traveller Reddit subcommunity, I note one of the three items that come up over and over is how do I increase skills.

Such a question should be answered with another question:

Why do you need to increase skills?

For further explanation, let me suggest two articles discussing the gross conceptual error many current RPG players labor under.

The first is from Robert Weaver: Travelle is not a Power Fantasy

The second is from Omer Joel: Once again on Classic Traveller skills

As Mr. Weaver explains that "The power creep in D&D and in video games has left Traveller behind."

A comment at Mr. Joel's blog contains this cogent observation: "I think the problem (to the extent that one can say a game with so many fans has problems) is that a certain segment of players *wants* granularity, *wants* special powers, and *wants* character advancement.

In a sense, Classic Traveller still offers the sort of characters that OD&D offers - lean, streamlined, not very differentiated mechanically. To a gamer who is used to 3.5E, 4E, or 5E, the old OD&D characters feel bland, like they are missing something."

Traveller was different from the start. Traveller was designed to be different. Traveller is meant to be played differently. You cannot bring the power creep mindset exemplified by 3.5E, 4E, or 5E to Traveller anymore than than you can bring a Settlers of Cataan mindset to Advanced Squad Leader or a poker mindset to Parcheesi.

Traveller is different. Not better. Not worse. Different.

 

[Condottiere]

It depends on when you bail on character generation.

You stay in long enough, you get a golden parachute; if you quit after a term, your skillset is rather limited, not to mention your financial resources.

So younger character should have an easier time acquiring more skills, not that the game was designed to do that.

 

[Enoki]

The problem with this is, at least in MT and probably onwards is...

Such a question should be answered with another question:

Why do you need to increase skills?

For further explanation, let me suggest two articles discussing the gross conceptual error many current RPG players labor under.

The first is from Robert Weaver: Travelle is not a Power Fantasy

The second is from Omer Joel: Once again on Classic Traveller skills

As Mr. Weaver explains that "The power creep in D&D and in video games has left Traveller behind."

With just an average set of characteristics (say, 6, 7, 8) and skill level one many Routine tasks are really pretty hazardous.

Consider. You have a starship with a pilot, navigator, and engineer with skill level 1 respectively and characteristics that are 5 and above but below 10, it means you have roughly a 1 in 5 chance of a mishap every time the jump drive is engaged.
You have to roll above a 4 three times in a row each time you jump. For something that's supposedly "routine" with a professional, skilled crew doing it, that's a pretty big crap shoot.
If you have any reason that this becomes a difficult task, you better be prepared for a misjump, because its almost certain to happen.

This isn't "power creep." It's a problem when a player with what are supposed to be competent skills in something can't pull it off regularly. There's clearly a dichotomy here between what skill levels are supposed to be good for and what the game actually allows for.

Going straight by the procedure in MT, I for one, wouldn't want an engineer that was less than a level 2 in Engineering and had at least a 6 in Education to be doing the procedure ( or a 1 in Engineering and an Education of 10+). Anything less is simply too risky. The chances are the jump will fail within the first 5 times the ship does it with anything less.

While the mishaps for minor and superficial aren't onerous, they are problematic. But, one major misjump and you're hit and seriously hit, particularly if you end up in a location with no system or chance to refuel.

While I don't want "super soldiers" and such in a game, there are lots of things within Traveller where you need more than skill level 1 just to really be competitive. Sure, some skills can languish at 0 or 1, but ones that involve real risk need to be higher or you're a statistic.

 

[kilemall]

The standing watch/apprenticing onboard thing is fine, but that's assuming that it is specific shipboard skills one is working on. Could be, but just as easily might not be.

Apprenticing also won't work when say the other engineers are skill-2, the student is skill-3 trying to reach skill-4.

The skill levels also count a certain background knowledge as well as practical experience.

Other self improvement options are the physical set, improving weapons and improving, and education, all of which can benefit from a dedicated time and equipped place for such.

As to Whipsnade's commentary, yes I know all that and have explained it many times to new Traveller ex-D&D leveling people surprised by the 'come-as-you-is' and lethal aspects of our game. So I hardly need a lecture on the topic.

However, you can increase skills in most Traveller versions, just seems to me ship life would routinely call for such facilities, and a lot of the services would look at providing space as necessary as the freshers.

 

[mike wightman]

It depends on when you bail on character generation.

You stay in long enough, you get a golden parachute; if you quit after a term, your skillset is rather limited, not to mention your financial resources.

So younger character should have an easier time acquiring more skills, not that the game was designed to do that.

Why should an adult be allowed to learn stuff faster just because they are younger?
Is it a meta-game want for all characters to have parity?
The real world is not like that.

What I still like after all these years about the CT experience system is that unless you pay a lot of money and go the high tech ref's discretion route characters in game can not advance their skills any faster than during character generation.

If you want everyone equal use points buy (easily houseruled).

I don't have a problem, and neither do my players, with a group that has a one term scout, a five term army general, a three term merchant and a two term other. It is how you play the character that is important.

 

[mike wightman]

The problem with this is, at least in MT and probably onwards is...
With just an average set of characteristics (say, 6, 7, 8) and skill level one many Routine tasks are really pretty hazardous.

My counter argument to this is that from DGP's task system onwards and MT in particular the Traveller games became roll playing rather than role playing - roll dice for every action no matter how trivial, build up a task library, think about how you can influence the dice being rolled.
How about just play your character and try stuff.

Consider. You have a starship with a pilot, navigator, and engineer with skill level 1 respectively and characteristics that are 5 and above but below 10, it means you have roughly a 1 in 5 chance of a mishap every time the jump drive is engaged.
You have to roll above a 4 three times in a row each time you jump. For something that's supposedly "routine" with a professional, skilled crew doing it, that's a pretty big crap shoot.
If you have any reason that this becomes a difficult task, you better be prepared for a misjump, because its almost certain to happen.

This is a consequence of requiring dice rolls where none are. It crops up a lot.
In CT there was no pilot roll, navigator roll, engineer roll, janitor droid roll just to enter jump space (yes you rolled for a misjump but there were no skills involved, just drive maintenance, fuel and distance from planet to worry about).
If you are a poor game designer and do not understand probability then you are unaware of the fact that requiring several concurrent routine rolls is going to produce failure of those routine tasks.

This isn't "power creep." It's a problem when a player with what are supposed to be competent skills in something can't pull it off regularly. There's clearly a dichotomy here between what skill levels are supposed to be good for and what the game actually allows for.

It's the law of unintended consequence.
Game designer with D- in maths - 'hey wouldn't it be kewel if players had to roll for every routine ship operation, they will feel much more involved'
In play - ships crash leaving space dock - how hilarious the first time, not the tenth; the misjump rate of routine shipping increases.
MT, MGT both do this, but the worst offender has to be GT.

Going straight by the procedure in MT, I for one, wouldn't want an engineer that was less than a level 2 in Engineering and had at least a 6 in Education to be doing the procedure ( or a 1 in Engineering and an Education of 10+). Anything less is simply too risky. The chances are the jump will fail within the first 5 times the ship does it with anything less.

While the mishaps for minor and superficial aren't onerous, they are problematic. But, one major misjump and you're hit and seriously hit, particularly if you end up in a location with no system or chance to refuel.

Then as a referee go back to the CT way of doing it.

While I don't want "super soldiers" and such in a game, there are lots of things within Traveller where you need more than skill level 1 just to really be competitive. Sure, some skills can languish at 0 or 1, but ones that involve real risk need to be higher or you're a statistic.

Not if you stick to the CT way of doing things.
And I don't mean scrap the MT, MgT, GT or T5 task systems - if you like them use them.
But don't roll dice for routine stuff.

 

[mike wightman]

However, you can increase skills in most Traveller versions, just seems to me ship life would routinely call for such facilities, and a lot of the services would look at providing space as necessary as the freshers.

IMTU staterooms have entertainment centres that make the x-box look like pong. The whole room can have all its (configurable) furniture fold away, every wall, the floor and ceiling are displace screen capable.
So the whole room can become a simulator complete with virtual trainer.

A cheaper option is the VR training pod.

As to virtual trainer - check how much instruction 4 can be bought for (for a robot), and then buy the skill you want to train up to level 3.

Finally there is the wafer method. Get a wafer jack installed and just plug in the skill you want for the situation at hand.

 

[Brandon C]

Worth noting that GT: Starships included gyms, shooting ranges, swimming pools, etc, some of which also appeared in earlier books.

 

[kilemall]

IMTU staterooms have entertainment centres that make the x-box look like pong. The whole room can have all its (configurable) furniture fold away, every wall, the floor and ceiling are displace screen capable.
So the whole room can become a simulator complete with virtual trainer.

A cheaper option is the VR training pod.

As to virtual trainer - check how much instruction 4 can be bought for (for a robot), and then buy the skill you want to train up to level 3.

Finally there is the wafer method. Get a wafer jack installed and just plug in the skill you want for the situation at hand.

Doesn't cover the physical exercise/increase regimen, which involves physical equipment. Cheaper to have it and the wallscreens in one room instead of each one (although a good feature on the list for what MgT calls luxuries for a passenger ship).

VR pods are perhaps usable for screen training or things like pilot or navigator, but not others like a shooting range or practicing body language skills for Liaison.

Robot programs are cheap, robot brains are not. A robot brain doing training and not doing other shipwork is a real cost. Also, an engineering bot or other specialist is not likely a multi-purpose trainer- probably need a human form bot for that (can make it a slave bot to the brain to make it cheaper).

If you like, assume the cost I outlined for pluses cover instruction upgrades including bot systems.

 

[kilemall]

Worth noting that GT: Starships included gyms, shooting ranges, swimming pools, etc, some of which also appeared in earlier books.

And no reason what I am outlining here would preclude such amenities for troop/war ships or liners.

I'm suggesting something smaller and more pervasive for everything down to the Type S for a very basic function, as important as maintaining a current and deep entertainment library (heh, maybe the Library program would be 5% galactic wiki and 95% video/game content).

 

[mike wightman]

TL9+ Wii Fit should do the trick for physical training

 

[Brandon C]

And no reason what I am outlining here would preclude such amenities for troop/war ships or liners.

I'm suggesting something smaller and more pervasive for everything down to the Type S for a very basic function, as important as maintaining a current and deep entertainment library (heh, maybe the Library program would be 5% galactic wiki and 95% video/game content).

As reference, the GT gymnasium is 2.5 displacement tons and allows four people at a time to work out.

 

[Enoki]

My counter argument to this is that from DGP's task system onwards and MT in particular the Traveller games became roll playing rather than role playing - rol dice for every action no matter how trivial, build up a task library, think about how you can influence the dice being rolled.
How about just play your character and try stuff.

I agree with that perspective totally. But, I was pointing it out in counter argument that skill level 1 would be sufficient in most cases for a character. The way I see it is skill level 1 is sufficient for the routine and repetitive. You can do something proficiently so long as its the way you regularly would do it.
Levels 2 and up are where you start getting ability to deal with problems, the unusual, and emergency situations.
I also think with additional levels you are getting a diminishing return on how much better you are than someone at a lower level.
For example, driving a car / vehicle.

Level 0 = You know how to do it and so long as everything is routine you can manage to do it without an accident.

Level 1 = You can operate it in a wider range of conditions like off-road, or in bad weather. You know something about how to deal with basic emergency situations like a skid, and something about how to improve handling.

Level 2 = You're more of a pro.

Or, as a fighter pilot:
L0 = You know how to fly and are a target.
L1 = You fly well enough to survive combat, maybe.
L2 = You're able to succeed well in combat, even make ace.
L3 = You're hot stuff and really rack up your kills.

The difference between each level gets smaller and smaller.

So, the scale of improvement might be:
L0 = 37% efficiency
L1 = 63%
L2 = 77%
L3 = 85%
L4 = 91%
L5 = 95%

The exact values aren't the point. The fact that the scale is exponential is. You gain a lot going from 0 to 1 but not so much going from 3 to 4.

 

[kilemall]

The difference between each level gets smaller and smaller.

So, the scale of improvement might be:
L0 = 37% efficiency
L1 = 63%
L2 = 77%
L3 = 85%
L4 = 91%
L5 = 95%

The exact values aren't the point. The fact that the scale is exponential is. You gain a lot going from 0 to 1 but not so much going from 3 to 4.

If it's my butt on the line, whether starship heroics or the surgeon operating on me, 95% looks WAY better then 85%.

 

[flykiller]

You cannot bring the power creep mindset exemplified by 3.5E, 4E, or 5E to Traveller

sure you can. start with humans in a mildly extrapolated 1960's sci-fi setting, and really, the sky's the limit, both ways.

With just an average set of characteristics (say, 6, 7, 8) and skill level one many Routine tasks are really pretty hazardous.

indeed. ditched the whole thing for a regular integrated skill/task system to make routine tasks routine and hazardous tasks hazardous relative to skill level.