• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Skills - quantity and level

True, and this is the reason why we only use "colour" low level skills in our
campaign, and all the rest is indeed something done by default.

With "colour" skills I mean those that emphasize the character's background
and distinguish the character from those with other backgrounds.
For example, someone from a low tech agricultural planet should have a dif-
ferent set of low level cultural skills than someone from a high tech colony
in a domed habitat on a hostile planet or someone from a floating settlement
on a mid tech water world.

Mongoose Traveller handles this with a homeworld skill, but in my opinion a
(small) number of low level cultural skills gives a much better picture than
the single homeworld skill.
So, in our campaign a character usually has up to five level 0 skills that are
typical for his specific background, and the low level skills that are common
to all the backgrounds (most of the ones on your list) are handled via de-
fault.
Clarification Re: Mongoose Traveller. Characters get a number of background skills equal to 3 + Edu DM (resulting in 1 to 5 skills). Background skills are level 0. You must first take the skills listed for your homeworld. Any extra skills can be taken from a list. Homeworld skills are based on the planets description/trade codes. Planets/Homeworlds can have no special traits or several (Example: High Population, High Tech, Water World).

I believe some of the alternate character generation rules in Mongoose Traveller do not use this.
 
Last edited:
Clarification Re: Mongoose Traveller.
Thank you very much ! :):):)

The text of the German edition is a bit unclear on this point, I did read it
as one homeworld skill plus the education skills you mentioned.
If several homeworld skills are allowed, this indeed makes things easier for
me.
 
One skill that I've always thought should be explicitely noted in RPGs is that adventurers are generally capable of "normal activities" that competent folks would generally be familiar with...culturally and setting dependent. But for instance, an early 21st century Terran adventurer would probably know
....
Etc.

Most of these things could be expressed as separate skills, but really--what's the point? Why not just let 'em do it by default?

I think this is key. From a certain culture/TL, a character probably
has knowledge of a list. Which means there is a chance they will not, for any "mundane" skill.

That's a long way from saying everyone can:
-Swim
-Use common computer software (Microsoft Office)
-Setup a plug and play network
-Surf the internet and use google effectively
-Shoot normal small arms with 0 level effectiveness (though loading such guns may require familiarity)
-Use basic first aid -- applying pressure to stop bleeding, use a tourniquet, etc.
-Drive a car or truck
-Use basic climbing gear

I would say that familiarization training a some experience are enough for -0 level. The level of exposure and the complexity of the task both fugure in.

In 4 hours of training, with the right resources, I can give anyone a temporary pistol-0, or grenade launcher-0; 4 more hours, spread over 4 years, and it will become permanent. Rock Climbing-0, probably 10 times the time. Swimming-0, probably 100 times the time, dependent on age.

I have driven an 18-wheeler, once, unloaded, on a dirt road, never over 40 m.p.h.. This a task that anyone with Wheeled Vehicle-1 should be able to do, so I don't have it. But for my woefully bad attention in parking lots and traffic lights, I'd say I have Ground Car (or "Sedan")-1. I think this is a key differentce between Rifle-1 and Combat Rifleman-1, for instance: one is narrower. This narrowing can be a valuable tool for the GM.

If a belt-fed autorifle is a "normal" small arm, I would disagree with you on the above list. I would think Scouts, Marines, Army Soldiers, and possibly Merchants and Others would have basic familiarities with the types of firearms in a CT interstellar society, but the average scientist or bureaucrat from 2009?

I think as GM's, the dice are our friends. Thinking about character background, task complexity, and breadth of task, and rolling from the hip I think are necessities. Once one roll is made (lo and behold, your "professor" actually went through NOLS, a military academy, a long abortive attempt at Ranger School :nonono:, some other civilian rock climbing and some other military rope work, so he's got Rock Climbing-0), the character can write it down for color. I don't think we can have too much color in Traveller: I think we may lack the time or imagination to create what we would want, so what we have should be captured.
 
I find this approach overly fiddly, if I still have to jack with a universal task system. You seem to ignore the fact that the whole point of having skill levels and a universal task system is to allow the same task description to apply across the board to folks with all levels of the applicable skill. At this point, you've pretty much "devolved" into CT territory -- each skill has differing, fiddly task definitions. Yet you keep a fiddly universal task system...the worst of both worlds seems to me.

Of course, this does point out a common flaw with universal task systems--there is often a far more significant gap in capability (especially with mundane tasks) than such systems can easily show.

Agreed on both points.

The simplicity in play, and the heroic nature of most games, make it an acceptable compromise to use a single set of labels.

In looking at the definitions for the DGP task system I noticed that they seem to describe tasks for stat 7 & skill 1 baseline. So when assigning tasks, do so as if for a skill=1 and stat=7.
 
A CT grodnard steps in...

I really enjoyed the discussion (despite the occasional grenades) on the MgT board, and appreciate the fact that it is now here.

Herewith are my musings...

Skill levels: MTU of course, YMMV
None - heavy non-proficiency penalty, as high as -5 IIRC.
0 - basic orientation. No penalties or bonuses, enough not to shoot yourself in the foot. No risky or fancy actions.
1 - 2nd/3rd year apprentice, can perform easy tasks alone, routine task under supervision.
2 - journeyman, can perform any routine task alone, difficult without supervision
3 - skilled worker, can perform difficult task with minor supervision
4 - master level
5+ legendary

IIRC in a JTAS article it says that a doctorate implies level 4 in a primary skill, and level 4 in a related skill. So would Star Trek's Scotty be Engineering 4+ and Jack-o-Trades 4+?

Some were talking about an apparent "skills bloat" problem in MgT. Having never seen it, I can't cxomment on it, but they said they liked the extra level of detail and it avoided "plain vanilla" characters.

As for me, when I roll up CT characters, I keep track of skills gained by term, and use that and some skull sweat to create a believable backstory. You can obtain detail, as well as good plot hooks.

As for a level 4/4 character being too powerful--let's admit that with that much skill, that one would not be satisfied being 3rd assistant deck polisher. A good GM will have him where the action is! Problem solved.
 
It is, of course, culturally and setting dependent. But for instance, an early 21st century Terran adventurer would probably know how to:

-Use common computer software (Microsoft Office)
-Setup a plug and play network
-Surf the internet and use google effectively
-Shoot normal small arms with 0 level effectiveness (though loading such guns may require familiarity)
-Use basic first aid -- applying pressure to stop bleeding, use a tourniquet, etc.
-Drive a car or truck
-Use basic climbing gear
-Swim
-Carouse at 0 level
-Change a tire
-Fish
-Read
-Operate consumer devices like GPS, Ipod, Cellphone, phones, walkie-talkies, etc.
-Figure out simple devises like a radiation detector, air sniffer, etc.
-Change batteries
-Follow installation instructions for electronic devices comparable in complexity to audio or home theater systems
-Effectively use over the counter medications
-Understand how to santize items
-Cook
-Follow operation instructions for simple devices or computer applications
-Balance a checkbook

Etc.
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects!"
-- Robert A Heinlain, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
 
IMO, there is no problem with having numerous low level skills.
Agreed.
CosmicGamer said:
Why couldn't someone know how to shoot a few types of weapons, do simple mechanical and electronic repairs, maybe even engineer something simple, drive/pilot a vehicle and a boat, navigate that vehicle to it's destination, be able to perform CPR and other basic first aid, Speak foreign language, entertain and host gatherings, know how to survive in the woods, set up computers for entire companies, wrestle, enjoy hitting the casinos . . .
They can, and in my game the characters do.
CosmicGamer said:
The list could go on with non typical Traveller skills like gardening, painting, plumbing, ....
Oh, let's not.

Skill bloat is one of the reasons I don't care for any edition after the original.
CosmicGamer said:
To make a point, if the skills get detailed, instead of just electronics, it could be: repair a child's remote control toy, install a home security system, add an MP3 player to a car sound system, ... and computer skill could be programming, repairing, networking, databases, security,...
No. Just . . . no.

The Keiths did this for the Medical skill in an article in Space Gamer or Different Worlds. Worst variant ever.
CosmicGamer said:
So, to me, there is no such thing as too many low level skills, it's just a matter of the game system, the players and the GM, being able to handle it all.
Yes.
CosmicGamer said:
Here is another item pulled from the other thread. Using Drive (wheeled) as an example, what level would an average driver on the road be? 2? Do you have to be a race car driver to be higher? Limo driver?

What level would a competent driver be? A skilled driver? A trained driver? A professional driver? Yes, it is a bit nebulous.
I notice you're talking about Mongoose skills, so I can't speak to how they're handled with any authority.

However, in CT, with a couple of exceptions (such as Medical), skill ranks are relative, not absolute. Electronics-3 is better than Electronics-2, but there is no explicit scale which says that Electronics-3 is a master and Electronics-2 is a journeyman. Some referees like to make assumptions about what skill levels mean - I'm not one of them.
 
Just curious: Did you intend to agree or disagree with what you quoted ? :D

I intended to agree with myself - which is good, means I haven't completely lost my mind! :)

Just that I enjoy skills stuff discussion so much - I tinker with systems all the time and love seeing how they mesh with "reality," and the fiction of the game world being played. I also have a strong tendency to "click" with certain systems, and MGT really does it for me dice-wise - it's everything I loved about CT (and BESM, coincidentally) with new additions to the first, and without the sometimes wonkiness of the roll-under second.

YMMV, etc etc.
 
... MGT really does it for me dice-wise - it's everything I loved about CT (and BESM, coincidentally) ...
I still prefer BRP's percentile system, but MGT really got me hooked with its
character generation system and its shipbuilding.
By the way, I just "hunted down" Centauri Knights for BESM on Ebay, and
very much hope that it will contain some interesting ideas for my campaign.
 
one thing to keep in mind (if it stills works after all these years) is that learning anything at all will take time. even a basic shooting course will take at least a couple hours. and since i personally dont seem to find instructors that make house calls, additional time is spent setting up and going to such instruction. so, taking that as given, realistically, how many skills would a person be inclined to pick up over the course of prior history? dont forget the majority of time is going to be filled with 1. work, 2. sleep, and 3. bathing and hygene. this limits the amount of time for adding in furthuring education and general "i want to learn that" classes to just a few hours a week. the above example of "wont shoot yourself in the foot" gun training being about 4 hours, (and i would add probably to that statement) that could realistically be two days of class time/gun range time. minimum. altho i would allow about 30 seconds in an emergency- "ever shoot a gun? no? hold that end, point the hole at the bad guy. ONLY at the bad guy, pull that to make a loud noise. repeat until bad guy falls down, then point at new bad guy. when it stops making loud noises, push that and put this back in where the one that looks just like it fell out. stay in front of me." but this would definately require an int check to stay with the student for anything longer than a few days.

so i would think that 100-200 hours per year of prior history is a nice compromise for fitting in skills. all you have to do is figure how many hours reaching each level of skill takes and you have a semi-realistic limit on how many skills players are going to be able to have. of course i just threw this together just this minute so feel free to pick it apart....er... i mean constructively criticize to your hearts content :D
 
I think a typical evening class is about 60 hours per year in the classroom (2 hrs per night, 1 night per week for 30 weeks), plus any homework, so I'd reckon up to 100 hrs per year for a conscientious Grade A student - half that for a slacker. If you had the self-discipline, you could conceivably squeeze five of these into each week without disrupting your daily chores too much. You'd have to be pretty desperate though; two or perhaps three is more than enough for most people. ;)

Full time learning could give you about 6 hrs per day for 5 days over say 30 weeks, so perhaps 1000 hours plus homework per year, say 1500 total. More if you did an evening class on top.
 
Typical figuring is 3 hours homework to one hour class time.

A Semester credit-hour is 15 contact hours. A typical class is 3 credit-hours.
 
Different parts of the world/universe may have different standards.

3 to 1?? :oo:

I think I must be more the slacker type. :smirk:
 
I got a 3.5GPA, and generally put in 2 hours of homework for every hour of coursework.

Grad School, online, I was putting in 3-5 hours per week per credit hour... counting time spent on the class newsgroups, but not counting the 200+ hours of classroom observation I needed for the degree. (Which, due to a work injury, I've not completed the last three courses: Phys Ed Methods, Student Teaching I & II)
 
Back
Top