skillsets

[flykiller]

elsewhere we read:

Combat Rifleman should cover not only rifles, but related tools and techniques of basic soldiery: hand grenades, rifle grenades, bayonets and so on.

a typical approach to ct chargen is that skill acquisition is atomized and (semi-)random. this alternate view sees skill acquisition in terms of default skillsets rationally related to career and assignment.

consider the "combat rifleman". one may envision the associated skillset as including rifle, sidearm, combatives, grenades, bayonet, vehicle, combat engineering, tactics, leadership, athletics, etc, all at skill level 0 or 1 depending on the task resolution system being used. perhaps the player may choose certain skills, perhaps two or three, for specialization and thus increased skill level? perhaps such choices define later career opportunities thus defining later skillsets available for acquisition?

would such a system be desireable?

 

[McPerth]

Personally I always assumed all players have several 0 level skills based on their careers (at large, those in the service skill/MOS table). So, I asume all former soldiers (be them Army or Marine) to have pole arm (mounted bayonet) and dagger/Blade (unmounted bayonet) at 0, and all former Navy and Scouts have Vacc Suit at 0, just to give some examples.

See that MgT, may years latter than I assumed this (this was in MT times), gave all service skills at 0 as basic training...

 

[Adam Dray]

Only if it's your first career. If you start as a Diplomat or something, then eventually transition into Army, you only get that Diplomat service package of 0-level skills. Do diplomats joining the Army not go through Basic Training? Why don't they get rifles 0 or whatever?

 

[whulorigan]

Only if it's your first career. If you start as a Diplomat or something, then eventually transition into Army, you only get that Diplomat service package of 0-level skills. Do diplomats joining the Army not go through Basic Training? Why don't they get rifles 0 or whatever?

IIRC, careers beyond the first get one skill at zero-level from the list of service skills of the new profession. But I had the same reaction as you when I first read the MgT Ruleset.

I guess it is to keep CharGen from granting too many skills to people who constantly switch careers. But it still seems somewhat illogical.

 

[McPerth]

Only if it's your first career. If you start as a Diplomat or something, then eventually transition into Army, you only get that Diplomat service package of 0-level skills. Do diplomats joining the Army not go through Basic Training? Why don't they get rifles 0 or whatever?

Because they are assigned to a post where their already learnt skills may be used, I'd say.

So, if a diplomat changes career to Army, he'll learn one service skill at 0 (probably gun combat) and be sent on a place where his/her diplomat skills are useful for the Army (after all, being so different careers, the Army may well be short of such individuals), instead of having him/her undergo all learning given to those whose possibilities are still to be seen and whose assingments are still to decide.

 

[Adam Dray]

I think "sent to a post" indicates a chance to learn level-1 skills. Having the basics to be a decent soldier at all means having the level-0 skills that we've been saying are about the barest amount of proficiency (crash course in a day or two).

Really, you don't get out of Basic Training without /qualifying/ in the use of a rifle and passing an obstacle course. Is that a 1 in athletics and rifle, or a 0?

 

[flykiller]

Is that a 1 in athletics and rifle, or a 0?

that would depend on the task system being used, yes?

 

[Adam Dray]

that would depend on the task system being used, yes?

Of course, but I thought we were talking about Mongoose at the time. I am probably (likely) wrong, because "combat rifleman" doesn't sound familiar. What edition is that from?

 

[flykiller]

Of course, but I thought we were talking about Mongoose at the time. I am probably (likely) wrong, because "combat rifleman" doesn't sound familiar. What edition is that from?

I was not thinking of any edition, but rather the concept of "combat rifleman", and for that matter of "skillsets", with an eye towards a career-related chargen system rather than a random chargen system.

 

[Adam Dray]

Why not adapt a "backgrounds" system? Each term in a background (a sort of career), you get a +1 to that background, but each subsequent term spent in it, you must specialize one level further.

For example:

1st term: I was a stoner, failing out of college, ending up on the streets in a hard way. Let's call this background "Drifter +1."

2nd term: I was still on the streets, but I fell in with a drug dealer. This is a specialization of Drifter, and I'll call it "Drifter / Drug Dealer +2."

3rd term: I got my life together. The only way off the streets was to join the Imperial Navy and literally leave the subsector. Let's call this new background "Navy Swab +1."

4th term: Proving myself, I got promoted to engineering. This is not really a specialization of Navy Swab, though, so I have to be a "Navy Engineer +1."

5th term: I excelled at fixing mechanical problems. Not good with physics or math or the complicated M-drive or J-drive stuff, I concentrated on fixing just about everything else. Let's call this "Navy Engineer / Mechanic +2."

Player wants to access a ship's technical panel. That's more Engineer than Mechanic, so he gets a +1 skill mod.

Player wants to hold a gun to a guy's face and intimidate him. It's likely he did that kind of thing as a Drug Dealer, so he gets a +2 skill mod.

 

[flykiller]

Why not adapt a "backgrounds" system? Each term in a background (a sort of career), you get a +1 to that background, but each subsequent term spent in it, you must specialize one level further.

has potential. includes youth too:

"backwoods" background
age 10-13) rifle 1, equestrian 0, hunting 0, wilderness living 0, wilderness recon 0
age 14-17) rifle 2, hunting 1, wilderness recon 1, equestrian 0, wilderness living 0
etc

 

[aramis]

Why not adapt a "backgrounds" system? Each term in a background (a sort of career), you get a +1 to that background, but each subsequent term spent in it, you must specialize one level further.

For example:

1st term: I was a stoner, failing out of college, ending up on the streets in a hard way. Let's call this background "Drifter +1."

2nd term: I was still on the streets, but I fell in with a drug dealer. This is a specialization of Drifter, and I'll call it "Drifter / Drug Dealer +2."

3rd term: I got my life together. The only way off the streets was to join the Imperial Navy and literally leave the subsector. Let's call this new background "Navy Swab +1."

4th term: Proving myself, I got promoted to engineering. This is not really a specialization of Navy Swab, though, so I have to be a "Navy Engineer +1."

5th term: I excelled at fixing mechanical problems. Not good with physics or math or the complicated M-drive or J-drive stuff, I concentrated on fixing just about everything else. Let's call this "Navy Engineer / Mechanic +2."

Player wants to access a ship's technical panel. That's more Engineer than Mechanic, so he gets a +1 skill mod.

Player wants to hold a gun to a guy's face and intimidate him. It's likely he did that kind of thing as a Drug Dealer, so he gets a +2 skill mod.

Paranoia used that kind of skill specialization. It was a pain in the ...

It really looks great on paper, but in practice... not so much.

 

[Adam Dray]

No, Paranoia had a skill tree. This is a freeform thing you negotiate with your referee. Totally different animal.

 

[aramis]

No, Paranoia had a skill tree. This is a freeform thing you negotiate with your referee. Totally different animal.

Nope. It's still the same thing, whether the list is fixed or not. The branching down was a nightmare with a skill list; it's going to be worse when there is no master list and different people in the group disagree with each other and/or the GM over which is more narrow...

 

[rhialto]

Why not adapt a "backgrounds" system? Each term in a background (a sort of career), you get a +1 to that background, but each subsequent term spent in it, you must specialize one level further.

For example:

1st term: I was a stoner, failing out of college, ending up on the streets in a hard way. Let's call this background "Drifter +1."

2nd term: I was still on the streets, but I fell in with a drug dealer. This is a specialization of Drifter, and I'll call it "Drifter / Drug Dealer +2."

3rd term: I got my life together. The only way off the streets was to join the Imperial Navy and literally leave the subsector. Let's call this new background "Navy Swab +1."

4th term: Proving myself, I got promoted to engineering. This is not really a specialization of Navy Swab, though, so I have to be a "Navy Engineer +1."

5th term: I excelled at fixing mechanical problems. Not good with physics or math or the complicated M-drive or J-drive stuff, I concentrated on fixing just about everything else. Let's call this "Navy Engineer / Mechanic +2."

Player wants to access a ship's technical panel. That's more Engineer than Mechanic, so he gets a +1 skill mod.

Player wants to hold a gun to a guy's face and intimidate him. It's likely he did that kind of thing as a Drug Dealer, so he gets a +2 skill mod.

Barbarians of Lemuria uses a system just like this (and on a 2d6 task system no less). Worked great in practice, ran a campaign with my group for quite a while.

 

[creativehum]

Nope. It's still the same thing, whether the list is fixed or not. The branching down was a nightmare with a skill list; it's going to be worse when there is no master list and different people in the group disagree with each other and/or the GM over which is more narrow...

Unless, of course, the group doesn't have this problem. There terrors of one person's experience with RPGs do not occur at all gaming tables.

My RPG needs aren't based on the things that happened at other people's tables. And the kind of rigidity you seem to require never seems to be required at my table.

 

[McPerth]

I think "sent to a post" indicates a chance to learn level-1 skills. Having the basics to be a decent soldier at all means having the level-0 skills that we've been saying are about the barest amount of proficiency (crash course in a day or two).

Really, you don't get out of Basic Training without /qualifying/ in the use of a rifle and passing an obstacle course. Is that a 1 in athletics and rifle, or a 0?

That will depend on the post and specialty. I guess if a doctor or a lawyer wants to join the Army, those requisites eil lbe quite lax when joining the medical Corps or the JAG...

To reflect it in the game, a carácter that, after two terms in the scientis (medical) career or Citizen (corporate, that is the closer thing to a lawyer I find) joins the Army, is given some basic training (let's say gun combat 0) and his skills would be so useful as not to be too hard in the rest.

Of course, CT and MT have not those problems, as there is no career change allowed...

I was not thinking of any edition, but rather the concept of "combat rifleman", and for that matter of "skillsets", with an eye towards a career-related chargen system rather than a random chargen system.

Sorry, I guess it was my reference to MgT that caused it.

What I meant, though, is that, in any version, we can asume several 0 level skills based on former career(s) and common sense.

With Traveller RAW, many ex-Navy or ex-Scout veterans will not know how to use a vacc suit, nor how to move in zero-G, and I guess they have lal been trained for both skills (at least at this familiarity level as 0 level is told to mean).

 

[Adam Dray]

Nope. It's still the same thing, whether the list is fixed or not. The branching down was a nightmare with a skill list; it's going to be worse when there is no master list and different people in the group disagree with each other and/or the GM over which is more narrow...

Freeform backgrounds work great in 13th Age, for example (but that game doesn't branch them).

If you want to try to solve your group's social problems with more rules, I'd recommend that the GM just list the available backgrounds and branches.

Paranoia's branches were skills. These are not. These are backgrounds. They're much broader and incorporate all the experiences you had during a period of your life.

Background systems do make characters more competent, overall. Generally, switching from a skill system to a background system changes the question from "Will they succeed?" to "How does a character's experience ensure they succeed?" because a good player can always figure out how to apply their best backgrounds to a problem. If that's not to one's liking, a background system won't work for you.

I find that it works out about the same in most games, though.

 

[flykiller]

Sorry

no need.

What I meant, though, is that, in any version, we can asume several 0 level skills based on former career(s) and common sense.

well ... I'd be nervous around anyone who has demolitions 0 or forward observer 0. and vacc suit 0 is just asking for trouble.

With Traveller RAW, many ex-Navy or ex-Scout veterans will not know how to use a vacc suit, nor how to move in zero-G, and I guess they have lal been trained for both skills (at least at this familiarity level as 0 level is told to mean).

well it's quite possible to serve 20 years in the modern navy and never touch salt water once, so likely a high-tech society with thousands of years of space travel and space engineering experience might not view vacc suit skill as required.

but all that is just a subset consideration of the notion of career-based skillsets.

 

[McPerth]

well ... I'd be nervous around anyone who has demolitions 0 or forward observer 0. and vacc suit 0 is just asking for trouble.

well, I'd expect any comando trained individual to have all three, as they are usually trained on them (in the case of vac suit, to use the CA/BDTL if the TL is enough high).

well it's quite possible to serve 20 years in the modern navy and never touch salt water once, so likely a high-tech society with thousands of years of space travel and space engineering experience might not view vacc suit skill as required.

but all that is just a subset consideration of the notion of career-based skillsets.

And how many of those ground duty navymen are not thought how to swim?