The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Skill level cap?
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters -> Skill level cap? Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
Naaman wrote:
If we require a teacher to get beyond +4D, how did the (first) teacher ever get beyond +4D?

In life, things seem be be the opposite: the initial learning requires a teacher, up to the point that a character is advanced enough to start innovating new methods/techniques in whatever field.


Well, its like ADND. If one needs a teacher to learn magic from, or weapon specialty from, HOW DID the first person ever learn it???
Its the 'chicken and the egg' conundrum.


Experimentation seems to be the means by which new techniques and methods come about. I was watching youtube the other day and there is a guy--ex army Ranger--who went and got some self defense training from a retired police detective. At first, I thought, "this feels backwards." But as the instructor started to explain how the techniques came about (through lots of trial and error and experimentation), things started making sense.

Either guy (the military guy and the cop) has the right foundational skillset to develop a curriculum on his own, but the cop actually had a NEED for the specific techniques he was teaching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 12915
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I’m mostly with Whill here, but seriously, why does the game need an arbitrary dice cap, when earning enough CP to get to that level takes years of gaming anyway? There’s already a rule in place to cap Attribute improvement, and skill improvement cost slopes up pretty far at higher levels, so if a player wants to push as far as he can in a specific area, what’s the problem. If this is something you’re having problems with in your gaming group, are you perhaps giving away too many CP, which allows characters to advance too quickly?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I figured it was more of an issue of adding value to attributes so that choosing where to allocate your attributes at character creation remains more of a consequential decision over time.

For what it's worth, our group used to play an entire campaign in one summer (hitting the 10D-12D range in our primary skills at the culmination of the campaign... I think my highest skill ever achieved was 13D+2 which was actually a combination of brawling and (A) martial arts). And yes, we spent almost every day, most of the day from morning to night gaming. 10 or more hours 5 or more days a week, basically... as I recall, anyway.

The point being that, depending on what the group considers "fun" and "worthwhile" in terms of role playing, there may be no limit to what an appropriate amount of CPs is for an adventure.

For example, in my opinion, a single session should yield at least enough character points to raise one primary skill and have at least one CP left over "in reserve" to add to dice rolls or whatever. Of course, the player may choose to raise two or three other skills or none at all, banking his CP. If the skills my character relies on get to the point where I have to play two or three sessions to raise one of them, it's not as "worthwhile" a gaming session (especially in grown up life where "worthwhile" sessions happen once a month or less).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mamatried
Line Captain
Line Captain


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 977
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Naaman is onto something here.

Now if we look at a normal adventure form a module, it is generally rewarding 3-5CP pr "episode" and most have 2 or more, so an average of 12 Cp pr module.

Now if we look to "non important"named characters, meaning characters that if killed by a palyer will not change anything significant in canon or the timeline used, be this canon, legends or custom.

First: 9/10 named NPCs that are force users have 18D to attributes + force skills, not like the characters where they spend attribute Dice to buy force skills.

Secondly, seeing their ages and their levels of skills and number of dice we see something strange.

there is no way a character can ever be anything other than a "elite trooper" in the game as pr the rules.
No character would be able to be at par with even a mere "padawan" without having spent about year or two playing.

Lets look at some of the characters, we can take mara jade, 2 years younger than Luke. She has 100s of Dice to skills, and 18D +force.

Luke, though he is a important one has the same thing.

Now if characters could get x10 cp each "episode" then they would over a year be able to "be the heroes" in level.

I see the general write up of a NPC bad guy, imperial officer on less galactic importance, even a group of 4 Players have combined less skills dice.
and this not at all a boss.

Now stormies and the like are mere mooks and should imo maybe be more challenging, but this is about the "detailed NPCS"

I for the life of me can not see how there can be that many on that level if they all (for the jedi and sith) had ot spend additional CP at a x10 cost to raise upto 3 of their attributes. and then withing the span of a year, or mabye onely 2 earn 100x the amount of XP a player group will earn in a year of play.

Now raising the CP rewards, allowing skills to be advanced to +1D over +1pip, would make a huge differnece.

I did an experiamnet, I had a player use BOBA FETT as a character, though the name was changed for the experiment and then comaperd him to a character, and while he was better in just about everthing, the characther in question could out pilot boba with ease.

However no other boutnty hunter could eve come near, no matter how muh they played and not in the same "in game time"


So maybe simply give more cp is answer I don't know
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3869
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Good point. I suppose the RAW also allows for advancement of attributes beyond species "maximum.'
Yes it does.

Here's the 2E rule. (I think it is the same in 2E R&E, but I'm too lazy to look it up.)

Quote:
Attribute Maximum
At the end of the training time, the character must roll to see if their attribute actually went up. The character rolls their current dice for that attribute, while the gamemaster rolls the maximum attribute die code for the species for that attribute (see Sect ion 7.1 under '‘Aliens"), if the character's roll is equal to or less than the gamemaster's die roll, the character's attribute goes up by one pip. If the character's roll is higher, the attribute doesn't go up and the skill points are held in "suspension" until after the next adventure.


A trainer isn't necessary, but training without one takes more time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In 2 R&E instead of being held in reserve, the character loses 1/2 the character points and immediately gets the balance back.

IMO, it's a lame rule.

Mostly because in the text of the rule itself, it says nothing about a risk of losing CPs for no gain, then, mentions something about going beyond species maximum, and then, the one and only example given is one where the character tries to go beyond species maximum and loses 1/2 his CPs because his roll on 4D+1 (17) was higher than the GM's roll on 4D (15).

It makes it seem like there is only a risk if you attempt to go beyond species maximum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 6005
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
I’m mostly with Whill here, but seriously, why does the game need an arbitrary dice cap, when earning enough CP to get to that level takes years of gaming anyway? There’s already a rule in place to cap Attribute improvement, and skill improvement cost slopes up pretty far at higher levels, so if a player wants to push as far as he can in a specific area, what’s the problem. If this is something you’re having problems with in your gaming group, are you perhaps giving away too many CP, which allows characters to advance too quickly?

I'm mostly with CRM here. In my game PCs tend to start out better than they would in RAW (so they are more capable right off the bat), but then advancement is slower than RAW. And since the attribute improvement rule was obviously written by WEG authors smoking a fat one after work on a Friday night, I've never allowed its use so my players have just focused on skills they wanted to improve for their PCs. I've never ran into the problem of PCs getting OP.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 12915
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can see both sides on Attribute improvement, but I’m inclined to allow it, as I can see circumstances where a broad enough spectrum of training could plausibly result in an overall increase. Boot camp, for instance, would merit a +1 to Strength skills across the board. A well-rounded college degree might do the same for Knowledge, and so on and so forth.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mamatried
Line Captain
Line Captain


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 977
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
I can see both sides on Attribute improvement, but I’m inclined to allow it, as I can see circumstances where a broad enough spectrum of training could plausibly result in an overall increase. Boot camp, for instance, would merit a +1 to Strength skills across the board. A well-rounded college degree might do the same for Knowledge, and so on and so forth.


I agree with this.
if we tak two 21 year olds, both graduates one in the military, and lets say Infantry a very Physically demanding service, and the other one a normal active life and lets say go into law studies.

I would strongly argu the military training and service will increase the person's "raw" strength.
I would not argu the latter would have a higher intelligence, but he will have most likely a significantly higher level of education, even what could be called the non specialized education, as in school even law school he would learn more than just the law, and he has significantly more "free" time for hobbies and studies.

The soldier will have free time, but most of his daily job is physical and he "specializes" in his role and the tools he use by experience, but he also for the most part have less access to the higher education and less "free" time for such activities.

So could it be that maybe we should have a "Skilled/Unskilled" destiction in the checks.

Joe the infantrymen has a high mechanical skill, he is the APC driver, but he has not really had any actual piloting training, he does know some very very basics though and have a good knack for this.

His rolls on piloting should maybe have a higher difficulty then if he actually had some training.

So lets say what trained plot has as an Very Easy: 1-5, an untrained "pilot" using his raw mechanical attribute and not the piloting skill would maybe need Easy: 6-10 to do the same task, or even Moderate: 11-15

So Joe with his 4D DEX, has nothing allocated to piloting, his difficulty is then one step higher.
he allocates 4 cp to get his starfighter piloting to 4D+1, his difficulties are now actually reduced, and is "normal"

I for the life of me can not see how a civilian who knows diving, parachuting and survival and is a crack shot and a good hand to hand comabtant becomes a navy seal just becuse a rule set give them the same named skills?

So I would think maybe raising difficulties for the "non skilled" checks could make some sense

2D mechanical....this is your average person, they have a hard time doing a "trained" maneuver, add 2CP for a "course" and they now have 2D+1, this +1 is traing, and reperesent the path of "specializing" without using the skill specialization mechanic. they become trained in the skill and can perfom better or easier than an untrained person using the same skill
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2019 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are some systems that work kinda like this. If we look at WotC's SWRPG (2002 time period) we see a few examples.

Piloting is a skill that a character can raise.

It covers all vehicles and jet packs and the like. A character with no training in piloting can still pilot any vehicle, but they automatically fail all piloting checks. In d20, you don't actually roll for doing regular stuff like driving to the store for some groceries.

If, however, you had to make an emergency maneuver, your dex of 18 (+4 on piloting checks) does you no good, while the guy with dex 10 and 1 rank in piloting (total of +1 on pilot checks) actually gets to roll to try to avoid a crash.

Then, if piloting a starship, the character can, again, pilot a simple commute. However, there are three feats that cover starship piloting (figuters, transports, and capital). A person must have 2 ranks in piloting to take one of these feats. If flying a ship for which you do not have the feat, you take a -4 penalty on the roll.

So, what we see is that zero training gets most people by in life on a normal day.

Minimal training opens up possibilities for contests (opposed rolls) and stunts (tricky or risky maneuvers that range from very easy to super heroic). Starships are harder to fly than other vehicles (-4 penaty).

With specialized training (the right starship feat) you negate the penalty for the classes of ships you train on.

In D6, it may be easier to simulate what you want by imposing a penalty on the roll of an untrained character than to "raise the difficulty."

One thing to be weary of, however, is characters taking 1 pip in every skill (or a whole bunch of skills that make little sense) to make life "easier."

One way to mitigate this would be to retain the penalty until the character has 1D over the attribute, if you wanted to go this route.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12355
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

True, but then some folks could argue "certain skills should be able to get done even untrained"//
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah.

Lifting, stamina, dodge, search...

The list goes on.

The skill system is really a mixed bag in this case.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2884

PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
True, but then some folks could argue "certain skills should be able to get done even untrained"//


Thinking about this more, maybe a rule of thumb could be to say that skills which rely on specific knowledge rather than inherent ability suffer the penalty.

The general rule would be that Knowledge, Mechanical and Technical skills require actual training to avoid the penalty, while Dex, Str and Per skills "start" at attribute level.

In such a case, I could see bouncing Intimidation and Willpower over to Perception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12355
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why do you think intimidation should be in that list?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3869
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
In 2 R&E instead of being held in reserve, the character loses 1/2 the character points and immediately gets the balance back.

IMO, it's a lame rule.
Well I'm not too fond of losing 1/2 the CPs due to a bad die roll. I don't think we ever enforced the CP loss on a failed improvement roll, only the loss in time.

Quote:
It makes it seem like there is only a risk if you attempt to go beyond species maximum.
That seems like a reasonable compromise. It makes exceeding species max a riskier thing than improving up to species max. Exceeding species max is theoretical, I've never seen a PC even try to improve a stat above species maximum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0