Is Combat Driving Enough?

[L. Marcus]

Just a thought: Would you let someone with Combat Driving or Combat Piloting use that skill to do tricks with? Or should there be ,like, a PS: Aerobatics besides Combat Piloting for the really nifty loops and rolls? Or would you allow the PS: Aerobatics to be used like Acrobatics?

[Captain Obvious]

Generally speaking, I'd say Combat Driving or Combat Piloting would be good enough. If it was a heavily vehicle-centric campaign (Car Wars Hero, Robot Warriors, WWI Flying Aces, etc) I might go with the added Aerobatics skills.

[ghost-angel]

Pretty much what Captain Obvious said, Combat Piloting/Driving would be enough. If a character were centering part of the background/life around it they would conceivably take a PS/KS.

I'd even go and say a character that took KS: Aerodynamics woudl be able to use it to cancel any modifiers you might give them, or do some extraordinary tricks.

[prestidigitator]

Combat Driving/Piloting are enough. Remember that a basic Transport Familiarity allows you to drive/fly in normal circumstances and gives you an 8- roll in hazardous/combat situations. The full Combat Driving/Piloting skill is essential for those who must pull every trick their vehicle is capable of in order to win the fight. In other words, if you can't pull a loop to get the hell out of a tail chase, you might as well get out of the fighter and go back to a two-seat Cessna or a commuter jet.

[archermoo]

Combat pilot would be enough to DO the cool loops and rolls. PS: Aerobatics would allow you to make them LOOK cool too.

At least that's the way I generally do it.

[prestidigitator]

Combat pilot would be enough to DO the cool loops and rolls. PS: Aerobatics would allow you to make them LOOK cool too.

At least that's the way I generally do it.
:lol: Sure. Actually, PS: Aerobatics might be enough to do them without Combat Piloting (and make them look good), but as soon as things get stressful, you'd better be able to maneuver in every way possible, however it looks (and not crash with your sudden 8- roll if you don't have Combat Piloting!).

[CBikle]

If a player had a skill like aerobatics or PS: stunt driver, I might allow them to occasionally use them as complementary skills.

Like the above posters, I think combat driving/piloting should cover it.

I try not to water down the skills. When I've seen other GMs do that it just leads to PCs exclusively throwing their XP into multipower slots or combat skill levels, etc.

[Vorsch]

I would treat them as seperate skills.

after all a stunt pilot wouldnt necessarily be a Ace combat pilot

[prestidigitator]

I would treat them as seperate skills.

after all a stunt pilot wouldnt necessarily be a Ace combat pilot
No. Not at all. But an ace combat pilot had better have a few good stunts!

[TheEmerged]

Depends, do you *want* it to matter? The answer to your question depends heavily on how much you feel the skills should play a role in your genre. If you want 11- to represent a professional level of skill, then you probably shouldn't worry about anything beyond Combat Driving/Piloting.

On the other hand, if performing these stunts is a major part of the campaign that occurs regularly, then requiring multiple skills is called for. Similarly, requiring finer gradients with the PS/KS/SS family of skills is similarly called for.

To pick on Iron Chef as an example, it's completely within the genre to have seperate PS: skill for different forms of cooking, as well as PSL's to represent special skills with certain ingedients, a seperate PS for Plating (or even multiple schools of plating technique), KS to represent knowledge of recipes as oppossed to the techniques...

[archermoo]

:lol: Sure. Actually, PS: Aerobatics might be enough to do them without Combat Piloting (and make them look good), but as soon as things get stressful, you'd better be able to maneuver in every way possible, however it looks (and not crash with your sudden 8- roll if you don't have Combat Piloting!).

Certainly, that was the intent. To be able to do well in combat situations, you need Combat Pilot. To do well in competition Aerobatics you need PS: Aerobatics. However in competition I allow Combat Pilot to be used as a complementary skill to PS: Aerobatics, and in combat I allow PS: Aerobatics to be used as a complementary skill to Combat Pilot.

Being a great combat pilot doesn't automatically mean you do stunts well, and being able to do excellent precision flying doesn't automatically mean you can fight for @$#%. However being able to do both well can certainly give you a bit of an edge when doing either.

[Vanguard00]

Aerobatics could/should be a complementary skill to Combat Pilot, but it shouldn't replace it. Nor should the reverse be true.

Think of it this way:

a USAF pilot has "combat pilot" and is trained to dogfight, basic formation flying, target acquisition, etc. He knows how to act and react in combat.

A pilot of the "Blue Angels" or "Thunderbirds" demonstration teams would have PS: Aerobatics as well, to demonstrate precision flying techniques and maneuvers not ordinarily taught in combat flight school.

I hate to use this as a reference, but all of the pilots in the movie "Top Gun" had combat pilot skill. Maverick demonstrated Aerobatics on a number of occassions, giving him an edge over other highly-skilled pilots.

[austenandrews]

Given that Hero generally models cinematic and comic books styles, in which world-class stunts are commonplace for heroic characters, Combat Driving/Piloting should generally be sufficient.

[L. Marcus]

Thanks a lot, everyone! Food for thought, and all that . . . :thumbup:

[Super Squirrel]

Just a thought: Would you let someone with Combat Driving or Combat Piloting use that skill to do tricks with? Or should there be ,like, a PS: Aerobatics besides Combat Piloting for the really nifty loops and rolls? Or would you allow the PS: Aerobatics to be used like Acrobatics?
I'd use Combat Piloting alone but would allow PS: Aeriel Maneuvers act as a complementary skill on it.

[Black Lotus]

If the special tricks and stunts have a measurable, beneficial game rules effect for the character -- on a decently occurring basis, not once or twice during the whole campaign -- create a PS for them. If no beneficial game rules effect can ever be achieved, it is roleplaying, and you should not charge for it.

Every Skill in the Hero System has a potential for providing a benefit in terms of game rules: disarming a bomb (escaping damage), Stealth (escaping detection), Science Skill: Biology (useful in many campaigns)... all Skills, Perks, and Talents provide a noticeable, measurable game benefit.

I'm repreating myself, but just decide how USEFUL the Aerobatics will be in terms of gameplay. If they exist mainly to advance the story or to add glitter and fun to the game session, but not to really help the characters, do not charge for it -- IMHO. Just group it in with the Combat Piloting.

[Trebuchet]

Aerobatics would be a great name for a "non-combat" Combat Piloting Skill which doesn't have the tactical ramifications (how to get behind another aircraft, how to shake an enemy off your "six", how to dodge antiaircraft fire, etc.) that attaches to Combat Pilot. It might be a good way to represent a stunt pilot, test pilot, or maybe a crop duster - anyone who is a skilled pilot but doesn't actually have training in aerial combat.

You could even consider making it a 2 Point Skill rather than a full 3 Point one as Combat Pilot.

[L. Marcus]

After some thought, I decided to make the Aerobatics skill a standard PS, and use it just to make nice-looking tricks. To use it in a competition, either the Aerobatics is complimentary to the Combat Piloting, or the other way (haven't decided which yet.)

Take, say, skateboarding. Doing tricks in a half-pipe, is that Skateboarding (Combat Driving in a different guise) polished by PS: Skateboarder, or the other way around?

[Rapier]

Just a thought: Would you let someone with Combat Driving or Combat Piloting use that skill to do tricks with? Or should there be ,like, a PS: Aerobatics besides Combat Piloting for the really nifty loops and rolls? Or would you allow the PS: Aerobatics to be used like Acrobatics?

For the most part its enough. Maybe the Blue Angels would have a TeamWork: Blue Angels Piloting skill, but Combat Driving/Piloting is specifically designed for those nifty swifty bits of driving/piloting that are beyond the normal ken.

About the only difference I would make is that if it was a special skill (eg barnstorming or something maybe) I might allow a supplementary skill. Make your Barnstorming skill roll and use the result as a modifier for your Combat Piloting roll to fly through the barn without hitting any chickens.

[prestidigitator]

Make your Barnstorming skill roll and use the result as a modifier for your Combat Piloting roll to fly through the barn without hitting any chickens.
Without hitting chickens?! Now where's the fun in that?! Chickens are worth at least 15 points!

[L. Marcus]

. . . Move Through on a chicken . . . :eek:

[ghost-angel]

. . . Move Through on a chicken . . . :eek:

ahem: http://lifeisaroad.com/stories/2004/10/23/whyDidTheChicken.html

this thread is in serious danger of imploding due to everyone agreeing on everything....

[JmOz]

I would probably say that PS: Aereobaticts and Combat piloting are related enough to allow a default roll for the otherone at -3

[prestidigitator]

ahem: http://lifeisaroad.com/stories/2004/10/23/whyDidTheChicken.html

this thread is in serious danger of imploding due to everyone agreeing on everything....
:rofl:

[LordGhee]

2 cents,

Aerobatics is the skill to move the airplane around. combat driving allows you to do combat with the plane. The frist skill is a commplentry to the 2nd as is tatics ect. It work just like acrobatics in HTH combat.

Just consider this a move by :) commit.

[Big Willy]

In a heavily vehiculocentric campaign (say World War One Flying Aces, or Frontier Truckers of the ****ed-Up Future), I'd dispense with Combat Driving/Piloting altogether, and work out a bunch of Martial Arts manoeuvres usable with each rig.

For more general games, I think they work fine as is - although you could differentiate between Combat and Stunt driving styles, if Jack Regan and Evel Knievel are both characters in your campaign...

[L. Marcus]

For more general games, I think they work fine as is - although you could differentiate between Combat and Stunt driving styles, if Jack Regan and Evel Knievel are both characters in your campaign...
Good point.

Now, how about diversified Combad Driving skills? Like Charioteering or Sailing in a Fantasy campaign? I feel that it wouldn't be right to use a single CD skill to cover both of these.

[ghost-angel]

Good point.

Now, how about diversified Combad Driving skills? Like Charioteering or Sailing in a Fantasy campaign? I feel that it wouldn't be right to use a single CD skill to cover both of these.
That is something we've started to do. Combat Piloting: Aircraft is a lot different from Combat Pilot: Spacecraft.

[zornwil]

Just to add on, yes, I'd allow it, to the original question. What I wouldn't allow is that the person would be effective at choreography or such, they'd be like a gymnast showing up to a dance competition. They could look cool and do cool stuff, but they wouldn't be effective if judged on actual dance. Similarly, if our combat pilot joined the Blue Angels, he'd have to develop Teamwork at least or the actual PS Aerobatics or some-such. Although, really, if it was a pure color thing where somebody wanted to do this and had a little reasonable time to prep, I'd let them; book-wise/orthodoxy, the prior sentences would be my ruling "if it mattered".

[L. Marcus]

Good point.

Now, how about diversified Combad Driving skills? Like Charioteering or Sailing in a Fantasy campaign? I feel that it wouldn't be right to use a single CD skill to cover both of these.
. . . I just wanted to add that this would be for more down-to-earth (not necessarily realistic :)) games. For Super games or Space Opera, I'd go with straight Combat Pilot and Combat Driving . . .