The Death of Knowledge Skills:

[Sean Waters]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

I'd agree with this' date=' by and large: you need some knowledge to make use of reference material, and all the internet is, is a very large repository of reference material (some of it of pretty dubious quality). That said, though, it does allow people to easily find out things that a few years ago would have been impossible without a dedicated research team. The same is true of smartphones. Everybody with a modern phone has a default FAM for AK: almost any city. A GM can say that's not paid for with points, and that they can't have it, but the players would be fully within their rights to ridicule such a GM, because in reality they [b']should [/b]have that. My own experience is that a decent GPS+net connection is a far more reliable and useful a guide to a large city than an ordinary person who has lived there all their life (and in terms of knowledge, far more capacious). At the same time, there are things you won't find on the net: it may know more restaurants and bars than the most ardent gourmand, but it won't necessarily know about the owners' private after-hours parties, or be able to tell you about specific customers.

 

Likewise unless he has public ID, or similar, you're not going to able to look up a villain's susceptibility. But if he's been in public fights, you probably could look up his basic powers, costumes, known associates, maybe even a good photo or two. If he does have a public ID, you can maybe work out his susceptibility from his ex-girlfriend's comment on E! that he always checked with the waiter if there was kryptonite in the dishes he ordered at restaurants

 

In that regard, the net gives you either a FAM for generally available knowledge, or it can act as a bonus on skill rolls. Of course, you won't always have access to it, or time to access it - in that case, what you carry in your head is going to have to serve. But it's silly to ignore it.

 

I think the internet is good for finding facts: specific knowledge points about something specific that you can look for by framing a question or a set of search parameters, and where the list of potential answers is relatively limited. Where is the nearest library? Not a problem. What is the name of the dark haired woman I just met? More of a problem. Even a full and entirely accurate physical description will get you nowhere. Everyone should have access to internet information, and sometimes it can be very useful, but we have to be aware of its limitations. For example my son's motorbike would not start this morning and the internet provided a range of potential solutions. I have not picked up KS: Mechanics, or even got to the familiarity level, but as a specific answer to a specific question that lots of other people have asked, it works.

 

 

 

Depends on what you wanted to do. If you wanted to design a plumbing system' date=' KS: Plumbing is likely to be required. If you want to fix a plumbing system, KS: plumbing is going to give you a a pretty crap roll. I have no problem with separating PS and KS: I actually see it as a strength of the Hero skill system. In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, there is. As a example, I know a lot about surgery - but I've also done some, and it's a [b']completely different thing[/b]. The only way to acquire the PS is to practice, practice, practice. Theoretical knowledge actually isn't that important in performing a specific task: I taught technicians to give vasectomies, for example, without them having any more than general knowledge of what the bits they were cutting and stapling actually were. In most cases, it's true the practical skill assumes some theoretical knowledge, but the theoretical skill doesn't really assume any practical experience.

 

To take your own example, it may be inconceivable to you, but I suspect that in fact the vast majority of plumbers don't know who Thomas Crapper was (that's a very English thing: the word crapper to mean toilet is barely known outside the UK).

 

cheers, Mark

 

However, the word 'crap' as faeces is widespread, and comes from the same derivation, so we both might end up surprised...

 

To take your example of surgery, though - anyone can have a go at PS Surgery, but trial and error is going to make you a very poor surgeon for a very long time unless you have the theory, or an enormous amount of luck. The two are so intimately linked that it is hard to see how you can usefully separate them. Yes you can learn a lot about surgery before ever operating, and you can operate without ever having read a book, but you are not going to be a useful surgeon if you do. Rather than require both skills, I would probably have gone with a 'Surgery' skill and allowed the player to buy it in limited form "Theoretical only" -1. Mind you I also like the Language system in Hero and would probably use a similar system for a lot of sciency stuff. It is hard to do Biology without being reasonably competent in maths, physics and chemistry. There ought to be a relational system, and one day I'll sit down and write one.

 

To take another example - driving a car - you can 'know' how to drive without ever having driven, but we don't suggest that KS Driving is ever going to be a skill anyone but the most esoteric character would have.

 

Hmm. Perhaps that is a point: all skills cost 3 points to buy. In practice, some skills are much more difficult to learn. Some skills should require appropriate background skills, or a relational table of associated skills you can use at a penalty: that way the Surgeon who has a high skill roll (and has therefore spent a lot on the skill) would have a decent roll in a number of related skills. Surgery should probably be something that almost always attracts a penalty, usually a big one - which is why most surgery is carefully planned, executed to a plan, requires time, assistants and specific equipment.

 

However that works out, best of luck checking the internet from your phone for tips on how to perform an intubation when your buddy's airways collapse after a dodgy prawn vindaloo. Or even knowing the word, if you haven't watched six seasons of House.

 

On the other hand, this is a game of cinematic reality. Computer searches are used to move the plot on in cinema, and as such tend to be a GM device. Probably the best approach is that, if the GM wants you to find it, you can.

[Ice9]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

One thing though, is that while the internet doesn't make you an expert at actually doing things - neither do Knowledge Skills, the way a lot of GMs run them. I think that if you do want to make most KS's useful in a modern-day setting, you should let them do things beyond the purely theoretical.

[psyber624]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

That's what PS's are for. KS can give you a complimentary roll for a PS if you have both as well as allowing you access to more information than a PS would provide. SS is sort of a blend of the two, combining both theoretical and practical knowledge into one.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

[off topic] "Crapper" is actually a pretty commonly known slang term for toilet in the USA as well, though I suspect most people would assume the origin came from the word "crap" and not from the man's name. [/off topic]

[Sean Waters]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

I don't know about you, but I'm feeling a little flushed.

[Lucius]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

The word "crap" comes from a French phrase meaning "to squat like a toad" which is the position one assumes if out in the field and needing to, well, crap.

 

The urgan legend deriving it from a man named Crapper is a load of toadsquat.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that Lucius has KS: Etymology

[bigbywolfe]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

The word "crap" comes from a French phrase meaning "to squat like a toad" which is the position one assumes if out in the field and needing to, well, crap.

 

The urgan legend deriving it from a man named Crapper is a load of toadsquat.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that Lucius has KS: Etymology

Good to know. My main point was that it wasn't a rare phrase in the US which was suggested earlier.

[Lucius]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

However that works out, best of luck checking the internet from your phone for tips on how to perform an intubation when your buddy's airways collapse after a dodgy prawn vindaloo. Or even knowing the word, if you haven't watched six seasons of House.

.

 

I haven't watched a single episode all the way through, but I know that vindaloo is some kind of Indian dish.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary asks what's a prawn?

[Markdoc]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

However, the word 'crap' as faeces is widespread, and comes from the same derivation, so we both might end up surprised...

 

To take your example of surgery, though - anyone can have a go at PS Surgery, but trial and error is going to make you a very poor surgeon for a very long time unless you have the theory, or an enormous amount of luck. The two are so intimately linked that it is hard to see how you can usefully separate them.

 

You can easily learn it with instruction, without any theory at all. As I noted, I have trained people to do simple surgery (and do it swiftly and safely) without giving them more than about 15 minutes theory, and that was only because I thought I should. It's all "Cut here, glue there, staple here".

 

Yes you can learn a lot about surgery before ever operating' date=' and you can operate without ever having read a book, but you are not going to be a useful surgeon if you do. Rather than require both skills, I would probably have gone with a 'Surgery' skill and allowed the player to buy it in limited form "Theoretical only" -1. Mind you I also like the Language system in Hero and would probably use a similar system for a lot of sciency stuff. It is hard to do Biology without being reasonably competent in maths, physics and chemistry. There ought to be a relational system, and one day I'll sit down and write one.[/quote']

 

I suggest you get some advice then: I know all too many mathematics specialists who have more or less zero knowledge of biology or chemistry and plenty of biologists with weak math and chemistry skills, and essentially no physics skills at all. And, as I noted, you can certainly teach surgery, without all the fancy theory. That's not how we do it in the west, but it is exactly what China did with its "Barefoot doctors". In another field, it's the same kind of thing they do at the Barefoot college still: they are training illiterate housewives to be solar energy electricians. Without making them literate or giving them any theory. They don't have the faintest idea of how a solar cell actually works, they can't do even basic electrical calculations ... but they can install, repair and run solar farms and set up wiring and power sockets. In other words, they have a PS: but no KS: at all.

 

To take another example - driving a car - you can 'know' how to drive without ever having driven' date=' but we don't suggest that KS Driving is ever going to be a skill anyone but the most esoteric character would have.[/quote']

 

Agreed. Not all PS: have an equivalent KS: and not all KS: have an equivalent PS:. There are academicians who know a great deal about early stone tools. But most of them are at best amateurs at actually making tools, (though I have met a few who definately have PS: stone tool knapping). I've also met a very few people who have PS: stone tools ... but who know pretty much zero about the history, theory or practice. That was my point, after all: a PS and a KS are not the same thing, and one is not always a prerequisite for the other. Many professionals would be well-advised to have both, but it is not always a requirement.

 

Hmm. Perhaps that is a point: all skills cost 3 points to buy. In practice' date=' some skills are much more difficult to learn. Some skills should require appropriate background skills, or a relational table of associated skills you can use at a penalty: that way the Surgeon who has a high skill roll (and has therefore spent a lot on the skill) would have a decent roll in a number of related skills. Surgery should probably be something that almost always attracts a penalty, usually a big one - which is why most surgery is carefully planned, executed to a plan, requires time, assistants and specific equipment.[/quote']

 

Yeah, this is one thing that has always bugged me: there is no relationship between points spent and difficulty in learning. Languages are a point in case. You can learn a language to perfect fluency in the tame it takes you to master one martial arts maneuver, which is clearly rubbish. You can become a professional janitor for the same point investment as it takes to become a professional neurosurgeon. On the other hand, trying to assign seperate costs to every skill seems like a descent into madness with little to no appreciable benefit in-game.

 

However that works out' date=' best of luck checking the internet from your phone for tips on how to perform an intubation when your buddy's airways collapse after a dodgy prawn vindaloo. Or even knowing the word, if you haven't watched six seasons of House.[/quote']

 

. Simple video guideline. It took me (I timed) 4 seconds to find it. I wouldn't recommend trying it without a PS: but you can get the basic knowledge off the net in time enough to use it, and we know that amateurs have occasionally been successful with simple intubation, so it can be done!

 

On the other hand' date=' this is a game of cinematic reality. Computer searches are used to move the plot on in cinema, and as such tend to be a GM device. Probably the best approach is that, if the GM wants you to find it, you can.[/quote']

 

That caveat is always true. A good GM, however, will be prepared for players who want their heroic persona to be at least as capable as a 6-year old child. If a kid in real life can easily find masses of information via a simple net search, it's a bit embarrassing, if Dr Payne, master of 20 sciences, can't.

 

cheers, Mark

[mvdwege]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

As I continue reading, an idea just came up: isn't the use of an Internet search to simulate a KS the same as Cramming?

[Markdoc]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

One thing though' date=' is that while the internet doesn't make you an expert at actually doing things - neither do Knowledge Skills, the way a lot of GMs run them. I think that if you do want to make most KS's useful in a modern-day setting, you should let them do things beyond the purely theoretical.[/quote']

 

That's what PS's are for. KS can give you a complimentary roll for a PS if you have both as well as allowing you access to more information than a PS would provide. SS is sort of a blend of the two' date=' combining both theoretical and practical knowledge into one.[/quote']

 

As a GM, I rule in most cases that a KS will give you a shot at practical performance, just as a PS will normally be assumed to give you some theoretical knowledge - but that what you get will always be inferior to having the appropriate skill (typically I treat it as a FAM). If you have both, you can usually expect to get a complementary roll.

 

Sean might argue that you'd be better off simply spending the extra points on a better KS or PS, but let's run the numbers:

A character with 14 INT spends 6 points on KS and PS Surgery, giving him 12- rolls in each.´He could, for 5 points, have gotten 13- in just PS: surgery.

But consider:

 

Session 1. His mate has a dodgy vindaloo and collapses. He needs to perform an intubation: a simple operation, so there's no penalty. He has a 12- plus complementary roll (80% chance) vs 84% for a straight 13- roll. If he has has a cell phone he can get the youtube video for a +1 bonus giving him an 89% or 91% chance of success.

 

Session 2. His mate, having survived the vindaloo, is gunned down by the restauranteur, enraged by the Tripadvisor review he got. This is a bit more difficult: he's got two bullets in his chest, and there isn't a surgical suite handy. Also the restauranteur is outside and still shooting, so the GM decides there is a -5 penalty to stop the bleeding and stabilise him. This makes the basic rolls 7- and 8- (16%/26% respectively) but the complementary skill roll has a 50% chance to lift the odds on the lower roll to the same level as the higher roll and a 30% chance of raising it to a higher point. In other words, the guy actually has a better chance of success if he has a PS and a KS rather than a better PS.

 

This is actually pretty reasonable: the kind of barefoot doctors who got only practical training can be very very good indeed at what they were trained to do, but often perform poorly when confronted with something out of the ordinary. Basically, theoretical knowledge lets you adapt your practical knowledge to address difficult or unexpected situations.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

Good to know. My main point was that it wasn't a rare phrase in the US which was suggested earlier.

 

Actually what was suggested earlier is that few people would associate crap or crapper with the Victorian English company Thomas Crapper & Co, manufacturers of fine toilet systems.

 

cheers, Mark

[Bolon]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

You are without KS and are using this new high Everything skill. You see the clue but without the appropriate background knowledge of the KS, you have no idea what to google or research for the info. On "Elementary", Holmes is one of the smartest men in the world but it was Watson who had the vital piece of information. A blood sample took them to an army chaplin that was out of country on posting for the last month where the blood was fresh. They searched the army chaplin's home looking for a clue and all that Holmes figured out was that the person should be sainted if there were miracles. Watson, the doctor, saw a bone marrow donor ribbon and made the connection that receipants of bone marrow will actually produce the blood of the donor in their system since that is what bone marrow does. Both facts required the KS and anyone who says they would have googled that, would be a liar. It will never replace.

 

A good GM always has a list of the KS and PS of the players so they can reference the skills as required. Calling out for who has the appropriate skill is good when the players are doing something they decide but you need to know your characters when it is something they would notice. The "looking at character sheets" will not work and often hurts the play. I am sorry but humans decide what they will research and it can be a bonus but they must have a frame of reference to use any other system and a need to notice.

[Markdoc]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

You are without KS and are using this new high Everything skill. You see the clue but without the appropriate background knowledge of the KS' date=' you have no idea what to google or research for the info. On "Elementary", Holmes is one of the smartest men in the world but it was Watson who had the vital piece of information. A blood sample took them to an army chaplin that was out of country on posting for the last month where the blood was fresh. They searched the army chaplin's home looking for a clue and all that Holmes figured out was that the person should be sainted if there were miracles. Watson, the doctor, saw a bone marrow donor ribbon and made the connection that receipants of bone marrow will actually produce the blood of the donor in their system since that is what bone marrow does. Both facts required the KS and anyone who says they would have googled that, would be a liar. It will never replace. [/quote']

 

Yes, but if Holmes had used Google, he would realised that Watson was pulling all that stuff out of his a** (a bone marrow transplant does not normally completely change your blood-type - the writers probably confused it with a stem cell transplant, or bone marrow ablation) and the UK army of course does not award ribbons for civilian activities such as bone marrow donation.

 

See? If they had used Google, a few turns could have saved them from an embarrassing lawsuit.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Tasha]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

Yes' date=' but if Holmes had used Google, he would realised that Watson was pulling all that stuff out of his a** (a bone marrow transplant does not normally completely change your blood-type - the writers probably confused it with a stem cell transplant, or bone marrow ablation) and the UK army of course does not award ribbons for civilian activities such as bone marrow donation.

 

See? If they had used Google, a few turns could have saved them from an embarrassing lawsuit.

 

Cheers, Mark

 

It wasn't the type that was changed, it was the blood produced had the DNA of the Marrow Recipient. Which seemed plausable.

[Markdoc]

Re: The Death of Knowledge Skills:

 

It wasn't the type that was changed' date=' it was the blood produced had the DNA of the Marrow Recipient. Which seemed plausable.[/quote']

 

It's ..... kind of plausible .... but not actually true (or to more precise, not entirely true).

 

What is true is that you would certainly get cells with the donor's DNA in them, no question about it. However, you also would normally still have cells with the original host's DNA in them. If you do a DNA analysis, you'd get a blended pattern that looked like neither the donor or the original host. This condition is called chimerism and is an sign that you are probably dealing with a transplant recipient (though natural chimerism can also occur: you can google it if you want to know more ). There are situations where all of the host's bone marrow is destroyed, and in this case, the bone-marrow-derived cells will all be of donor type.

 

Now to be fair, we are just talking about a couple of TV scriptwriters, who are trying to set up a cunning situation. It doesn't have to be literally true, it just has to sound, as you note, plausible. And even if they wanted to get it as accurate as possible, once you start dealing with specialist areas, even google is going to steer you wrong on many occasions.

 

cheers, Mark