Jump to content

Perceptions of the game change


BigJackBrass

Recommended Posts

We decided long ago to drop deduction from the skills list, since it always ended up just being an INT roll to figure something out.  I have long thought the skills list was too long and far too granular.  Do you really need 57 varieties of survival?  Weapon Famliarity, do we truly need that many categories?  Are they all reasonably priced or are we just grandfathering in stuff because that's always how its been?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have adopted a practice for most of the RPGs I run.  All PC's are made at the gaming table as a group.  I follow the GUMSHOE practice of defining certain skills as Investigative and all the rest as general. 

 

Investigative skills are purposely divided among the PC's.  Basically only one character may have a specific investigative skill above 8-.  This means that each PC has their spotlight.  There will only be one PC for each specialty/skill, but still allows the other PC's to have enough skill to be a backup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

We decided long ago to drop deduction from the skills list, since it always ended up just being an INT roll to figure something out.  I have long thought the skills list was too long and far too granular.  Do you really need 57 varieties of survival?  Weapon Famliarity, do we truly need that many categories?  Are they all reasonably priced or are we just grandfathering in stuff because that's always how its been?

 

I agree that the skill list is too long, but we should have a way to increase granularity as a toolkit option. Maybe treat the subskills as Familiarities, and penalize the main skill if the character doesn't have the appropriate familiarity? As an example, let's take Survival. In the heroic game, the base skill would be enough. In a grittier game, the character might need a 1 pt Familiarity for each terrain type or take a -3 penalty when trying to survive in that terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

I agree that the skill list is too long, but we should have a way to increase granularity as a toolkit option. Maybe treat the subskills as Familiarities, and penalize the main skill if the character doesn't have the appropriate familiarity? As an example, let's take Survival. In the heroic game, the base skill would be enough. In a grittier game, the character might need a 1 pt Familiarity for each terrain type or take a -3 penalty when trying to survive in that terrain.

 

Pretty much the way I do it now.  +x in a skill specialization. 

I assign penalties by situation based on the PC rather than hard guidelines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

I agree that the skill list is too long, but we should have a way to increase granularity as a toolkit option. Maybe treat the subskills as Familiarities, and penalize the main skill if the character doesn't have the appropriate familiarity? As an example, let's take Survival. In the heroic game, the base skill would be enough. In a grittier game, the character might need a 1 pt Familiarity for each terrain type or take a -3 penalty when trying to survive in that terrain.

 

 

When I was here some years ago, I put a post up that I favored a 5 and 3 system (or even a 6 and 2 system).  Tiered Skills.  This leaves the option in the hands of the play group.  If you want "Forensics," that's a 5 pt skill and it covers most everything related to forensics.  This is the way I'd go with casual games and probably with Supers.

 

If you want to split and split and split until you get all the bits and pieces of Forensics as individual skills, then make them 3 pts each, or about what they are now.

 

The only problem here (before anyone starts crying about "ten sub skills is 30 points!," please keep in mind that you would not use _both_ of these methods in the same game.

 

Duh.

 

I mean, "Duke."

 

 

;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, rather than a huge list of specifics, just allow people to buy 1 point +1 to any skill for specific subcategories.  Survival 12-, +3 in arctic conditions.  Gambling 14-, +2 with card games.  You could get even more specific and allow +2 per 1 point in very sub, sub categories (+2 with Baccarat costs 1 point)

 

And weapon familiarities, just basic categories: common, uncommon, exotic, something like that.  Transport familiarity: land, sea, air, space.  Does it make sense that James Bond can fly a helicopter just because he can fly a plane?  No, but he does.  The source material is pretty consistent in this: if you know the basics in one category, you can handle them all.  Frank Martin can rive a BMW, but also a 50 ton dump truck and a tank, because he can drive.  If you want to get technical you can split out military craft if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Does it make sense that James Bond can fly a helicopter just because he can fly a plane?  No, but he does.  The source material is pretty consistent in this: if you know the basics in one category, you can handle them all.  Frank Martin can rive a BMW, but also a 50 ton dump truck and a tank, because he can drive.  If you want to get technical you can split out military craft if you want.

 

Driving cars and driving tanks are different. Also Inwould break Model T Fords, away from basic transport familiarity because of the very different control scheme. 

 

Helicopters and aircraft have the same control scheme(with one exception), but behave very differently. What I have heard from pilots in conversion training is that it takes 3 hours to understand it, and a month to get comfortable. 

 

So if one wants to beak out skills into thin slices, it should be a bit more

logical.  Is almost say a 5 point transport familiarity would get planes And Helicopters. A three point would be tracked vehicles or passenger cars, but not Semi tractors, or military wheeled vehicles  (How many out there with no military experience could even start a 5ton 6x6 military truck, let alone an M-60?)

 

But as What was agreed no new rules, we need to focus now on presentation and ease of use by beginners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 (How many out there with no military experience could even start a 5ton 6x6 military truck,

 

Yo!

 

(But to be fair, every hunting club in this area-- or at least the ones I belong to-- and all the larger farms  ha one or two for truck retrieval and trail maintenance, so....)

 

 

2 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

But as What was agreed no new rules, we need to focus now on presentation and ease of use by beginners. 

 

 

That's the spirit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Driving cars and driving tanks are different. Also Inwould break Model T Fords, away from basic transport familiarity because of the very different control scheme. 

 

If I was going to be that much of a stickler I would go more:

personal vehicles: manual transmission

personal vehicles: automatic transmission

commercial vehicles: semi's, buses and other larger transports

construction vehicles: tracked, cranes, etc.

Just to provide a little granularity and allow a more focused spotlight for PC's.  I'd plug military into those four categories.

 

The point would be cinematic action, not realistic simulation

 

3 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

But as What was agreed no new rules, we need to focus now on presentation and ease of use by beginners. 

 

Absotively :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I know back in the day Acrobatics covered a lot but I wouldn’t go there again. Do many many of my characters have both Acrobatics and Breakfall? Yes but there are times where a character should only have Breakfall. 

 

 

I find it quite justifiable.  In several space opera games, I have allowed military hard suits to provide "Breakfall," but not acrobatics.  The reason is that in this case, the hard suit was doing an autopilot subroutine to protect the occupant.  It was not making the occupant more agile or skilled; it was simply operating to protect him from the fall and orient him to effectiveness in the best way possible.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Spence said:

 

If I was going to be that much of a stickler I would go more:

personal vehicles: manual transmission

personal vehicles: automatic transmission

commercial vehicles: semi's, buses and other larger transports

construction vehicles: tracked, cranes, etc.

Just to provide a little granularity and allow a more focused spotlight for PC's.  I'd plug military into those four categories.

 

The point would be cinematic action, not realistic simulation

 

 

Absotively :yes:

 

 

I'm not sure I'd go that far, simply because you hit "how do you break it down?"  Anyone with a passenger car license can drive a motorhome, which drives like a bus.  Anyone who has ever pulled a trailer understands the principles of driving a tractor truck; they just need to pay a bit more attention to the length of the sweep.  Making them even more user friendly is the incredible uptick in automatic transmissions now that they can be built durable enough for the job.  Driving most any tracked vehicle is like most any other, and tractors (the farm kind) are in this weird place of using car hand controls and tracked hand controls, but inverting the tracked hand controls into foot controls.  It really doesn't take much more than knowing how to drive a stick to _drive_ a tractor, but it takes a good deal of practice to _operate_ one, simply because your hands want to do what you need to be doing with your feet (if you have track experience) and your feet have no idea why there are so many options. Skid Steer equipment is much the same way.  Pan Loaders are in the unique class of "bend in the middle," which creates some interesting tail swing effects, but no more than four-wheel steering does on every commercial failure on which that's been tried (why do people not want tighter handling on their personal vehicles?  It's maddening!)

 

With rare exception, military (ground) vehicles have a civilian equivalent control scheme, as for the most part, they are improvements on existing designs, and those designs were pulled from civilian vehicles.

 

So from a Super or action movie level, I'm usually totally fine with "drive: wheels" and "Drive: tracks"  (where these reference the control schemes, as that makes far more difference to the operator than does the actual engagement to the ground), and may--- _maybe_, mind you, +1 pt for "stick shift."

 

Same with others.  Drive: boat, Drive: ship.  Default to motor or sail, default sail to one / two or multi-rigging., +1 pt each to pick up the others.

 

10 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Well I wouldn't call 'cutting back on the skill bloat' new rules, personally.  I'd call it 'ease of use by beginners'

 

 

Same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

I'm not sure I'd go that far, simply because you hit "how do you break it down?"  Anyone with a passenger car license can drive a motorhome, which drives like a bus.  Anyone who has ever pulled a trailer understands the principles of driving a tractor truck; they just need to pay a bit more attention to the length of the sweep. --snip---

 

Well it really depends on how you use skills.  What you said is true, for casual "I'm in no hurry driving".  But I have never required a skill roll in those situations.

 

For me, skill roles are used "when the excitement is happening" or "when there is a dramatic need".   I personally have the knowledge to fire up a semi and even pull it forward, I've done it.  But if I was driving and the rig was barreling down the steep road from a mountain pass in the winter, I'd be dead at the first curve. 

 

Which is why I would use those four general skill breakdowns for driving.  But since you made me take a closer look and after a little thought I'd say.

personal vehicles: manual transmission and automatic transmission.

personal vehicles: automatic transmission.

commercial vehicles: semi's, buses and other larger transports

construction vehicles: tracked, cranes, etc.

If you can drive a manual, you can drive an automatic which is not necessarily true the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After saying "let's cut down complexity and rules bloat", we are now spending a page discussing how "I can operate a vehicle" should work and be costed.

 

What happens in the movies?  The hero's girlfriend takes out an alien robot with a wrecking ball on a crane that happens to be on the construction site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

After saying "let's cut down complexity and rules bloat", we are now spending a page discussing how "I can operate a vehicle" should work and be costed.

 

What happens in the movies?  The hero's girlfriend takes out an alien robot with a wrecking ball on a crane that happens to be on the construction site.

 

:rofl:

 

You made me snort my Pepsi.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

After saying "let's cut down complexity and rules bloat", we are now spending a page discussing how "I can operate a vehicle" should work and be costed.

 

What happens in the movies?  The hero's girlfriend takes out an alien robot with a wrecking ball on a crane that happens to be on the construction site.

 

 

Being fair to the conversation, however, it's being held as an example of the over-all Skills issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duke I’ve even gone so far and stated that a character (in this case a stretching wrestler) could only use the first use of Breakfall. It doesn’t make sense that he could use the other versions. Plus I’ve been keen on using Skills as Powers when it makes sense. Just like how Cybermind has a really high Computer Programmer skill but represents his affinity to cybernetics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been contaminated by GUMSHOE (now now, don't everyone roll their eyes :winkgrin:) so I tend to run all skills their way.

 

Essentially overall using a skill for information is not rolled.  Ever.

If a PC has a skill and asks a question using that skill they get the basic answer.  If they use the skill. 

 

In other words let us say that the PC has the version of criminology/forensics in your game that can be used to investigate a crime scene. 

 

If they say I am going to check out the dead body, I'll tell them all the information about the body that they could know without having to run tests.  But would not tell them about the blood behind the couch or the claw marks on the window. 

 

If they say that they are going to check the room for clues, I'd tell them about all the clues. 

 

Now if the PC wants to run tests or perform an autopsy, they would need to roll success.  Degree of success or failure would determine the clues they find (or destroy). 

 

This is another reason I prune back skills allot. 

 

I am also mentioning this so you can understand where I am coming from when discussing skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Spence said:

I have been contaminated by GUMSHOE (now now, don't everyone roll their eyes :winkgrin:) so I tend to run all skills their way.

 

Essentially overall using a skill for information is not rolled.  Ever.

If a PC has a skill and asks a question using that skill they get the basic answer.  If they use the skill. 

 

In other words let us say that the PC has the version of criminology/forensics in your game that can be used to investigate a crime scene. 

 

If they say I am going to check out the dead body, I'll tell them all the information about the body that they could know without having to run tests.  But would not tell them about the blood behind the couch or the claw marks on the window. 

 

If they say that they are going to check the room for clues, I'd tell them about all the clues. 

 

Now if the PC wants to run tests or perform an autopsy, they would need to roll success.  Degree of success or failure would determine the clues they find (or destroy).

 

On the one hand, this makes sense in an investigative game.  On the other hand, would a skilled criminologist just forget to check the windows or the couch? 

 

Maybe the fellow performing the autopsy should be asked which body parts he is investigating.  Perhaps he forgets to run a toxicology test on the victim's blood, so the heroes never realize he was poisoned (or drunk at the time of death).

 

This depends a lot on the kind of game we want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

On the one hand, this makes sense in an investigative game.  On the other hand, would a skilled criminologist just forget to check the windows or the couch? 

 

Maybe the fellow performing the autopsy should be asked which body parts he is investigating.  Perhaps he forgets to run a toxicology test on the victim's blood, so the heroes never realize he was poisoned (or drunk at the time of death).

 

This depends a lot on the kind of game we want.

 

You do realize that those were broad examples to illustrate a concept 😉

 

But to answer, like any game I prompt the players in the beginning until they get hang of things.  

 

And no, asking the parts of the body processed in an autopsy would be a bit stupid for a game.

 

And also no, I was not telling you to do this.  I clearly stated:

45 minutes ago, Spence said:

I am also mentioning this so you can understand where I am coming from when discussing skills.

 

I was laboring under the impression that it might help readers understand the direction I was coming from.

I didn't realize that it could be taken as directing other people to do the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spence said:

I have been contaminated by GUMSHOE (now now, don't everyone roll their eyes :winkgrin:) so I tend to run all skills their way.

 

Essentially overall using a skill for information is not rolled.  Ever.

If a PC has a skill and asks a question using that skill they get the basic answer.  If they use the skill. 

 

In other words let us say that the PC has the version of criminology/forensics in your game that can be used to investigate a crime scene. 

 

If they say I am going to check out the dead body, I'll tell them all the information about the body that they could know without having to run tests.  But would not tell them about the blood behind the couch or the claw marks on the window. 

 

If they say that they are going to check the room for clues, I'd tell them about all the clues. 

 

Now if the PC wants to run tests or perform an autopsy, they would need to roll success.  Degree of success or failure would determine the clues they find (or destroy). 

 

This is another reason I prune back skills allot. 

 

I am also mentioning this so you can understand where I am coming from when discussing skills.

 

Is this not more or less how everyone uses Skills?   I was under the impression that they weren't meant to be "roll x to win."

 

 

56 minutes ago, Spence said:

 

You do realize that those were broad examples to illustrate a concept 😉

 

But to answer, like any game I prompt the players in the beginning until they get hang of things.  

 

And no, asking the parts of the body processed in an autopsy would be a bit stupid for a game.

 

And also no, I was not telling you to do this.  I clearly stated:

 

I was laboring under the impression that it might help readers understand the direction I was coming from.

I didn't realize that it could be taken as directing other people to do the same. 

 

 

Don't take offense to Hugh's questions.  I can't explain it, but it's just his way.  I mean, he _is_ contributing, he just has a hard time doing it in a non-destructive way.  Once you get used to it, and understand that it's not meant as offensive, it doesn't bother you anymore. ;)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spence said:

And no, asking the parts of the body processed in an autopsy would be a bit stupid for a game.

 

 

It seems no more stupid than "oh, you did not think to check the windows, despite being an experienced crime scene investigator and the roll of '4' on your 17- Crime Scene Investigation skill". 

 

Having to describe each part of the room I investigate seems more like "guess where the GM hid the clues" than "my skilled detective character investigates the scene of the crime", at least to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Maybe the fellow performing the autopsy should be asked which body parts he is investigating.  Perhaps he forgets to run a toxicology test on the victim's blood, so the heroes never realize he was poisoned (or drunk at the time of death).

This is terminally idiotic. 

Your player will not know how to properly conduct an autopsy.  Their character with PS: Crime Scene Investigator and Forensic Medicine will know how to properly conduct an autopsy.  By forcing the player to describe a process they know little about but their character is an expert in and then evaluating success based on player narration, you invalidate the character's skills. 

 

11 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

It seems no more stupid than "oh, you did not think to check the windows, despite being an experienced crime scene investigator and the roll of '4' on your 17- Crime Scene Investigation skill". 

 

Having to describe each part of the room I investigate seems more like "guess where the GM hid the clues" than "my skilled detective character investigates the scene of the crime", at least to me.

The flip side to the above is that if the big secret is that there's a trap door under the carpet and the player describes their character rolling up the carpet to check under it, then their narration of their character's action should ensure success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...