Playtest 2.0 files - Things that still bug me.

[Klaus Kipling]

Yeah, we're not really discussing what is, or what is not a science.

We're wrestling with terminology so we can group history among other 'evidence gathering and interpreting disciplines that cast light on the world around us using facts'.

Basically, we're looking for a neat list title.

side note: as far as Philosophy is concerned, if we widen it from just study and knowledge to debating and rhetoric it becomes more of a social skill. After all, the primary skill of philosophers is marshaling an argument.

 

[Mongoose Gar]

Science will be getting changed in V3. I've had a chat to Marc about skill list stuff and T5 conversion, and it shouldn't be an issue to break the current Science into two-three skills. I'll also fix the 'Chemistry is the study of Chemistry' stuff.

 

[Andrew Whincup]

At the risk of setting fire to things, I have a suggestion.

I think that part of the problem comes from breaking down academic disciplines too much and not having headings that cover them well. In some ways it reminds me of a couple of the Universities I've been to.

How about simplifying things a bit more?

Science
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and physics)
Life Sciences (Biology and biological sciences)
Planetary Sciences (Geology, Geography etc)
Social Sciences (History, Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology and the rest)

As someone with degrees in Archaeology, Geology and a field that lies between the two, I recognise that there is a certain degree of cross pollonisation between these disciplines (having to have degree level knowledge of pretty much all of the above subjects) and that this will blur some lines that purists would like to keep.

On the other hand I think it offers a chance for more rounded characters an the groupings are based more on use than academic sensibilities.

(Ducks andwaits for the flames to kick off.)

andy

 

[TrippyHippy]

Thanks Mongoose Gar, and yes, the breakdown that Andrew has provided, would make me quite content (as long as the definitions provided are good!).

 

[Tychus]

This is going to mess up the scholar skill tables. Currently, science shows up several times on the tables. Every time it is rolled, the player can choose which speciality to increase - either repeatedly pumping the same speciality to become an expert, or branching out into many specialities to become a generalist. Breaking the science skill up into several skills is going to make it more difficult to create an expert scholar, because the odds of rolling the (new, narrower, replacement) science skill will be lower.

Alternatively, to keep the odds the same, other skills could be bumped off the chart in favor of these extra science skills, but that makes the skill table rather boring.

"Realism" is nice, but it should take a backseat to playability. How often are science skill checks going to come up in normal play?

On a related note, the Engineering skill leaves out the vast majority of actual engineering. These are all skills things Scotty of Star Trek might know, but they have nothing to do with civil or chemical engineering, for example. As an Engineer(Civil)-2, I know I don't have even rank 0 in any of the specialties listed. The current Engineer skill would be more accurately titled Ship's Engineer. I could make a case for a separate Civil Engineer skill (with say transportation, structural, geotechnical, hydraulic, and environmental specialities). But I won't. I don't think that level of detail is really appropriate for the game. If your game requires the skill, it's easy to house rule it in, but otherwise it's appropriate to abstract into a more generalized engineering skill to keep the rules as clean and simple as possible.

 

[Exwrestler]

At the risk of setting fire to things, I have a suggestion.

I think that part of the problem comes from breaking down academic disciplines too much and not having headings that cover them well. In some ways it reminds me of a couple of the Universities I've been to.

How about simplifying things a bit more?

Science
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and physics)
Life Sciences (Biology and biological sciences)
Planetary Sciences (Geology, Geography etc)
Social Sciences (History, Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology and the rest)

As someone with degrees in Archaeology, Geology and a field that lies between the two, I recognise that there is a certain degree of cross pollonisation between these disciplines (having to have degree level knowledge of pretty much all of the above subjects) and that this will blur some lines that purists would like to keep.

On the other hand I think it offers a chance for more rounded characters an the groupings are based more on use than academic sensibilities.

(Ducks andwaits for the flames to kick off.)

andy

This is perfect.

 

[AKAramis]

A
How about simplifying things a bit more?

Science
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and physics)
Life Sciences (Biology and biological sciences)
Planetary Sciences (Geology, Geography etc)
Social Sciences (History, Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology and the rest)

As someone with degrees in Archaeology, Geology and a field that lies between the two, I recognise that there is a certain degree of cross pollonisation between these disciplines (having to have degree level knowledge of pretty much all of the above subjects) and that this will blur some lines that purists would like to keep.

On the other hand I think it offers a chance for more rounded characters an the groupings are based more on use than academic sensibilities.

(Ducks andwaits for the flames to kick off.)

andy

This is perfect.

Almost perfect, but not quite.

I've a degree in a Social science, with a minor in a socio-physical science, and am nearly done with a masters in Education, another social science.

It's missing

Space Sciences (Astrophysics, stellar dynamics, orbital dynamics).

 

[Exwrestler]

Science
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and physics)
Life Sciences (Biology and biological sciences)
Planetary Sciences (Geology, Geography etc)
Social Sciences (History, Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology and the rest)
Space Sciences (Astrophysics, stellar dynamics, orbital dynamics).

Okay...now it's perfect(and Robotics goes under engineering?). Mongoose look over here!

 

[captainjack23]

Science
Physical Sciences (Chemistry and physics)
Life Sciences (Biology and biological sciences)
Planetary Sciences (Geology, Geography etc)
Social Sciences (History, Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology and the rest)
Space Sciences (Astrophysics, stellar dynamics, orbital dynamics).

Okay...now it's perfect(and Robotics goes under engineering?). Mongoose look over here!

Well...almost. By the 52nd century, I'm sure that Planetary sciences would be rolled into the space sciences (called xenosciences ?): which is good, 'cause I see much of the space sciences listed above being included in Physical sciences as physics.

I'd toss the description of "space", really, as the whole "up there down here" (biology vs xenobiology, as an example: earth life, vs all else) distinction is likely to be long since irrelevent in universe with literally thousands of "down heres".
How 'bout:

Life sciences: things that live, and are not sentient
Physical Sciences:things that don't live
Sophont sciences:things that are sentient

(Interestingly, it can also break down as :
Chemistry based sciences
Mathematical based sciences
descriptive sciences (statistical ?))

Robotics could go in EITHER life physical or sophont science, which could be a BIG academic dispute : sentient, but not alive = ?. department affilitation could be seen as a major political statement.

Engineering would be what it is: the application of theory , in the appropriate science.

Genomics could be seen as lifescience engineering, gravitic engineering as Physical engineering; and Psychology as sophont engineering.

This would leave the skill named engineering as a technical extension of ....things that go VROOOOM. You know : ENGINES.
(Me, I presume that since gravitics is so crucial to the OTU, it has to be subsumed in Engineering)

Psionics ?
As a guess:
In the imperium, a sophont science;(and illegal)
In the Consulate, physical science engineering (and published).




In fact, given that much of the basis of what we see as science is learning how to learn, I have no trouble with science being treated as any umbrella skill. If you have Science(Physical) -1, getting 0 in all others is no stretch. Learning how to think and read within the professional literature and abstract where you need to learn is a BIG part of any begining grad program - (or good undergrad, or excellent highschool, really). And sounds like a level 0 skill candidate.



-cap

 

[Klaus Kipling]

The slight beef I have with the scientist/scholar is that is seems predicated on research or academics rather than fieldwork, which is surely a better paradigm for Traveller. Be nice to see a handful of 'Indiana Jones/Dr. Livingstone' type skills in there.

Like Vac Suit or Zero G (for space scientists), or Survival or Drive for planet based fieldwork. There's alot of diplomat/linguistic stuff on the scholar list.


Oh, and perhaps Campus is better than Student to indicate university based careers.

 

[Mongoose Gar]

The slight beef I have with the scientist/scholar is that is seems predicated on research or academics rather than fieldwork, which is surely a better paradigm for Traveller. Be nice to see a handful of 'Indiana Jones/Dr. Livingstone' type skills in there.

That's a really good point. Thanks.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Life sciences: things that live, and are not sentient
Physical Sciences:things that don't live
Sophont sciences:things that are sentient

Wetware; Hardware; Software.

...as they say in Paranoia XP.

 

[Andrew Whincup]

Almost perfect, but not quite.

I've a degree in a Social science, with a minor in a socio-physical science, and am nearly done with a masters in Education, another social science.

It's missing

Space Sciences (Astrophysics, stellar dynamics, orbital dynamics).

I would imagine that education would come under instruction. before I get completely shot down, I should point out that it's what I do for a living. I know there's a whole load of theory and socsci behind teaching but, in terms of skill, it's the ability to impart things to others successfully.

Space sciences is a good call though.

Jack, I'm for keeping space and planet science separate (though it might be me defending my turf against being rolled into something else), because I feel they're likely to still be seen as separate. Yes they're related but they're not rolled into the same thing.

I'm not desparately attached to it though.

Andy

 

[Klaus Kipling]

I would imagine that education would come under instruction. before I get completely shot down, I should point out that it's what I do for a living. I know there's a whole load of theory and socsci behind teaching but, in terms of skill, it's the ability to impart things to others successfully.

Yeah, are we going to have an Instruction skill? While it does have a lot of soft sciency bits, to be honest so does a fine/interactive art education. I was pretty much already aware of over half the concepts I'm studying in teacher training from my art degrees. And half the job is Admin!

Anyhoo I'm going to start a new thread on the Entertainer, as I think there's a few tweaks we need there too.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Teaching is 90% classroom management, with the rest made up with administration, middle management, crisis management, social working....and about 1% subject knowledge.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Teaching is 90% classroom management, with the rest made up with administration, middle management, crisis management, social working....and about 1% subject knowledge.

Well, depends on the level, but that's more or less spot on.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Regarding Instruction, as someone who worked a lot one-on-one with college students (as a Teaching Assistant); instruction is also the ability to explain a concept or idea in a variety of ways until the student understands it.

I had a professor once who spent 2 hours explaining an idea to me in about six different ways until I finally got it (yes, I can be bit dense some times). THAT is Instruction Skill!

 

[TrippyHippy]

Yes, you get multiple styles of learning for different students: visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc.

Much of that idea, however, is an application of psychological research though. Piaget, et al.

 

[AKAramis]

Teaching is 90% classroom management, with the rest made up with administration, middle management, crisis management, social working....and about 1% subject knowledge.

more like 10% subject knowledge, at least in elementary.

 

[AKAramis]

Regarding Instruction, as someone who worked a lot one-on-one with college students (as a Teaching Assistant); instruction is also the ability to explain a concept or idea in a variety of ways until the student understands it.

I had a professor once who spent 2 hours explaining an idea to me in about six different ways until I finally got it (yes, I can be bit dense some times). THAT is Instruction Skill!

AMEN!

I tend to be the one translating Tech to English for my coworkers.