Robot Crew Oversight

[Endie]

This makes me wonder about something else. If you are paying your star engineer 12,000Cr per month, he won't stay in a medium stateroom because it is below his SOC. Look at the Standards of Life table on page 98 in the CRB. If we assume that only 25% of his salary goes to pay for standards of living, that still puts him at 3,000Cr per month or SOC 10 or 11. A person like that is not travelling in a medium stateroom.

If this was true then every major navy in the world would have to have the senior specialists swanning about in glamorous comfort demanding balconies for their cabin suites.

Part of why they’re paying him 12k is to make up for the conditions on-ship. The standards of living thing is for guidance: I know that this is calculated to make you furious but it’s not a hard and fast rule that means that when a soldier gets promoted to captain he refuses to live in a tent any more.

As a Scot from the north-east, I know a bunch of guys who work on the oil rigs. They get paid extremely well. They live in cramped conditions for two weeks out of every month.

 

[MasterGwydion]

If this was true then every major navy in the world would have to have the senior specialists swanning about in glamorous comfort demanding balconies for their cabin suites.

Part of why they’re paying him 12k is to make up for the conditions on-ship. The standards of living thing is for guidance: I know that this is calculated to make you furious but it’s not a hard and fast rule that means that when a soldier gets promoted to captain he refuses to live in a tent any more.

As a Scot from the north-east, I know a bunch of guys who work on the oil rigs. They get paid extremely well. They live in cramped conditions for two weeks out of every month.

True, but what do highly skilled people not on a starship make for having higher skill levels? Does their SOC go up with their income? Do they have living expenses that are commensurate with their paycheck when not on the oil rig or in the case of Traveller, when they are not on the ship? Going by the Traveller rules, how do they pay to maintain their SOC as granted by their living standards? I know that in previous editions, you had to do certain things to maintain your social standing. These are more worldbuilding questions than they are gameplay questions.

There seems to be some correlation between SOC and income in Traveller at least in relation to how much needs to be spent on maintaining Standards of Living. Even if you are on a ship, and not having to pay for your accommodations on the ship, to maintain a SOC score you'd have to maintain those living standards somewhere. Yes? or no? It seems to be a bit of a fuzzy area.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Sorry late niggle. I am not sure you can have Engineer 5. I think the Star Tek example makes it clear that the Skill Level 3 cap from the Advanced Engineering tools includes the INT bonus.

RH p64
" Starship engineering toolkit (advanced) Max DM+3"

I read this as the Max DM you can apply to this roll (from Skill and/or INT DM)

RH p75
"... Its INT 12 provides DM+2 to all these skills, allowing a package of skill level 1 to emulate skill level 3 in the execution of its duties."
"... With an advanced starship engineering toolkit, the robot can perform all these tasks at a equivalent skill level 3."

If I read that correctly, I think that means Skill higher than 3 is impossible in Engineering Tasks. On the upside this is an excellent reasons for that to be the supervisory level for a sophont.

I’ll look when I can this evening. The Mongoose sheet might not be calculating it correctly.

Edit: Looked at the Robot Handbook.

“Starship Engineering Toolkit

This set of equipment provides increasingly complex toolkits for a robot to perform routine engineering maintenance and repairs aboard a spacecraft. These include generalised electronic and gravitic test and repair equipment, mechanic’s tools, a small laser, cutting torch, bulkhead patches, iris valve opener, duct tape and a large hammer. A starship engineering toolkit supports starship-related engineering, electronics and mechanical repair tasks at up to the maximum Electronics, Engineer or Mechanic skill indicated.

The toolkit may be used as a generalised electronics or mechanical toolkit but at a potentially lower skill maximum at the Referee’s discretion.”

The way I read this is that the toolkit adds no DM. It merely supports the skill at the indicated level. I can, however, get rid of the maintenance and electronics toolkits and save some money.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Sorry late niggle. I am not sure you can have Engineer 5. I think the Star Tek example makes it clear that the Skill Level 3 cap from the Advanced Engineering tools includes the INT bonus.

RH p64
" Starship engineering toolkit (advanced) Max DM+3"

I read this as the Max DM you can apply to this roll (from Skill and/or INT DM)

RH p75
"... Its INT 12 provides DM+2 to all these skills, allowing a package of skill level 1 to emulate skill level 3 in the execution of its duties."
"... With an advanced starship engineering toolkit, the robot can perform all these tasks at a equivalent skill level 3."

If I read that correctly, I think that means Skill higher than 3 is impossible in Engineering Tasks. On the upside this is an excellent reasons for that to be the supervisory level for a sophont.

I took the time to look at this more closely.

On page 73, the Robot Handbook says this:

“The characteristic associated with a skill can provide an additional DM to checks. For simplicity, this DM is included in the final skill determination of the robot as listed in the skills row of its description.”

This is done to keep things simple for the general user. I’m not doing this the simple way but using the skill levels and tools to their fullest extent.

The advanced starship engineering toolkit, as written, supports a skill up to 3, not including stat DMs. So, I can build a robot with skill three and the tools support that and the stat bonuses add on to the base level of support.

The spreadsheet supports me doing this. I can see exactly why Geir wrote the simple way in the book and for general use, this sort of generalization is quite acceptable, but I consider myself a robot power user and I’m using the rules as they’re actually written and the spreadsheet as distributed to build an even better machine.

 

[Terry Mixon]

I am going to say that this can not be correct for one very simple reason. The smarter the robot the less skill it is able to have? That seems to be the opposite of how it should work. If my robot has a 15 INT, are you telling Me that I can now use no skills because their INT bonus is already +3?

Correct. If that simplistic cap were a hard limitation, there would be no call for more advanced robots.

 

[swordtart]

I took the time to look at this more closely.

On page 73, the Robot Handbook says this:

“The characteristic associated with a skill can provide an additional DM to checks. For simplicity, this DM is included in the final skill determination of the robot as listed in the skills row of its description.”

It would have been helpful if the default presentation had not implemented skill descriptions it this way. It also doesn't help that we don't get the software listed and some of the skills come from components, some from the brain and some from installed software.

This is done to keep things simple for the general user. I’m not doing this the simple way but using the skill levels and tools to their fullest extent.

So does that mean the supervisor has skill level 5 and gets a +2 for the INT on top? Surely not as I didn't think you could get software above level 3.

The advanced starship engineering toolkit, as written, supports a skill up to 3, not including stat DMs. So, I can build a robot with skill three and the tools support that and the stat bonuses add on to the base level of support.

The bit in bold is not written in the rules. It may be or may not be true, but it is not written.

I am still not sure how your interpretation squares with the statement on p64 which lists a maximum DM+3, rather than a maximum software level. Unfortunately this is in the example rather than the main body of the rules.

The spreadsheet supports me doing this. I can see exactly why Geir wrote the simple way in the book and for general use, this sort of generalization is quite acceptable, but I consider myself a robot power user and I’m using the rules as they’re actually written and the spreadsheet as distributed to build an even better machine.

To be fair we have found acknowledged errors in the spreadsheet that were not spotted my the designer by exercising them to death.

To shoot holes at my own argument (or maybe the idea of built-in tools in general). I am not sure why some built-in tools should limit the robot anyway. Presumably one with manipulators could use the same tools the sophont engineer uses (that don't limit his skill level).

Maybe the limit should be what it can do organically - if such a term can be used for a machine. If you want to use the higher level skills you need to give it access to proper tools (and provide it with appropriate manipulators).