Should you cap basic skills?

[Tabularasa]

Should basic skills be capped?

I am tempted to cap some of the basic skills (i.e. all those not having to do with social interaction or knowledge) based on a multiple of the underlying characteristic.

My argument for this is that, though everyone is proficient with these skills, the drawback is that they are much more dependent on your underlying characteristics than on something you learn. I never understood why someone with 6 in STR could theoretically end-up with 80%+ in Atheltics.

Agree/Disagree?

 

[smiorgan]

Leave them free. The MRQ skill set is nice and simple. It's perhaps the only part of the rules where MRQ is clearly better than RQ3. I like it simple as is without introducing further rules.

 

[Loz]

Capping them would be a mistake.

A skill is about technique and expertise; not necessarily physical limitations. How do you think a small, physically weaker, judo block belt can deck someone twice her strength and size? How can a skilled fencer disarm a faster opponent with a flimsier weapon? Paula Radcliffe is certainly NOT high in STR, but she's a champion athlete in endurance running, so would have a very high Athletics skill, despite having, say, STR of 8 or 9.

Its down to training and technique - not limitations of physical capability. Plus, as Smiorgan says, introducing caps adds in complexity AND limits Maximum Game Fun.

 

[Rasta]

A skill is about technique and expertise; not necessarily physical limitations.

One exception would be resilliance. I use a cap on resilliance, because it seems odd that one could learn to be "good" at taking damage.

How do you think a small, physically weaker, judo block belt can deck someone twice her strength and size?

This is true, to a degree. Why are there weight classes in all fighting sports?

Its down to training and technique - not limitations of physical capability. Plus, as Smiorgan says, introducing caps adds in complexity AND limits Maximum Game Fun.

This could be true to a degree.

 

[Rurik]

A skill is about technique and expertise; not necessarily physical limitations.

One exception would be resilliance. I use a cap on resilliance, because it seems odd that one could learn to be "good" at taking damage.

Two answers. First is Conditioning. Fighters condition themselves. I knew a guy years ago who was into kickboxing. He would tape bottles to his shins and kick things to break the bottles. The object was to get conditioned to the point that his legs no longer bruised. An MMA fighter may not have the SIZ and STR of as say a weightlifter, or have the CON of a marathon runner, but he can sure take a hit better than either.

The second is summed up by mind over body. The first time someone gets cut with a knife they could easily freak out, be incapicitated by pain, or go into shock. A seasoned warrior, wounded many times before, will be much better able to bear the pain, to channel his adrenaline, and fight on through a wound that would drop someone of similar physical characteristics who is a snivelling bureaucrat for example.

Watching any fights (Boxing, Muay Thai/K1, MMA) there are always some guys who can just take a rediculous amount of punishment and keep fighting - more than is the norm for their sport.

Though I should point out Resilience IS capped in the current MRQ RAW as per the Players Update/Deluxe changes.

How do you think a small, physically weaker, judo block belt can deck someone twice her strength and size?

This is true, to a degree. Why are there weight classes in all fighting sports?

In a fighting sport, both combatants should be of similiar skill at their craft. Skill being equal the physical characteristics are very important. I'd say reach (which is not really modelled in MRQ) is the biggest factor - when two fighters are the same weight but one has a noticably better reach he has the advantage.

Skill will often trump physical advantage though. The small blackbelt who fights/spars regularly will have a definate advantage over a big bodybuilder who never trains at fighting. Can the body builder take out the smaller guy with one solid punch? Absolutely - but usually the blackbelt will mess him up long before he lands that punch.

Its down to training and technique - not limitations of physical capability. Plus, as Smiorgan says, introducing caps adds in complexity AND limits Maximum Game Fun.

This could be true to a degree.

If one wanted a compromise and didn't mind a ltille extra complexity you could base each skill of a primary characteristic and have the skill advance slower once the skill exceeds that characteristic times 5. For example stealth is dex based. If your dex is 12 stealth increases normally up to 60%, but once above 60% it only goes up by 1d4 per improvement or something like that.

Personally, I'm gonna stick without capping skills at all.

 

[Loz]

Why are there weight classes in all fighting sports?

Its so that athletes can compete on an equal footing in a competitive arena. . But note that its a weight class - not a speed or strength class.

 

[Rasta]

Why are there weight classes in all fighting sports?

Its so that athletes can compete on an equal footing in a competitive arena. . But note that its a weight class - not a speed or strength class.

Noted. Also note, that all major sports make sex divisions as well. Apparently, speed and strength are a huge factor, not just skill.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Two answers. First is Conditioning... The second is summed up by mind over body.

From a fighting perspective, you have summed up Resilience perfectly. The same two reasons are also applicable to any strenuous physical sport/activity/injury - mountain climbing, marathon running, surviving disasters, etc.

The interpretation becomes a little fuzzy when applying the skill to other situations, notably disease and poisons. However, physical condition(ing) and mental focus are still significant modifiers to recovery or survival.

This is true, to a degree. Why are there weight classes in all fighting sports?

Up until very recently, there were no weight classes in competitive fighting. Modern preconceptions of 'fairness' were a Victorian invention, formed mainly to allow gentlemen and amateurs the chance to win against the 'professionals' of the time.

Even during the classical age at the Olympic games, there were no separate weight divisions. Did hulking big bruisers predominate? We'll never know for sure. But no matter what the size or strength disparity, there is always a technique which will overcome it.

Skill and experience wins fights - not raw physique.

 

[Rasta]

Two answers. First is Conditioning. Fighters condition themselves. I knew a guy years ago who was into kickboxing. He would tape bottles to his shins and kick things to break the bottles. The object was to get conditioned to the point that his legs no longer bruised. An MMA fighter may not have the SIZ and STR of as say a weightlifter, or have the CON of a marathon runner, but he can sure take a hit better than either.

The second is summed up by mind over body. The first time someone gets cut with a knife they could easily freak out, be incapicitated by pain, or go into shock. A seasoned warrior, wounded many times before, will be much better able to bear the pain, to channel his adrenaline, and fight on through a wound that would drop someone of similar physical characteristics who is a snivelling bureaucrat for example.

Excellent points. I used to do some unprofessional fighting very simular MMA. I was also in the Marines, which have their own style of martial arts. There is much to be said for nerve conditioning. Which is not unlike lifting weights. You put repeated stress on the nerves to kill the nerve endings, and in the case of shin training, build calcium deposits. (I don't practise anymore, but still have little grooves on the surface of my shins)

This is completely unrelated to having a "strong jaw" however. Once you have recieved a concussion, you are more prone to simular injuries in the future. This would be compouned when we are speaking about fighting with weapons. You can't condition your shins to take an axe blow.

This is why I like the idea of being able to improve resilliance to a degree, which is ultimately capped based on (CON). I do the same for persistence (POW), and acrobatics (DEX).

Watching any fights (Boxing, Muay Thai/K1, MMA) there are always some guys who can just take a rediculous amount of punishment and keep fighting - more than is the norm for their sport.

I'm huge into fighting sports. I think there is a reason why some professional fighters have this while other professional fighters do not. I don't think it is all skill.

 

[Rasta]

Up until very recently, there were no weight classes in competitive fighting. Modern preconceptions of 'fairness' were a Victorian invention, formed mainly to allow gentlemen and amateurs the chance to win against the 'professionals' of the time.

I think it was a good innovation.

Even during the classical age at the Olympic games, there were no separate weight divisions. Did hulking big bruisers predominate? We'll never know for sure. But no matter what the size or strength disparity, there is always a technique which will overcome it.

Skill and experience wins fights - not raw physique.

Tell that to Randy Corture.

 

[Loz]

Noted. Also note, that all major sports make sex divisions as well. Apparently, speed and strength are a huge factor, not just skill.

A good point. But consider this scenario.

Roger Federer and Venus Williams. Both strong; both at the top of their game. Federer might be stronger than Williams, because he's male (although looking at the muscles on Venus, you have to wonder), but if you took their tennis technique and boiled it down to an RQ skill stat, would Venus be any lower number-wise, than Federer? Does her lower STR actually cap or inhibit her skill as a tennis player? I'd argue that it doesn't. On sheer power - ie, serving the ball at 150mph - then Federer would probably win hands-down, but in terms of volley, return, drop-shot - the techniques - then they may well be equal.

Its all hypothetical, but this kind of consideration is behind why I don't think you should cap basi skills to reflect the raw Characteristics.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Noted. Also note, that all major sports make sex divisions as well. Apparently, speed and strength are a huge factor, not just skill.

Going back to the original example, Athletics is probably the only basic skill which I can see a partial reason where a poor STR might limit their effectiveness - but only in actions which require brute force to overcome the mechanics of the real world. Throwing a weight over distance for example. Yet even in this case I'd place my money on the female Olympic champion to beat any raw body building fanatic, despite the fact he could probably lift three times what she could.

However, Athletics is an encompassing skill. Would a STR of 6 prevent a character from being a good climber or jumper? Possibly if they were SIZ 18, but if the STR to Mass ration was more even I don't see why. Technique and experience count for much more.

If you think back to the last athletics competition you saw, were all the javelin throwers, long jumpers, runners, etc the equivalent of hulking body builders? Strength does have an effect, but within the same sex it is not the major one.

From the game system perspective, do we penalise an otter's swimming ability just because their STR is 6? Of course not. But if you introduce a capping rule which is applicable to humans, then it needs to also apply to every other race or species in the game system - both for consistency and because in Glorantha especially, players can be non humans. Should a Troll should be able to climb or jump better than a human just because its inherently stronger? I don't think so.

As for the other skills I see no justification for any sort of capping. Conditioning might not prevent an axe from fracturing your shin, but it could allow you to stay conscious or keep supporting your body on that leg by shunting the pain, which is what the Resilience skill is modelling for most wounds.

Even when it comes to poisons, there are recorded instances of boosting resistance by the ingestion of small amounts to increase tolerance. The simplest example is alcohol consumption. As for Persistence, there are countless examples of religious and martial training to boost mental resistance, determination, self denial, conviction etc. Not every religious zealot has a POW of 18, but I bet most of them would still be able to resist most temptations or counter-indoctrination we could pose. :wink:

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Skill and experience wins fights - not raw physique.

Tell that to Randy Corture.

I'm not sure of your point here (are you agreeing with me?). Randy Couture trained in various forms of fighting since his middle school years.

I propose its this vast experience of free form combat plus many years of study which has made him such a versatile and superior fighter against opponents in two different weight classes, often at a height and reach disadvantage. Not his physique

 

[Rurik]

The interpretation becomes a little fuzzy when applying the skill to other situations, notably disease and poisons. However, physical condition(ing) and mental focus are still significant modifiers to recovery or survival.

"They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder."

(Sorry, I'm off to look to at Venus Williams' muscles to wonder some more about her strength relative to Roger Federer).

 

[Loz]

(Sorry, I'm off to look to at Venus Williams' muscles to wonder some more about her strength relative to Roger Federer).

I also highly recommend researching Maria Sharapova, too.

 

[Rurik]

I also highly recommend researching Maria Sharapova, too.

I'll get right on that. Any more homework?

 

[Rasta]

I'm not sure of your point here (are you agreeing with me?).

My point is that the more experience and more skilled Randy Courture recently lost his title to the hulking brute Brock Lesner.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

My point is that the more experience and more skilled Randy Courture recently lost his title to the hulking brute Brock Lesner.

Ah, please forgive me. I don't keep up with UFC nowadays (being more of a K1 watcher until I gave up having a TV), so I missed the inference.

 

[Rurik]

My point is that the more experience and more skilled Randy Courture recently lost his title to the hulking brute Brock Lesner.

Ah, please forgive me. I don't keep up with UFC nowadays (being more of a K1 watcher until I gave up having a TV), so I missed the inference.

Not having seen the fight (I don't actually pay for my MMA - thank god for the WEC, which IMHO is better anyway), and having nothing but disdain for the WWE, I will point out that he was the NCAA national Wrestling champion one year and runner up another year, so he can't be a total bum.

But back to the little black belt versus the big weightlifter - it is entirely possible that the big guy can get lucky and land a blow wins the fight, but more often than not I still think the big guy is going down (especially in a real world no-rules fight where vitals can be targeted).

 

[Rasta]

My point is that the more experience and more skilled Randy Courture recently lost his title to the hulking brute Brock Lesner.

Ah, please forgive me. I don't keep up with UFC nowadays (being more of a K1 watcher until I gave up having a TV), so I missed the inference.

No worries. I should have clairified.