Skill Specialties house rules

[BP]

I'm contemplating (*based on RW) allowing certain specialties at level minus 1 upto level 2. An exceptional expert at M-Drives should be proficient/cross trained in Electronics. Maybe weak when talking of say Life Support - with chemistry and biological processes being an aspect - but the level 2 cap should balance this. Engineer (M-Drive) 2 would have (Electronics) 1 - and (M-Drive) 3 (Electronics) 2. While Engineer (M-Drive) 4 would gain no further (Electronics).

-> Unfortunately this leaves less reason to specialize in (Electronics) - though one would be one skill level behind. Basically you end up with free skills - which may be quite unbalanced (hence the 'contemplation')...

This won't make sense for all specialties - i.e. such as Languages. Social Science Linguistics skill isn't likely to be greatly enhanced by Space Science Robotics skill - though one could argue with natural language capabilities an expert knowledge of linguistics.

Maybe I'm way off base here - but an expert marksman is gonna have an edge at shooting many weapons - not the same experience, but better than just competent in the use with no experience.

Also, why would someone skilled at Acting be competent at Holography or Sculpting (Art-0)?

Anyway - I'd sure appreciate input...

 

[CosmicGamer]

I understand where you are coming from but atm, I handle it as follows. Skill checks are situational and totally up to the GM. Often multiple skills could apply to the same situation. For example, trying to get an official to look the other way and let your cargo through. Perhaps bribery, deception, admin, and so on. Maybe the NPC official is very lawful but gullible so using bribery could be a very difficult task, admin a difficult task and deception an average task (the players would not know these details but some clue to the NPC's traits might hint at it)

So, if in a situation that requires an average electronics skill check, a GM could also allow Engineer(Electronics), average; Physical Science(Electronics), average; Engineer(any), difficult.

Computer and other skills may be applicable because it seams, to me, basic electronics is needed to be able to repair these systems.

Essentially, when a given situation comes up, let a character say 'I'm going to try and do this' and then as a GM I look at all skills and even the players backgrounds to determine what needs to be rolled.

One of the things I do is allow 'bridge experience'. For example: any person who has spent 12 years piloting a ship with a small bridge crew is going to know something about sensors and the comm just from observing others. Pilot(small craft) definitely has some 'collateral abilities' even if it is not actual skills on the skill sheet.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

As an engineer myself, the specialization of this skill has been a bugaboo for me.

Personally, I wish that they had pulled out Electronics into it's own skill, like Mechanic (like it was in CT).

Almost all types of engineering involve Mechanical and Electronics and as technology advances, Electronics are going to be even more integrated into designs.

I don't have a problem with the Specialization as written. I am an Aerospace Engineer by trade and training. While I had a class that could apply to Civil engineering, I am not really skilled in civil engineering (Skill level 0). I know engineers that are good at Avionics (electronics) but don't use their training in structures very often (or at all).

As I as I said, I would have pulled Electronics out and had Engineering be more of a design skill while Mechanical and Electronics were the operation and maintenance skills that everyone uses.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Personally I just lump MDrive and JDrive together with Power Plant.

 

[BP]

Awesome feedback folks! Love the ideas - and its put me on a different track...

I like the concept of specialties, but I'm looking for a mechanic that is simple and yet fairly believeable to handle cross-over specialty skill checks. One that allows both players and referees to easily calculate odds and yet stays consistent with existing rules - especially for documented task checks.

So now I am thinking Task Difficulty adjustments:
* bump task difficulty one level
* give a DM of +1 (i.e. half the Difficulty modifier)
* limit cross-over specialty advantage (no advantage over level-3)

Essentially cross-over skill checks happen at specialty level (up to 3) minus 1 for other specialties under a skill. But, it doesn't give them the skill for advancement, explicit requirements like special BattleDress, record keeping, etc. Additionally, if the task is formidable, then use level 0 as per normal.

In practice, this is like skill level minus 1 for other specialties of a skill upto a max skill DM of +2, except for Formidable tasks and for advancement and meeting specific minimum skill level requirements.

Level 1 works per normal (DM is 0).
At level 2 one gets additional DM +1 with the task being more difficult (DMs: Skill +2; -2 difficulty; +1 per rule). Effectively skill level 1 except for formidable tasks. Note still apply original difficulty DMs.
For level 3, DM +2 with difficulty adjustment (its +3 for skill, DM -2 for bumped difficulty with a DM +1).
No extra benefits for level 4+ (i.e. - treat like level 3 above)

Note that difficulty adjustment is only one level (not cummulative) and that players can take advantage of this even if they have the other specialty skill (which they might need for certain requirements ala BattleDress).

[Hopefuly, despite my normal blathering way, this is clear enough and not too messed up!]

Again - love feedback...

 

[CosmicGamer]

First read through left me confused. I'll give it another try in the morning.

 

[rust]

The first thing I did when working on the Mongoose Traveller version of
my new setting was to reorganize the science skills, because the way
they are treated in the rules seems implausible to me - especially the
three unrelated space sciences.

Now I have Basic Sciences (Chemistry, Mathematics, Physics), Biological
Sciences (Biology, etc., plus Xenobiology), Geosciences (Geology, Ocea-
nography, etc., plus Planetology), Social Sciences (Archeology, etc., plus
Xenosociology) and Technical Sciences.

The Technical Sciences include all the Engineering fields that require a
university degree, including for example Electronics, Space Engineering,
Planetary Engineering, Marine Technology and Robotics.

Someone with a skill in Technical Sciences / Space Engineering can han-
dle all drives, power plants and other systems that are used on spaceships,
just like a trained naval engineer in our real world is expected to be able
to work with all of the ship's systems, not just one kind of them.

If an engineer has to work on an unfamiliar field, for example a Space En-
gineer who is asked to repair a mining robot, he has the basic Skill 0 -
he knows a lot about basic technology, but is not familiar with the specific
technology.

If there is a plausible reason why the engineer should have a better chan-
ce of success, I handle this with the difficulty of the task or the situational
modifier of + 1, depending on the background of the character or the spe-
cific situation.

So, while I understand the idea to design some kind of rules for such situ-
ations, I do not think that it is really necessary to introduce another rule,
especially because in my view the situations are too varied to make one
rule fit them all.

 

[BP]

Sounds like you have nicely managed things by changing the skill definitions and breakdowns. 8) I like yours a lot better than the offical ones.

On reflection, my current idea leaks believability badly when it comes to languages, social sciences and piloting (like rotor versus fixed wing). Plus as a rule it is probably still too complicated...

Without changing the game mechanics, you have addressed the problem nicely - and more believably IMHO. The only catch is the explicit task checks in the book will no longer apply. (Though a simple lookup table might be possible?) I'm attempting to extend the rules without changing any real content - which is the reason I avoided this type of change. Ultimately, this level of change may be the simplest and best - and your changes sound intuitive enough to be very easy to apply.

'...situations are too varied to make one rule fit them all' - nicely said! Don't expect them to, just to provide something general that players as well as refs can hang their hats on. It sounds like I'm not alone in considering the current specialities a little constricting - i.e., seems a Engineer (M-Drive) 4 would have more than a little experience with Electronics (definitely more than level 0 implies).

My other main concern is that players are more likely to attempt things they know will have better odds. If the Ref has to point them all out, then it becomes the Ref leading and roleplay has another reason to take second fiddle. Or the players may avoid attempts that would otherwise add fun.

P.S. - I bet I'm also not alone saying I'd love to hear more of your skill changes if you've got em...

 

[BP]

First read through left me confused. I'll give it another try in the morning.

Well - that's probably all on me - and a good indication that my 'rule extension' is over complicated at best...

Especially since I spent like an hour trimming and editing to make it 'clearer'. Alas - 'Mud' can often be used as an adjective when refering to my 'clear explanations'. Very much appreciate feedback CosmicGamer- it can only help me improve! (I don't think I can get worse :lol

 

[rust]

My other main concern is that players are more likely to attempt things they know will have better odds. If the Ref has to point them all out, then it becomes the Ref leading and roleplay has another reason to take second fiddle. Or the players may avoid attempts that would otherwise add fun.

The players usually do a little bookkeeping of their own and note what
kind of equipment or field of technology their characters are familiar with.

This approach became necessary for my usual "remote colony settings",
because almost all of the characters arrive on the new colony world with-
out most of the skills that are required to survive there and to develop
the colony.

For example, Varun is (yet another ...) water world, but most colonists
lack any experience as hard suit divers, submarine helmsmen and thelike.
To aquire such skills, they have to spend some training time and to gain
some experience "on the job", so it is useful to note what technology they
have already encountered and learned to use.

A Space Engineer with some belt mining background will probably find it
not really difficult to deal with the machinery and robots used for seafloor
mining, but he will have serious problems when the hydrojet engine of the
submersible that takes him to the seafloor mine stops to work - here he
is at Skill 0.

However, once he has repaired the hydrojet, he has become a little fami-
liar with the technology, and the player notes "hydrojet" on the character
sheet, giving the character a modifier the next time he has to solve any
problem with a hydrojet.

But this does not improve the character's general Marine Technology skill
(that would require actual training time), so when next time the sonar of
the submersible fails, he is at Skill 0 once more.

 

[BP]

Sounds like you have a rather highly developed alternative system for handling skills and experience and your players are aware of how that works - i.e. the modifier for hydrojet in your example.

Your approach is more fine grained (and better organized) than official MGT - at the expense of a little more record keeping and probably more skills.

As you are basically tracking experience - do you have your own system for acquiring and enhancing skills... does the hydrojet experience factor into the effort/time required to gain Marine Technology skill levels?

 

[rust]

As you are basically tracking experience - do you have your own system for acquiring and enhancing skills... does the hydrojet experience factor into the effort/time required to gain Marine Technology skill levels?

If the Space Engineer goes back to university to study Marine Technology,
his familiarity with the colony's technology will not reduce the time he has
to study (universities usually do not do that), but it will increase his chance
to finish his studies successfully, perhaps even with honours.

However, as a colonist he will probably stay on Varun, and try to get fa-
miliar with all the themes of Marine Technology (about a dozen or so).
Once he has achieved that, and spent some time with a teaching expert
program at the library, he gets Marine Technology Skill 1, and from then
on can improve the skill normally through training.

The training times in my setting are a bit longer than those in the core
rules, and they are different for practical skills and theoretical skills -
learning to use a speargun is easier than learning marine paleontology,
to use some extreme examples.

 

[BP]

After re-reading the responses, imbibing some spirits and rereading the book - epiphany has occurred!

Turns out my years of experience in CT & AD&D refereeing don't give me anything other than MGT 0, especially when it comes to Skills and Task Checks!

My most sincere thanks for all the responses! Handling cross-specialty (and cross skill) DMs on a case-by-case basis finally makes more sense to me.

For Gun Combat (Energy Rifle) 4 I might give extra DMs for firing an Energy Pistol when using it for aimed distant shots (i.e. more like a rifle), but not normally. Explaining this to players and advising them that if they think their skills may cross apply in a given situation to speak up - i.e. "Don't know about sensors, but I might be able to fix those damaged controls - they probably are not much different than M-Drive ones..." - handles my other concerns.

My read on Skill 0 was also flawed. Core pg 51 describes Skill 0 as 'competent in using that skill, but has little experience...avoids penalty for being untrained'. I forgot that Skill-0 with no extra DMs results in less than 50% chance of success for an average skill check. So Skill 0 could also be described as simply being familiar with a skill - not really trained nor competent - i.e. observed, read about, (been 'programmed'), or previously attempted only with the supervision/help of others. I also kinda over-looked certain special handling for Skill 0 - notably Language and Trade.

MGT had me covered all along - so no general game mechanic/rule changes (hurray!).

In the RW I am not officially/formally trained in a number of highly technical cross-specialties in which I have years of practical experience and success - and I forget that this is unusual and basically I am trained (self-trained) in these related areas. It certainly helps hearing others' points of view!

Again, my thanks and a Happy New Year to you all!

 

[TrippyHippy]

The first thing I did when working on the Mongoose Traveller version of
my new setting was to reorganize the science skills, because the way
they are treated in the rules seems implausible to me - especially the
three unrelated space sciences.

Now I have Basic Sciences (Chemistry, Mathematics, Physics), Biological
Sciences (Biology, etc., plus Xenobiology), Geosciences (Geology, Ocea-
nography, etc., plus Planetology), Social Sciences (Archeology, etc., plus
Xenosociology) and Technical Sciences.

The Technical Sciences include all the Engineering fields that require a
university degree, including for example Electronics, Space Engineering,
Planetary Engineering, Marine Technology and Robotics.

Someone with a skill in Technical Sciences / Space Engineering can han-
dle all drives, power plants and other systems that are used on spaceships,
just like a trained naval engineer in our real world is expected to be able
to work with all of the ship's systems, not just one kind of them.

If an engineer has to work on an unfamiliar field, for example a Space En-
gineer who is asked to repair a mining robot, he has the basic Skill 0 -
he knows a lot about basic technology, but is not familiar with the specific
technology.

If there is a plausible reason why the engineer should have a better chan-
ce of success, I handle this with the difficulty of the task or the situational
modifier of + 1, depending on the background of the character or the spe-
cific situation.

So, while I understand the idea to design some kind of rules for such situ-
ations, I do not think that it is really necessary to introduce another rule,
especially because in my view the situations are too varied to make one
rule fit them all.

I still keep the monikers of Physical (Physics, Chemistry, etc), Life (biology related) and Social science (psychology, etc), but I agree that the Space science seemed a little confused - Planetology and Robotics do not seem particularly related to each other, and Astronomy isn't even mentioned! In my view, it would have been better to make the 4th category 'Applied Science', with the application being decided as the specialty. In the case of Space science, for example, you could have Applied Science (Space Travel), which would incorporate anything to do with the topic, but still leaves the scope for other specialties like Robotics for example. On this basis, you could also integrate Engineering into the Applied Science skill as a specialty, Applied Science (starship engineering), and I wouldn't be unhappy about that.

 

[rust]

In my view, it would have been better to make the 4th category 'Applied Science', with the application being decided as the specialty.

Yes, this would also be a good way to handle it.

I mainly used the one described in my posts above because it fitted the
setting, where the exploration of a water world and the creation of a co-
lony there are at the center of the campaign.

Therefore I wanted to give the geoscientists (cartographers, planetolo-
gists, oceanographers, etc.), the bioscientists (marine biologists, xeno-
biologists, etc.) and the engineers as the most likely character concepts
of the campaign their own wide science fields, to enable them to have at
least Skill 0 in all of the standard situations they might encounter.

With another setting and another focus of the campaign, I would probab-
ly arrange the science skills (and a number of other skills) differently.