v2.0 Promotions and Skills

[Mongoose Pete]

I believe that character generation is currently flawed with is bias towards Advancement. A successful Advancement roll not only advances your Rank (with all its additional benefits), but it also gives you a second roll on the Skills and Training table.

This means that its not worth rolling up PC's in careers which have high Advancement values. Why bother being a support specialist in the military, an X-Boat pilot, or worse still - an scholar, if you end up with a character who has significantly less skills than the rest of the party?

Neither does it realistically reflect reality. People tend to pick up new skills, or deepen their knowledge of existing ones as a function of time, not promotions. If anything, my life has shown me that the higher I advanced in my career, the less time I had to learn things... unless you count gaining useless levels in Admin, spent pacifying the egos of my development team, and fighting off the boss!

Just because a grunt marine never gets promoted, shouldn't mean that he's wasted his life and never learned anything useful. On the contrary, he's probably an expert in scrounging, highly developed physically, and can kill me in a dozen ways, and far better at it than his CO! (And before anyone tells me that Sergeant's are always better at things than their troops, just remember that that is a product of age, not rank)

To fix this, I suggest allowing all PC's two rolls on the Skills and Training table each term, and removing the extra roll from Advancement. In my opinion, increasing Rank already has a lot of advantages (rank specific skills, mustering out benefits, and potential social advantages in the campaign) and doesn't need any more.

 

[AKAramis]

I believe that character generation is currently flawed with is bias towards Advancement. A successful Advancement roll not only advances your Rank (with all its additional benefits), but it also gives you a second roll on the Skills and Training table.

It's a travellerism. It's been true in EVERY "Real" traveller edition, and also in T20.

CT Basic, no enlisted system, officers gained a skill (or stat) roll for every promotion. Some ranks carried a skill grant in addition.

MT Basic, as CT, possibly a second roll for every promotion due to special duty.

TNE: Every promotion, officer or enlisted, is an extra skill gained.

T4: As TNE.

T20: Every promotion, officer or enlisted, carries an XP bonus.

Here's a working explanation of the idea behind it, profferred on the TML years ago IIRC: The skill roll does not represent training for having recieved the promotion, but gaining skill(s) from prior duties that lead to being promoted within the same term.

 

[Andrew Whincup]

Here's a working explanation of the idea behind it, profferred on the TML years ago IIRC: The skill roll does not represent training for having recieved the promotion, but gaining skill(s) from prior duties that lead to being promoted within the same term.

Never thought of it like that. I like the idea that the bonus skill is what caused the promotion.

I suppose it shows you can justify anything if you think about it hard enough.

Andy

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Here's a working explanation of the idea behind it, profferred on the TML years ago IIRC: The skill roll does not represent training for having recieved the promotion, but gaining skill(s) from prior duties that lead to being promoted within the same term.

Unfortunately, that still leaves the in bias there.

I am suggesting a fix to enable reasonably skilled PCs to be generated without needing promotions... and prevent some careers and specialties being shunned entirely for their poor returns.

 

[Mongoose Gar]

Theoretically, the balance should be in the Survival roll - X-Boat's the safest scout role, for example, so you pick that if you want to live.

 

[Halfbat]

Just because the skill was in previous versions doesn't mean it has to be in a newer version.

I also think that by tying everything to a rank advancement, irrespective of the reason why, some characters are being hampered unnecessarily. People often do stay at an existing level but almost never stagnate unless they don't want to go anywhere anyway (which means they wouldn't eb traveller player characters! ). Skills are learnt at both work and in leisure/home life.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

Theoretically, the balance should be in the Survival roll - X-Boat's the safest scout role, for example, so you pick that if you want to live.

In theory yes. However this can be subverted by placing your highest stat in the characteristic linked to survival. A +1 bonus granting you a survival chance of 58%. Since every sixth PC should have a starting characteristic of 12, a +2 bonus would give a 72% chance of survival each term.

Even if you are going to fail a Survival roll, its still worth the gamble for the additional skills you can get for even surviving one term (1 Rank skill and 1 extra roll, in exchange for losing a benefit and possibly an event related skill if you muster out). Surviving two terms in the Navy (still over a 50% chance with a +2), or three in the Marines or Army just improves the advantages.

However, this still does not address the issue when it comes to civilian careers with simply rotten Advancement values. There are some which are 9+ or 10+, meaning that PC's in those professions would be lucky to get even a single promotion. And why would anyone choose to be a drifter with both poor Survival and Advancement values?

I think splitting the extra skill per term from Advancement would encourage a wider selection of the less promotion capable careers.

 

[Mongoose Gar]

No-one should choose to be a drifter willingly. It's consciously designed as the 'if you can't do anything else' career.

(Advancement values may be too high on it, all right.)

 

[AKAramis]

Here's a working explanation of the idea behind it, profferred on the TML years ago IIRC: The skill roll does not represent training for having recieved the promotion, but gaining skill(s) from prior duties that lead to being promoted within the same term.

Unfortunately, that still leaves the in bias there.

I am suggesting a fix to enable reasonably skilled PCs to be generated without needing promotions... and prevent some careers and specialties being shunned entirely for their poor returns.

And that bias is a major part of the "Look & Feel" of Traveller. If that bias goes away, a good number of grognards will openly pan the system in many, many forae. Many more will just stick with the PDF versions of their favorite, and tell players "No, we don't play that. It only thinks it is Traveller..." (Direct quote of one CT GM talking about TNE.)

And there is a fix for it, BTW, in Draft 1 & 2: point based characters. Bypass the whole issue... for with point based characters, they actually LOSE skills for being promoted. (you get one skill from rank about every other rank... at 2pts per rank... or 4 points for a level 1 skill....)

 

[Mongoose Pete]

And that bias is a major part of the "Look & Feel" of Traveller. If that bias goes away, a good number of grognards will openly pan the system in many, many forae.

Really!?! I would have thought a more balanced skill learning system would be welcomed by GMs and players alike. After all, there would still be plenty of benefits left which are specific to being promoted.

I particularly liked the way Halfbat phrased it...

"I also think that by tying everything to a rank advancement, irrespective of the reason why, some characters are being hampered unnecessarily."

 

[SableWyvern]

I think splitting the extra skill per term from Advancement would encourage a wider selection of the less promotion capable careers.

I agree entirely. If this is the sort of thing that really will create an uproar in the traditional fan-base, then it could at least be mentioned as an option.

 

[Exwrestler]

I have an issue with the the logic behind this complaint.

I challenge you to introduce me to a guy who has been a PFC for 8 years who is more skilled than his CO.

The only thing that guy is good at is slackin'.

Not to mention irl being passed over for promotion more than once generaly changes your MOS to Civilian.

The guys your thinking of are probably Specialists of some kind which is a promotion (and usually coems with some kind of special training eh).

 

[SableWyvern]

I have an issue with the the logic behind this complaint.

I challenge you to introduce me to a guy who has been a PFC for 8 years who is more skilled than his CO.

The only thing that guy is good at is slackin'.

Not to mention irl being passed over for promotion more than once generaly changes your MOS to Civilian.

The guys your thinking of are probably Specialists of some kind which is a promotion (and usually coems with some kind of special training eh).

This argument comes tied with the theory that someone who doesn't slack off will be promoted. That further presumes that every Traveller character that fails his advancement roll is lazy -- and given the fairly reasonable chances of failure under the current system, that in turn suggests a very shoddy Imperial military. Over 50% of Imperial Marines in support roles will still be privates arfter four years. A quarter will still be privates after eight. They can't all be slackers.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

I challenge you to introduce me to a guy who has been a PFC for 8 years who is more skilled than his CO.

The only thing that guy is good at is slackin'.

I agree with SableWyvern. There are only a limited number of promotion slots available, and the vast majority of un-promoted grunts aren't or won't be slackers, depending on the discipline and training of the particular military.

That being said said, even a slacker can be skilled. It all comes down to the interpretation of what skills he develops. Slackers still learn things... perhaps not things his military superiors value, but a lazy PFC would probably be far more skillful than his CO in

Gambling, Sneaking (avoiding the CO), Carousing, Scrounging, Persuade (convincing associates to cover his lazy arse, or blackmailing his CO), Brawling (bar fights) etc, etc.

Just because he's not being promoted, doesn't mean he's not learning new things!

 

[Mongoose Pete]

The guys your thinking of are probably Specialists of some kind which is a promotion (and usually coems with some kind of special training eh).

I might be wrong, but I think you're referring to American military practice here. E.g. Joining the US Special Forces gives you an immediate promotion to SF (specialist) sergeant.

In other military forces it can be quite different. For example non-officer candidates who join the SAS are actually demoted to the rank of Trooper for the period they remain with the Regiment.

So there are examples both ways.

 

[hdrider67]

I have an issue with the the logic behind this complaint.

I challenge you to introduce me to a guy who has been a PFC for 8 years who is more skilled than his CO.

When I first joined the Navy, I knew two guys who were getting ready to retire as Seamen. Making BM3 was almost as easy as signing your name. I asked both of them why they never struck or rated up in Deck. They chose to be career seamen.

Neither was lazy and both of them were excellent sailors. They simply didn't want the crow or the responsibility that goes with it.

That's not allowed these days. If you don' make rate, you don't stay in more than 8 years (unless things have changed again).

I still think skills should be tied to advancement. Fact is, these guys knew *their* jobs very well. They never grew past a certain set of skills, though.

But they sure as heck weren't skates (slackers in today's parlance).

 

[AKAramis]

The guys your thinking of are probably Specialists of some kind which is a promotion (and usually coems with some kind of special training eh).

I might be wrong, but I think you're referring to American military practice here. E.g. Joining the US Special Forces gives you an immediate promotion to SF (specialist) sergeant.

In other military forces it can be quite different. For example non-officer candidates who join the SAS are actually demoted to the rank of Trooper for the period they remain with the Regiment.

So there are examples both ways.

In the UK, it's been heard of for guys to serve 20 and retire without making corporal.

In the US, don't make promotion, out you go.

The imperium need be neither model. The Rules probably shouldn't be either....

 

[Exwrestler]

I might be wrong, but I think you're referring to American military practice here. E.g. Joining the US Special Forces gives you an immediate promotion to SF (specialist) sergeant.

In other military forces it can be quite different. For example non-officer candidates who join the SAS are actually demoted to the rank of Trooper for the period they remain with the Regiment.

So there are examples both ways.

I'm not refering to Special Operations troops. I suppose this is a bit unclear because the term "Specialist" the way I am using it is specific to the US Army.

Basically a becoming a Specialist is roughly equivellent to becoming an NCO without the authority. Soldiers are promoted to Spec 4, Spec 5, etc.

It is a way to recognize a Soldiers progress when he isn't right for (or their isn't an opening for) an NCO job.

My point is that in a real military formation a trooper will either be promoted in some way to recognize his progress or he will be culled.

A promotion roll is really a check to see if you did well in your job and I don't want to see those rolls rendered meaningless by changing to some homogenized chargen system where everyone comes out identical. I would say if that is what you want then you should use the point buy system.

 

[anselyn]

My point is that in a real military formation a trooper will either be promoted in some way to recognize his progress or he will be culled.

I think you've got an unfortunate confusion here between "real military formation" and "my cultural bias". Did you see the other posts that said this isn't necessarily true in the RW?

Now in the OTU, perhaps Vilani traditions make it very acceptable to do one job well for a very long time. It's those pushy Solomani that have "up-or-out" ideas - also leading to the well-known Peter Principle hypothesis of Solomani advancement.

PAS

 

[Mongoose Pete]

A promotion roll is really a check to see if you did well in your job and I don't want to see those rolls rendered meaningless by changing to some homogenized chargen system where everyone comes out identical. I would say if that is what you want then you should use the point buy system.

I'd be more prone to say that in general a promotion is the recognition of those who show leadership potential. Sergeants, managers, team leaders, CEO's etc, are people who can organise others and accept heavier responsibility. Excellence, or even competence in the company's (or military organisation's) productive skills is often not necessary for promotion... and skill excellence is normally rewarded financially, rather than with rank. Your culture may vary of course.

But we are getting away from the main point. Which is that no matter what your rank, the skills and knowledge you possess is a factor of life experience... not promotions.

Will a warrant officer with twenty years service as an aircraft engineer in the Airforce have more skills than a self employed bloke who's got twenty years experience as a car mechanic? Are either of them the equivalent of a nuclear scientist who's studied the same period of time and has science skills coming out of his ears?

In my opinion they all have about the same number of skills, since they've all studied, worked, and pursued personal interests for the same period of time.

My objective is not to have a homogenized chargen system where everyone comes out identical, the events tables and random rolls on various Skill and Development tables itself will prevent this. My suggestion was to help balance the careers so that there is no significant penalty to playing characters with poor promotion chances.

Is that so bad?