Vacc Suits (continued)

[CosmicGamer]

NOTE: Page references are to the core rulebook.

Here is a quote from another thread that prompted this post:

One can always use a suit with no skill, just with extra DMS. Normally the DM is -3, but armour is an exception at -2 for each missing skill level (so -4 for TL 8 suits, and only -2 for TL 12+).

Factoring in TL of the suit, the process of 'donning' the suit can be classified as Routine (TL 8+), Easy (TL 12+) or Simple (TL 14+). The definition of an Easy task is '...activating an unfamiliar device that has a clear and simple interface.'. At higher TLs (book states TL 14), putting on a suit is basically putting on clothing with a 'hat' - the suit automatically sealing and enabling life support functions or informing the occupant of what needs to be done.

For TL 8, with Vacc 1 requirement, this would make the net DM only -2 before any characteristic DMs. For TL 12+, this would completely eliminate the negative skill DM. At TL 14, the difficulty might be Simple - so the starting DM would be +2.

An 'emergency suit' might be even easier to don and use than normal - say Vacc 0 at TL 8 and no skill required at TL 12+ (with a lower armour value and possibly shorter air duration like 3 hours). Additionally, at higher TLs, such suits could offer automatic cryoberth features that kick in if air is low or suit integrity is compromised (impacts, tears, radiation, etc.).

First I'll point out page 59

A character will rarely need to make Vacc Suit skill checks - merely possessing the skill is enough.

Next, read page 48 starting with

Most of the actions undertaken by characters do not require a skill check.

but it goes on to give examples where no skill at all is needed or having the skill is enough, and no skill check is needed.

The following is covered several times. Once on page 87 under armor and then again under the Battle Dress and Vacc Suit skill descriptions.

A character suffers a -2 DM to all actions taken in the armour per missing skill level..

From all this, the discussion I'd like to have is
1) Skill check for putting on armor, specifically a Vacc Suit.
1a) Character possesses the required skill (Vacc Suit TL 8 requires Vacc Suit 1. Vacc Suit TL 12+ require Vacc Suit 0)
I think no skill check would be needed if you have the required skill.
1b) Character does not possess the required skill
I can see this being a situation that normally does not need a check (page forty eight) if you are casually donning the Vacc Suit because you can land at something like a class E port and only need to do something simple like get from the ship to one of the local structures.

My opinions. The skill rules typically give examples of common task rolls. Neither Battle Dress or Vacc Suit provide a task for donning the suit. Die rolls are too random and I wouldn't want to lose a player to a bad die roll for something that they would keep on trying until they got it right (I assume there will be an indicator even in the TL 8 suit). I would allow donning of a vacc suit with no skill checks unless there were extenuating circumstances. Something like the suit has to be put on quickly or under stress or while injured. Even then, if the task fails I wouldn't send the character off into the void. I would tell the player that a red light is flashing (maybe they don't know what the light represents).

Just a thought, does anybody do skill checks for properly operating an air lock or opening and closing an air tight door? This is in no way identical to putting on a Vacc Suit but it does have some similarities both in the danger factor if done improperly and because it would require some know-how to make sure everything got sealed up properly and the environment is correct - probably all would have air/vacuum and seal automated indicators.

2) Skill checks while in armor, specifically a Vacc Suit.
2a) Non Vacc Suit related checks when a character does not possess the required Vacc Suit skill
So, you've got your vacc suit on and now you are trying to do Engineering repairs. The way I read the section describing the -2 DM (per level) for not having the proper armor skill is that the Engineering skill check would have an additional negative DM imposed if the character does not possess the required Vacc Suit skill. It is probably more difficult to do things in a cumbersome vacc suit if you haven't practiced and gained some experience. More so in the low tech version.
2b) Vacc Suit related checks when a character does not possess the required Vacc Suit skill
Example 1: Applying an emergency patch to fix a rip in the vacc suit or some other malfunction. For this example, the character is Vacc Suit level 0 and using a TL8 Vacc Suit (skill 1 required).
It appears that this task would get a -2 DM
Example 2: Applying an emergency patch to fix a rip in the vacc suit or some other malfunction. For this example, the character has no Vacc Suit skill and is using a TL8 Vacc Suit (skill 1 required).
Do you take a -3 unskilled penalty or the -4 penalty or both?

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

If a player failed a roll to don a vacc suit, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are dead.

Unless it was an Exceptional Failure (Effect of -6 or less) then I would simply make them roll again and say they are taking longer. An Exceptional Failure might mean they damaged the suit or somehow got it so tangled that they couldn't put it on (knot in one of the legs for example).

I would also think that by TL8, the difficulty of donning is no more than Routine (Easy at TL12+) so that -2 DM for no skill is offset by the ease of the suit itself.

 

[BP]

Difficulty level factors in for whether I require a skill check.

It is worth it to note that a DM 0 difficulty level is Average - 'a moderate obstacle to a trained professional' (pg 49). A check for an Easy task (trivial for a vacc 0/1+ donning a suit) has a default >90% chance of success - and I would only use it if the plot was going to put the PC in unusual circumstances.

For unskilled - I would. (My read on 'requiring' skill levels for vacc suits.)

Of the top of my head, I can't think of many other times I actually would call for a vacc suit check. Most other activity has its own checks (i.e. hull repair).

As for the 'donning check, failure doesn't mean they somehow missed getting it on - i.e. PC wouldn't keep trying as they are really unaware of their mistake - though another check might be in order for another character to recognize the failure.

It may mean it is not properly 'safe'. So, in a RP setting, this can result in being merely uncomfortable (temp controls wrong) to being outright dangerous (unsealed, wrong atmo pressure mixture), depending on the roll. Dieing would only be an indirect option - thus not dependent directly on a roll.


Opening airlocks is a good example - since they would be automated, opening them is normally a Simple task - ' trivial for everyone'. With a DM of +6, that normally means 100% chance of success (unless the character has a negative Int DM :twisted: ).


Skill checks are best used when random elements are appropriate in a game - to me they represent luck and fate based on ability, skill, haste (timing), tools, and situation. To me they represent a fork in the road - if overused the trip be a drag...

 

[BP]

P.S. - what is missing from my initial post - because it is second nature to me - is that skill checks with +6 DM are unnecessary (as are any that will not affect the plot - like things one would just retry), unless effect is important.

A note on 're-trying' a check. Rolls are meta-game mechanics - players may or may not know the outcome immediately - but that does not mean a PC is aware of failure/success or effect. That should be RolePlayed.

For circumstances where the PC is aware of failure and can retry (jumping for a ledge; vacc suit alarms screaming in their ears) - Timing may come into play and factor into the RP and plot. As may other checks - like endurance in the case of the failed jumper...

 

[BP]

...
2a) ... you've got your vacc suit on and now you are trying to do Engineering repairs. The way I read the section describing the -2 DM (per level) for not having the proper armor skill is that the Engineering skill check would have an additional negative DM imposed if the character does not possess the required Vacc Suit skill. ...

That is the way I read it too - i.e. - no separate vacc suit check.

...
2b) ...
Example 1: Applying an emergency patch to fix a rip in the vacc suit or some other malfunction. For this example, the character is Vacc Suit level 0 and using a TL8 Vacc Suit (skill 1 required).
It appears that this task would get a -2 DM

If one was in the suit at the time - I would say yes (according to the rules).

...
Example 2: Applying an emergency patch to fix a rip in the vacc suit or some other malfunction. For this example, the character has no Vacc Suit skill and is using a TL8 Vacc Suit (skill 1 required).
Do you take a -3 unskilled penalty or the -4 penalty or both?

By the rules - the -4 DM.

My read here is that TL 8 vacc suits are being treated like today's hard vacc suits (especially MMU style). These are very heavy, bulky and complicated. Today, most require assistance to be able to 'don'. The next jump is TL 12 - which seems a bit off to me, but the idea is sound (i.e. more like soft/skin suits rather than self shape retaining armour).

 

[rust]

The equivalent of a vacc suit in my settings is a closed environment suit.
While it does have an armour value, I usually do not treat it as armour,
but as just one more piece of everyday gear that is used routinely and
without any need for a skill roll if the character has at least Vacc Suit 0.

Characters without any Vacc Suit skill need a little more time for all rou-
tine tasks, but as long as they are used to wearing any kind of clothing
and have an Int of 3+ I do not require a skill roll in most situations. At
the technology levels of my settings an environment suit should really be
fool proof to use.

Skill rolls only become necessary when the characters attempt something
that requires fine manipulation or carries the risk that it may damage the
suit. For example, repairing a watch or climbing a cliff while wearing a suit
would be difficult actions and need skill rolls to succeed.

Since in my view the situations are too different to use fixed modifiers, I
decide upon the actual modifier based on what the situation is like and
which potentially helpful skills - and ideas - the character has. For exam-
ple, in one of the settings a character had to climb a mountain, and there
was a high risk that he would tear his suit. He decided to wear an XXL
combat fatigue over his environment suit, and so I waived the skill roll.

 

[DFW]

Another way to look at it (analogy) is if an untrained person in an emergency, had to don a parachute. Would it require a "check"? If they chute were TL 12 and basically was idiot proof?

 

[far-trader]

Another way to look at it (analogy) is if an untrained person in an emergency, had to don a parachute. Would it require a "check"? If they chute were TL 12 and basically was idiot proof?

I don't think you're giving idiots enough credit

There is no such thing as idiot proof and never will be until all idiots are eliminated. The stuff I've witnessed and heard of happening when innocents (I'd as soon hope they weren't really that stupid) encounter something they don't understand or have had no previous experience with are astonishing.

For example:

Is your TL12 chute going to know that the untrained person has put it on backwards? Upside down? Inside out? All three??? You imagine I'm joking or exaggerating? You'd be surprised at just how creatively obtuse an "idiot" can be then

Or is the TL12 chute going to inform the untrained person that they have put the chute on backwards, upside down, and inside out? I've seen people; competent, trained, experienced people try and fail to explain simpler concepts without time and pressure constraints such as bailing out of a falling vehicle. A simple AI won't lose it's patience trying to explain the correct wearing a of chute, but it won't succeed either, calmly trying and failing all the way to the sudden stop of impact with the ground.

Of course one can simply accept that PCs are not in the (I pray) insignificant fraction (but why do they seem so many) of people who (sometimes) just, don't, get, it.

But I probably wouldn't even be rolling for something like that if it was PCs involved and not a critical plot point. Why kill them out of simple gear idiocy? "Oh, I'm sorry, you're not skilled in the use of a Revolver and you failed your roll. Let's see... you shot yourself in the head and are dead." Let them at least die attempting something they were supposed to be in danger of dieing from. "Oh, you have no skill with a Revolver? OK, you manage to point it in the right direction and get off a few rounds that scare the creature away before dropping the gun. Moving on... "

 

[DFW]

Is your TL12 chute going to know that the untrained person has put it on backwards? Upside down? Inside out? All three??? You imagine I'm joking or exaggerating? You'd be surprised at just how creatively obtuse an "idiot" can be then

Or is the TL12 chute going to inform the untrained person that they have put the chute on backwards, upside down, and inside out?

Hmm, if clothing at this level can be self cleaning I'd imagine the above tech features would be trivial. I DO know how idiotic people can be. Sometimes it is mind boggling and, amusing if not a dangerous situation.

 

[rust]

Since player characters usually managed to get through at least four
years of a career without earning themselves a Darwin Award, I think
one can assume that they can handle simple problems ... 8)

 

[CosmicGamer]

A note on 're-trying' a check. Rolls are meta-game mechanics - players may or may not know the outcome immediately - but that does not mean a PC is aware of failure/success or effect. That should be RolePlayed.

For circumstances where the PC is aware of failure and can retry (jumping for a ledge; vacc suit alarms screaming in their ears) - Timing may come into play and factor into the RP and plot.

Let me clarify. By re-trying, I was not referring to re rolling a skill check. In that part of my post I was discussing not needing a roll. I meant something more like if the character has plenty of time and no pressure while putting on their vacc suit and a "vacc suit alarms screaming in their ears" then the character would know they are not finished putting their vacc suit on and would (re-try) work at it till they got it right so no check may be needed.

Would a character with no comm skill roll when they try pull up someones name and contact them? How about when they try to store someones comm info? I'd just assume they figure it out and let the player decide how to roll play the lack of skill.

Since player characters usually managed to get through at least four
years of a career without earning themselves a Darwin Award, I think
one can assume that they can handle simple problems ... 8)

The last character I rolled up failed enlistment, failed their first survival roll and got severely injured.

Often I use a characters background and related skills to determine if a roll is needed. Does someone who has worked on a bridge as a pilot for 12 years but has no comm skill know how to send a distress message? Does a 18 year old passenger who has no comm skill, comes from a low tech world, has never used a comm or a computer, and this is their first time on a ship know how to send a distress message?

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

Since player characters usually managed to get through at least four
years of a career without earning themselves a Darwin Award, I think
one can assume that they can handle simple problems ... 8)

Hmm...

Not sure about that, especially when the simple problem is not something they have had to do before. I would imagine that your, e.g. noble, would be untrained, unskilled and potentially dangerous in putting on his vacc suit unaided. Of course, given a little help, and lots of time, no problems.

In a hurry, with the noble's yacht venting atmosphere and the boat already gone, now that should require a skill roll, though I agree with most of the above messages that a simple failure might be unconfortable rather than immediately lethal...

Egil

 

[rust]

I would imagine that your, e.g. noble, would be untrained, unskilled and potentially dangerous in putting on his vacc suit unaided.

I have problems to believe that even a noble would go spacefaring with-
out any training in using the emergency gear. Even "Spacefaring 101 for
Dumb Bluebloods" should include that basic survival training.

 

[far-trader]

I have problems to believe that even a noble would go spacefaring with-
out any training in using the emergency gear. Even "Spacefaring 101 for
Dumb Bluebloods" should include that basic survival training.

How many commercial and private plane passengers know how to use a parachute?

Or perhaps even more related, how many cruise liner and sea yacht passengers know how to use a sea survival suit? Even if one was provided for every passenger. Heck some of them even have a hard time managing a simple life-vest.

I don't see a typical Noble, even with their own Yacht automatically knowing how to use a Vacc-Suit, nor do I see the ship's locker containing a Vacc-Suit for every person aboard. There would be survival bubbles (the equivalent of a life-vest/inflatable raft) certainly, but not Vacc-Suits. And most of the time any "emergency" requiring abandoning ship is going to be handled by using the small craft and not require Vacc-Suits.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

How many commercial and private plane passengers know how to use a parachute?

Or perhaps even more related, how many cruise liner and sea yacht passengers know how to use a sea survival suit? Even if one was provided for every passenger. Heck some of them even have a hard time managing a simple life-vest.

I don't see a typical Noble, even with their own Yacht automatically knowing how to use a Vacc-Suit, nor do I see the ship's locker containing a Vacc-Suit for every person aboard. There would be survival bubbles (the equivalent of a life-vest/inflatable raft) certainly, but not Vacc-Suits. And most of the time any "emergency" requiring abandoning ship is going to be handled by using the small craft and not require Vacc-Suits.

Agreed

Egil

 

[rust]

How many commercial and private plane passengers know how to use a parachute?

I hope you are not going to tell me that parachutes would be acceptable
rescue devices for commercial planes. :shock:

Or perhaps even more related, how many cruise liner and sea yacht passengers know how to use a sea survival suit?

At least over here each passenger on a cruise that is more than that of
a ferry has to take part in an emergency training at least once during
the cruise, and this in waters where rescue teams will arrive within only
a few hours.

In a space travel scenario, where help will usually by weeks instead of
hours away, I am fairly certain that there would be more and more in-
tense mandatory training for emergency situations, including the use of
an emergency vacc suit and other survival gear.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

How many commercial and private plane passengers know how to use a parachute?

I hope you are not going to tell me that parachutes would be acceptable
rescue devices for commercial planes. :shock:

In a space travel scenario, where help will usually by weeks instead of
hours away, I am fairly certain that there would be more and more in-
tense mandatory training for emergency situations, including the use of
an emergency vacc suit and other survival gear.

You know, in the same way that there are no effective measures to help passengers in a mid-air airline disaster, I think it is quite possible that space ships will not have "intense mandatory training for emergency situations", the assumption being that if anything really bad happens, everybody dies.

However, in Trav terms I am quite happy with the details on MTU escape pods (though note that many commercial designs don't carry escape pods, quite a substantial loss of dtons with something that should never be used), its a bit of a sci-fi classic

Egil

 

[far-trader]

How many commercial and private plane passengers know how to use a parachute?

I hope you are not going to tell me that parachutes would be acceptable
rescue devices for commercial planes. :shock:

:lol:

No, not at all, it was the first analogy that came to mind, and as noted the second was a better one. But, for the same reasons airliners will never issue parachutes to every passenger and instruct them on their use in the rare case of an emergency, so too will spaceships not issue Vacc-Suits to every passenger and instruct them on their use in the rare case of an emergency.

Or perhaps even more related, how many cruise liner and sea yacht passengers know how to use a sea survival suit?

At least over here each passenger on a cruise that is more than that of
a ferry has to take part in an emergency training at least once during
the cruise, and this in waters where rescue teams will arrive within only
a few hours.

Yes, the equivalent in the space scenario of a lecture on the use of rescue bubbles (life-vests) and procedures for boarding life-boats (small craft or escape pods). Not, at least imo, instructions on the use of and issuing of Vacc-Suits (immersion survival suits) to every passenger.

In a space travel scenario, where help will usually by weeks instead of
hours away, I am fairly certain that there would be more and more in-
tense mandatory training for emergency situations, including the use of
an emergency vacc suit and other survival gear.

Whereas I agree with help being possibly weeks away I disagree that any training in Vacc-Suit use is going to be of any help in that case. They're only going to last a few hours. What you need for weeks is a life-boat, that can last that long or make it's own way to a suitable world to wait. The user friendly survival bubbles (life-vests) are for those who can't get to the life-boat but hope to be picked up shortly by it.

 

[rust]

What you need for weeks is a life-boat, that can last that long or make it's own way to a suitable world to wait.

Well, yes, but once the life boat made its way to a planet, and the crew
and passengers on board do not have the incredible luck that it has a
breathable atmosphere, they cannot leave the life boat without vacc
suits - no way to refuel the life boat, no way to get water or other use-
ful materials, no way to erect the pressurized emergency shelters ...
just sitting in the life boat's passenger seats until someone comes by
to rescue them or the lights go out ...

In my view an emergency vacc suit and the knowledge how to use it
and the other survival gear would make a real difference in such a si-
tuation.

Well, but in the end this is a setting thing, it depends on how one sees
the specific setting and what makes sense there.

 

[BP]

...Let me clarify. By re-trying, I was not referring to re rolling a skill check. In that part of my post I was discussing not needing a roll. I meant something more like if the character has plenty of time and no pressure while putting on their vacc suit and a "vacc suit alarms screaming in their ears" then the character would know they are not finished putting their vacc suit on and would (re-try) work at it till they got it right so no check may be needed.
...

Ah, but you have introduced another DM - Timing. Such would make the task 100% doable (though it might take 6 hours) - thus, no need for a task check.

I don't think you're giving idiots enough credit
...

Yes, lets give them their due!
Nothing like improving the gene pool...

...You know, in the same way that there are no effective measures to help passengers in a mid-air airline disaster, I think it is quite possible that space ships will not have "intense mandatory training for emergency situations", the assumption being that if anything really bad happens, everybody dies.
...

Sounds quite plausible for passengers.
For crew on military vessels, corporate lines, merchant marines, and the like, it would most likely be provided and required - with simulations and hands on training for military. Even if the likelihood of survival was near nil.


On another note, I find it interesting how many folks share the notion that a bad roll for a skill check indicates a PC dies... :?

During chargen, death from a bad roll seems acceptable - one is really just playing a solo game of craps with tables and a handfull of choices - there is no roleplay involved, and the only real 'investment' is some time. Though, players can become 'attached' to their creations even then.

Afterwards, during RP, there is generally quite an investment and attachment for players, the whole group and the story. Letting dice and a table completely determine a non-recoverable fatal outcome is rather counter productive to playing this type of game IMO.

Not to say death shouldn't be 'an option' - just not an automatic based on a roll. The result of Effect is ultimately determined by the Ref. Combat is, of course, an exception - as is foolishly attempting something that is inherently deadly. But, this is not fate at the hand of dice, rather choice of player and Referee to roll the dice.