Topic: Agree / Disagree: Everyman & Occupation weapons...

[DavidKlecker]

I seem to have a group that likes to make sure they have there primary weapon skill at an Everyman or even better an Occupational. After some reflection on this I have come to the conclusion this is power gaming and am not going to allow these classes to change unless an excellent reason is provided or the profession or race or Training Package (I've added a few new rules) changes it.

I see the class adjustments in the following way. Your normal gunslinger is just that, normal. The skill bonus itself will determine how good this normal gunslinger is. If the gunslinger has their weapon with an Everyman attached then this gunslinger is obviously not normal. I would assume some serious training was in his past for him to accomplish such a task. To have occupational obviously this is definitely not normal, and almost rare. That is, I see Occupational meaning the gunslinger is an exceptional shooter. The best of the best.

A couple of real world examples: I would assume your regular cop, about 90% of them are normal shots, ranging from weak to strong, but none of them would have any weapons at everyman. I would assume your average swat member would have an everyman in their primary weapon to show that they are a specialized unit. Your sniper I would say would have the Occupational to show they are the elite of the elite.

Movie examples. Jayne from Firefly would be a skilled marksman with an Everyman. Mal would be normal and so would Zoe. Sgt Riggs from Lethal Weapon would definitely have an occupational in his primary weapon. Sgt Murtah definitely normal with a specialized ability to draw and fire a single bullet and hit the target dead on (as long as he takes one round of preparation  ).

Do you think this is a strong argument against allowing these classes to change? Do you agree these classes should never change unless the person has shown excelled training with that weapon through a training package or perhaps a talent? Any other thoughts?

Thanks!

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Official Opinion is that weapons and/or spell lists should NEVER be allowed as everyman or occupational for any reason.

[yammahoper]

For many skills, it makes more sense to buy a one time bonus rather than ev or occ, such as the +5 to a catogory or a +10 to a skill bg option available in the core game. 

EV and OCC skills should apply to trade and professional skills, such as surgery, diagnostics, military organization, administration, etc.  When ev and occ are applied to primary skills like weapons and spells, imbalance typically follows.

Yet players love these options.  It is a great way to get an early jump on higher skill totals, and that means competence, which all players strive for.

lynn

[markc]

Official Opinion is that weapons and/or spell lists should NEVER be allowed as everyman or occupational for any reason.

Agree strongly.

I also agree with what you had to say.
MDC

[David Johansen]

Though orcs get weapons as everyman in the core RMSS book.  On the other hand, they're pretty sucky otherwise.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Please note that the current personnel at ICE had nothing to do with the decisions that went in to creating RMSS/FRP. This means that there are quite likely a lot of things in those products that do not match the current  "Official Opinion" of ICE.

[David Johansen]

Fair point, but the current staff doesn't really like the special skills rule any more than they like the skill categories, so not particularly surprising.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Just to be absolutely clear -- The current staff at ICE does have issues with RMSS/FRP. However, those issues are specific to each individual, and different to each individual as well.

As for my personal opinions, I like the idea of purchasing skill ranks in categories. What I dislike is the lack of uniformity that is present in doing so. All skill cats should be treated in the same manner in this regard.

My personal issues with O/E/R skills is that RM is already a system that presents differing costs for different skills. It could have achieved the same effect by adjusting costs (or by giving a static modifier -- i.e. Dwarves gets -50 to all swimming maneuvers or all Elves gain a +30 to Stalk/Hide), but instead RMFRP utilizes a system that adds in an extra level of complexity by changing the number of skill ranks gained based upon the classification of the skill.

[David Johansen]

Yeah, I know, just being a pain as usual.

I think they got overused in Space Master but were really pretty rare in RMSS.  I don't mind when you've maybe got crafts at everyman from being a high elf and lock lore at occupational for being a thief but when you've got half a dozen categories at everyman for being an Oort, that's when I think it's a problem.

[David Johansen]

It occurs to me that I'd probably scrap stat, profession, and item bonuses and keep special skills.

The thing is that special skills effect the rate at which a skill is learned and thus are very prone to the diminishing returns of rank bonuses.  Take that common orc weapon master with 8 ranks in scimetar just from the training package, plus two from his culture and four more from his first level!  That's rank 14 at first level for a whopping + 62.  Now your basic fighter profession bonus is only +20, but it currently stacks one for one with ranks.  +82, +102 with a +20 weapon and probably another +20 for stats. +124 at first level!  But if the profession, weapon, and stats handed out another 4 ranks each, he'd only be at +89.

Ranks are self restraining while bonuses are not. 

It would make magic items less of a major influence on a high level character's combat abilities, which feels more heroic to me.

[lev_lafayette]

Personally, I think it depends on the game world.

I can't imagine a Glorantha, for example, where sentient beings simply don't have ordinary access to magic (or weapons for that matter, when I think about it). I am almost tempted to even suggest the same for Kulthea, given how magically intense that place was. Or, as another posted suggested, Orcs with weapon backgrounds in Middle Earth.

[Tommi]

My personal issues with O/E/R skills is that RM is already a system that presents differing costs for different skills. It could have achieved the same effect by adjusting costs (or by giving a static modifier -- i.e. Dwarves gets -50 to all swimming maneuvers or all Elves gain a +30 to Stalk/Hide), but instead RMFRP utilizes a system that adds in an extra level of complexity by changing the number of skill ranks gained based upon the classification of the skill.

I've always liked the 1st printing RMSS version of EV and OCC skills. EV = cost 2/4 occ = cost 1/2/3. This even makes wery much more sense in those racial EV/OCC skills: Orc mage would be able to buy cheap skill for polearm instead of e.g. not pumping huge amount DPs to weapon skill (e.g. cost 9) and then have huge jump in skill...

If you have EV or OCC skills in RMX could this be again the way to look into those classifications?

[Ecthelion]

The problem with that older approach was that it might lead to DP costs that are the same or even worse as before. E.g. a Woodman (Climbing = EV) Thief (normal Climbing DP cost=1/3) would have - if strictly following those rules - DP costs for Climbing of 2/4 instead of 1/3 as this skill is rated EV for him. Of course we would apply common sense in this case and say that the costs never increase for EV or OCC skills, but even then there is at least no benefit from the EV rating. In any case the advantage of a skill being rated depends highly on its initial costs.

The new ruling for EV/OCC/RES skills removed this dependency and always gives the same advantage, no matter what the costs are. It is also easy to apply. That are the advantages. On the downside the EV/OCC classifications may now lead to an insanely high number of skill ranks.

I would have preferred a cost reduction rule instead, something like an EV skill reducing the costs of a skill by 1/2, an OCC skill reducing the costs by 2/4 and a RES skill increasing the costs by 2/4 (a percentage reduction/increase might also be nice). But this probably has new downsides and is a little more complicated to apply.

[dreameling]

Official Opinion is that weapons and/or spell lists should NEVER be allowed as everyman or occupational for any reason.

If you have a system -- added complexity as you put it -- where skill development can be modified ? la O/E/R, then the system should apply equally to every skill. Having the O/E/R rule apply only to certain skills and not to others would be added complexity on top of added complexity. But I understand your sentiment. Were I a GM, I would probably ditch O/E/R and replace it with something that follows more "naturally" from the core skill rules.

Of course, as a player, I likes me my Occupational Primary Weapon Skills.

- Timo -

PS. Aren't Restricted skills actually double-cost, not half-the-gain? So, even the O/E/R system itself is not consistent, right?

[Tommi]

The problem with that older approach was that it might lead to DP costs that are the same or even worse as before. E.g. a Woodman (Climbing = EV) Thief (normal Climbing DP cost=1/3) would have - if strictly following those rules - DP costs for Climbing of 2/4 instead of 1/3 as this skill is rated EV for him. Of course we would apply common sense in this case and say that the costs never increase for EV or OCC skills, but even then there is at least no benefit from the EV rating. In any case the advantage of a skill being rated depends highly on its initial costs.

Even if it was not the letter of law it was in the spirit of law to allow char keep the cheaper cost if it was (in very rare case) in question. There used to be (may still be?) note about this same thing in Finnish law books - if spirit of law in specific case is in peril then the letter of law should not be followed. RM has always left something to GM - this was one of those  cases and as one pretty obvious...

The old was much better in simulating cultural familiarity. If some say that blanck bonus does the same then (s)he and I disagree.