Topic: Training Package with Everyman?

[Malleable]

So if I have Natural Physique, so Everyman for Body Development, and I take a training package providing a rank in BD, would I get the extra rank in BD?

Thanks,
Mal

[tulgurth]

No, everyman ranks come with purchased ranks only.   Purchasing a TP is not considered purchasing a rank, at least in my games.

[jdale]

No. In RMFRP, see the last paragraph before the example on page 23. I'm not sure this is explicitly addressed in RMSS (it's not in the location that corresponds to RMFRP pg 23). Note that Restricted also does not apply in training packages; you get the listed number of ranks in the TP regardless of whether the skill is occupational, everyman, or restricted.

[Cory Magel]

Just FYI, depending on your short vs long term outlook, I've switched Everyman to mean +1 point per rank and Occupational to mean +2 points per rank.  I find that diminishing returns just hurts all that much more with them the way they are... but we tend to run up to the upper teens in levels.

[Malleable]

Thanks guys.

Mal

[Grinnen Baeritt]

Always been a bone of contention with me this particular issue. Especially since it's such an easily overlooked "rule"

Since you pay for training packages with DP (albeit at a slightly discounted rate) you are in effect still purchasing them with DP.

And talents should perhaps be applied across the board for simplicity.

Ok. RAW say otherwise. But I'm fairly sure that most RM players don't stick to ALL the rules

[dagorhir]

Just FYI, depending on your short vs long term outlook, I've switched Everyman to mean +1 point per rank and Occupational to mean +2 points per rank.  I find that diminishing returns just hurts all that much more with them the way they are... but we tend to run up to the upper teens in levels.

I think this is missing the true purpose of the classification, which is to reduce the development cost. To illustrate this I have 3 characters developing the same Crafts skill. Character A has the skill classified as Everyman. All characters are developing to skill rank 10.

Character A reaches 10 skill ranks at level 5 for a total DP cost of 20 (5 x 4)
Character B reaches 10 skill ranks at level 5 for a total DP cost of 70 (5 x 4 + 5 x 10)
Character C reaches 10 skill ranks at level 10 for a total DP cost of 40 (10 x 4)

All other things being equal, all characters are equally proficient in the crafts skill but character A gets to develop additional skills with the DP savings provided by the classification. And that in my mind is the true benefit of having the classification.

The classification are not meant to make characters better or worse then other characters, it just meant to change the development cost of a skill. As such, the diminishing returns of higher skill ranks is irrelevant.

[markc]

Note also that TP skills cannot advance past 10 ranks by using TP's, except lifestyle skills which can advance to 15 ranks. So it is best to keep the number of ranks in a separate section or item on a spreed sheet to keep this rule in check.
MDC

[dagorhir]

Note also that TP skills cannot advance past 10 ranks by using TP's, except lifestyle skills which can advance to 15 ranks. So it is best to keep the number of ranks in a separate section or item on a spreed sheet to keep this rule in check.
MDC

That's how I build my spreadsheet, I have separate entry for Developed ranks, culture ranks, hobby ranks and TP ranks. It doesn't yet support the 10 ranks limit but since I generally don't allow training packages after creation it isn't a problem yet. The spreadsheet also has an entry for classification which calculates the actual total of dev ranks.

[Cory Magel]

Just FYI, depending on your short vs long term outlook, I've switched Everyman to mean +1 point per rank and Occupational to mean +2 points per rank.  I find that diminishing returns just hurts all that much more with them the way they are... but we tend to run up to the upper teens in levels.

I think this is missing the true purpose of the classification, which is to reduce the development cost. ...
... The classification are not meant to make characters better or worse then other characters, it just meant to change the development cost of a skill. As such, the diminishing returns of higher skill ranks is irrelevant.

The classification is indeed to make one character better than the other at the skill.  Everyman and Occupational are directly related to a professions primary function, the thing they are supposed to be better at.  They can develop twice as many ranks as others, which gives them more skill at it.  That obviously leads to being better at it than other characters.

Unfortunately this leads to hitting the 'diminishing returns' wall just that much faster which has the side effect of all the other professions catching up to them in that skill in the future levels, causing them to be 'as good' as each other again.  Therefore diminishing returns is by no means irrelevant.

The reason I treat them the way I do is because we play to higher levels than a lot of other RM users, which makes my treatment of them more useful in the long run.... because it lets them remain better at those skills than those who do not get that bonus.

[arakish]

So if I have Natural Physique, so Everyman for Body Development, and I take a training package providing a rank in BD, would I get the extra rank in BD?

Thanks,
Mal

I'm late as always.  If I understand the question, my ruling for these has always been: TPs only give a number of ranks, regardless of whether the skill is Restricted, Normal, Everyman, or Occupational.

In other words, if the TP gives 2 ranks in BD, and BD is an Everyman skill, then you still only receive 2 ranks, NOT 4.

Of course, I may have just repeated what someone else said, but all I did was read the question and clicked "Reply".  Sorry if I stepped on other's feet.

rmfr

[arakish]

And I did repeat in previous post.  Sorry jdale.

After reading the thread...

Just FYI, depending on your short vs long term outlook, I've switched Everyman to mean +1 point per rank and Occupational to mean +2 points per rank.  I find that diminishing returns just hurts all that much more with them the way they are... but we tend to run up to the upper teens in levels.

I think this is missing the true purpose of the classification, which is to reduce the development cost. To illustrate this I have 3 characters developing the same Crafts skill. Character A has the skill classified as Everyman. All characters are developing to skill rank 10.

Character A reaches 10 skill ranks at level 5 for a total DP cost of 20 (5 x 4)
Character B reaches 10 skill ranks at level 5 for a total DP cost of 70 (5 x 4 + 5 x 10)
Character C reaches 10 skill ranks at level 10 for a total DP cost of 40 (10 x 4)

All other things being equal, all characters are equally proficient in the crafts skill but character A gets to develop additional skills with the DP savings provided by the classification. And that in my mind is the true benefit of having the classification.

The classification are not meant to make characters better or worse then other characters, it just meant to change the development cost of a skill. As such, the diminishing returns of higher skill ranks is irrelevant.

EXACTLY.  +1.

Note also that TP skills cannot advance past 10 ranks by using TP's, except lifestyle skills which can advance to 15 ranks. So it is best to keep the number of ranks in a separate section or item on a spreed sheet to keep this rule in check.
MDC

Only if using RAW.  I have overruled that TPs can still give ranks, regardless of how many a character has.  Using RAW, that is like saying I can learn 10 ranks in a skill by practice, but I cannot learn anymore if I actually seek out an instructor to further enhance my skill later on with a TP.

Just FYI, depending on your short vs long term outlook, I've switched Everyman to mean +1 point per rank and Occupational to mean +2 points per rank.  I find that diminishing returns just hurts all that much more with them the way they are... but we tend to run up to the upper teens in levels.

But I also like this.  I may combine the two.

Restricted Skill – for every two ranks developed, the character gains only one rank (round down).  For example, if have one developed rank, then it counts as zero ranks.  If have two developed ranks, then it counts as one rank.  If have three developed ranks, then it counts as one rank.  If have four developed ranks, then it counts as two ranks. Et cetera.  Additionally, you receive a -1 modifier for every rank developed.

Normal Skill – for every rank developed, the character gains one rank.

Everyman Skill – for every rank developed, the character gains two ranks.  Additionally, you receive a +1 modifier for every rank developed.

Occupational Skill – for every rank developed, the character gains three ranks.  Additionally, you receive a +2 modifier for every rank developed.

Perhaps too overpowering?  Maybe, I'll have to have it playtested.

rmfr

[dagorhir]

...
Perhaps too overpowering?  Maybe, I'll have to have it playtested.

I think that's quite overpowering. If a skill is Occupational, a character develops 1 rank, he (she/it) gets 3 ranks and a +6 bonus. A bit much IMO.

I also have a rule that once classified a skill cannot be unclassified and classifications can be combined. Thus a skill can be both Restricted and Occupational at the same time which gives 1.5 ranks per rank developed (rounded down). This also allows classifications to be double if the race and profession provides the same classification for the same skill. So far I have not hit any cases where this as caused a problem, which may be because my players have yet to catch on to this.

[tulgurth]

Dagohir, I think he is saying, that instead of everyman and occupational getting the extra ranksthe player instead gets a +1 or +2 bonus respectively.  Or at least that is how I read his ruling.  Correct me if I am wrong please.  Because I like this handling of everyman and occupational skills.

[Cory Magel]

Tulgurth is right regarding how I, personally, do it.  With me Everyman means instead of getting two ranks, you get +1 per rank developed (and Occupational +2 instead of three ranks).

As I mentioned before, I do this strictly due to the diminishing returns problem (which is magnified by the official Everyman and Occupational skill rules).

[Grinnen Baeritt]

As I stated before, I'm not really happy with the RAW regarding the handling of Everyman and Occupational skills, plus the capping of ranks gained or the exclusion of ranks gained through TP.

Cory is right that the Diminishing returns "problem" exists. I'm not sure that it does really have that much of an effect, though I like the simplicity of his solution. I feel this does little to really differentiate between characters at low levels though.

I've always considered that the more rapid acquisition of skill (via E/O definition) is due to one of two factors: increased exposure and/or extraordinary "Talent" before the character begins adventuring and that later also serves as an advantage should those skills be further developed. This is reflected in the system by the character getting more "Bang for their Buck" when selecting those skills with multiple ranks per purchase.

What I'd like to see is a method that is fluid and applicable across the board.

This could be a combined cost reduction and increased bonus effect applicable to skills.

e.g. Everyman skills simply receive a 1 point cost reduction on skills per rank developed, occupational skills 2 point reduction. If that cost is reduced to 0 as the result of that calculation then a rank is gained free of charge when the character advances a level.

Secondly, those skills also get a +1 for everyman, +2 for occupational skill for each skill acquired either with direct purchase.. or those associated with TP purchases.

However, these E/O definitions should be limited to those characters that select them as such as Talents/Background Options or that are given them as racial bonuses. Not applied as a profession bonus. 



 

[pastaav]

It might be worth pointing out the way everyman ranks was handled changed between printing runs. Original RMSS had everyman work as change of DP cost for the skill but you still got the normal number of ranks. I believe that later when RMSS was changed so that you got double ranks for everyman they did not revise the rest of books to fit the change. This might explain why the ruling from RMFRP is missing in the RMSS books and the RMSS books is silent about the matter. These where also the days when the cost formula for training packages was secret so it was a very different time indeed, not much focus put on keeping stuff consistent.

Personal opinion....now when we know how broken the cost formula for TPs are I think the sane decision is to avoid using TPs in the game. The variable discount of the TPs is horrible idea both in theory and in practice, you either end with hidden discounts given to some of the players or that character generation takes ages as everyone need to evalutate how relevant TPs perform combined with different professions. Without the TPs you get avoid the tricky rules about ranks being treated different depending on the source and get quicker generation of characters so there are small benefits of using TP except if they give TP spell lists needed for the character concept.   

[Tommi]

I found the 1st edition RMSS version to better reflect what everyman or occupational skill is/was supposed to mean. Everyman skill cost was 2/4 for all that got it from race , profession, or any other source while Occupational skill cost was 1/2/3. So even nomad illusionist would have riding cost 2/4.

The old mechanics did not cause these clear but inevitable TP questions.

The way Ev and Occ skills are now handled in game mechanics allows unbelievably unbalanced characters: starting ranks + TP's  = 10 ranks,  add master warrior friend  and occupational weapon (category is EV) and one gets 19 ranks 1st lvl (+10 category ranks), 55ranks 5th level... Reasonable stats, quality weapon, add another talent and OB is around 150 at 1st level and closing to 200 at 5th level.

Arakish solution could be good game mechanics - I may test is in my next game - but it doesn't reflect what it should in culturally gained everyman or occupational skills.

[markc]

 Information: the discount in RMSS/FRP for skill DP for TP is 25% off, which is supposed to be balanced by a time requirement. Also if you take a TP more than once you only get 1/2 ranks but pay full cost DP cost.
 



 19 ranks seems like a lot at 1st level. The most I think is 4 for App + 4 from 1st level + additional ranks fro Adolo, App and 1st level. But if you are using Talent Law then it can become very unbalanced quickly as there are quite a few talents in there that are very powerful and quickly break the rules, IMHO.
MDC

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I'd defend the use of TP's regardless.

If a cost formulae is available and applied correctly there is no real problem with them. It just becomes a useful tool to speed the character creation process.  It's the rulings limiting the maximum ranks and the application of E/O modifications that is the sticking point behind stream-lining the character creation process. It's simply an unnecessary exception.

If I would cut anything, it would be the E/O modification, as it is, altogether. However, I'd replace it with a talent purchase scheme that does something very similar.. or one that is factored into the racial build cost in a standardised fashion.

The only element I'd change about TP's (apart from the effect of E/O and rank limitations) is the randomness of the "extras". I'd rather they be included as discountable "items" for characters that purchase them (either for modifying starting equipment costs or as talent purchases representing other advantages.).