Topic: Skills limited to 10 ranks

[markc]

 
[Note RMSS/SM:P]

 I am thinking about limiting some skills to 10 ranks as a way to force players to take them before some other skills. The three examples I have are the basic math skill, research skill and a new skill called basic science. The math skill would be required for advanced math as well as some other skills, research would become an everyman or occupational skill limited to 10 ranks do to the other two skills in the category also be limited to 10 ranks. And basic science would be linked to other science skills as a requirement. I do not see any skills being lined this way besides that skills in the various science, engineering and medical categories.

 So what do you think?
MDC

[Winterknight]

Is using a ten-rank limit going to help you achieve the intent, would be the question in my mind.  Will they be using these lesser skills as part of play, or are they primarily intended as a prerequisite for logic's sake?

If it were me, and I wanted to ensure someone had some basic training, I would either assume them to be part of the preliminary training for the higher skill, or I would have them make a one-shot DP investment up front to cover the cost of the introductory education.  Apply that only on the first related skill purchased, or even make it a talent purchase.

Mathematics Training: 10 DP.  Player gains an understanding of mathematics applications in science and engineering, including the use of equations and formulae.

[pastaav]

[Note RMSS/SM:P]

 I am thinking about limiting some skills to 10 ranks as a way to force players to take them before some other skills. The three examples I have are the basic math skill, research skill and a new skill called basic science. The math skill would be required for advanced math as well as some other skills, research would become an everyman or occupational skill limited to 10 ranks do to the other two skills in the category also be limited to 10 ranks. And basic science would be linked to other science skills as a requirement. I do not see any skills being lined this way besides that skills in the various science, engineering and medical categories.

 So what do you think?
MDC

There is a risk the player will be reluctant to buy the advanced skill if they can not build a useable bonus until very late in the campaign. At what level can a player who want a inventor like character realize his character concept. If the require level to realize the concept is high then the player might drop the desired character concept totally.

Also in general I am very skeptic about skills like basic math vs advanced math or mapping vs cartography. The design reason behind having a super skill that cost more DP and does the skill in a better way is very obscure. A more clean solution is to have one single math skill and require the player purchase lots of rank if he want to do advanced math stuff.

[Arioch]

I've always found strange having two separate skills for maths... I mean Advanced math is more complex math, wouldn't that be handled better by giving a higher difficulty to math maneuver?

[markc]

 As to the two math skills I think that it may result from the fantasy game vs a Renascence game in which geometry, algebra, etc are very different from basic addition and subtraction.

 I think I will combine the two math skills but I would also like some way to have a PC have some basic sci knowledge with out having to specialize in a specific discipline. Do you have any ideas?

Thanks
MDC

[markc]

 Taking some more time to think about it I think I will just dump the whole category and move the research skill to lore general as the only other skill in that cat is basic math.
MDC

[vroomfogle]

Yeah, combining such skills is definitely the way to go.  If you have Math above Rank 10 you can just say you have Advanced Math!

[Arioch]

Markc, Vroom: good ideas! 

[providence13]

I guess the logic stems from Martial Arts Strikes/Sweeps? Or skills like Two weapon Combat and Riding Mount/Mounted Attack...

But I think I'll use this new Math/Research idea from now own. You wind up with less of a point spread to do the same thing, basically. Save Ranks and it doesn't change much in the game!

[Dark Schneider]

Advanced math really are more complex, is as far from basic math as physics or chemistry. Advanced math is what you need to prove theorems, or research for new ones, etc.

The problem is that I think many people think that advanced math is used for divisions, square roots, etc., but all that is included in basic maths, so there is no need to join adv. with basic maths, because are not the same.

Think in basic math as maths you learn in high school, and advanced maths in University for mathematician career.

Then, there is no need to learn adv. math for research or other science skills, but don't use basic maths for cases where adv. math should be neede (don't join them in 1 skill).

For limits, use the other skills way as RM is used to do, set a relation skill1:skill2 and then use it, the typical relation is 1:1 (you can't have more ranks in 2nd skill than in 1st one) but you can set any other like 1:2 (you can have double ranks in 2nd skill than in 1st one), 1:3, etc. or more complex like 2:3 or any other.

[Steve_990]

Keep in mind if you are thinking of pre-requisite skill/rank levels for math that most sciences and technical skills today require you to have a certain level in math. So would you also require Basic/Advanced Math skills before you could take say specific tech or science skill?

[providence13]

This is not my field... but a friend told me long ago that Calculus should be taught in 4th Grade and then you wouldn't need anything else.

But again, not my field.

[rdanhenry]

Statistics is far more widely useful than calculus. Advanced Math is not a single skill in the modern or science fictional world. For SF, it would probably make more sense to break out several subfields of mathematics and assume that everyone has the basic knowledge of arithmetic and the fancy arithmetic that most people think of when they hear "algebra". Probably simple geometry, too. Not that *everyone* would know such things, but the few that don't are unlikely to be PCs unless it is a "ragtag band of rebels" scenario, where I might allow some kind of flaw to cover it.

In a pseudo-medieval fantasy setting, Basic Math is all that would be available to most folk. Advanced Math could exist as a single skill, although I'm inclined to think that you'd have some very different traditions among different races. Elvish Mathematics and Dwarven Mathematics might diverge considerably beyond the basics of figuring out who killed more Orcs.

Limiting to 10 ranks doesn't really cover it, though. Even in a stereotypical fantasy setting, there's no reason someone can't become ever more sophisticated and skilled with arithmetic manipulations. The Royal Accountant may not be able to work out a single geometric proof, but be able to astound anyone with his quick mental calculations adding long rows of figures and finding percentages.

[pastaav]

Advanced math really are more complex, is as far from basic math as physics or chemistry. Advanced math is what you need to prove theorems, or research for new ones, etc.

This is a bit like the arguments about the concept of applied math is used by lawyers to try to justify software patents. For the mathematically schooled person there no magic line that defines the boundaries of applied math and I also argue that there likewise is no real line differing between proving theorems and using math that is beyond trivial adding numbers.

Let's take a example...for the person with little knowledge in mathematics the formula for calculating the volume of a ball is something simple that you memorize so you can do such calculations while the formula for the mathematically skilled is a simple fact of nature that can be derived by calculating integrals of complex valued functions.  

Think in basic math as maths you learn in high school, and advanced maths in University for mathematician career.

Sounds good if you are running a game that place in a University where exact courses taken by the players should matter. Personally I find the difference pointless. If a player insist on a archtype that is "godlike ability to use basic arithmetic, but not a clue about what it can used for" or "he is the perfect cosmologist, but totally lacks the ability to actually apply his knowledge in the real world" the correct path in my game would be to give the character matching flaws. In all other cases I think, buy one skill and you are fit to go is the more sane design perspective.

The concept can be extended to that that basic counting can be viewed as a talent that every character with an education receive, and that any differences from this should be accounted by flaws. If a player want to play a mathematician then I point him to single mathematics skill and tell him many ranks makes him good at math and allow him to succeed even when the task is difficult. There is little point with requiring the players to sort through layers of skills that is split in ways that does not matter to the current setting.

To close the circle you could have a setup when abilities in mathematical fields like statistics or integrals is determined by talents purchased by the player. You could also use the rules from School of Hard Knocks and have every field of mathematics be a specialization to the normal mathematics skill. A number of different solutions is possible and it is the desired setting that determines what idea that is the best solution.

[providence13]

One skill does make things easier
But of course it isn't entirely accurate.. (like Cooking for instance.)
IMO, I can make allowances for ease of play. In a modern setting, more precise skills would make sense though.

[Dark Schneider]

This is a bit like the arguments about the concept of applied math is used by lawyers to try to justify software patents.

One thing is what the skill is, and other different is if that skill fits in the game system.

I explained what each skill is, then is each one job determine if that skill is right for your systems or not.

But there is no reason to join the skill into one because they are both "maths". If adv. maths is not good for some games then don't use it just like physics or computing, simply the skill is there and should be used only when is appropiate.

But trying to join all maths concepts in a single skill, and basic science one, is a mistake IMO. Ask a mathematician if maths are so easy to learn.

Science specialized is a category where goes all the science career skills, and then decide what are appropiate for your world. Are adv. maths appropiate for fantasy medieval?, who knows, greeks used it (many theorems are from that age) so surely in RM is mentioned for that, but is your work to decide that.

But is really far from lawers justifications.

[Steve_990]

Another item you should weight in on this is why. If Math is an essential skill to your campaign idea, then maybe breaking it down makes sense.

For me I never bother with the skill as taking any of the technical and science skills never state the need of math - so I assume they include the mathematics needed to perform the tasks they say they can.

Unless you wish to enforce math as a prereq for those skills, I don't really see a point in it... unless someone wants to be a professor in math???

But you must justify it for the setting you wish to use it for...

[pastaav]

But there is no reason to join the skill into one because they are both "maths". If adv. maths is not good for some games then don't use it just like physics or computing, simply the skill is there and should be used only when is appropiate.

Why should we not split the skill broadsword into broadsword thrust and broadsword slash then? Quite obviously there is a design choice here that applies when the game designer make the choice if it is two skills or not. The skills as written is only good if you agree with the design choice.

But trying to join all maths concepts in a single skill, and basic science one, is a mistake IMO. Ask a mathematician if maths are so easy to learn.

Hard to learn does in my world imply some combination of high DP costs and many ranks needed before you can do difficult stuff. It does not to me by necessity imply separate skills that need extra rules to synchronize since they in the real world is about the same thing.

To finish the discussion I have during my studies visited two universities, one with focus on theorem proofs and one with more "applied math" focus so I am very familiar with the idea that differing teaching methods give different "skills". I just don't think that the difference is significant enough to matter in an abstract game like RM. The capability of the two approaches is very close if enough time is given.

I would must certainly expect to be done faster with actual counting exercises with my master of science in engineering background than actual theorem proofs, but that is more properly modeled by a reduced difficulty for problems you are more familiar with than different actual limits on what you can compute.

[Dark Schneider]

For me I never bother with the skill as taking any of the technical and science skills never state the need of math - so I assume they include the mathematics needed to perform the tasks they say they can.

Me too 

Hard to learn does in my world imply some combination of high DP costs

To finish the discussion I have during my studies visited two universities, one with focus on theorem proofs and one with more "applied math" focus so I am very familiar with the idea that differing teaching methods give different "skills". I just don't think that the difference is significant enough to matter in an abstract game like RM. The capability of the two approaches is very close if enough time is given.

Yes, that is more reason for not join, you see in more detail how is not possible to have the whole knowledge in only 1 skill, and more if this one is basic. Think that basic math is relative cheap, so the adv. math concep (the skill) is for complex knowledge. Maybe using university as example is not good, maybe using these is better:

- Basic math: maths for all.
- Adv. math: math for mathematicians.

These 2 ranges are dependant of each one, so in old greek age adv. could be trigonometry (as those theorems was made in that age) and in today age trigonometry is in basic maths.

Then determine your ranges.

As you say there could me more than 2 skills, but this is in this way for all skills (in real life there are many and many disciplines), so we need to abstract it for game, maybe the case you talk about (one with focus on theorem proofs and one with more "applied math" focus so I am very familiar with the idea that differing teaching methods give different "skills") can be translated to game as specializations for adv. maths, it is usual to use specializations for this as are expensive skills.

Anyway I think if other disciplines like physics or chemistry (alchemy in medieval game) are their own skills, "deep knowledge" of maths should have its own too, as any other specialized science. Can have its version "for all"?, yes, the basic maths, we learn maths since childhood, right?, and is the ambientation what determines your basic and your advanced.

[pastaav]

Yes, that is more reason for not join, you see in more detail how is not possible to have the whole knowledge in only 1 skill, and more if this one is basic. Think that basic math is relative cheap, so the adv. math concep (the skill) is for complex knowledge.

If you want math to be hard to learn then you keep the cost of the advanced skill...simple as that.

Personally I don't buy the idea that math is hard to learn really, every person I have encountered that sucks at math does it because they had teachers in school that failed to make it to a interesting subject. In other subjects people blame the teacher when the lessons suck....but not for math since everyone "know it is hard" so it acceptable that people walk out in life with barely any knowledge at all in mathematics.

Anyway I think if other disciplines like physics or chemistry (alchemy in medieval game) are their own skills, "deep knowledge" of maths should have its own too, as any other specialized science. Can have its version "for all"?, yes, the basic maths, we learn maths since childhood, right?, and is the ambientation what determines your basic and your advanced.

Okay, we are obviously having different perspectives. I don't view alchemy as simplified chemistry since it contains lots of mystic stuff that is not part of a science. Thus from my point of view there is a single skill for all science skills, the exception being math that has been split into two skills for some reason.

The pattern with two skills that does the same thing but with difficult quality also exist for tasks like mapping so it is not unique for math. You obviously has the opinion that for math the split makes sense while I don't. Let's leave it at that...