Author Topic: Training Package with Everyman?  (Read 3723 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline arakish

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,579
  • OIC Points +5/-5
  • A joy of mine
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #20 on: August 07, 2014, 09:37:47 AM »
I just had a Fuzzy pop into my head reading the few last posts.

Problem: It is definitely too unbalancing except for power-gamers.  And it would require extra bookkeeping.

But here is the thought.

Instead of getting double, triple, half number of ranks for the REO (Restricted, Everyman, Occupational) skills, why not adjust the bonus received for each rank?

Normally, my progression for skills is 0,5,3,2,1.

  • For Restricted skills, this would be 0,2.5,1.5,1,0.5, rounding down fractions.
  • For Everyman skills, this would be 0,10,6,4,2.
  • For Occupational skills, this would be 0,15,9,6,3.

Of course any GM could seriously curtail the number of REO skills any character may have.  Say, no more than 2 Occupational and no more than 4 Everyman?

As said, this could be way too unbalancing except for power-gamers.  But it was a Fuzzy that jumped into my head.

rmfr
"Beware those who would deny you access to information, for they already dream themselves your master."
— RMF Runyan in Sci-Fi RPG session (GM); quoted from the PC game SMAC.

Offline tbigness

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,518
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #21 on: August 07, 2014, 10:58:48 AM »
I like it... Brilliant. This would give the separation between just learning a skill and excelling in a skill due to strict training. An example is a fighter learning first aid vs a healer learning first aid, the healer would have an initial intense understanding of how to apply the skill even at even ranks with the fighter.
Knowledge is unimagined Power

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #22 on: August 07, 2014, 11:19:05 AM »
  In the past the problem was that there was a divide in way old ICE looked at skill bonus vs skill ranks. That is to say some wanted to say skill bonus should be used as a measure of what a "persons" skill is and some said no it should be based on the number of skill ranks.
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline dagorhir

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 571
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2014, 11:41:21 AM »
I have always seen the ranks as being the measure of the skill, since natural talents (stats, etc.) are not included while the skill bonus represents how good a character is at the skill including all of his natural talents. If two characters can have equal training only their natural abilities should differentiate them in skill.

Since I consider classifications as a measure of "ease of training" and not actual ability, I don't think it should affect the final bonus. It should affect how easily a skill is learned, thus reduce (or increase) development costs.

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2014, 12:02:48 PM »

I am just saying, ;D [size=78%]Why should not "talents" that provide a bonus to skills represent how good a PC is at something? 

For example two PC's have 1 rank in a skill, no stat bonuses; but one has a talent that provides a +10 skill bonus. So one has a skill bonus of 5 and the other 15. Does not the PC with a bonus of 15 know more?
MDC[/size]
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #25 on: August 07, 2014, 12:11:57 PM »
Me I like to think of how much the character has learnt (relative to others), with the bonus simply being how good they are at it. The two should be quite different when game-mechanics are taken into consideration.

An everyman skill should simply be one that the character finds *easy* to learn for whatever reason. This could be both ease of picking up the nuances of the skill or simply being *better* at it than someone else with the same training.

I disagree with the onus being entirely placed upon the skill bonus. A reduction in the DP cost to learn it is thus a logical advantage. However this alone doesn't make the character better than another character it just allows them to spend that saved DP somewhere else. Thus there should be a skill bonus element to separate those who do and those that don't have the skill as an everyman. Whether this is applied simply as a set bonus at the start, or an increasing bonus per rank...or level is another matter.

In practice, the system should cope with the principle that a fighter with +50 but only 1 rank in a weapon, should not be able to achieve the same things as another character with 5 ranks in the same weapon but only a bonus of only +30. There are examples, principally languages, where this is the case, but it isn't universal.

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #26 on: August 07, 2014, 12:16:59 PM »
  If the skill ranks are the way to go then using a multiplier is the way to represent increased skill knowledge. So buy ranks use multiplier to get actual ranks then figure bonus.
  It would also be good then to have talents that provide skill ranks and not bonuses to represent this facet of the game.
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline dagorhir

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 571
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2014, 05:37:29 PM »
  If the skill ranks are the way to go then using a multiplier is the way to represent increased skill knowledge. So buy ranks use multiplier to get actual ranks then figure bonus.
  It would also be good then to have talents that provide skill ranks and not bonuses to represent this facet of the game.
MDC

There are talents that provide either increased classifications or skill/category bonuses. I think there may even be talents that do both. I would have to look.

Offline tulgurth

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 110
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2014, 10:15:31 PM »
Background options allow you to purchase a bonus to a category or to a bonus.  But you are only allowed to purchase the once per category/skill.  However, you can purchase for multiple categories/skills.  As far as talents I am not sure, but nothing a little reading couldn't solve.

Offline pastaav

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,615
  • OIC Points +0/-0
    • Swedish gaming club
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #29 on: August 10, 2014, 03:30:57 AM »
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.

That is a houserule.

I would not say it is a bad house rule, but still a house rule. I am actually using a version of it (no rule about half ranks if you take the TP twice) to avoid the problems with the TP costs. What is problematic with such house rule is that some training packages become so expensive that is questionable if they are realistic to purchase as all. As example you can consider the TP Doctor(V) that has includes skills worth of 54 DP. With a 25% discount you end with 41 in DP cost (compared to the books listed price of 23 DP or the 29 in the official TP cost list). The solution I use when using the flat 25% discount rule is that such expensive TPs is split into different parts so you can purchase it over a couple of levels instead.

As for the background of the DP mess. The real TP "cost formula" used in the first books is actually a mixture of many different discounts that was applied ad hoc by series editor John W. Curtis III. The reason the TP cost formula was not released was simply that there was no such formula in reality. This design became really problematic when companions was to be produced by independent authors and they could not get answers about the correct way to price TPs. Shiela Mguez and others on the RM mailing list did a massive job to come up with an actual formula that approximated how John W. Curtis III had done the costing.
 
The process they figured out looked a bit like this. The starting discount you get is between 25% and 0% depending on how much combat skills are included in the training package (a TP with five or more combat skills would get 0% in starting discount). Furthermore the cost is based on the cost of first rank in the category, the cost of second rank or the that fact that some professions should not be able to buy a second rank at all was not considered by John W. Curtis III. Finally there was cost adjustment done based on the total price of the TP if it was deemed to be too pricey. The ad hoc part was that John W. Curtis III did not always not apply the same final cost adjustment for every TP. The Doctor TP got an larger discount than many other TPs and it was not possible to figure out any pattern of when to apply a larger discount. Most probably the decision was based on how often the skill was used in his own roleplaying group. The actual discount applied in this step is as far as I knew between 0 and 60%, but I have not checked in detail.

What Shiela did was to determine the average final discount used in John W. Curtis III TPs and use that in a spreadsheet. This spreadsheet was approximately the same costs as the previous TPs and I believe it was used by the companion authors afterwards, but ICE never got around to update the core books so these continue to ship with the ad hoc costs from John W. Curtis III. In 2007 or Rasyr  as series editor used the spreadsheet to calculate the cost of all TPs (that is TPS from books that by then was in print) and uploaded both the spreadsheet for TP creation and list of revised TP costs to the Vault.

Today your choices thus are:
1) Use the TP costs listed in the books that John W. Curtis III created with ad hoc discounts that are not consistent between professions
2) Use the official costs that exist in the Vault with consistent costs, but variable discount/benefit for each profession depending on the skill cost for the second rank.
3) Create some kind of house rule about flat discounts like I and many others have done to avoid the min/max playground that the above two choices present. 

As a final comment...the time limitation to acquire TPs is problematic in practice since it only applyies during actual play. If one of your players are making a replacement character since his character died then there are no good reasons he can not say his character did have the time to take any number of TPs. Using TPs in this situation makes sense since you are creating a background for the new character, but all the discounts will mean this character become stronger than a character developed during actual play. It is a matter of opinion if this is a critical issue or not, but it is clear even with fair pricing of the TPs, the existence of discounts can be problematic in some situations.
/Pa Staav

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #30 on: August 10, 2014, 05:36:49 AM »

A) I thought Rasyr ruled that the new official formula was the one that was represented by the spreed sheet in the vault and as such that is what I try and quote to posters on the site.

1) You are right the sheet in the Vault uses 25% with a mod for each combat rank.
2) You are right that TP time cost is a problem during play and makes replacement PC's more powerful.


a) I had thought that in SM:P they ruled that if you take a TP twice you only get 1/2 ranks but after a quick search I could not find the rule. So maybe it was a House Rule I used once upon a time instead of the max 10 ranks you could learn from a TP. 
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline dagorhir

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 571
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #31 on: August 10, 2014, 06:43:27 AM »
Thanks for the history of the TP costs pastaav. Very interesting.

Offline pastaav

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,615
  • OIC Points +0/-0
    • Swedish gaming club
Re: Training Package with Everyman?
« Reply #32 on: August 10, 2014, 02:20:08 PM »
A) I thought Rasyr ruled that the new official formula was the one that was represented by the spreed sheet in the vault and as such that is what I try and quote to posters on the site.

Indeed that was his ruling, but the 25% initial discount is not the only part in the spreadsheet's formulas. If the final discount cost is above 13 the second kind of discount is also applied.
/Pa Staav