| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Grimace
Captain
Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 729
Location: Montana; Big Sky Country
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:05 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I never said what I was posting was the gospel truth. I never made a claim that I knew it to be completely official. Thus why I put in the line "(Or who knows, maybe I'm confused and am about to show you a completely wrong way of doing it)". I admit that I was likely confused.
Excuse me for trying.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tupteq
Commander
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 285
Location: Rzeszów, Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Masque's explanation is sensible, but I think there's one small thing that is not resolved here. If somebody has a specialization higher than base skill (for example blaster: sporting), then maybe it's easier for him to learn base skill (he already knows better some aspects - specialization), he may focus on other than his specialization blaster types.
For example raising cost of base skill may be lowered by 1/3 (round down) for each specialization higher than base skill (but it must cost minimum 1 CP).
Alternatively - training of base skill may include specialization (which has higher value), especially if it's not much higher (x2) than base skill. And for every 3 pips of base skill specialization will raise by 1 pip. How to track it easily? You raise all specializations whenever base skill goes from xD+2 to (x+1)D.
Also - I think specializations shouldn't be lower than base skill (they should be "consumed" by base skill), but it may be useful to keep them on sheet for one reason because some devices (especially weapons) require specialization to use. And IMO character taking such specialization during his early career should be able to use a special tool on his base skill level, even if it's higher than specialization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gry Sarth
Jedi
Joined: 25 May 2004
Posts: 5304
Location: Sao Paulo - Brazil
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow, that really overcomplicates something that's working fine as is, in my opinion.
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tupteq
Commander
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 285
Location: Rzeszów, Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gry Sarth wrote: | | Wow, that really overcomplicates something that's working fine as is, in my opinion. |
Heh, people says, that I like to complicate things. I only wanted to give some CPs back to characters. SW solution is not honest for me (it gives nothing back) and D6 Space solution gives to much  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grimace wrote: | I think some people are getting slightly confused about how Specializations add. (Or who knows, maybe I'm confused and am about to show you a completely wrong way of doing it). I'll show some demonstrations of how I run specializations.
SNIP>>>!!!
Of course, everyone has different ways of thinking of things, but that's how I work my specializations and why I only allow one per skill. |
BTB that is wrong..Initially yes, a specialty adds 1d to the base skill, so starting the character off, yes he would look like that. BUT as soon as you start spending cp on raising the base skill, the specialty stays as is. its only when you spend cp on the specialty OR up the base Attribute (at a cost of 10x the # before the die) that the specialty goes up. So it is feasable for someone to have a skill higher than the specialty.. stupid, but feasable..
| Quote: | | So tell me what's better; using the official rules and having problems and inconsistancies, or using it the way I suggested and not having any problems at all? |
Grimmy, where is the inconsistency there??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gry Sarth
Jedi
Joined: 25 May 2004
Posts: 5304
Location: Sao Paulo - Brazil
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh no, having a specialization lower than the base skill is stupid indeed. That shouldn't happen. Once the base skill reaches the specialization level, you should disregard that specialization, since now you're equally good at all aspects of that skill. Later on you could raise that specialization again, starting at whatever level the base skill currently is. It makes absolutely no sense to be worse at firing a blaster rifle just because lately you've been spending more time handling all sorts of blasters.
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masque
Captain
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 626
Location: Houston, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tupteq wrote: | | Masque's explanation is sensible, but I think there's one small thing that is not resolved here. If somebody has a specialization higher than base skill (for example blaster: sporting), then maybe it's easier for him to learn base skill (he already knows better some aspects - specialization), he may focus on other than his specialization blaster types. |
Even if this were true, and I don't agree that it is, the benefit would be so small, realistically, that I wouldn't even bother with the type of workaround you propose.
In fact, it would be my thinking that a specialization might make it HARDER to broaden the skill, as the character is so used to his speciality that he might need to unlearn specific habits. I'll just stick to the basic method from the rulebook, it's easier. If I wanted complicated rules I'd be playing GURPS or Rolemaster.
_________________
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedFox
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 196
Location: El Centro, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd just cross out that line about specializations not increasing with base skills completely. There's just no good reason for it, and it creates absurdities down the line.
If you want to limit specializations in a meaningful way to keep things from getting abused, I'd suggest just putting a hard cap on specializations. Pick 1D to 3D and say that's the most you can ever have in any one specialization. The "rationale" for that would be that there's only so much you can focus on in a niche before you need to broaden your skill base.
_________________
Ooo, a droid! Can I fix it?
I have Star Wars stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masque
Captain
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 626
Location: Houston, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RedFox wrote: |
If you want to limit specializations in a meaningful way to keep things from getting abused, I'd suggest just putting a hard cap on specializations. Pick 1D to 3D and say that's the most you can ever have in any one specialization. The "rationale" for that would be that there's only so much you can focus on in a niche before you need to broaden your skill base. |
In that case, no one would ever take a specialization, as it's way too crippling. I'll stick with the regular rules, thanks.
_________________
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Endwyn
Commander
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 481
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have to agree that limiting specializations would discourage people from taking them, and for many characters specializations are needed.
At game start specializations help you to have a more skillful character than you might otherwise, even if only in narrow fields. It helps relieve some of the pain of having to make up for lack of dice from things like attribute loss for force powers. It also helps when building characters who need lots of skills in more limited fashion. Why learn to fly all ships if all you are ever going to fly is a YT-1300? Especially if as the only person flying a ship you need at least 4-5 other skills minimum to solo man the ship's controls?
Don't cripple specializations unless you want them gone....but realize that when specializations are gone so are some of the character concepts your players may have wanted to try.
_________________
Luke, I am your father.
That's impossible!
And Leia is your sister!
That's improbable?
And the Empire will be destroyed by..EWOKS!
That's...highly unlikely.
The Force? Bacteria called midichlorians.
If you don’t take this seriously I'm out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedFox
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 196
Location: El Centro, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| masque wrote: | | RedFox wrote: |
If you want to limit specializations in a meaningful way to keep things from getting abused, I'd suggest just putting a hard cap on specializations. Pick 1D to 3D and say that's the most you can ever have in any one specialization. The "rationale" for that would be that there's only so much you can focus on in a niche before you need to broaden your skill base. |
In that case, no one would ever take a specialization, as it's way too crippling. I'll stick with the regular rules, thanks. |
Wait, where did that hyperbole come from? Capping specializations means nobody would ever take them? Whatever for?
They're still discounted dice. It's just that instead of being able to get oh, say, blaster 3D, blaster: blaster pistol 10D, you would instead have blaster 3D, blaster: blaster pistol 6D.
That's still a significant improvement in power for a piddly amount of points (1D skill still = 3D specializations).
Only now when you put a pip into blaster, you now get blaster: blaster pistol 3D+1 for free as well.
How does this mean that nobody would ever buy specializations? Are people only interested in specializations if they can pump them into the stratosphere? I know I'm not.
_________________
Ooo, a droid! Can I fix it?
I have Star Wars stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gry Sarth
Jedi
Joined: 25 May 2004
Posts: 5304
Location: Sao Paulo - Brazil
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
It does kinda makes sense to limit how far a specialization can get from its base skill. I mean, how can you be the best damn gunslinger in the galaxy with a DL-44, but absolutely suck if you're wielding any other kind of blaster?
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masque
Captain
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 626
Location: Houston, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RedFox wrote: | Wait, where did that hyperbole come from? Capping specializations means nobody would ever take them? Whatever for?
They're still discounted dice. It's just that instead of being able to get oh, say, blaster 3D, blaster: blaster pistol 10D, you would instead have blaster 3D, blaster: blaster pistol 6D.
|
Ahh, I thought you meant that you couldn't take a specialization over 3D, total. I still think 6D is a discouraging limit, though. If however, you mean simply a limit of 3D+base skill, it's a little more workable, but I don't see it as particularly useful.
| Quote: | Only now when you put a pip into blaster, you now get blaster: blaster pistol 3D+1 for free as well.
|
Which shouldn't happen. That's a munchkin move. A specialization is a subset of a skill, but is also a skill unto itself. If the specialization increased automatically, you are increasing 2 separate skills for the price of one. That's too easy, no one would ever use anything BUT specializations. It also fails to reflect the extra time the character would have to put into the skill to make that specialization better than the base skill. Specialized skills require effort, and the standard rules reflect that.
| Quote: | | How does this mean that nobody would ever buy specializations? Are people only interested in specializations if they can pump them into the stratosphere? I know I'm not. |
If a player want to push any of their skills into the stratosphere, that's their right, but they have to pay the point cost to do it, be it a regular skill or a specialization. Freebies like you propose, without limits, encourages abuse, and with limits is pointless. I see no reason to change the rule.
_________________
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedFox
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 196
Location: El Centro, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gry Sarth wrote: | | It does kinda makes sense to limit how far a specialization can get from its base skill. I mean, how can you be the best d*mn gunslinger in the galaxy with a DL-44, but absolutely suck if you're wielding any other kind of blaster? |
Yes, that's what I was getting at with "justifying" the rule in my first post up-thread.
There's only so much you can specialize before your base competency has to improve. I may be really good with a RU-38 swoop bike, but that gives me an edge, it doesn't mean I can do without being able to pilot any other kind of swoop.
This rule proposal just means that specializations are an edge, not a cheaper sub-skill. Which I think is really what they should be, and what they were intended to be in the first place.
YMM, of course, V.
_________________
Ooo, a droid! Can I fix it?
I have Star Wars stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedFox
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 196
Location: El Centro, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| masque wrote: |
Ahh, I thought you meant that you couldn't take a specialization over 3D, total. I still think 6D is a discouraging limit, though. If however, you mean simply a limit of 3D+base skill, it's a little more workable, but I don't see it as particularly useful. |
I mean 3D+base skill, just like RAW only with a cap and re-linking skills to their specializations.
Start with Dexterity 2D, add 1D to blaster for blaster 3D. Buy a 2D specialization of blaster for blaster: blaster pistol 5D.
Like that.
| Quote: | | Which shouldn't happen. That's a munchkin move. |
No, it's not.
| Quote: | | A specialization is a subset of a skill, but is also a skill unto itself. If the specialization increased automatically, you are increasing 2 separate skills for the price of one. That's too easy, no one would ever use anything BUT specializations. It also fails to reflect the extra time the character would have to put into the skill to make that specialization better than the base skill. Specialized skills require effort, and the standard rules reflect that. |
The effort are the pips you pay into it. Re-examine the R&E take on specializations as skills themselves. Instead, evaluate them as bonus dice to the base skill in specific circumstances.
The thing preventing munchkinism is the hard cap on specialization dice.
| Quote: | | If a player want to push any of their skills into the stratosphere, that's their right, but they have to pay the point cost to do it, be it a regular skill or a specialization. Freebies like you propose, without limits, encourages abuse, and with limits is pointless. I see no reason to change the rule. |
And yet people were complaining about the way specializations currently work. That's why I proposed a house rule for it.
And again, you're throwing out unqualified hyperbolic statements. I'm still unsure how a maximum of 3D of linked specialization is "abuse" or "worthless." Which is it, by the way?
_________________
Ooo, a droid! Can I fix it?
I have Star Wars stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
