| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 11:18 am Post subject: Bringing general skills up to specializations. |
 |
|
I had a player approach me about finding some way to merge his specialties back into the general skill.
I said, 'that's easy enough, bring the base skill up to the same level as the specialization. Then continue to improve it as a base skill.
Of course this brought us to the real meat of the issue:
He's concerned about the CPs spent on the specialty, as they will be 'wasted' by bringing the base skill up to the same level as the specialty.
He'd like a refund-like arrangement where he gets a CP reduction for raising the base skill...considering he already has an aspect of that skill category at a higher level.
ie he has blasters at 4D and Blaster Pistol at 6D. He wants to bring Blasters up to 6D or higher.
I'm thinking "no".
He's thinking that specializations are therefore nearly useless, and wishes he would have just kept raising the base skill.
Thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm pretty sure this isn't BTB, but I view specialties as being linked to base skills the same way base skills are linked to attributes. So, let's say I have the following:
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D
If I increase my Dexterity by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D+1
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
If I increase my Dodge by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
And if I increase my Dodging Blaster Fire Specialty by 1 Pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
Improving the specialty is CHEAPER, but less broadly effective, which is why people do it. If I only ever need to fix a YT-1300, then I might consider a specialty. If I work on a lot of different ships, then a specialty is less useful.
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shadin
Cadet
Joined: 26 Mar 2016
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MrNexx wrote: | I'm pretty sure this isn't BTB, but I view specialties as being linked to base skills the same way base skills are linked to attributes. So, let's say I have the following:
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D
If I increase my Dexterity by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D+1
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
If I increase my Dodge by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
And if I increase my Dodging Blaster Fire Specialty by 1 Pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
Improving the specialty is CHEAPER, but less broadly effective, which is why people do it. If I only ever need to fix a YT-1300, then I might consider a specialty. If I work on a lot of different ships, then a specialty is less useful. |
I ran it the same way in my games, as this is also how Shatterzone treated specializations (Attribute + Skill + Skill Specialization = Total). It's the only way that really made sense to me, since if you're spending time training and learning in the main skill, that's only going to make your already specialized knowledge more robust as you apply that generalized expertise.
As long as the specializations are sufficiently narrow, it shouldn't really ever cause a balance issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xain Arke
Line Captain
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 989
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I'm thinking "no".
He's thinking that specializations are therefore nearly useless, and wishes he would have just kept raising the base skill.
Thoughts? |
You are right. Player is wrong. It's about choice.
At the beginning the player made the choice to take a specialization to get a higher blaster pistol skill, he probably didn't complain when hosing down Stormtroopers etc. Now he's grumpy? The player has to live with that choice and next time use more thought in spending his CPs.
Alternately, and I would not recommend it, if you do let the player get a refund, only give him half the CPs spent back, as specializations cost half as much to improve as a normal skill.
Stick to your guns though.
Xain |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shootingwomprats
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Sep 2013
Posts: 2690
Location: Online
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is part of the reason I hate specializations. In the hands of a competent and mature gamer they can be interesting but typically, its a min/max mechanic with little thought other than +1D for a single pip dropped into typically martial skills or some attempt at intrapersonal skills.
Never surprises me when the player can read the +1D for +1 pip rule but fails to read the, "Specializations are separate skills. If a character improves the basic skill, the specialization doesnt improve; if the specialization is improved, the basic skill doesnt go up." With a bright and shiny example provided immediately below the section.
I like how you handled the situation with your player and it seems a reasonable decision to me. I would point out to him that blaster refers to all types of configurations and represents overall knowledge. A heavy pistol is similar to, but does not necessarily handle the same as machine pistol nor like a carbine or rifle.
I would also point out that a specialization is exactly that, focused knowledge or ability into a narrow area. That is why it gets a +1D bonus at the start of character creation and improves at half price.
I suppose as a GM if you want to give him a break of 1/2 in blaster until he gets up to the specialization isn't unreasonable. Mathematically it comes out to the same cost as if he had spent the character points to upgrade blaster and the specialization disappears once they are equal.
The problem I have it more from a fairness and personal responsibility aspect. The player is responsible for understanding the rules of character creation. As someone else pointed out, he has had the benefit of the bonus die and reduced cost of the specialization. Those who did not have a specialization have not complained about this.
I understand both sides but it really comes down to how you want to run your game. In my games, with new players, I allow them to make changes and tweak their characters for a few sessions. Some times a skill or the amount of dice in it does not work how they thought or do what they wanted.
Star Wars is meant to be fun. Its rules light for a reason. Depending on how much time has elapsed since character creation, the tone of your game and the behavior of your player I would probably let him make the change. He places the CP back into blaster and removes the specialization. Done and people are off and playing again. Besides his blaster skill will be lower right?
Blaster 4D, Blaster: pistol 6D. So he has taken a specialization and three pips improvement. Total cost 10D. He puts that back into blaster at four character points per pip, so +2 pips and he has two character points leftover. He now has no specialization but now has Blaster 4D+2. Meh I would be inclined to give it to him and move on the important stuff, having fun and telling a great story.
_________________
Don Diestler
Host, Shooting Womp Rats
The D6 Podcast
http://d6holocron.com/shootingwomprats
@swd6podcast, Twitter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shadin
Cadet
Joined: 26 Mar 2016
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, I did it the way I did it based on other systems, because a specialization not increasing along with the basic skill doesn't really make any sense to me. That's all assuming that players aren't trying to just game the system into becoming min/max combat gods. As long as it's approached maturely, I always erred on the side of people being as happy with the mechanics of their characters as they were with the story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MrNexx wrote: | I'm pretty sure this isn't BTB, but I view specialties as being linked to base skills the same way base skills are linked to attributes. So, let's say I have the following:
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D
If I increase my Dexterity by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D+1
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
If I increase my Dodge by 1 pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D+1
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
And if I increase my Dodging Blaster Fire Specialty by 1 Pip, it looks like this
Dexterity 2D
Dodge 3D
Dodging Blaster Fire 4D+1
Improving the specialty is CHEAPER, but less broadly effective, which is why people do it. If I only ever need to fix a YT-1300, then I might consider a specialty. If I work on a lot of different ships, then a specialty is less useful. |
The player and I discussed something similar. The problem is that it's open to abuse.
Example:
Guy gets blaster skill at 4D. He then spends the CPs to get a blaster pistol specialization up to 6D.
Now he focuses on raising the base skill and gets it up to 6D. Then his blaster pistol skill has 'rides the wave' up to 8D.
Look at the CP expenditure it would take to get a specialization up to 8D, versus the points required to get the specialization at low level and then raise the base skill up to 6D.
Specialization cost from 4D to 6D: 15CP
Base skill cost from 4D to 6D: 27 CP
So...blaster pistol at 8D (as a bonus) for a total expense of 42CP.
vs:
Specialization cost from 6D to 8D: 21CP
That's an extra 21CP that never has to be spent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And while it is abusable, I don't particularly have a problem with that. Someone who brings up their Dexterity skill lets their blaster skill "ride the wave"... as does their Dodge skill, or their Dance skill. Improving Knowledge not only makes you better at Agriculture, but makes you better at languages, as well. Someone who improves Perception not only gets better at Notice, but they get better at Command and Con and Bargain, which would've been expensive to improve on their own.
That you can reach a point where it is cheaper to improve the base skill over the specialization isn't a problem for me... sometimes, the easiest way to learn more about a subject is to study related. "Oh, I'm running into trouble with history, but I have a much better understanding once I started studying archaeology or economics."
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14214
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:04 pm Post subject: Re: Bringing general skills up to specializations. |
|
|
| Dredwulf60 wrote: | I had a player approach me about finding some way to merge his specialties back into the general skill.
I said, 'that's easy enough, bring the base skill up to the same level as the specialization. Then continue to improve it as a base skill.
Of course this brought us to the real meat of the issue:
He's concerned about the CPs spent on the specialty, as they will be 'wasted' by bringing the base skill up to the same level as the specialty.
He'd like a refund-like arrangement where he gets a CP reduction for raising the base skill...considering he already has an aspect of that skill category at a higher level.
ie he has blasters at 4D and Blaster Pistol at 6D. He wants to bring Blasters up to 6D or higher.
I'm thinking "no".
He's thinking that specializations are therefore nearly useless, and wishes he would have just kept raising the base skill.
Thoughts? |
In the past i have also toyed with that, where they gain half CP back from raising the base, by 'unlearning' the specialization', but these days i feel that's bupkiss. They wanted the benefits of the specialization, but are no longer happy with it.. That's on them.
Now it MAY depend on how 'newbie' the player is too, as to whether i might or might not let him get a refund on raising the base skill. As with a lot of things, i usually am more lenient on punishing newer players for a poor choice. But as they progress in the game, that leniency disappears..
| MrNexx wrote: | | I'm pretty sure this isn't BTB, but I view specialties as being linked to base skills the same way base skills are linked to attributes. So, let's say I have the following: |
That most definitely is not BTB.. Raising the base skill to raise the specialization..
| Xain Arke wrote: |
You are right. Player is wrong. It's about choice.
At the beginning the player made the choice to take a specialization to get a higher blaster pistol skill, he probably didn't complain when hosing down Stormtroopers etc. Now he's grumpy? The player has to live with that choice and next time use more thought in spending his CPs. |
Agreed. Back in London in one of my 2 Star wars groups, we had one guy who took both melee and melee parry specialties in the Jengarrden double bladed vibro-sword, thinking the awesomness (and damage out put was worth it), not realizing that the weapon's size and restrictions would sorely limit him on when he could take it on missions.. So whined to the DM after almost 4 months of game play that "I should get refunded my spent CP and initial starting dice, cause i made a poor choice"...
| shootingwomprats wrote: | This is part of the reason I hate specializations. In the hands of a competent and mature gamer they can be interesting but typically, its a min/max mechanic with little thought other than +1D for a single pip dropped into typically martial skills or some attempt at intrapersonal skills.
Never surprises me when the player can read the +1D for +1 pip rule but fails to read the, "Specializations are separate skills. If a character improves the basic skill, the specialization doesnt improve; if the specialization is improved, the basic skill doesnt go up." With a bright and shiny example provided immediately below the section.
|
So cause of some bad players misreading the rule (deliberately it seems), that IYO means the rule itself is what's wrong, not the players??
| shootingwomprats wrote: | | I understand both sides but it really comes down to how you want to run your game. In my games, with new players, I allow them to make changes and tweak their characters for a few sessions. Some times a skill or the amount of dice in it does not work how they thought or do what they wanted. |
This is how sparks handles it.. You have till the end of your 10th gaming session for newbies, to change anything about your character, from starting template, to race, to skills initially assigned, to CP spent etc.. But after that 10th game, you are locked into it.
| shootingwomprats wrote: | | Its rules light for a reason. |
With how much you seem to want to add in/change up rules, isn't that kind of an oxymoron??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MrNexx wrote: | And while it is abusable, I don't particularly have a problem with that. Someone who brings up their Dexterity skill lets their blaster skill "ride the wave"... as does their Dodge skill, or their Dance skill. Improving Knowledge not only makes you better at Agriculture, but makes you better at languages, as well. Someone who improves Perception not only gets better at Notice, but they get better at Command and Con and Bargain, which would've been expensive to improve on their own.
|
yeah, this is why I house-ruled that away. In my game, skills are not direct extensions of attributes. Attribute dice are added as pip bonus to the skill roll.
ie Dex 3D Blaster 4D
the player rolls 4D then adds +3 to the total.
If a character wants to do something and doesn't have the formal skill, they can roll the attribute as a default and take half the result.
In cases of very low skills, you can have someone with natural talent still do better than their meagre training. ( a 1D skill with a 4D attribute for example) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dredwulf60 wrote: |
yeah, this is why I house-ruled that away. In my game, skills are not direct extensions of attributes. Attribute dice are added as pip bonus to the skill roll.
ie Dex 3D Blaster 4D
the player rolls 4D then adds +3 to the total.
If a character wants to do something and doesn't have the formal skill, they can roll the attribute as a default and take half the result.
In cases of very low skills, you can have someone with natural talent still do better than their meagre training. ( a 1D skill with a 4D attribute for example) |
So, how do you handle character creation, then, because that seems like it would cause problems under the 24D/7D scheme of standard character generation. I put 3D in Dexterity, in order to get 4D in Blaster, I'd need to use up most of my skill dice, whereas in the standard system, 3D in Dex and 4D in Blaster means only 1D of my skill dice.
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shootingwomprats wrote: |
I like how you handled the situation with your player and it seems a reasonable decision to me. I would point out to him that blaster refers to all types of configurations and represents overall knowledge. A heavy pistol is similar to, but does not necessarily handle the same as machine pistol nor like a carbine or rifle. |
I also pointed out that CPs are large clunky units, not finely granulated units.
if you had a system where it took 1000xp to raise a skill die class, you could theoretically divide 1000xp by all the classes of blasters you can specialize in. Then you would know how many points it costs to improve JUST blaster pistol, forsaking all others.
Then later if you want to equally train in all other blasters except pistols, you could spend 1000 minus the cost to improve the pistol.
But you can't spend CPs in fractions...and thats way crunchier than even *I* want to go.
| Quote: |
I would also point out that a specialization is exactly that, focused knowledge or ability into a narrow area. That is why it gets a +1D bonus at the start of character creation and improves at half price.
|
Also don't forget you can burn more CPs to augment a specialization than a base skill roll.
| Quote: |
I suppose as a GM if you want to give him a break of 1/2 in blaster until he gets up to the specialization isn't unreasonable. Mathematically it comes out to the same cost as if he had spent the character points to upgrade blaster and the specialization disappears once they are equal. |
Nope. Not going to happen. 
| Quote: |
The problem I have it more from a fairness and personal responsibility aspect. The player is responsible for understanding the rules of character creation. As someone else pointed out, he has had the benefit of the bonus die and reduced cost of the specialization. Those who did not have a specialization have not complained about this. |
Exactly. I am very fair, but this struck me as a bit more petulant than I am used to from this particular player.
| Quote: |
Star Wars is meant to be fun. Its rules light for a reason. |
Yep, and I tend to make them more complex only in order to enhance the experience...not to make it more convenient to kick @$$. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | So, how do you handle character creation, then, because that seems like it would cause problems under the 24D/7D scheme of standard character generation. I put 3D in Dexterity, in order to get 4D in Blaster, I'd need to use up most of my skill dice, whereas in the standard system, 3D in Dex and 4D in Blaster means only 1D of my skill dice. |
I just increase the amount of starting dice...
I also encourage custom archetypes that start with decent base skills depending on the character intended.
I also have new skills start at 0D+1. Players can improve them as desired without requiring outside training or in-game use until they get up equal to the associated attribute. Afterwhich they need training.
I started doing this after running a game consisting of a group of young padawans. This allowed them to start with individual varied attributes, but without skill dice beyond a young child.
ie a kid could have a dex of 4D but have only modest familiarity with blaster...skill of 0D+2 fr example. Instead of automatically being better than most soldiers with it, just out of natural talent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrNexx
Rear Admiral
Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dredwulf60 wrote: | | Quote: | | So, how do you handle character creation, then, because that seems like it would cause problems under the 24D/7D scheme of standard character generation. I put 3D in Dexterity, in order to get 4D in Blaster, I'd need to use up most of my skill dice, whereas in the standard system, 3D in Dex and 4D in Blaster means only 1D of my skill dice. |
I just increase the amount of starting dice...
|
So, what do you use? (I realize I should've used 18D/7D, not 24D/7D; mea culpa)
_________________
"I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!"
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dredwulf60
Line Captain
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MrNexx wrote: | | Dredwulf60 wrote: | | Quote: | | So, how do you handle character creation, then, because that seems like it would cause problems under the 24D/7D scheme of standard character generation. I put 3D in Dexterity, in order to get 4D in Blaster, I'd need to use up most of my skill dice, whereas in the standard system, 3D in Dex and 4D in Blaster means only 1D of my skill dice. |
I just increase the amount of starting dice...
|
So, what do you use? (I realize I should've used 18D/7D, not 24D/7D; mea culpa) |
Trying not to derail my own thread....
But it depends on the game setting I want to achieve.
In my current mandalorian game for example , I had 8 "interests". Players could pick any 2, with as a 'major' and one as a 'minor' or they could take '3 minors'.
example:
gunslinger
close combative
space pilot
Heavy weapons soldier
Scout
etc.
each has a list of associated skills with dice attached; one amount for a major, a lesser amount for a minor.
once a character has used this to construct the base framework they get 25 discretionary dice to further customize.
I can't give you specifics as I don't have my materials with me, but I can send it to you when I get home if you like.
It's crunchy, but the extra detail is worth it when you have a group of 5 guys who are ostensibly playing the same or similar archetype in the RAW. (Bounty Hunter). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
