Linked Skills

[Fallon Kell]

Since there is a great degree of similarity between some skill sets, e.g. lightsabers and melee combat, blasters and firearms. I'm thinking of playtesting these pairs of skills as being linked, so that they are separated by no more than 1D. For example, if a player were to have 4D dexterity, and improve his blaster to 5D+1, his firearms skill would automatically be rolled at 4D+1 for no CP cost and vice versa. (At least to hit. Clearing jams and such might be rolled at actual skill level.)

Any other suggestions for linked skills?
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier

Complete Starship Construction System

[MacRauri]

This makes a lot of sense to me and I'm interested in hearing your play-testing results. You could also do the driving skills for different technological eras.

That's all I have for real suggestions for now as I tend to run into stuff like
"I'm going to lift myself to get off the side of the cliff"
"I want to persuade the merchant to cut me a better deal"
or "I'm going to try to will my blood to clot"

[Matthias777]

I thought about doing this one time, but the mechanics of it seemed a little clunky. It means that you only have to improve one skill, really. For instance, let's say you have Dexterity at 3D, Blaster at 6D, and Firearms is unimproved (3D). With a house-ruled separation of only 1D, your Firearms skill rolls as 5D, despite being only 3D. So, if you wanted to actually get to 6D with Firearms, you'd have to spend 36 CP (if I counted that right). 36 CP to gain 1D of proficiency doesn't make any sense. The remedy for this, of course, is to have the Firearms skill literally pulled along whenever you raise Blaster, meaning that without spending any CP to improve it, your Firearms skill reads as 5D on your character sheet (given 6D in Blaster). By doing this, though, you've essentially rolled the two skills into one, and given the character a -1D unskilled penalty when using firearms.

To me, what makes more sense than this is to go ahead and roll the skills together (with one major caveat that I'll get into shortly)...but I would make Handguns and Long Guns separate skills (a revolver and a blaster pistol would use Handguns, while a bolt-action .30-06, shotgun, and a blaster rifle would use another). That's the skillset differentiation. Clearing a jam is a Technical skill, as is loading or otherwise servicing a weapon. This is my understanding, at least; Dexterity has to do with aim, not knowledge of how to field strip a weapon or clear a jam.

The other major caveat I mentioned is this: any time a character operates something he or she is unfamiliar with, they should get an unskilled penalty. If your Blaster skill (or, if we're using my previous suggestion, Handguns skill) is 6D, and your character picks up a thug's Tipporin Arms GU-9 blaster pistol (made it up just now, so I know your character hasn't used one ), he or she suffers a -1D penalty, firing the blaster with a skill level of 5D. However, if they retrieve their trusty DL-44 or someone's E-11, weapons with which they are already familiar, you'd roll their full skill level of 6D (or higher, if they have an applicable specialization, obviously).

You can tailor this however you like, of course, but I suggest that if you are familiar with something made by one manufacturer, it counts as being familiar with their other products (within reason). I know that I can pick up any Glock and shoot competently with it (regardless of model), because I am familiar with my Glock pistols. Likewise, Rebel pilots are often described as making the transition easily from the Incom skyhoppers of their youth to the cockpit of an X-wing, because the craft are so similar. So you might write down "BlasTech blaster pistols", which would cover everything from a DH-17 to a T-6 Thunderer. Or you might write down "Incom air/spacecraft", which would cover everything from a T-16 skyhopper to a T-65B X-wing starfighter. This would require a little more bookkeeping, as you'd have to scribble down the different manufacturers (or whatever) of each handgun/starfighter/etc. your character got familiar with, but that's really not much work at all. I am also a proponent of making specialization naming conventions follow this model, since the current one seems flawed.

Fallon, you should have a PM.
_________________
Arek | Kage

[garhkal]

In the past i had a gm who did a 'sort of linked' skill with the ranged personal weaponry.. How he did it was for every D any of the 4 had (flux disintergrator, blaster, firearms and flamers) you added 1 pip to the roll of the others with no cost. BUT the stat was still what you had increased it too..

EG
Dex 3d+1.. Blaster 6d+1, firearms 4d+2 (5d+1), flux disintergrator 3d+2 (4d+2),
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Bren]

[Raven Redstar]

Climbing/Jumping + Acrobatics
Hide + Sneak
I had some other ideas, but they're eluding me at the moment.

[garhkal]

True. there needs to be some sort of 'logical cut mark'...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Fallon Kell]

Excellent thoughts, all! I think I may do just as you suggested, Matthias, at least after I talk it over with my player. Bren, your suggestions also seem especially commonsense to me.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier

Complete Starship Construction System

[S-Foil]

In GURPS there's the idea of skill defaults. Skills are linked conceptually linked to other skills as well as a controlling attribute. For instance the Shortsword skill has several skills listed as defaults, if a character was trying to use a short sort without training in the skill but did have one of the defaults they could wield the short sword using that skill with a penalty. Shortsword defaults to Broadsword-2 and being an Average DX skill another of DX-5.

So if you are trained in the Broadsword skill but pick up a short sword you can use it with your Broadsword skill at a -2 penalty. If you're familiar with one type of sword that's often better than no sword training at all.

A D6 approach doesn't necessarily need to be that complicated but I think it makes sense for skills to be related to one or more others before falling back to the attribute. At the same time in the context of the game I think the RAW system is not bad. With FPs, CPs, and the Wild Die characters can get nice bonuses to untrained skill checks. In D6 it's not a hopeless situation if you really need to use a skill for which you lack training like it might be in some other systems.

[Bren]

[garhkal]

So how's about..

Use of weapon without the skill defaults it to one of the other skills instead of the attribute, at say a -1 pip penalty.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Matthias777]

[Raven Redstar]

You make a fair point Matthias. One idea that I had, was that for practiced shooters may start combat with a -1D penalty, but perhaps the penalty degrades after a few rounds of taking shots. I was thinking that reducing the penalty by a pip every round, or every two might be a nice way to sort of level off the penalties. But limit this to talented shooters (i.e. 5D+ or 6D+) to show that a combat veteran will be able to adapt to a new weapon better than some kid off a farm who's still wet behind his ears.

Another idea for professional combatant characters would be that they get 1 manufacturer per D of blaster at character creation. So, if a Merc starts the game with 6D blaster he gets 6 manufacturers that he's familiar with from his years in the service. Maybe all Rebel templates start the game with Blastech proficiency for free, and Imperials get Sorosuub for free.

My only argument for glock vs anything is that by their very nature, glocks are meant to be user friendly. The safety catch is built into the trigger, and the swayed back grip is designed to be more natural to aim for someone with less combat experience. But I will admit that there are obvious differences between a glock and a 1911. But less major differences between more conventional "modern" pistols like a Baretta and a 1911.

But honestly, I think the "language rule" can be easily adapted to combat veteran templates.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________

[Matthias777]

[Raven Redstar]

Absolutely. Sounds like a way to go. You'll have to tell me how your play testing goes!
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________