Semi-Skills

[ChalkLine]

Some skills aren't really skills at all.

These skills are just something you have to learn the concept of and then just do once you know how.

I think drone operation might be one of these 'semi-skills'.

Perhaps these things could be just done through statistic checks once the qualification is noted on the PC sheet

[Raellus]

I respectfully disagree. I think any task that can be improved through practice can be considered a skill.

That includes drone operation.

How would that example (drone operation) be any different, fundamentally, than operating small arms, scuba diving, or riding a motorcycle You learn the concept, do it, and improve through practice.

By your definition, couldn't one simply read about operating a firearm "and then just do once you know how" I'd never fired a shotgun or a rifle before, but I read about how it was done, and then just did it. Your definition of "semi-skill" kind of breaks T2K char-gen, since pretty much any of the established Skills fall under it.

If it's a matter of adding new skills- like drone operation- to the T2K v1 or 2/2.2 lists, either include it in a skill that already exists (e.g. drone operation could fall under computers and/or piloting) or create a new one and place it under the appropriate Attribute/s (e.g. drone operation could fall undre Agility [dexterity], Education, or Intelligence) .

[swaghauler]

Some skills aren't really skills at all.

These skills are just something you have to learn the concept of and then just do once you know how.

I think drone operation might be one of these 'semi-skills'.

Perhaps these things could be just done through statistic checks once the qualification is noted on the PC sheet

I would consider them subskills. TW2K13 handles this by having Qualifications which are subskills under another skill. For example, Drone Pilots may only need familiarization on the controls BUT put a non-pilot in front of a drone control station and watch their confusion as they simply try to interpret all the symbols on the screens meanings. Without that basic pilot training to teach the drone operator what the controls DO, and what all those symbols on the screen MEAN, they would be lost on how to operate the drone.

I love the idea of Qualifications because they are a "Skill Within A Skill" in essence. Some examples include things like...
1) EOD as a qualification of Demolitions.
2) Rebreather as a qualification of Scuba.
3) Hacking as a qualification of Computer Operation.
4) Heavy as a qualification of either Pilot or Wheeled Vehicle Driver.
5) Surgery as a qualification of Medical

These all have their own Skill Levels BUT cannot be larger than the parent skill.

[swaghauler]

I added some basic skills that I think everyone would have like Perception, Persuasion, Observation, and Stealth to my game. These basic skills start at 1/2 the Characteristics they are based on.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I stole "Awareness" from I think Cyberpunk 2020 and had it for all the other senses. Observation covers sight and I left it at that because most of what we perceive is through sight, it's a major sense so it should have its own "skill" - for everything else, sense of smell, hearing, balance, temperature, etc. etc. I had Awareness.
I think Perception is a good addition as well because in most games, it covers those areas that while your senses might indicate something is "out there", it's the mind's ability to make sense of it that informs you of the potential for threat.

However, it might make better sense to swap them around - Perception would be the various senses ability to detect something and Awareness would be the mind's ability to figure out what the senses are telling you

[Targan]

I stole "Awareness" from I think Cyberpunk 2020 and had it for all the other senses.

Awareness is a primary automatic skill in Harnmaster/Gunmaster too. Its Skill Base is determined from the stats Eyesight, Hearing and Smell/Taste.

[CDAT]

I would consider them subskills. TW2K13 handles this by having Qualifications which are subskills under another skill. For example, Drone Pilots may only need familiarization on the controls BUT put a non-pilot in front of a drone control station and watch their confusion as they simply try to interpret all the symbols on the screens meanings. Without that basic pilot training to teach the drone operator what the controls DO, and what all those symbols on the screen MEAN, they would be lost on how to operate the drone.

I love the idea of Qualifications because they are a "Skill Within A Skill" in essence. Some examples include things like...
1) EOD as a qualification of Demolitions.
2) Rebreather as a qualification of Scuba.
3) Hacking as a qualification of Computer Operation.
4) Heavy as a qualification of either Pilot or Wheeled Vehicle Driver.
5) Surgery as a qualification of Medical

These all have their own Skill Levels BUT cannot be larger than the parent skill.

I just have to say as I see this alot, but EOD should not be a sub-skill/Qualification what not of Demolitions. US Military (I guess more or less the same for other nations but do not know) getting demolitions qualified is about two weeks, EOD is about a year. There is a lot more to EOD than just knowing how to deal with demolitions.

[swaghauler]

I just have to say as I see this alot, but EOD should not be a sub-skill/Qualification what not of Demolitions. US Military (I guess more or less the same for other nations but do not know) getting demolitions qualified is about two weeks, EOD is about a year. There is a lot more to EOD than just knowing how to deal with demolitions.

Which is why EOD makes a good Qualification. You cannot even buy a Qualification WITHOUT first buying the "parent skill." The Qualification CANNOT be higher than the parent skill either. A Qualification is, in essence, a specialization or concentration of a set of skills which cannot even be learned UNTIL the student has mastered the fundamentals of the parent skill to the Qualification.

This prevents someone from learning EOD without first learning DEMO. Keep in mind that someone with DEMO skill CANNOT effectively perform EOD without possessing the Qualification.

[CDAT]

Which is why EOD makes a good Qualification. You cannot even buy a Qualification WITHOUT first buying the "parent skill." The Qualification CANNOT be higher than the parent skill either. A Qualification is, in essence, a specialization or concentration of a set of skills which cannot even be learned UNTIL the student has mastered the fundamentals of the parent skill to the Qualification.

This prevents someone from learning EOD without first learning DEMO. Keep in mind that someone with DEMO skill CANNOT effectively perform EOD without possessing the Qualification.

Except that there is a lot more to it than just Demo, we also are trained on electronics, WMD's, Robots, ECM and more.

[Legbreaker]

Except that there is a lot more to it than just Demo, we also are trained on electronics, WMD's, Robots, ECM and more.

As an Assault Pioneer I was also trained and qualified in construction (bridges, bunkers, etc), boats & pontoons, mine warfare, booby traps and, if I'd done the course just a month or two earlier, flame warfare (the course before was the last one that covered flamethrowers, etc ).
Explosives (including precision charges used in construction and clearing mines and booby traps) was only about a quarter of the whole course.

In 2.2 game terms I probably picked up a couple of points in Small Watercraft, Combat Engineer, Scrounging (you're ALWAYS on the lookout for building materials), Construction and Excavation.

[CDAT]

As an Assault Pioneer I was also trained and qualified in construction (bridges, bunkers, etc), boats & pontoons, mine warfare, booby traps and, if I'd done the course just a month or two earlier, flame warfare (the course before was the last one that covered flamethrowers, etc ).
Explosives (including precision charges used in construction and clearing mines and booby traps) was only about a quarter of the whole course.

In 2.2 game terms I probably picked up a couple of points in Small Watercraft, Combat Engineer, Scrounging (you're ALWAYS on the lookout for building materials), Construction and Excavation.

If I had a real complaint with the game, it would be how they simplified down so many of the Military Occupations/skills. I understand on some level why they did, but some of the things just scream to me that they had no idea what they were talking about.

Some examples of things that they simplified down that I understand. Driving tracked, just because I can drive a tank does not mean that I can drive a Bull Dozer, but you either have to make it one skill or you end up with hundreds and that does not work. Same with the weapons, At Basic (OSUT to be 100% accurate) I was trained on the M240 (Mag MG), when I went to PLDC later I was put on the M60 for a time, this was the first time in my life I had ever seen one, and it was beat up had lots of issues. When I had to ask for a block of instruction on how to use it as I was not familiar with it, even though it was a US weapon and some units still had them. It was close to the M240 so I could fumble my way though if I had to, but some things were different enough that I would be hard pressed to do so under the stress of combat.

But then some of the things that they did that are head scratchers, US Army Support Arm Enlisted (V2.2). "This category is a combination of a number of noncombat arms (ordnance, quartermaster, etc.)" First term skills: Ground Vehicle (Wheeled)-2, Mechanic-2, What were they thinking this sounds like a mechanic at best not a support troop. When I was in for a lot of the support jobs you did not need to know how to drive, as that was not part of the job, then when you go on to the subsequent term skills they are Computer, Electronics, Ground Vehicle (Wheeled) [what about all the tracked cargo vehicles in use], Gunsmith, Hovercraft [really], Instruction, language, machinist, mechanic, metallurgy, scrounging, small watercraft [one more really], Warhead. What about I don't know any of the ordnance [at least in the US this is where EOD falls] skills besides Warhead like Demo What about the other unit skills Things that they list as MOS [mostly infantry], but everyone in the unit is trained for, examples I know a cook who was part of Ranger Bat, guess what he was Ranger, and Airborne qualified but as a support troop in game can not happen.

[ChalkLine]

I think people may not have understood my original point, and I probably didn't put it well.

In many games, thankfully not Twilight 2000, different weapons need different skills - even though this is obviously counter-intuitive.

Here's a classic:
In various editions of Traveller you need different skills for different pistols. This is, of course, silly.
What is needed is something you could say is a 'qualification' before using a strange version of a pistol. The classic would be loading a cap-and-ball revolver. In a combat situation you simply may not be able to do it unless you'd been shown how. This is the 'semi skill' I'm referring to.

So what a semi skill would do is increase your ability to use a standard skill. So if you have SCUBA and you got 'multi gas diving' you could use those systems but still use your SCUBA skill.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I understand your point but to say that needing different skills for, (for example) different pistols is silly, is something I disagree with.
This is the place where you need to decide just how far you want to go with game versus reality. For example, the difference between revolvers and semi-auto pistols is like the difference between automatic and manual transmissions for vehicles.

That's the most obvious difference but there's also significant differences between hammer fired semi-autos to striker-fired semi-autos that require a different level of training and that's even before we get into the differences between traditional frame mounted safeties such as the Browning Hi-Power compared to the trigger safeties of say Glock pistols. They all require another level of training for effective handling.

But do you want to add that extra layer of complexity to a game Generally I would say no but I do believe there is a good argument to say yes. For this reason I don't disagree with the idea of needing different skills for different firearms but I also see that at some point, you need to factor in how your players are going to deal with that level of granularity and make compensations for that. Having said that, I still maintain that needing different skills for different pistols (for example) is probably more than needed but it is not "silly" per se.

Personally, I would have liked to have made the Players have skills for each individual weapon because for example, (and I have used both), there is a big difference between the handling of the L1A1 compared to the M16A1. We are not talking simply about how they perform but the significant difference between strip/clean/assemble of the two rifles and other things such as the fact that the M16 family does not go to "Safe" unless it has been cocked first (unlike most other military rifles). I realize that my desire for realism does not mesh well with the playability of the game so I didn't try to enforce that onto the players but the fact remains, just because you know how to effectively use one rifle, does not mean you know how to effectively use a different rifle.

[ChalkLine]

From a game design point of view I'd just have the GM assign a minus until you'd got some experience through practice, training or experience. Otherwise it's way too complex

[Legbreaker]

That's the way several other systems work it. Until you've spent some time training or just plain using the weapon, you suffer a penalty of around 20% of your skill (sometimes more, sometimes less, that just seems to be the average).

Actually, come to think of it, 1st ed had something like that for pilots - Skill level dictated how many aircraft you started out being familiar with, and applied a penalty if you tried flying something else until you'd spent some time behind the controls.