 March 29, 2008 - 8:56pm | New Skill System Proposal There are nine professional skill areas (PSAs) describing all potential aspects of a character's knowledge and ability. None of these PSAs are skills unto themselves, but instead a categorical collection of related skills. For example, you won't have a military skill. You'll have a melee weapons skill, or a demolitions skill. More Skills. Although there exists a list of skills under each PSA, this list is not exhaustive. Players are encouraged to develop their own ideas for skills to complete their character conceptions. Referees must approve the skill and the PSA under which it falls. Different players may even have the same skill under different skill areas if the Referee allows, representing different types of skill training. For example, Sarah wants her character to be good at data encryption. She looks throught he skill lists and can't specifically find that ability. She suggests it should fall under the Agent PSA. The Referee likes the idea and approves. Robert's character is a Military specialist and also wants skill with data encryption. He asks if he can have a data encryption skill under his Military PSA and the Referee allows it. In the end, they are both the same skill, but the training was derived from a different source. When decrypting military data, Robert's character is the obvious choice, though really they are both able to perform the skill the same. Character Generation All players must decide which PSA is primary to their character concept, and which two are secondary to it. List one PSA with a "P:" next to it. List two PSAs with an "S:" next to them. All seven other PSAs are tertiary to your character concept, and need not be listed on your sheet. Your character will begin with two level 1 skills. One of which must be from your character's Primary PSA. The second can be from any skill area desired. For example, your character's primary PSA is Military, and your secondary PSAs are Tech and Agent. You begin with two level 1 skills. One of which must come from your Military PSA, the other may come from any PSA (Military, Tech, Agent, or any other). You select Beam Weapons level 1 from Military, and Robotics level 1 from Tech. Character Advancement Instead of keying the costs of individual skills to the skill area itself (as it was done in Alpha Dawn rules), the costs are keyed to your PSA selections, rewarding a solid concept. Some people are good at learning sciences, some are good at learning languages... Some are natural born pilots. Whichever PSA is chosen as your character's primary one will have the easiest experience point progression. Your secondary PSAs will advance slightly slower, and all other skills will advance slowest still. After earning experience points, players may spend them on new skills or to advance skills they already have. The cost of the new skill level depends on whether the PSA which governs that skill was important to the character concept (i.e. was selected as either Primary or Secondary to your concept). The table below summarizes experience point costs. Table: Experience Point costs
Example: Logan is quite good at technical things. He can't change that about himself. Tech PSA is Primary to his concept. He's quite knowledgeable in many obscure areas and therefore Scholar PSA is secondary to his concept. Finally, he's a fair artist and that creativity often gives him insight to troubleshoot where hard facts fail him. Artist PSA is also Secondary to his concept. All other skill areas are tertiary to his concept. Skill Checks Where are the subskills? Where are my character's chances of success listed? The existing Alpha Dawn skill system requires lists and tables to be present at the gaming table, something that has been an antiquated idea since the early 1990s in role-playing evolution. This skill system takes its mechanics from the way Alpha Dawn expressed chance of success in combat. This helps keep your ability scores relevant even when testing one of your character's skills. To make a skill check, use 1/2 your character's ability score relevant to the situation, then add 10% per skill level. This applies to any roll having anything to do with that skill. There is no list of "subskills" defining what you can do with a skill: if you have a Survival skill (from the Scout PSA) for example, you get to make any roll having to do with survival in the same way. Modifiers apply based on any situational condition the Referee decides applies. Example: A robotics expert (someone with skill levels in Robotics, a skill in the Tech PSA) would be using his Intuition coupled with robotics skill when guessing where an access panel might be located on an attacking alien robotic technology, but if he were repairing it, he might be using Logic. There may even exist situations where the robotics skill could be used in conjunction with Dexterity or even Persuasion (haggling over the price of robotics parts with a chop shop owner?). In each of these cases, the player would use half his relavent ability score added to 10 times his skill level. Unskilled Skill Checks If you are asked to make a skill roll for a skill that is from either your primary secondary PSAs, yet you have no skill level in that skill, you may (if the Referee allows, based on the situation) use 1/2 your attribute but add nothing for skill level. This is called an Unskilled Skill Check. If you are asked to make a skill check for a skill you don't possess and is one that is from a PSA tertiary to your character concept, you can only succeed on a 01-05 (which is an automatic success in alpha dawn rules). Unskilled skill checks can be abused by players, and Referees are to be the final arbiter in such situations. For example: Uwan is a yazirian fleeing for his life from natives on a dangerous world he's gotten himself stranded on. As he rounds a corner in the canyon, he sees a place he thinks he can quickly climb up to a higher level. He needs to do this before the natives round the canyon, or they'll see him climbing and he'll be in trouble. His player, Fred, is told to make a climbing check using his Reaction Speed. His character's primary PSA is Scout, but he never thought of devoting any experience points to a climbing skill. He is allowed to use 1/2 his Reaction Speed score and use 0 as his skill level. Since his Reaction Speed is only 45, he has a 23% chance. He fails, and is half-way up the canyon wall when natives round the corner, spears in hand. Fred decides that after the adventure, he'll buy a level of climbing if his character survives! The Skill Areas Rather than provide an exhaustive list of skills, this system provides nine categories of professional skill. Individual skills are to be drawn from these PSAs. After each skill name is an example of the types of situations where that skill might come into play. This is meant to be a short example, not a comprehensive list of all situations.
Standard Rules Many skills from the tech skill area involve repairing equipment. These will use the standard repair rule from Alpha Dawn rulebook. Application of medical science can use the standard rules from Alpha Dawn as well, or a simpler mechanic: a successful Medic skill roll will heal a number of d10 equal to the medic's skill level, but require a like number of hours of recovery (thus a 3rd level medic might roll 3d10 and get 15... meaning he heals 15 STA if the patient rests 15 hours afterwards). If the full period of rest isn't taken, the healing will be halved. Finishing notes: Effort was made to allow this skill system to integrate seamlessly into existing campaigns. For example, all thirteen of the existing Star Frontiers Alpha Dawn skills are mentioned here, so converting a character is seamless. However, since there are more skills (and PSAs) than the original game, Referees might allow starting player characters to have Level 1 in a third skill drawn only from a tertiary PSA, just to round out the character and add more diversity. The defining factors about this skill system are the following:
3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
 April 21, 2008 - 10:00am | So you actually got to play, Larry? I am jealous! I do want to compliment Bill on some of the consolidations of the PSAs - it seems he has made some changes - reducing the number of PSAs and increasing the number of skills in each. Although I noticed you still have not added Heavy Weapons to the Mil section... :) Likewise, I appreciate the unification of the XP system. At first I did not like it, but as I examine it more and more it has grown on me, so to speak. |
 April 21, 2008 - 10:17am | I agree with Imperial on the focus on stats (as I briefly stated on the other thread). I think experience counts for much more than ability scores - and this is a real-life observation as well. For instance most athletes are very very skilled in their field - raw ability is there, but it is the training that really makes athletes elite. I know some very smart folks (old school nuclear engineering people among them), but they do not have much ability with computers unless they take the time to learn like anyone else... they still have their children show them how to do stuff with MS Office!!.. again training. This in mind, 1/2 ability score + level is a methodology that has roots already, is easy to figure, and works relatively easily as well. For myself, I would rather see skills with more levels (possibly costing a little less per level), and much small focus on ability scores... but that is only my own opinion. A small modifier figured out like Punching Score (1 point for each 10 or 20 points) would be adequete for adjustments in my mind. Otherwise, I really like the expansion yet simplification of the skill system. <insert witty comment here> |
 April 21, 2008 - 10:25am | Computers also make mistakes. They can also fail to optimize because they are not aware of all of the variables in the situation. Or, they incorrectly weigh the variables, etc. A highly skilled ship crewman, with the vital PRE requisites, can take care of that unknown. It's not just a matter of pushing a button, inserting a flight plan program, and then reclining in your comfy acceleration chair until the docking sequence is complete. Normally that might be the case, but, you gotta be prepared. But, once again, I concede to the majority... No, computers almost never make mistakes. Programmers and operators often do. However... the problem isn't that the SFKH skills have prerequisites, but the levels required... Level 6 computer? Level 6 Technician? Absurd, given level 6 is as good as it gets. Having prerequisites is good. Having absurdly high ones is not. |
April 21, 2008 - 10:50am | Aramis - I agree with you that the prereqs might be a little high. Where do you think they should be? |
 April 21, 2008 - 10:50am | So you actually got to play, Larry? I am jealous!  I had flashbacks of sitting at the table with friends around Summer of '83! Awersome time and Bill's boys are GREAT role players. Playing table top is much more fun than the Gameroom but I notice we get distracted more.At first, this makes perfect sense - after all, a guy with a higher LOG score should be able to figure out a computer better, right? That is correct, from a realism perspective. However, from a play balance perspective, I think it is a bad idea. This puts too much importance on the players' stats, and they will fudge their start up character rolls because they think they don't have a chance to survive. We'll start seeing 60s and 70s everywhere. Characters with 30s and 35s will be viewed as hopeless, and largely disappear, rather than their PCs taking their bad luck like a man. Just a comment about this. I rolled a really really bad character - all my stats were 30 to 35, Bill allowed me to re-roll and my highest was INT/LOG at 70 with 55 STR/STA and 40's for the rest. After the game I realized I needed to upgrade my skills in certain areas based on my poor abilities! It didn't bother me at all, part of creating a character concept. :-) I can never change my DEX of 45 (unless spending XP) - but I can increase my training with an auto pistol. So my PC is not naturally gifted with agility but there is hope if I practice. Now for some background and caveat (w00t is not an expert in gaming so ignore my prattle and ignorance) If that is true I can see where GM's will lean towards their concept of the game. In the start of the game we played I was weak in abilities and skills - so I had to come up with good ideas to keep myself alive by making the right decisions like backing our team up against the stalk of a mushroom so the Trapesaur's could not surround us.
|
April 21, 2008 - 11:02am | "You're saying that game mechanics can be based on abilities or skills (but not both, they will lean heavily one side or the other)?" Actually Larry, it's the other way around - "both". My intent is to preserve character viability of someone with low ability scores. Having "flat" (i.e. non-ability score based skill checks) is important to maintain that balance. More tedious, but important. Characters with great ability scores will always be at something of an advantage. But why "up" that advantage massively by putting them into the skill system as well? And I absolutely agree with you that good ideas and great role playing makes up for a lot of this. But that is a universal truth about good RPGs. A person with lousy scores can accrue extra XP by hiding in the mushrooms and avoiding the Trapesaurs, etc... That's what it's all about. |
 April 26, 2008 - 10:26am | FAMILIARITY AND SPECIALIZATION Some skills(such as Starship Piloting) require that the character specialize in a particular discipline or type of system, while characters trained a particular skill may be more familiar with the equipment/practices they use in that skill than others. In either case, a character can apply skill use to a discipline/piece of gear with which he isn't familiar or hasn't specialized in, at a -20% penalty. EXAMPLE: A character with a DEX of 70 has the Starship Pilot skill at Level 1, specializing in the operation of his fighter. If he tries to take the helm of the assault carrier on which his squadron is based, he has a (35+10-20)20% chance of flying it without damaging or destroying the vehicle. To buy off an unfamiliarty or non-specialization penalty, the character must buy it off at an XP cost equal to the XP cost of his originial skill level. In other words, a character must purchase the skill all over again for each discipline/vehicle/piece of gear he wishes to be completely proficient with. EXAMPLE: The Level 1 fighter pilot wants to be completely proficient at piloting his squadron's base assault carrier(at least as proficent as a first level pilot can be). He must acquire enough XP to purchase the Starship Pilot(Assault Carrier)skill at level 1 to be able to pilot the ship without the -20% penalty. THAT'S CHALLENGING Certain skills have set challenges for their use, such as risk jumping for an astrogator, or selective targeting for weapons skills. The usual penalty for a skill challenge is -30% to skill use. A character can buy off the penalty for a skill challenge at an XP cost equal to the XP cost of the current level in that given skill. EXAMPLE: A character with Level 3 in Beam Weapons and a DEX of 50 wants to be able to take a head shot. Targeting a part of the body is a Selective Targeting challenge and a -30% penalty, for a total chance to-hit of(25+30-30)25%. If he wants to target a particular body part without penalty(assuming it's a primary skill), he has to pay (3+6+9)18 xp to buy off the penalty. Partial Buyoff Alternately, a character may only be able to buy off part of a challenge/unfamiliarity penalty. In this case, -5% of the penalty can be bought off as per a level of skill. EXAMPLE: If the character above has a Beam Weapons skill of 6, and not enough XP to buy off the entire Selective Targeting penalty, he can opt to buy off part of it, spending (3+6+9)18 XP to have a Selective Targeting penalty of only -15%. DUH, WHICH BUTTON DO I PUSH, GEORGE? There may come a time when a character has to do something he's normally trained to do. The chance to use a skill without training is ½controlling stat-50%, if the referee rules that that such a thing is possible at all. MY SKILL LEVEL'S BIGGER THAN YOURS There may come times when characters have to make opposed skill checks against other characters or NPCs, such as a pilot rolling to evade incoming fire from an enemy gunner. In this case, both players(or the player and the referee if one of those making the opposed check is an NPC)make their skill check normally, with the winner being the one who succeeds by the most percentage points or fails by the least percentage points. EXAMPLE: The pilot of an assault scout is desperately trying to evade the laser cannon of a hostile frigate. The pilot has a DEX of 55 and a Starship Piloting skill of 4, giving him a (27+40)67% chance, while the frigate's laser cannon gunner has a DEX of 50 and a Gunner(Beam Weapons) skill of 6, giving him a (25+60) 85% chance. Both the pilot and the gunner trying to fry him make their skill checks, the pilot rolling a 37 and the gunner rolling a 9. The gunner having succeded by the most, hits his target. Edits are in blue text(WSS 4/26/2008). "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
 April 25, 2008 - 3:11pm | THAT'S CHALLENGING Certain skills have set challenges for their use, such as risk jumping for an astrogator, or selective targeting for weapons skills. The usual penalty for a skill challenge is -30% to skill use. A character can buy off the penalty for a skill challenge at an XP cost equal to the XP cost of the current level in that given skill. EXAMPLE: A character with Level 3 in Beam Weapons and a DEX of 50 wants to be able to take a head shot. Targeting a part of the body is a Selective Targeting challenge and a -30% penalty, for a total chance to-hit of(25+30-30)25%. If he wants to target a particular body part without penalty(assuming it's a primary skill), he has to pay (3+6+9)18 xp to buy off the penalty. Partial Buyoff Alternately, a character may only be able to buy off part of a challenge/unfamiliarity penalty. In this case, -5% of the penalty can be bought off as per a level of skill. EXAMPLE: If the character above has a Beam Weapons skill of 6, and not enough XP to buy off the entire Selective Targeting penalty, he can opt to buy off part of it, spending (3+6+9)18 XP to have a Selective Targeting penalty of only -15%. So I should buy off all my challenging skill uses (selective targeting, risk jumping, etc) that I can think of when I'm still level 1. That way I can buy of the -30% modifier for only 3 XP. At least that what it seems to be saying. Either it needs to made more clear, or maybe just require 3 levels to buy off and give 10% per level for the partial buy off. Why should a level 6 sharpshooter have to spend 63 XP to buy off the -30% when a level 3 character (per your example) only has to spend 18? Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |
April 26, 2008 - 8:17am |
"You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
April 26, 2008 - 8:18am | The XP expenditures listed above assume that we're talking about primary skills, BTW. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
April 28, 2008 - 11:31pm | Aramis - I agree with you that the prereqs might be a little high. Where do you think they should be? half (round up) the level being purchased. |
April 29, 2008 - 1:19am | "You're saying that game mechanics can be based on abilities or skills (but not both, they will lean heavily one side or the other)?" Actually Larry, it's the other way around - "both". My intent is to preserve character viability of someone with low ability scores. Having "flat" (i.e. non-ability score based skill checks) is important to maintain that balance. More tedious, but important. Characters with great ability scores will always be at something of an advantage. But why "up" that advantage massively by putting them into the skill system as well? And I absolutely agree with you that good ideas and great role playing makes up for a lot of this. But that is a universal truth about good RPGs. A person with lousy scores can accrue extra XP by hiding in the mushrooms and avoiding the Trapesaurs, etc... That's what it's all about. I remember Twilight:2000 1e attempting to balance out munchkinism in the ability score area by granting a lower expirience point base for higher scores(i.e. the higher your ability scores were, the less points you ended up with for skills....)and people still fudged and created munchkins(dead munchkins which kept coming back to life with the flick of an eraser and a simple rewrite....). ImpLord makes a valid point concerning the ability scores, but I honestly see no good way to account for munchkinism in the system...bottom line, those who want munchkins will create them, and the only thing referees and other players can do is to put these paper demigods in the path of blaster fire as many times as the munchkins keep erasing the names on their character sheets. That's my two centicreds.... "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
April 29, 2008 - 6:48am | Will - munchkinism? LMAO! I've never heard it quite put that way, but ok...I think the term I heard was min/maxing or cheeseing/cheddaring/fudging. Anyway. But seriously folks: is it really that bad looking up separate skill tables that you eventually memorize anyway? What is the big deal with that? Why is it soooo bad that we need to push the game even more towards those initial ability score rolls? |
April 29, 2008 - 6:49am | Oh and Aramis - I am cool with the lowered prereqs - but rounded up or at least 2, which ever is higher. |
May 2, 2008 - 9:06am | Will - munchkinism? LMAO! I've never heard it quite put that way, but ok...I think the term I heard was min/maxing or cheeseing/cheddaring/fudging. Anyway. But seriously folks: is it really that bad looking up separate skill tables that you eventually memorize anyway? What is the big deal with that? Why is it soooo bad that we need to push the game even more towards those initial ability score rolls? I don't know if I picked up the term from either playing GURPS or True 20, I forget which, but yeah a munchkin is also slang for a outrageously super-powered character....but I think you get my point. In answer to your question, nothing more or less than what Emerson(or was it Thoreau, I forget)referred to as the "hobgoblin of little minds," and what my life really needs right now, consistency. Some people like it, some people like the various tables for skills, some like both. Or neither. I'm personally a fan of all four options..... "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
 May 19, 2008 - 12:47am | Bill, Excellent work, as usual! I have a few suggestions: Artist These days I just hand out Art skills for free to any player who's interested. No need to spend points if you want to play the saxophone or be a master painter. Generally I've found that few players want these skills, and those who do want to add flavor or depth to their character, often at the expense of "useful" skills. As you said (although perhaps in a different context) "reward the concept." Medical I'm strongly in favor divorcing Medical from Science, almost exactly like SmootRK suggests (each species as a seperate skill, plus some of the Psycho-social skills.) Why? Star Frontiers is one of the few rpg's where playing a Medic really shines. The sub-skills and the various equipment give you alot of material to work with. In many other games, there's usually just a medic skill and a medkit-- about as exciting as eating sawdust. Granted, we're leaving AD's sub-skills behind with your new mod, but I propose swapping in the species skills to sustain that medic goodness. Scholar I'd roll up literature, history, and philosophy into a blanket skill called Academics. I'd add a new skill called Social Sciences (religion, anthropology, culutral studies, etc.) For example, if you've been captured by small primitive furry beings, you might realize they worship golden robots. Or that the cave drawings on Tantos 5 look alot like those on Minos 7, a culture that practiced human sacrifice. Mentalist I love psionics, so I'd add this as a PSA. It would take some work in terms of game balance, but it should be possible. |
 July 14, 2008 - 8:32am | This is great material. I was a little frustrated by the way characters in Alpha Dawn tended to advance similarly in the same PSA mainskills. It reminded me a lot of early DnD (1st edition) classes where all 3rd level Thieves were pretty much the same. |
July 14, 2008 - 8:47am | Imperial Lord wrote: "Granted, I understand what you are trying to do here, and from a realistic perspective, I agree with you. However, from a play balance perspective, I disagree. Games that put an inordinate focus on stats tend to suck, as they allow bad play to be compensated by flashy rolling against the high scores. Skills are opportunities to diverge from the chains of the stats that a PC rolled in the beginning of the game. PCs with bad stat rolls get to compensate against the PCs that rolled stats like rock stars."
|
July 14, 2008 - 8:50am | Having the two extra levels available in skill advancement offers the possibility of starting a game with slightly more proficient (advanced) characters. Newbie-type campaigns would have characters start with just the two skills from their PSA choices (plus 1 skill from a Tertiary, non-PSA if you use that optional rule).
These ideas are just possible examples; the referee could set up whatever they think would be best for their games. |
