Alt Rule for Cascade Skill Progression

[SpaceBadger]

It has always seemed strange to me that Cascade Skills in T5 (Fighter, Engineer, Pilot, etc) progress in the pattern Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill... and then Skill, Skill, Skill thereafter. In other words, for a character’s first receipt of Pilot Skill he chooses the Knowledge of Pilot (Adventure Class Ships). He has Pilot (ACS)-1, but only Pilot-0. He gets Pilot Skill again, and again chooses Pilot (ACS); he now has Pilot (ACS)-2, but still only Pilot-0. Then he receives Pilot Skill a third time, and this time it applies directly to the base Cascade Skill, so that he has Pilot (ACS)-2 and Pilot-1. And every time afterward that he receives Pilot Skill, it applies to the base Cascade Skill (which counts as skill in all included Knowledges) rather than any of the included specialized Knowledges. As Marc has commented, there is no point in taking any individual included Knowledges from here on, in fact it is counter-productive because the base Cascade Skill would cover all included Knowledges.

That's fine under the current rule, I just happen to think that rule loses a lot of flavor by making everyone a generalist rather than a specialist above a certain level of skill, and I don't think that makes much sense.

Let's look at another example for extreme silliness. Take the Fighter Cascade Skill, which includes Knowledges such as Beams, Blades, Slugthrowers, Unarmed, and Exotics. Exotics covers things like whips, bolas, shuriken, and such. A character in the Army will probably take his first two Fighter Skill results as Beam or Slugthrower (depending on background TL) which makes sense, then his remaining receipts will be in base Fighter Skill. So in the Army, after learning in Basic and his first term how to use his primary weapon, he suddenly becomes an all-around skilled fighter advancing equally in martial arts and the use of whips and bolas? Really? :nonono:

Or take it another way, a non-military character, maybe on the Other career track. He picks up a little Fighter skill, taking Blade and Unarmed as his first two Knowledges. With his third receipt of Fighter Skill, he is becoming comfortable with some basic principles of combat, so gains a level of the base Fighter Skill. OK, that's fine, but then each bit of Fighter Skill from then on is also taken in the base Cascade Skill, soon making him an expert with Beam and Slugthrower weapons, along with Exotic whips, bolas, shuriken, etc? :nonono:

So now I've nattered on at length explaining what I see as the problem with the current rule on progression in these Cascade Skills. What's my great solution, huh? Glad you asked! It's pretty simple really: the skill level in the base Cascade Skill is taken only every third receipt of that skill. So, Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill, Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill, Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill, etc. This pattern thins out the number of those powerful generalist Cascade Skill levels to where they make more sense, and require more of the specialized Knowledge Skills that individualize and add color to characters so they aren't all the same.

"Oh, you're good with Power Plants? That's great, we need a power systems engineer. How are you with Jump Drives?"

Has anybody tried something like this? Did it work out as I'm hoping? (I admit I have not read even close to all threads in this subforum, so this may have been previously brought up and discussed.)

 

[ThornPlutonius]

I've not actually played T5 yet, but I agree with your choice to use K-K-S as the standard pattern. Especially since the set of Knowledges can be expanded. I am further tempted to require basing further general Skill level increases upon accumulating [insert yet to be determined formula] number of Knowledge levels to gain the next Skill level.

 

[agorski]

My interpretation of the rules is to use KKS repeating indefinitely. This is what I used in my iPad app for T5 chargen.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Not according to the Knowledge - Knowledge - Skill table on p114? The fourth level is a skill, not a knowledge.

It is also not consistent with "No matter how far Lloyd progresses, he will always be better at J-Drive and best at M-Drive (unless, at some point, he attends another school)." on the same page, i.e. the knowledges stays the same but progress is made in the skill?

 

[ThornPlutonius]

My interpretation of the rules is to use KKS repeating indefinitely. This is what I used in my iPad app for T5 chargen.

I have that idea in my mind, too. I also recall reading, in the Character Generation section, that the k-k-s progression only happens during chargen.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I have that idea in my mind, too. I also recall reading, in the Character Generation section, that the k-k-s progression only happens during chargen.

You mean this:

The first two instances a character receives one of these Skills (typically in Character Generation), he instead receives one of the Skill’s contained Knowledges.

K-k-s always happens, not just in chargen.

 

[ThornPlutonius]

You mean this:


K-k-s always happens, not just in chargen.

I am not able to find the text that I remember/hallucinate having read. I am probably misrembering. I did find this (T5.1, B1, P66):

Contained Knowledges. Some skills
(Animals, Driver, Engineer, Fighter, Flyer,
Gunner, Heavy Weapons, Language, Pilot,
Seafarer) include within them Knowledges.
Acquisition of these skills (except Language
which is handled differently) follows a standard
pattern: Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill.

A character has always has the option
of choosing a knowledge (either already possessed
or as-yet-unlearned) rather than the
skill, up to level-6.

So, I am reminded that not all skills have knowledges and those that do not progress s-s-s rather than k-k-s.

Also, I need to look at T5.09 later to see what P114 says. P114 is about Sophonts in T5.1.

Later:

Yes, the table on P114 of T5.09 does show advancing a full skill level on receipt of the 4th point.

Knowledge - Knowledge - Skill
First Receipt of Skill= Skill-0. Knowledge-1
Second Receipt of Skill= Skill-0. Knowledge-2
Third Receipt of Skill= Skill-1. Knowledge-2
Fourth Receipt of Skill= Skill-2. Knowledge-2

Errata?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Errata?

I found this:

Page 114, lower left hand corner "follows a standard pattern" should be changed to read "uses the following sequence". It should then read

Knowledge, Knowledge, Skill, Skill (continues)

"Pattern" is something that repeats, and apparently the design intent is KKSSSSS, rather than KKS KKS KKS.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=515946&postcount=241


Hopefully T5.10 is a bit more clear.

 

[kilemall]

Hmm, I went kickstarter on 5.10, but things like this are unlikely to get into my games.


I would tend to use a combo of skill and education to define the difference between 'treeshade mechanic' and a mechanical engineer, and note familiarity with equipment. Then the character can 'get up to speed' pretty quickly on new stuff, in most cases with skill + INT or EDU and it's more organic to what the character has done and is doing rather then trying to pre-program curricula/ability trees.



Among other things, gives the player a sense that their character can improve without having crazy skill acquisition/super Heinlein ubercharacters as the norm.

 

[SpaceBadger]

I guess maybe I wasn't clear enough, given the discussion above over what the rules say.

T5 rules specify Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Skill-Skill-Skill... ad infinitum.
Traveller 5 original 2013: p.144
Traveller 5.v09: p.114
Traveller 5.v10: Book 1, p.134
It's not errata.

I proposed that this be changed to Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill... etc, for reasons that I stated above.


*

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I proposed that this be changed to Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill-Knowledge-Knowledge-Skill... etc, for reasons that I stated above.

I'm fine with K-K-S-S-S... for most skills. It's only the overly broad Fighter skill that is a problem.

For Engineering and the various driver skills it works well. You start with an specialisation, e.g. Flyer(Grav) and then gets general skill in Flyer. Once you have, say, Flyer(Grav)-2 and Flyer-1 you can fly anything in safe circumstances but you will always be much better with grav vehicles as this is your specialisation.

The Fighter skill probably works as a general skill for hi-tech army and marine characters? For everyone else it should perhaps be divided into e.g. Ranged Combat( Beam, Slug, Portable, Bow, Thrown ), Melee Combat( Unarmed, Long Blade, Short Blade, Axe, ... ), and Armour (≈Vacc Suit?).

 

[Panzerkraken]

Another game with a similar skill structure put a limit on the general skills and required specialization afterwards. The author's justification was that people are by nature specialized; they tend by nature to go deep into the rabbit holes of what interests them, rather than acquiring broad knowledge at the same depth.

A real-world example could be: You have an auto mechanic with 20 years of nothing but car experience. He says "I'm a Ford Guy" (you all know someone like this and you know it..). He can tell you all about Fords, the various years and models, the differences in the engines and drive trains. He doesn't have to check the manual for torque settings, and he can tell by listening to a Ford engine which cylinder is wearing faster. Put him under the hood of a Subaru with a Boxer, and he scratches his head and goes for the manual. He has Auto Mechanics - 6 and K: Fords -14 (he might have a couple side KS's in things like Mazda or GMC, but I'm being extreme).

Not prescriptive for everyone, but it makes sense to me. I think that once I'm actually running I'll be using the KKSKKSKKS... format.

 

[kilemall]

Another game with a similar skill structure put a limit on the general skills and required specialization afterwards. The author's justification was that people are by nature specialized; they tend by nature to go deep into the rabbit holes of what interests them, rather than acquiring broad knowledge at the same depth.

A real-world example could be: You have an auto mechanic with 20 years of nothing but car experience. He says "I'm a Ford Guy" (you all know someone like this and you know it..). He can tell you all about Fords, the various years and models, the differences in the engines and drive trains. He doesn't have to check the manual for torque settings, and he can tell by listening to a Ford engine which cylinder is wearing faster. Put him under the hood of a Subaru with a Boxer, and he scratches his head and goes for the manual. He has Auto Mechanics - 6 and K: Fords -14 (he might have a couple side KS's in things like Mazda or GMC, but I'm being extreme).

Not prescriptive for everyone, but it makes sense to me. I think that once I'm actually running I'll be using the KKSKKSKKS... format.

This observation is where I'm getting the familiarity thing from. So an Engineer from a Navy might just have worked the power plants of X navy, whereas a Merchant Engineer would be familiar with all A-C drives. The main thing is that there is a big wide skill and familiar/constant use that gets you the full advantage, but it's wide open enough to flex for different situations without every single thing mapped out ahead of time, or mismatched 'some things are real specific and others are vague'.



I'm commenting without seeing the T5 rules, once I get the KS books I'll see if there is an advantage to this paradigm.