T5 Errata Discussion Thread

[mvdwege]

Well that's the debate, and my concern:

Second (and on this point there is disagreement on how to interpret the text) if you gain a Knowledge, do you gain the underlying skill? The text says


Which mvdwege takes as meaning you can have the Knowledge without having the skill. Thus the default Turrets-0 would not confer Gunner-0.

Yup, you caught my meaning well.

I think it's a defensible reading, just like yours. Word of God should bring clarification.

Not that I mind having Skill-0, as this is almost worthless anyway, especially with the This is Hard! rule. All it gives you is the right to attempt an almost impossible roll.

 

[Frewfrux]

So the debate really is whether or not you get the controlling skill at level-0 when you directly acquire a sub-knowledge.

A) IF you do, then having Turrets be a default means that Bay Weapons, Ortillery, Screens, SPines, *and* Turrets are all defaults. Turrets gives you Gunner-0 and Gunner-0 gives you all the sub-knowledge, at level-0, associated to that skill.

In this case the addition of "turrets" to the default skills is likely an errata and it's either not supposed to be there (my preference) or it's supposed to be "gunner."

B) IF you don't automatically get the controlling skill at level-0 by acquiring a sub-knowledge directly, then the sub-knowledge skills become theory, nothing more.

This would likely also mean that "turrets" is not really supposed to be a default skill, as how many people would really know the theory behind turret operation, regardless how easy the interface makes it?

Either option (in my ind) leads to removing Turrets from the default skill list.

The option that seems to make the most sense to me is B), that you can acquire theoretical knowledge without knowing anything really practical about it. ("Yes, that's how a Jump drive is supposed to work captain, but I'm a doctor, not an engineer; I can't fix the bloody thing.")

 

[Frewfrux]

Medic

Is there a reason Medic is listed as a Starship skill?

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Imperial law.

Is there a reason Medic is listed as a Starship skill?

Medic, along with Pilot, Astrogator, and Engineer (with Gunner if carrying Mail) are the Positions/Skills required to legally operate a Starship in the Imperium.

 

[Frewfrux]

Medic, along with Pilot, Astrogator, and Engineer (with Gunner if carrying Mail) are the Positions/Skills required to legally operate a Starship in the Imperium.

That's a legal reason to have a medic on board, not a reason that the skill would be classified as a starship skill. If Imperial law required a counselor on board would that become a starship skill?

I don't think it's a huge deal one way or the other, it just feels a little odd that the only way a Rogue or Nobel can gain medic skill is by spending time in space.

 

[Frewfrux]

Immediate Actions and First Aid

From the description of the task resolution item "Immediate Action" (thrown in the skill section between skill description and knowledge description on page 173????) it sounds like you have to first have skill in something in order to be able to execute an 'immediate action' task.

The description then says that an immediate action done on injures is first aid. So, if you have to have a skill first, I assume in this case that would be Medic. This brings up two questions in my mind:

1) Why would a medic administer first aid by taking an immediate action and not just use their medical training?

2) Does this means that anyone who wants basic first aid (a one week course in RL - for level 2 first aid) must be a trained medic? (ie. no one can administer first aid without full medical training?) It would seem to me to make more sense to have Medic be a default skill which equates to first aid (apply pressure, clean the wound, change the gauze, etc.), something any adventurer worth their salts will take the time to acquire before doing any sort of traveling.

 

[Frewfrux]

Honors Restriction - Clarification

Page 71:

Honors. A character can optionally make one additional Pass/Fail Roll: success confers Honors and one level from the Major. Failure has no effect.

No mention of this being restricted to College/University. This restriction is noted in a note under one of the tables on page 100.

 

[Frewfrux]

Errata Clarification

From the errata document:

Code “In” requires Atm 012479ABC and Pop 9ABC. Pop value of 7 is deliberately not in a population code.

I can't make sense of that last sentence. "Pop value of 7 is deliberately not in a population code."

1) It actually IS a population code
2) Pop 7 is not saying that it shouldn't be there
3) Pop 7 is not in the new Pop, so it's not saying to add it

????

EDIT: Sorry, that quote is on page 2/3 of the errata (it carries over between the pages)

 

[fridge]

From the errata document:



I can't make sense of that last sentence. "Pop value of 7 is deliberately not in a population code."

1) It actually IS a population code
2) Pop 7 is not saying that it shouldn't be there
3) Pop 7 is not in the new Pop, so it's not saying to add it

????

EDIT: Sorry, that quote is on page 2/3 of the errata (it carries over between the pages)

It is trying to say that there are no Population trade codes that use Pop7 ie the text on page 81 is correct. This is a clarification rather than an errata - i think Don got sick of seeing the question asked "what happened to Pop 7 for the Population Trade Codes?".

 

[Frewfrux]

It is trying to say that there are no Population trade codes that use Pop7 ie the text on page 81 is correct. This is a clarification rather than an errata - i think Don got sick of seeing the question asked "what happened to Pop 7 for the Population Trade Codes?".

Oh I see. Because it follows the note about the "In" trade code it sounded like it was a part of that errata. What it means is "Pop value of 7 is deliberately not in aNY OF THE population TRADE codeS." (Capitals added to original text)

 

[DonM]

It is trying to say that there are no Population trade codes that use Pop7 ie the text on page 81 is correct. This is a clarification rather than an errata - i think Don got sick of seeing the question asked "what happened to Pop 7 for the Population Trade Codes?".

This is correct. Well, I didn't get tired of the question so much as not having an answer. I actually suggested it be in a code, and Marc clarified to me that my suggestion was incorrect.

 

[DonM]

So the debate really is whether or not you get the controlling skill at level-0 when you directly acquire a sub-knowledge.

A) IF you do, then having Turrets be a default means that Bay Weapons, Ortillery, Screens, SPines, *and* Turrets are all defaults. Turrets gives you Gunner-0 and Gunner-0 gives you all the sub-knowledge, at level-0, associated to that skill.

In this case the addition of "turrets" to the default skills is likely an errata and it's either not supposed to be there (my preference) or it's supposed to be "gunner."

B) IF you don't automatically get the controlling skill at level-0 by acquiring a sub-knowledge directly, then the sub-knowledge skills become theory, nothing more.

This would likely also mean that "turrets" is not really supposed to be a default skill, as how many people would really know the theory behind turret operation, regardless how easy the interface makes it?

Either option (in my ind) leads to removing Turrets from the default skill list.

The option that seems to make the most sense to me is B), that you can acquire theoretical knowledge without knowing anything really practical about it. ("Yes, that's how a Jump drive is supposed to work captain, but I'm a doctor, not an engineer; I can't fix the bloody thing.")

Note that I do NOT have an official answer yet for this. I do have a house rule (Don's House Rules) which says that in my games, NO getting the knowledge does NOT give you level-0 in the skill. But that only applies to T5 when Don McKinney is running the game (or anyone who borrows that ruling).

 

[Frewfrux]

The Craftsman Cheat

Craftsman is a very difficult career to use. Getting two skills at level 6 is hard enough, but you also need 40 master points gained primarily from having high enough skill levels.

However, nothing seems to be mentioned about what skills are needed, and language is a skill, not 'just' a knowledge.

If your homeworld is Industrial you can grab the craftsman skill, then if you have an Int of A or better, after one (good) year at university with language as your major and craftsman as your minor and you will have:

Starting language-A
First Gained language-9
Second Gained language-8
Third Gained language-7
Fourth Gained language-6
Craftsman-3

Total Master Points (using Int A): 53

There you go. You are all set to make your masterpiece, a....uh....tongue?

As a GM I would never allow it. However, I can't see anything in the rules against it.

 

[fridge]

Starting language-A
First Gained language-9
Second Gained language-8
Third Gained language-7
Fourth Gained language-6
Craftsman-3

Total Master Points (using Int A): 53

There you go. You are all set to make your masterpiece, a....uh....tongue?

Sounds like a massive novel in 5 languages - Lord of the Rings?

 

[Frewfrux]

Sounds like a massive novel in 5 languages - Lord of the Rings?

LOL. And without the author skill to boot!

 

[Hemdian]

Note that I do NOT have an official answer yet for this. I do have a house rule (Don's House Rules) which says that in my games, NO getting the knowledge does NOT give you level-0 in the skill. But that only applies to T5 when Don McKinney is running the game (or anyone who borrows that ruling).

I've just noticed something that may strengthen your idea. Ignoring the sciences and the specialised Knowledges, I've tended to treat a Knowledge as a kind of sub-skill. For the most part that works ... except for one: Grav. Grav is a Knowledge contained in three different skills (Driver, Flyer, and Seafarer). It seems way overpowered to say that gaining a level of Grav incurs gaining level zero in three different Skills and their included Knowledges.

So maybe having a particular Knowledge protects you from the affects of null skill without actually giving you Skill-0. (And since you don't actually get Skill-0, you don't get the other included Knowledges.). Thus in the case of Grav you can attempt Driver tasks, Flyer tasks, and Seafarer tasks where Grav is appropriate.

This would resolve the Turrets-0 issue. To resolve the Fighter-0 issue, replace Fighter on the Default 'Skills' list with Unarmed-0, and either Slug Thrower-0 and/or Blade-0 depending on homeworld conditions.

 

[Thoom]

I'm probably way off here as I'm really still making my way through the book, so I'm sorry if I'm forgetting something obvious.

My way of looking at these things is that knowledges are fractions of the skill. If you have Gunner then you have trained in all knowledges, but if you only have the default Turret-0, that means that you can manage to press the right button in a pinch using a turret. You have, effectively, Gunner/turret-0. I would not give the player Gunner-0, and he doesn't get to use Ortillery at 0-level, because he doesn't have Gunner-0, he has Gunner/turret-0. If that makes sense.

Similarly, for Grav, if you have gained Seafarer/grav-0, you can't use Flyer/grav-0, as they are fractions of different skills.

 

[Frewfrux]

My initial post about this was incorrect. Here's the updated one:

Page 100 in the notes under the education tables:

Honors. A College or University student may roll one additional Pass/Fail: success confers Honors and Major+1

That appears to restrict the honors roll to college or university. However, on page 78, the character generation checklist, the honors roll is included for every educational institution.

Trade Schools
Trade School (Major, Honors)
Training Course (Major; Honors)
Mentor (+2 to Tra)
Advanced Education
College (4 years, Major and Minor;
Honors)
OTC/NOTC
Flight School
University (4 years, Major and
Minor; Honors)
OTC/NOTC
Flight School
Masters Program
Professors Program
Medical School
Law School
Service Academy (4 years, Major
and Minor; Honors)
Flight School

So which is it...are honors restricted to University/college or not? (I'm assuming not, but the note under the education table should be a bit more clear if that's the case.)

Also note that the "Honors" roll is separated from the Major/Minor rolls by a semi-colon everywhere except for the Trade School. Not sure if that's a typo or not.

 

[Hemdian]

Similarly, for Grav, if you have gained Seafarer/grav-0, you can't use Flyer/grav-0, as they are fractions of different skills.

It is the exact relationship and interaction between Skills and Knowledges that we're trying to fathom. I've summarised it (with quotes from the book) in message #299 of this thread. Bottom line is that there is some ambiguity around what happens when you gain a Knowledge.

However, your contention that Grav Knowledge under Seafarer and Grav Knowledge under Flyer are different Knowledges is both supported by p174 of the book (which lists Grav Knowledge multiple times depending on the Skill) AND contradicted by p156/159/169 (which states that the Grav Knowledge of one Skill is interchangeable with Grav Knowledge of another Skill). So, another ambiguity and/or contradiction.

 

[Thoom]

It is the exact relationship and interaction between Skills and Knowledges that we're trying to fathom. I've summarised it (with quotes from the book) in message #299 of this thread. Bottom line is that there is some ambiguity around what happens when you gain a Knowledge.

However, your contention that Grav Knowledge under Seafarer and Grav Knowledge under Flyer are different Knowledges is both supported by p174 of the book (which lists Grav Knowledge multiple times depending on the Skill) AND contradicted by p156/159/169 (which states that the Grav Knowledge of one Skill is interchangeable with Grav Knowledge of another Skill). So, another ambiguity and/or contradiction.

I see, thanks for pointing me to the right message. I guess we'll need Marc to untangle all this. Until then it's house rules and whatever makes the more sense to you. I'm still going with what I wrote as it's what makes sense to me (whatever 156/159/169 says)