Starting skill top?

[kiryamo]

It does not seem very realistic that a 21 years old adventurer has starting skill levels of 80, 90 or 100% - or even more! If the proficiency in a skill is measured between 0 and 100, how is it possible that any 21 year old warrior has achieved technical perfection in the handling of a weapon, for example?

I think the system is not well balanced, and maybe it would be necessary to re-establish the RQ3-limit of 75% + modifier.

[Richard S.]

For one, PC's are supposed to be exceptional. For two, the scale is technically not correct since skills can go over 100%. For three, PC's have probably been adventuring and using their skills extensively since they were initiated, going by the personal history charts, moreso than your average farmer.

[Connan]

Miyamoto Musashi at the age of 20 was already an accomplished swordmaster and well on his way to becoming a legend.

Edited April 21, 2019 by Connan

[g33k]

RQG takes the position that a "starting" character  isn't a "starting" adventurer.  At 21, they may have up to 5 years' combat and "adventure" experience under their belts.

 

[Kloster]

47 minutes ago, kiryamo said:

I think the system is not well balanced, and maybe it would be necessary to re-establish the RQ3-limit of 75% + modifier.

In RQIII, professional level started at 30% IIRC. In RQG, it starts at 51%. Higher skill levels are logical in that view.

[olskool]

1 hour ago, kiryamo said:

It does not seem very realistic that a 21 years old adventurer has starting skill levels of 80, 90 or 100% - or even more! If the proficiency in a skill is measured between 0 and 100, how is it possible that any 21 year old warrior has achieved technical perfection in the handling of a weapon, for example?

I think the system is not well balanced, and maybe it would be necessary to re-establish the RQ3-limit of 75% + modifier.

Consider the case of a 21-year-old US Army soldier who joins at 18 right out of high school.  If that soldier signed up after 911, he could have more than 2 years of actual combat experience and already be an NCO (SGT or possibly even an SSGT with a waiver and a good career record).  It takes about 6 months "in country" to get to a passable level of experience as a soldier on deployment.  By the time that soldier has 2 years in combat, he (or she) would be an expert in the "soldiering skills" needed in the combat zone.  Therefore, "Experience" has very little to do with a person's "chronological age" and more to do with their exposure to danger in a combat zone.

"Wisdom is a product of Experience and Experience is often the product of poor choices."  

                                                                                                       Mark Twain

   

Edited April 21, 2019 by olskool

[Rojo]

YGMV.

My players have started as non adults, so I will establish a 75% maximum (quite generous, keeping in mind that I will use old material) when they initiate in adulthood. I will let them to distribute the excess as they like too.

[PhilHibbs]

24 minutes ago, Rojo said:

YGMV.

My players have started as non adults, so I will establish a 75% maximum (quite generous, keeping in mind that I will use old material) when they initiate in adulthood. I will let them to distribute the excess as they like too.

If they start out at 13, the beginning of adulthood, then they won't get the occupation skill percentages so that cuts 25% off the warriors so 80% is pretty much the maximum achievable anyway.

[ChalkLine]

It's my primary problem with the new game

[Bill the barbarian]

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

6 hours ago, kiryamo said:

I think the system is not well balanced, and maybe it would be necessary to re-establish the RQ3-limit of 75% + modifier.

 

I am sure I have said and read this often, but  suppose it is worth noting again that unless things have really changed at the Chaosium, they do not and never have said that  balance is required to make good games.  Life is not balanced so generally they have left that silly little concept to other games.

David was not equal to Goliath, and thats the point!

Cheers

Edited April 22, 2019 by Bill the barbarian

[Mechashef]

While I believe that having to House Rule a game to make it playable is bad writing, I’m a big supporter of creating House Rules to adapt a game to make it more suitable to your playing style.

 

In my campaign  skills can only be increased to a maximum of 75% as part of Character Creation.

 

So if you don’t like having starting characters with high skills, set your own limits.

[Shiningbrow]

7 hours ago, kiryamo said:

It does not seem very realistic that a 21 years old adventurer has starting skill levels of 80, 90 or 100% - or even more!

Actually, it does. Certainly for 80%, a few for 90%... and there are prodigies in the world who master something at a very young age.

Why 80%?

Because of a thing called an 'apprenticeship'. You get 4 years of practical and theoretical training. You come out at the end being capable of doing your job quite well. If a chef is asked to do a meal, they can do it well easily 80% of the time... A good blacksmith will make that sword 80% of the time with no issues (probably more often).

4 years of military training, and you will be hitting that target most of the time.

4 years of martial arts training will make you that competent.

4 years of language training should (if you're not a lazy sh*t like a lot of the students I've had) make you near fluent in a language (ie, 80% or higher)... especially if you've lived in the country and actively tried to learn the language.

And, all of that is only presuming a starting character is 21, and has started doing those things from age 17... If a child starts cooking, or smithing, or shooting, or fighting, of speaking, or any other skill from say, 6 years old, they're going to be a *lot* better at it than above (which is why we do have fluent multi-lingual speakers, as an example _ (again, if they're not lazy little sh*ts, like most of my students 😛 ). The skills that our PCs start with are basic skills that one has usually learned from an early point in their life (remembering that this will actually be around 13-15 years old, especially for cult skills). Since most people in the land should actually be farmers and herders etc, that would actually mean they've been doing those occupational skills from about 6 years old.

(and, just for shits and giggles - let's not get started on Passions such as a devotion to a temple or deity.... 🙄🙄)

 

For another current, real world example based on age - how are your computer operation skills, compared to most teenagers and youngsters these days? (presuming, of course, that you don't fit into that category yourself). Kids are far more tech-savvy than the majority of their parents...

 

100% is not "technical perfection". It's technical *mastery*. It's the point at which you should be able to achieve the task desired, under normal circumstances, with no hinderances, to a passable level, within the expected timeframe.

Musashi, at age 21 (taking what was said above) wasn't merely getting a basic success - he was hitting specials and crits in weaponsmithing *regularly*... that's much higher than 100% base chance! (maybe he had some magical help???)

Edited April 22, 2019 by Shiningbrow
phrasing

[Bill the barbarian]

34 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Because of a thing called an 'apprenticeship'. You get 4 years of practical and theoretical training. You come out at the end being capable of doing your job quite well. If a chef is asked to do a meal, they can do it well easily 80% of the time... A good blacksmith will make that sword 80% of the time with no issues (probably more often).

4 years of military training, and you will be hitting that target most of the time.

4 years of martial arts training will make you that competent.

4 years of language training should (if you're not a lazy sh*t like a lot of the students I've had) make you near fluent in a language (ie, 80% or higher)... especially if you've lived in the country and actively tried to learn the language.

I would add one more year beyond your four suggested years of apprenticeship. One year as a journeyman to have all the lessons make sense as you settle into your new profession, perhaps. That would coincidentally be five years at an average 2000 hours a year for that magic number that Paul McCartney and  many others  advocate to being necessary to become a professional... 10,000 hours!

[DreadDomain]

4 hours ago, ChalkLine said:

It's my primary problem with the new game

That starting character have high skills? Personally, I think it is a feature but I also see your point. I suggest perhapscapping starting skills to suit or taste and/or giving less skill points to distribute.

[Jeff]

As an aside, 21 for most of us is still part of prolonged adolescence. In Glorantha societies, people are full adults around 15 or 16. They are expected to fight, work, and even lead.

[klecser]

7 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

100% is not "technical perfection". It's technical *mastery*. It's the point at which you should be able to achieve the task desired, under normal circumstances, with no hinderances, to a passable level, within the expected timeframe.

Also worth noting that, even at 100%, a character will still only attain a critical success 5% of the time. 100% skill only guarantees a Regular success.

Thanks for posting TC! As others have said, it's your game and you can choose to alter any parameter. There is no rule that says that anyone has to play any RPG "as written."

Edited April 22, 2019 by klecser

[Rojo]

21 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

If they start out at 13, the beginning of adulthood, then they won't get the occupation skill percentages so that cuts 25% off the warriors so 80% is pretty much the maximum achievable anyway.

They don’t have ATM, but they could (not entirely decided yet) when they initiate into adulthood. It’s not that all of you are wrong (you aren’t), only that the 75% limit suit me more.

[Crel]

The adventures in the Gamemaster's Screen Pack are a good example of the change in paradigm, for age and expected skill. In particular, Cattle Raid provides a variety of ages and skills. For example, Heortarl on p.91-2 is 16, a brand-new initiate of Orlanth Adventurous, and has only one skill listed under 40% (Speak Tradetalk, 20%). His weapon skills, Sling and Dagger, are 50% and 40% respectively; no Broadsword, Battle Axe, etc. skill is listed. The Orleving raiders, meant to be on a similar skill & threat level to the adventurers, are largely older, with similar or slightly-low best weapon skills. The highest skill is Broadsword 75% for Deseros (30) and Erlanda (27), on p.99-100.

Also worth noting is Arnstal's statblock on p.106, in Dragon of Thunder Hills. He's 13, and already has Sling 40% and Short Spear 35%. So in RQG's simulation of Glorantha, an adolescent can plausibly have skill percentages equal to an RQ3 "professional" (according to @Kloster's post).

Note that the age difference between a starting 21 year old adventurer and the late-20's Orleving warriors does still demonstrate that an RQG adventurer is still someone quite exceptional for their age--since Deseros and Erlanda aren't farmers or militia, but actual, experienced warriors. To compare with the pregens, Sorala--a scribe--is nearly as skilled with a Broadsword as Deseros!

[PhilHibbs]

5 minutes ago, Crel said:

To compare with the pregens, Sorala--a scribe--is nearly as skilled with a Broadsword as Deseros!

A scribe who has fought in several battles.

Also, going by the actual character creation rules, she should only be able to get Broadsword up to 55% maximum. She could get Battle Axe to 70, though.

Edited April 23, 2019 by PhilHibbs