Skill Specialisation

[Zelston]

The Narrator of the game I'm involved in has an unusual slant on skill specialisations. The +2 bonus is still used but he also asserts that only a charcater with the specialisation can use the skill for complex or unusual tasks ie with System Op's the Tactical specilisation has to be had for the character to do any of the more interesting stuff.

His argument is that only someone with the extra knowledge the specilisation represents could know enough to be able to do the task, so no matter how good another characters skill they would have to have the relevant specilisation to do anything unusual.

My arguement is that a character with the relevant specialisation is more likely to suceed due to the +2 bonus than an equivalent character wthout the specialisation so there is no need to not allow someone without the specialisation to attempt the task. Also for every specilisation a judegment would have to be made to decide whether any task could be done without the specilisation, which would slow down play and possibly cause confusion about what a character can actually do.


Any thoughts?


(Sorry if this post is a little jumbled but I got a stinking headache and am having problems thinking)

[Lancer]

As far as realism is concerned your Narrator certainly has a convincing argument going for him.

OTOH I think he is totaly wrong in applying this argument to a Star Trek roleplaying game!
On the show we constantly see characters who have no trouble using any ships system they need to use and can even apply those skills to alien equipment without any big problems. And this isn't restricted to the Starfleeters; just think of Rom and his technical skills that cover everything from locks to self-replicating mines.

The rules are not written to allow a completely realistic game, but one that mirrors the 'realism' of the show.
If your Narrator wants to make the game more 'realistic' I can see nothing wrong with it, but if he turns the game away from the way things work in the Trek universe than I'd say he is on the wrong track.

So yeah, I agree that this house rule doesn't seem the best way to handle specializations.


And BTW, welcome to the board. Hope your head gets better soon.

[KillerWhale]

I agree - I think this approach is wrong, and moreover, difficult to mirror in game mechanics.

However, I can understand why a player wants to be very specialized in an area. In fact, we encountered the problem when switching from Icon.

For instance, the tactical officer had
Shipboard Systems (Tactical) 2 (6)

And the helmsman had
Shipboard Systems (Conn) 2 (6)

So, according to the conversion rules, they would both have Systems Ops at 3, therefore making them exactly as competent as the other, and also, allowing them to do tasks that they knew nothing about (moreover: they don't want to have these skills, they think it wouldn't fit witht their characters).

That's the view of my players, and I tend to agree with it: Okay, the PCs can do a variety of stuff, but they also need to be overkill in some areas.

So as a Narrator, I decided the following rule: each character can have up to 3 Skill Focus (instead of one). That allowed the tactical officer to have System Ops (Tactical) at 3 (+6), which mirrors his specialty and still flows in the course of the game.

You may want to propose this to your Narrator. I hope this helps!

[Ramage]

There is an intriguing problem with the Ops rules when you throw the game era back in time. (This is appropriate for my new campaign which begins directly in the wake of STVI)

During TOS/Movies people did not move from console to console. A game set in such an ear would probably treat Ops like Engineering.

My two tiny-bit-o-latnum's worth

[PGoodman13]

Originally posted by Ramage
During TOS/Movies people did not move from console to console. A game set in such an ear would probably treat Ops like Engineering.

Did we watch the same show? I can remember a number of times when Uhura was called away from communications to navigation, and she didn't even blink. Any number of red- and blue-shirted individuals sat at Sulu's station in a crisis. Chekov was frequently pulled from navigation to the science panel. And this is all off the top of my head, without actually having to go do research.

What do you mean people didn't switch consoles? It seemed more the rule than the exception....

[Erik Filean]

Originally posted by PGoodman13

Did we watch the same show? I can remember a number of times when Uhura was called away from communications to navigation, and she didn't even blink. Any number of red- and blue-shirted individuals sat at Sulu's station in a crisis. Chekov was frequently pulled from navigation to the science panel. And this is all off the top of my head, without actually having to go do research.

What do you mean people didn't switch consoles? It seemed more the rule than the exception....

The trend continued into the movies, too: Saavik sat both sciences and navigation at different times during STII, and in STIII Scotty took navigation and Chekov both communications and sciences at different points in the film.

I'd call it a safe bet that stations were more specialized during the TOS/movie era, but I agree, the crew manning those stations seemed just as flexible.

[Doug Burke]

Zelston: While your Narrator's explanation may be more realistic, it goes against the spirit of the Specialty system in the first place. It has been said many times (mostly by Ross) that the character should never be penalized for not having a specialty. That's why having the specialty is a bonus instead of a separate score.

So, by the letter of the rules, you're right. But, it is his game and he is encouraged to do what he feels is right. You might be able to use some of the examples shown in this thread to convince him to change his mind, though...