[TheOneRonin]

Originally Posted by Kraydak

For anything OTHER than military templates, GURPS forum readers object wildly to more than 12 cp/year for intensive training (full time education). Even for non-stat-normalization followers will look askance at that number, and it doesn't apply once you start doing anything other than full-time studying. Every time you write down a cp number, think "1 month dedicated, fairly intensive training". A 3-week course, might, maybe, qualify for 1cp in something. Following your templates, other high-education characters will have *absurd* skill levels (and that is speaking as an extreme NON-stat-normalizer).

Keep in mind that you aren't looking at a template for some 22 year old who has just been training for a few years. You are looking at a guy who has had MONTHS of training and YEARS (10+) of practical application. He is going to use every one of those skills on every single deployment. I don't think 2cp in Driving (Auto) simply equates to an 8-week tactical driving course. It might be a 3 week course, coupled with hundreds of hours of actually performing tactical driving under combat conditions. Under that consideration, the 2cps start to sound a lot more reasonable.

Your current core template gives 9 cp in melee combat. Basically, a full year (with followup maintenance time) in training in mostly obsolete skills. Overkill.

Again, same as above. These guys will get plenty of hand-to-hand training AND experience using said skills over their 10+ years in special operations. Plus they get more EXTENSIVE hand-to-hand combat training as part of the 18 month CST program. I think 4 points in Karate and Judo is perfectly reasonable, especially since a lot of these guys probably train and practice outside of "work" as well.

You also overestimate the skill levels required to function for most tasks. For example, Navigation [2] gives a level of 13. Which doesn't sound that high until you add the +1 for a good topo map and +3 for GPS (or +1 for the backup compass), and then the usual +4 TDM. A base skill level of 13 is massive overkill, and I doubt 2 months of dedicated training in Navigation (land), much less Navigation (sea). The dabbler perk is what is called for here.

And you completely underestimate the requirements for having to do things like Land Nav in austere environments when you don't always have a GPS, compass, or even a detailed map. The point is that these people are trained to be able to perform under the WORST type of conditions. If the only time you can effectively use your skill is under IDEAL conditions, then you WILL FAIL when you are in the field.

Survival is another questionable skill. There is no reason to train modern military personnel to live off the land indefinitely.

I agree 100%. I would never include such a skill in a template for conventional modern military personnel. But we aren't talking about those people. We are talking about people who MUST be able to survive long periods of time in austere environments with NO SUPPORT whatsoever. So yeah, survival makes sense here.