Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-26-2011, 10:12 PM   #11
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk View Post
Really? I'd guess linguistics or the actual navy nuke school is more rigorous.
IIRC nukes have a higher ASVAB requirement.
sir_pudding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 10:15 PM   #12
cosmicfish
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

I just found this passage:

Quote:
The last division for surface students is the Nuclear Ordnance Division. A 21 class-day curriculum includes studying and testing on various aspects of nuclear physics, weapon design and effects, and EOD emergency response procedures. Also included is contamination detection, personnel protection, and contamination control.
(http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/re...chment%20F.pdf)

Based on this, I think I could justify about 2 points for Nuclear issues. It seems like both of these points should go into Nuclear EOD, but then the characters lack any of the other knowledge they should have.

This is one of those times where I really wish skills could be chunked a little finer - the gap between default and 1 pt can be a chasm when trying to create realistic characters...
cosmicfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 10:18 PM   #13
Crakkerjakk
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
 
Crakkerjakk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
This is one of those times where I really wish skills could be chunked a little finer - the gap between default and 1 pt can be a chasm when trying to create realistic characters...
Dabbler Perk, PU2:16.
__________________
My bare bones web page

Semper Fi
Crakkerjakk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 10:29 PM   #14
Lord Carnifex
 
Lord Carnifex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quirk: Unofficial motto, "If you see me running, try to keep up." [-1]
__________________
An ongoing narrative of philosophy, psychology, and semiotics: Et in Arcadia Ego

"To an Irishman, a serious matter is a joke, and a joke is a serious matter."
Lord Carnifex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 10:33 PM   #15
cosmicfish
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Rev 1:

ST 11, 10pts
DX 12 (14 manual), 40+10pts
IQ 13, 60pts
HT 12, 20pts

Will 14, 5pts
Perception 14, 5pts
Fatigue 14, 4pts
Single-Minded or Unfazable (either), 5-15 pts

Dabbler (Physics (Nuclear) +2, Engineer (Combat) +2, others TBD)

Electronics Repair (Comm) 12, 1pt
Electronics Repair (Sensors) 12, 1pt
Explosives (Demolition) 14, 4pts
Explosives (EOD) 16, 12pts
Explosives (Nuclear EOD) 14, 2pts (from default)
Explosives (Underwater Demolition) 14, 3pts (from default)
NBC Suit 12, 2pts
Search 14, 2pts
Set Trap (Explosives (Demolition)) 13, 2pts

This puts the minimum at 186 points, including 29pts of skills over the 42 weeks. Non-naval personnel would lose 4pts of EOD, 3pts of underwater demo, and 1pt of search, as these roughly correspond to the extra 60+ days of training underwater that only Navy personnel receive.

This pulls points away from nuclear and from underwater demo, since they really do not spend that much time actually learning to blow things up or dismantle nukes. It pulls completely away from the math and physics, with Dabbler added to cover that gap. NBC suit is added at 2 pts.

Last edited by cosmicfish; 01-26-2011 at 10:44 PM.
cosmicfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 10:38 PM   #16
cosmicfish
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk View Post
Dabbler Perk, PU2:16.
Excellent... I think I will use this a lot. I have PU2 but have not learned it thoroughly yet, and somehow missed that one. It seems like this should have been included in the basic set - it is just so useful for situations like mine!!!
cosmicfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 11:02 PM   #17
Wolf
 
Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The not so wild west.
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk View Post
Really? I'd guess linguistics or the actual navy nuke school is more rigorous. But then the only EoD guys I knew were Jarheads, and they knew their explosives but weren't necessarily the brightest enlisted guys I ever met. Not that they were dumb. Just my experience is the highest concentration of smart Jarheads were in other occfields.
One would think, but if you look at the attrition rates for things like linguistic schools (which every Army Green Beret, most Intel folks, plus everyone who has a basic linguistic MOS makes it through, you can even enlist into linguistics in most forces) you'll find more people make it through the course. I know nothing about the Navy Nuke school, but again I'm going to assume it's an MOS that can be enlisted into, and as such has a much lower attrition rate... This doesn't show you that it's for more or less smart people, it just means that they allow more more mess-ups along the way, so the people who make it through are more likely to work hard at it, or just end up naturally gifted in that direction. The two that I talked to at ABN school, said that they had to become an NON-Com and had to have a few years in.

For us in the Army (when I was in, I've heard at different points during the war this has changed, so it may not be up to date info) you had to be an E4 (specialist) promotable to go into Ranger School (not Ranger Batt(alion), mind you, you can do that after passing the PRC as a private (E1)) though I've seen a E3 (PFC) get fast tracked into Ranger School. Also you had to be an E5 to make it to Special Forces or and E5 promotable to go to a Delta Force Briefing. Though, again, I heard you could enlist into SF (not delta) at some point in the mid 2000's, haven't heard it again recently, but that could mean it's still on the books.

Main point being that some of those schools that are mainly for NCO's (special operational forces, et all) tend to have the higher attrition rates, though from my experience it's all depending on how many slots are available when they graduate, and much of it is due to something called "badge protecting" where a training NCO will find a way to keep you from getting his beloved school badge, because he thinks you don't deserve it.

Much of the internal dynamics to "passing" these things (that much more resemble "weeder courses" in colleges and universities) is what the dynamics of your particular course is. If you are the "smartest" by a country mile, then you'll have no problems, but if you happen to go into a class with several people who joined because they graduated advanced in their class in college, but felt they wanted to "see the world" before going into their "real world" job you may be out-classed.

Also you find that more and more smart/ highly educated people are joining the service, I know the most common reason for folks being in the Infantry while I was in was because you got crazy help in school with the GI bill (I just got done with my associates, and without any kicker from my signing bonus (50,000 for college) the Montgomery GI bill got me a payment of 2,500/ month for attending school (that really helped when I had my first kid, as it only cost me about 2,000 bucks for the semester books and all). So taking the ASVAB "low" scores as an average IQ for a service man is a bad idea, then again... I've met some "rocks" while I was in... including one Marine who was taking the ASVAB for the 4th time, because he kept failing Infantry requirements.... so they are out there, lol.

One other thing to note, an engineer (demolitions) expert is an MOS, a basic training MOS to-boot. These guys are NOT EOD. EOD (navy EOD) is what's left over from the WWII frogmen, and the training that didn't go into the SEALs. They are Quazi-special operational forces, and pretty de-facto working with SOCOM... I think there are only a few who have gotten their EOD tab and SEAL trident, and these guys are viewed as beyond human in they're own fields. I know the guys who I roomed with had memorized everyone who earned both. Also note due to decreased budget, the Navy EOD school is the only EOD school any branch take their folks to (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, CIA, etc) everyone goes to the Navy school... just like EVERYONE goes to the Army Airborne school, to learn to jump out of planes... in my class we had 23 SEAL's, 3 Navy EOD, 2 Air Force Para-rescue, and lots more from every other army MOS, I was one of only two Infantry that were there, I think we had some 800+ guys in the company... it was a huge class.
Wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 11:12 PM   #18
Wolf
 
Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The not so wild west.
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
This puts the minimum at 186 points, including 29pts of skills over the 42 weeks. Non-naval personnel would lose 4pts of EOD, 3pts of underwater demo, and 1pt of search, as these roughly correspond to the extra 60+ days of training underwater that only Navy personnel receive.

This pulls points away from nuclear and from underwater demo, since they really do not spend that much time actually learning to blow things up or dismantle nukes. It pulls completely away from the math and physics, with Dabbler added to cover that gap. NBC suit is added at 2 pts.
Don't forget that Navy EOD get Airborne training as part of their coursework.
Look at the training ladder at the bottom of the EOD page here the 3 weeks basic parachute training is Army Airborne training (and where I met those two guys). The Non Navy folk only go to the 42 week main course... their branch takes care of any other training as per their service SOP for their branches of EOD.
Wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 11:24 PM   #19
cosmicfish
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk View Post
Really? I'd guess linguistics or the actual navy nuke school is more rigorous. But then the only EoD guys I knew were Jarheads, and they knew their explosives but weren't necessarily the brightest enlisted guys I ever met. Not that they were dumb. Just my experience is the highest concentration of smart Jarheads were in other occfields.
I knew an Army linguist (high school friend), two Navy nuke techs (college friends, they were on a "bootstrap" officer program), and one Army EOD (consultant for a fireworks company). I do not think any of them were smarter than the others (all were pretty intelligent), but the EOD had a greater attention to detail and discipline.

I think that linguistics and nuke school require more book smarts, but there are just so many ways to flunk out of EOD and other special ops training that it just runs up the attrition rate. Plus, for both the linguistics and nuke courses they are most interested in you graduating, to maximize the return on their investment, and so are more willing to give extra help where needed. It is easier for those courses to predict success based on testing, so entry requirements are high but attrition is low.
cosmicfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2011, 11:28 PM   #20
cosmicfish
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default Re: Template for modern EOD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
Don't forget that Navy EOD get Airborne training as part of their coursework.
Look at the training ladder at the bottom of the EOD page here the 3 weeks basic parachute training is Army Airborne training (and where I met those two guys). The Non Navy folk only go to the 42 week main course... their branch takes care of any other training as per their service SOP for their branches of EOD.
I know, and I mentioned earlier that I was just focusing on the 42-week main course. I already have the other courses written up, or else they are close enough to other courses I HAVE converted that I am not concerned about them. I like this granularity, because then it lets characters send their non-Navy personnel through the program without inconsistencies.
cosmicfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
demolition, military, special ops, template

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.