CIA Special Activities Division PMO Skill Set

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by TheOneRonin

And what I don't understand is how many people on these boards will argue to their death that certain units can't possibly have a skill at level N or higher because that's just not realistic. And then when you get down to the mechanics of doing what that unit HAS to be able to do, you come out with the unit NEEDING to have N+2, by the rules, to be able to meet those requirements.

Two parts of the answer are: (a) people have very different models of what are acceptable odds of success and (b) situational modifiers.

Here's an example with situational modifiers that would fit into a PMO campaign: shooting someone whom you have to take down, because if he gets to start giving orders, things get a lot harder. He's in a house 100 yards away, visible through the window his desk looks out of; your team is concealed, but will get spotted when you start firing.

Totally naïve calculation: I need to hit the skull (-7) at 100 yards (-10), I'm at -1 for firing through glass and I need to do this on 16 or less. I need Guns (Rifle) + Acc of 34, rifles are Acc 5, so I need skill 29. That is not a skill level that real humans have.

Really optimised calculation: I need to hit the Vitals (-3) at 100 yards (-10) with -1 for the glass, and I'll accept doing it on a 14-. I have a Fine rifle (Acc 6), hand-made super-match ammo (+2), I'm braced (+1), I have a telescopic sight for +4, and two seconds of extra Aim (+2). All-Out Attack (Determined) gives another +1. I need Guns (Rifle) of 12, and while that's better than a DX10 rifleman fresh from basic training, nobody could call a professional sniper with skill 12 implausibly good: indeed, it's implausibly low for someone with all this equipment. Getting the exact range and wind could help some more but may risk alerting the target, who thinks there's only him and his henchbeings within ten miles. There's a rule somewhere about not being able to more than double Acc with equipment bonuses, but I can't find it right now.

The situation when this came up in a somewhat cinematic game a few weeks ago: I want to hit the Vitals (-3) at 100 yards (-10) with -1 for the glass and I have skill 16 (defaulted from Pistol-18) as a generalist commando. I have a Fine rifle (Acc 6), Match ammo (+1), I'm braced (+1), I didn't bring a telescopic sight because this is the first time in the whole campaign that I'd have used it, but I have a collimating sight for +1, and two seconds extra aim for +2. My effective skill is 14-, which will have to do.

[Kraydak]

Originally Posted by TheOneRonin

...
To be fair, I started the thread by posting a snippet from Wikipedia and asked the community how to translate that quote into GURPS skills, and what those skill levels would be.
...

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).

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.

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.

Survival is another questionable skill. There is no reason to train modern military personnel to live off the land indefinitely. Off the land indefinitely with logistical support, yes. Endure until extraction without logistical support, naturally. But neither of those require even a single point in Survival (specialty). Dabbler, at most. And don't forget the advantage of TL-8+Massive budget. Good gear means that even low skill levels can be adequate. No need to hunt your own food if you can carry it in.

[Ewan]

Originally Posted by safisher

You need to look over this document, specifically page 10 and following.
http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...7&postcount=21

That's what I use for my modern campaign with the option of choosing six 25 point templates rather than four for ex Tier One characters.

[chrissandvick]

Originally Posted by safisher

You need to look over this document, specifically page 10 and following.
http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...7&postcount=21

That is an awesome doc, somehow missed it before. Thanks for posting it.

[Peter Knutsen]

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).

"Full-time education" is not the same as "intensive training".

[Þorkell]

Originally Posted by Kraydak

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.

Two comments.

1. What usual +4 TDM?

2. In what I've read about special ops selection there is this intense navigation and endurance component to it. The selectees have a map and compass and get orders to go to place A, then when they get there they get orders to another place, etc. etc. To me that's no Dabbler level of training.

[safisher]

Much of the discussion here is missing the point; GURPS templates, 3e or 4e clearly set forth the designers expectations that the skills listed on them are in fact what is needed to do those jobs. Hans' books, the SEALS book or the Commando one, both list historical templates with lots of skills and Perks that help operators do their jobs. As mentioned, check out GURPS Spec Ops for a 3e version; their are templates in many places which will help you. The shooting styles in Tactical Shooting (in fact, much of the discussion in that book on skill levels) is meant to answer some of the very questions cropping up in the thread. If other posters on the forums disagree about skills and their levels, so be it. They can play how they want. But really, that's the disconnect. The official meaning of the skills, levels, or their presence on the templates is not really a matter of debate. You can look at the link I posted earlier to see how Sean Punch, the GURPS line editor, uses the templates and skills in his own "realistic" campaign.

Tip: the posters here often mean well, but some insist on pushing their unofficial interpretations as gospel, or don't know the rules as well as they claim. The forums are very friendly and useful, but I wouldn't put a lot of stock in those who argue with the books. That way lies madness.

[Kraydak]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

"Full-time education" is not the same as "intensive training".

I meant full time as in eating/sleeping/eduction, with enough R&R to stay sane and functional (which is vital when you start talking about multi-month/year training programs). 25 days at 8 hours/day=200 hours. One month is just about the minimum time for gaining 1 cp in any sort of sustained education environment.

Originally Posted by Þorkell

Two comments.

1. What usual +4 TDM?

2. In what I've read about special ops selection there is this intense navigation and endurance component to it. The selectees have a map and compass and get orders to go to place A, then when they get there they get orders to another place, etc. etc. To me that's no Dabbler level of training.

1. The +4 TDM that gets quoted for every roll ever anywhere (except in stressful situations) by the stat-normalization cult and, IIRC, confirmed by Kromm.

2. How long is this component? 1 full month of nothing but navigation problems (both classroom and in the field)? Then maybe 1 point.

[TheOneRonin]

Originally Posted by safisher

You need to look over this document, specifically page 10 and following.
http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...7&postcount=21

I've got a copy, and it is a FANTASTIC resource.

I used it as a basis for my template, if you couldn't tell by looking at it.

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Kraydak

How long is this component? 1 full month of nothing but navigation problems (both classroom and in the field)? Then maybe 1 point.

Land nav is built into the training, throughout, rigorously tested, and routinely re-tested and retrained. You must pass basic skill levels or you are a "no-go." As servicemen will tell you, you will fail training courses without mastering this skill, Further, it's listed in Fairbairn Close Combat Systems and in SEALs in Vietnam.