Skill Default Issues

[Grouchy Chris]

Originally Posted by Owlglass Moot

ISSUE 3: "ADVENTURING SITUATION" IN SKILL LEVEL EXAMPLES

You are correct on this one, and other people have said that perfectly well, but I wanted to expand on something, which might make it easier for your player to understand. A base skill of 12 or 13 is defined as professionally competent for most occupations. That does not mean that a professional is expected to have an effective skill of 12 or 13 when trying to accomplish something in the game. Instead, you should expect Task Difficulty Modifiers (B345-6) to raise or lower your chance of success quite frequently -- depending on how your GM, maybe most of the time. One of those TDMs is being in a situation where there is no time pressure and no great consequences -- in other words, in non-adventuring situations.

But my player's interpretation is that "If they meant that, then they would have written 'someone who is competent at their job in an adventuring situation."

Did you point him at the section on base skill vs. effective skill on B171? It explicitly refers to "adventuring conditions" right there.

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris

Did you point him at the section on base skill vs. effective skill on B171? It explicitly refers to "adventuring conditions" right there.

This is still a bit dodgy, because it depends on what kind of penalties the character can expect to see in their "profession". A typical civilian pilot can do fine with a level of 12 in most conditions, but a bush pilot who has to routinely operate in rough conditions and rough terrain might need a 14, and a military pilot could justify a 16 without too much difficulty.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by cosmicfish

... and a military pilot could justify a 16 without too much difficulty.

However, an awful lot of pilots have gone into combat with skill in the region of 12. That's why newbie fighter pilots tend to get shot down by more experienced ones.

[Witigis]

A bit off-topic:

As I do currently work on a Zombie-apocalypse setting myself, I have to admit that I am a bit skeptic about your campaign setting:
It would interest me how you handle combat in that setting. As at least one thread has shown, there is quite a big problem with default gun skills or even average skill against zombies (to-hit difficulties for classical head shots). With the gun skill you mentioned for the character of your friend he would almost need to stick his gun into the mouth of the beast for a successful hit (and he would probably fail this attempt, too).
You mentioned the intense use of NPCs in the first sessions, but I see the great danger, that this may just frustrate the players, frex if the seasoned SWAT-officer NPC just saved their skin (or brains) for the 57th time, while they just shot some holes in the air around the zombies head...
I am really interested in how other GMs handle this setting, so this is not thought as criticism to your planning, just interest in problem solution (and maybe I should open a new thread on this topic...).

[Ulzgoroth]

I think it's pretty simple: Using guns is a skill. If you want your character to be an effective shooter they need to be a shooter, not someone who's never handled a gun.

If you want to you can let PCs learn gun skill quickly once things are underway, but if they don't have the skill, they shouldn't expect to be effective.

Also, if you want your zombies to be individually not tough, don't make them headshot-dependent. Headshot slow-zombies can be massed fodder for high-powered combatants, but they're far from trivial for average joes to stop.

[Witigis]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I think it's pretty simple: Using guns is a skill. If you want your character to be an effective shooter they need to be a shooter, not someone who's never handled a gun.

If you want to you can let PCs learn gun skill quickly once things are underway, but if they don't have the skill, they shouldn't expect to be effective.

Also, if you want your zombies to be individually not tough, don't make them headshot-dependent. Headshot slow-zombies can be massed fodder for high-powered combatants, but they're far from trivial for average joes to stop.

Ah, well, I have probably been misunderstood.
In my campaign, every character has gun skill. I also decided to give the players some extra points earned in the first few sessions to boost their skill, especially I intend to use the Targeted Attack technique from Tactical Shooting (some of the characters have that for vitals, as they have a hunting background (and I am currently spending some thoughts on a gunfighter style for hunters, though this is not exactly gunfighting at all)).
After playing out some engagements just on paper, I also decided that the use of shotguns will in the beginning greatly enhance the survival chance of the characters.
While I am still going for destroy-the-head-is-the-only-sure-way-to-kill-a-zombie, it is still possible to do so by body hits alone, but using Injury Tolerance (Unliving) will make this more difficult.

Therefore, I do not have any problems at all with this setting, but I am still interested about how others have handled it... (Owlglass Moot, for instance...)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Witigis

With the gun skill you mentioned for the character of your friend he would almost need to stick his gun into the mouth of the beast for a successful hit (and he would probably fail this attempt, too).

This is a Telegraphic, All-Out Attack Determined using the weapon as melee (rather than ranged) weapon and gets +8 to hit. Good thing that Classic Slow Zombies can't defend and never take Waits!

EDIT: Oops! Um... Arr!

[Witigis]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

This is a Telegraphic, All-Out Attack Determined using the weapon as melee (rather than ranged) weapon and gets +8 to hit. Good thing that Classic Slow Zombies can't defend and never take Waits!

EDIT: Oops! Um... Arr!

Ah, good to know. I will remember that... :-)

[Kromm]

For this kind of thing, I've always gone with Move 2 slow zombies that don't dodge. The PCs can then safely Aim and brace (say, with a two-point sling) for every shot and, unless the zombies are within a couple of yards, use All-Out Attack (Determined). Also, don't forget RoF bonuses for shotguns. Joe Blow with Guns (Shotgun)-10 – "I shot a gun once!" – can get +3 for Acc, +1 for bracing, +2 for nine pellets, and +1 for AoA (Determined), and make headshots (-5) at 12 or less at 2 yards, 11 or less at 3 yards, or 10 or less at 5 yards. Throw on a reflex sight for another +1, if you like, and he'll be rolling 10 or less at 7 yards.

[Owlglass Moot]

Originally Posted by Witigis

A bit off-topic:

As I do currently work on a Zombie-apocalypse setting myself, I have to admit that I am a bit skeptic about your campaign setting:
It would interest me how you handle combat in that setting. As at least one thread has shown, there is quite a big problem with default gun skills or even average skill against zombies (to-hit difficulties for classical head shots). With the gun skill you mentioned for the character of your friend he would almost need to stick his gun into the mouth of the beast for a successful hit (and he would probably fail this attempt, too).
You mentioned the intense use of NPCs in the first sessions, but I see the great danger, that this may just frustrate the players, frex if the seasoned SWAT-officer NPC just saved their skin (or brains) for the 57th time, while they just shot some holes in the air around the zombies head...
I am really interested in how other GMs handle this setting, so this is not thought as criticism to your planning, just interest in problem solution (and maybe I should open a new thread on this topic...).

I'm using a variant of the living, infected, not-really-a-zombie zombie from 28 Days Later, The Last of Us, or The Crazies, for example. Any sort of damage can kill them, not just head shots, although they're still harder to take down than an average human. I doubt the issue of gun skills will come up much, anyway; gunfire is like ringing a dinner bell, so melee weapons will probably get a lot of focus.

As for your second worry, the NPCs are mostly a side-effect of having only two players—Not a whole lot of skill variety there. So a few of the NPCs are included to help out with skills that are probably needed, but which the PCs have zero experience with. Most of the rest are there for emotional/roleplaying sake or to serve as a buffer and rack up the body count. None of the NPCs are at all combat-savvy, so there's no real chance of them upstaging the PCs in that regard. Most of them are liabilities, now that I think about it. :\

Both of my players enjoy the idea of being Rick Grimes and leading a relatively inept group of survivors, I think, so this should be right up their alley! To help get a better idea of the "group":

• PC #1: The aforementioned over-employed math teacher.
• PC #2: A charismatic but sociopathic banker (think Patrick Bateman from American Psycho, without all the murder).

And the prospective NPCs, at least a few of whom will probably be dead by the end of the first session:

• The math teacher's son and emotionally distant wife.
• A drunk, haggard, salt-of-the-earth Walmart cashier.
• An acutely depressed boat captain.
• A neurotic, not-especially-skilled clinic doctor.
• A cowardly bartender.
• An awkward German engineer.
• A rude, selfish attorney (a.k.a. the d-bag in every zombie movie who gets most of the group killed).
• A helicopter mom and her horror movie-loving teenage son.

I'd enjoy hearing more about your campaign! Always looking for advice/tips/ideas/what-have-you.

Edit: I'm also incredibly excited about GURPS: Zombies, Kromm! I keep checking your LiveJournal every few days to see if a release date has been set.