[Sci-Fi] Managing the player that can have any skill

[ericthered]

Modular abilities gives you ready access to LOW skill. Unless this trait is taken by the sky-high IQ guy, you can maintain the challenge by requiring high skill. If you are dealing with an IQ monster, my condolences. You may wish to charge 20 for IQ without per and will, or to cap IQ and encourage talents. Talk it over with the player, express your concerns, and find out what the real core of the ability is: is he really going to need intelligence analysis.

Ensure that other players have equally super-human abilities. Make no mistake, this ability is super-human.

Combat will challenge this character: combat relies on high and specialized skills and non-skill abilities.

Remember that he WANTS to be a jack of all trades. Don't punish him, just let make sure the other players have fun.

Also, have you considered that he wants to be this kind of character specifically because you rely on obscure skills to guide the plot?

If you are concerned about denying the character the information unnecessarily, say "no, but ..." and give a way for him to get the information. It could even be a way to control the plot: you have to do this to get the info you need -- and you point them the way you want them to go. Also note that its likely that for high skill he'll need more information than is on the publically available internet. He'll have to buy a subscription to a medical or scientific journal. Really -- the free internet is pretty shallow when it comes to good, solid information. And the better information he needs, the harder to get it will get. Nickle and dime him away!

[Donny Brook]

I really urge you to just disallow it rather than to cruelly nerf it as most of the suggestions so far are urging.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I really urge you to just disallow it rather than to cruelly nerf it as most of the suggestions so far are urging.

I've not suggested nerfing the ability at all.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by weevis

Yes, this was certainly helpful. I think you and Mailanka have it right that this fear/problem has do to with my approach to adventure design. I do find myself doing a lot of niche protection, for example. I don't know if this is bad -- maybe it is just my style. But it sounds like I can use this chance to take some other GM moves out for a spin.

I want to be clear about something: When I was giving my three options, it wasn't rhetorical, though it might have sounded that way. If you find that something is incompatible with your style, rather than changing everything about how you do, sometimes it's easiest to say "Look, my model cannot handle this, so I have to disallow this."

This is not a bad approach. In fact, saying no is the heart of a lot of good game design. Gameplay is often about adapting to limitations. Your problem is that this advantage removes a limitation that's fundamental to how you tend to build your games. It's like building a platformer where not falling into a pit is the core of the game, and then giving someone the ability to fly. It ruins the game. Naturally, if you want a game about a character who can fly, you need to remove "falling into the pit if you miss a jump" as a major gameplay element, but if you really like a game about falling into pits if you miss your jump, then you should remove the flight.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by ericthered

the free internet is pretty shallow when it comes to good, solid information.

Citation needed.

:)

[robkelk]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I really urge you to just disallow it rather than to cruelly nerf it as most of the suggestions so far are urging.

Well, yes ... but the OP said "P.S. I realize that I can disallow this advantage, but as you can probably tell from the above, I'd prefer to encourage people when they are interested in a trait. Just not sure how to manage it." Thus, disallowing the trait is a no-go.


If the ability is going to be nerfed, then I'd strongly suggest lowering its cost. Nerfing an ability is the GM adding Limitations to it, and the RAW is quite clear that Limitations reduce the cost of an advantage.

[Culture20]

Information-rich can lead to a needle in the haystack scenario if the PC needs a video of a certain skill *now* I'd suggest making him do some information gathering skill rolls before he obtain his modular skills.

[weevis]

I most appreciate the suggestions and experiences about how to manage a modular ability during game play. There have been some great ones! Many thanks.

Maybe I was too self-deprecating before, I've never run a game with this kind of modular ability, but I'm not saying I am the king of a strange GM-ing style where every moment pivots on a critical skill being absent. (And the best advice is therefore to break me of this terrible GM-ing habit.) Let me be more specific:

I play with a lot of newcomers to RPGs. In my experience when they are new they cannot reliably remember their own traits. (Some players never can.) Or maybe they remember "I'm a scientist-type," but it isn't obvious to them how to apply this to the puzzle in front of them. While it would be nice if I could give them a nice open-ended situation and they would solve it any way they wanted -- by consulting their skill lists, for instance, as would be logical -- in practice I write or at least tailor the adventure plan *after* the characters are done and spoon-feed them some avenues of attack based on their skills. At least I do this if there are any silences. This works well for me.

When I set up an encounter I go through what the PCs are good at and try to put some time into advance planning for what might happen if they follow their strengths. "Hmm... what if the demoman tries to blow this important thing up? I'll look up the rules for blowing up metal things." Or, "What if Con Man tries to bluff his way through? That would mess up this other part of the plot, so I'll need to make this NPC Indomitable." I'm pretty sure this is not an unusual approach, at least according to "How to be a GURPS GM" and similar sources.

I don't know how other GMs do things, but I find that when I don't do this kind of planning, I fall back on improv that is much worse. I'm more of a planner. The more I have to improv the more the game becomes filled with these boring faceless Skill-11 henchmen and this particular tavern that exists only in my imagination and is extremely fake. (OK, exaggerating, but you know what I mean. Don't you?)

I'm sure I can handle the modular ability and I'm excited to try, it just seems to make my planning style ineffective because this guy can have any skill. So it is hard for me to imagine what he will do as the options are very broad. And it would be interesting if he can have any skill. And I'll let him have it. I'm just not sure what it is going to be like. We might end up at that tavern.

[jason taylor]

Has anyone ever tried running a PC Kwaitz Haderach?

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by robkelk

Well, yes ... but the OP said "P.S. I realize that I can disallow this advantage, but as you can probably tell from the above, I'd prefer to encourage people when they are interested in a trait. Just not sure how to manage it." Thus, disallowing the trait is a no-go.

Yes, I remember, but he also said he didn't want to nerf. As between the two undesired alternatives, I'm urging disallowance as less fraught with troubles.

If the ability is going to be nerfed, then I'd strongly suggest lowering its cost. Nerfing an ability is the GM adding Limitations to it, and the RAW is quite clear that Limitations reduce the cost of an advantage.

That makes sense -- use the rules to create the ability the GM can live with while giving the player fair use for the price paid.