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 09-03-2010, 03:53 AM   #21
Michele
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Udine, Italy
Default Re: Compulsory Specializations for Tactics

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
How so? They have at worst a -2 familiarity penalty for an unfamiliar environment.
I'm talking real life, not games.
Anyway, Familiarity in GURPS terms refers to using _equipment_.
And Strategy specializations default to each other at -4.
__________________
Michele Armellini
GURPS Locations: St. George's Cathedral
Michele is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2010, 08:03 AM   #22
Figleaf23
Banned
 
Figleaf23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Default Re: Compulsory Specializations for Tactics

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2 View Post
I'd say Professional Skill.
Yeah, maybe so.
Figleaf23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2010, 10:47 AM   #23
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Compulsory Specializations for Tactics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michele View Post
I'm talking real life, not games.
Ah, I misunderstood you, I thought you were arguing in favor of the RAW.
Quote:
Anyway, Familiarity in GURPS terms refers to using _equipment_.
Aircraft, Rifles, Submarines and so on are equipment. I can't see any other way by RAW that a rifle squad leader would be penalized if placed in charge of an SDV's AKVs.
Quote:
And Strategy specializations default to each other at -4.
Tactics doesn't have mandatory specialization.
sir_pudding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2010, 10:55 AM   #24
Michele
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Udine, Italy
Default Re: Compulsory Specializations for Tactics

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
Ah, I misunderstood you, I thought you were arguing in favor of the RAW.
Aircraft, Rifles, Submarines and so on are equipment.
Well...
And leeward shoals, hills, and the position of the sun relative to the most likely approach of the enemy bomber raid are not equipment. Nor are the weather conditions, nor a cold-eyed assessment of what your tired soldiers can be expected to do, nor the same assessment as what _the enemy's_ tired soldiers might be up to.
If Tactics was about using Rifles, why do we need that skill? Guns would suffice, right?

Quote:
I can't see any other way by RAW that a rifle squad leader would be penalized if placed in charge of an SDV's AKVs.

Tactics doesn't have mandatory specialization.
Oh, absolutely. Maybe some of the posters here are wondering if RAW is OK in this case. Note that with 3e, for instance GURPS WWII, Tactics did have compulsory specializations.
__________________
Michele Armellini
GURPS Locations: St. George's Cathedral
Michele is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
specialisation, specialization, tactics

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 02:26 AM.


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