Retired or renegade Soldiers

[MantazSectle]

Does a soldier O.C.C. character who, during gameplay, leaves the service in which he had been enlisted stop advancing in his current O.C.C.? Judging by the text, I'm rather inclined to think he does. One must remain in regular service and training to continue advancing as a soldier. That's why the mercenary fighter is noted as having the advantage of freedom.
But what do you guys think?

[ShadowLogan]

No you would continue advancing in the current OCC, unless you change Class either by choice or circumstances (megaversal examples: receiving more than 6-Magic Tattoos or suffering enough injuries that you can be considered a full conversion cyborg, etc).

Simply dropping out of regular service IMHO wouldn't automatically mean you'd have to change OCC, even if the character took up being a Mercenary (especially here) though some "careers" might require it/be a good idea (like if a Solider was granted the title of Knight).

[GoliathReturns]

Im going with Logan.. while many may not consider him a soldier anymore, his training and advancement (based on that training) would keep him a soldier.

While he may behave as a merc, and people may call him a merc, training and such will have him a soldier, unless he specifically abandons that sort of training to learn something else.

For most of the fighter OCCs, it doesn't make sense to abandon that training path, just to get another fighter OCC (with specific exceptions, like Knight or Palladin). It's not like the magic users, where you get an entirely new set of magic abilities.

--
GS

[Grazzik]

Does a soldier O.C.C. character who, during gameplay, leaves the service in which he had been enlisted stop advancing in his current O.C.C.? Judging by the text, I'm rather inclined to think he does. One must remain in regular service and training to continue advancing as a soldier. That's why the mercenary fighter is noted as having the advantage of freedom.
But what do you guys think?

First, the question of OCC vis a vis the work a PC does. Second, advancing.

No you would continue advancing in the current OCC, unless you change Class either by choice or circumstances (megaversal examples: receiving more than 6-Magic Tattoos or suffering enough injuries that you can be considered a full conversion cyborg, etc).

Simply dropping out of regular service IMHO wouldn't automatically mean you'd have to change OCC, even if the character took up being a Mercenary (especially here) though some "careers" might require it/be a good idea (like if a Solider was granted the title of Knight).

RAW - ShadowLogan is correct. The PC has the OCC they were written up with, unless there is a mechanic that allows for a circumstantial change, i.e. in Rifts there is full bionic augmentation, etc. The only RAW "retirement" option in Rifts is presented for City Rats in the Bionics SB pg 17. However, for PFRPG, the mechanic is in High Seas pg 10 for switching OCC.

In High Seas, when to switch is left to the player "at any point in his [the PC's] life". IMO it should be narrative driven - so a soldier that sells their sword post-retirement, no switch, but a soldier that opens an inn, switch. The Knight example ShadowLogan suggested is a good one to consider, as IMO a title is just words, no switch, but going through additional knightly training and learning/adhering to a code of honor to earn the title is a substantial change in the PC's world view and would likely suggest a new OCC.

Re advancement of skills. If there is no switch to a new OCC and the PC still pursues a different career path, as a GM, I'd likely look to the High Seas for guidance on skill deterioration. RAW, pg 10 says that, with an OCC switch, the old frozen skills don't deteriorate as they somehow get used. However, there are other sources, like the specific mechanics in Rifts, that say frozen skills deteriorate over time with an OCC switch. That said, there is no rule I'm aware of that expressly says what happens to skills if there is no switch but skills don't get used enough. So, if a PC is still under the original OCC, the presumption is that skills would continue to advance as normal, even if the work being done is notionally different, say a retired soldier becomes a tavern's bouncer. As GoliathReturns says, "While he may behave as a merc, and people may call him a merc, training and such will have him a soldier, unless he specifically abandons that sort of training to learn something else."

As a GM, I'd probably do a couple things as a house rule - use the approach of unused skills deteriorating towards their base skill % and/or apply a skill penalty depending on when the last time the PC used the skill. Darthauthor has posted a number of topics about how to encourage players into using underserved skills by plot. I see the story plot can be the "carrot" and skill penalties as the "stick" for this.

Hope this helps.

[MantazSectle]

It does help. This is all stuff worth considering.

[Veknironth]

Well, I think that if you start as a sldier OCC, then you will continue with that whether you are with an army or not.

-Vek
"Simple."

[ShadowLogan]

For most of the fighter OCCs, it doesn't make sense to abandon that training path, just to get another fighter OCC (with specific exceptions, like Knight or Palladin). It's not like the magic users, where you get an entirely new set of magic abilities.

--
GS

Going from Solider to Mercenary OCC can make sense, but overall I do agree that this particular change just doesn't make as much sense as something else (like Solider to Knight/Palladin). A Mercenary does get better Related/Secondary Skill advancement numbers, but their OCC it self is largely redundant in terms of skills (though they do get Expert instead of Basic: HTH, and a slightly better class bonus to pull) either directly or indirectly.

EDIT:
Plus factor in the Skill freeze/lock when you change OCCs even if you re-select them in the new OCC, you still need to reach the same level as in the old OCC to unlock/unfreeze them. Plus factor in the Level 0 to Level 1, and changing OCCs doesn't seem as worth it in this case.

[MantazSectle]

The merits of the switch may look a bit different in 1e.

No Expert or Basic HtH.

HtH Soldier is slightly better on bonuses than HtH Mercenary but doesn't get that kick attack (1d6 damage).

[MantazSectle]

I certainly plan to add in-game consequences for leaving the service early.
The character may incur a debt for gear for leaving early or gain an enemy because he has deserted the service he was obligated to fulfill.

[Grazzik]

I certainly plan to add in-game consequences for leaving the service early.
The character may incur a debt for gear for leaving early or gain an enemy because he has deserted the service he was obligated to fulfill.

Definitely consider the social aspects. IRL ancient armies used tattoos, marks, ritualistic scarring, or branding to affirm a recruit into the ranks. For example, in 4th c Rome...

The recruit, however, should not receive the military mark as soon as enlisted. He must first be tried if fit for service; whether he has sufficient activity and strength; if he has capacity to learn his duty; and whether he has the proper degree of military courage. For many, though promising enough in appearance, are found very unfit upon trial. These are to be rejected and replaced by better men; for it is not numbers, but bravery which carries the day. After their examination, the recruits should then receive the military mark, and be taught the use of their arms by constant and daily exercise.

There is debate what this mark may be - tattoos, brands, insignia, cingulum, etc. - but some traditions may have been imported from the lands conquered or from local auxiliaries leading to much diversity between how units identified themselves.

Regarding the armies of PFRPG, I could imagine similar traditions for a number of reasons - maintaining a sense of comradery, being able to track deserters, establishing one's credentials as a professional warrior, etc. So, if one were to break an oath of service, word could spread to watch out for the warrior with a certain mark as they are an oath-breaker. Some marks may be easier to discard than others - clothing and insignia, easy; brands or scarring, not so easily unless you use magic. Speaking of which, I'd even go so far as to suggest that some magic heavy forces may use mystic marks - the spell speaks to "items" and "possessions", but in a fantasy world that includes slavery, that could theoretically extend to military slaves or indentured soldiers.

[Library Ogre]

If you leave the service, you'd still be a soldier with regards to skills, advancement, and so on. However, you'd wind up using some of the social aspects of mercenary fighters... you're not getting replacement gear anymore, nor a salary.

(This is part of why I think they should just be the same class)

[JuliusCreed]

One of the primary differences between a Soldier and a Mercenary is one of loyalty. If you're loyal to the Crown, you're a Soldier. If you're loyal to the Coin, you're a Mercenary. That being said, when a Soldier leaves the Service, he only stops being a Soldier on paper. More often than not, the training and routines of a Soldier's lifestyle become his quirks and habits as a civilian. Many ex-Soldiers even continue practicing many of their skills in a civilian capacity. After all, it's what they were trained to be good at.
As far as transitioning to a different OCC in the event a Soldier ever ends his service, I personally HR that the Optional OCCs of Peasant/Farmer, Vagabond, Merchant or Scholar, OR the Men of Arms OCCs of Mercenary or Thief may be switched to automatically. (ignore the multi-class rules for these classes ONLY) Should the retired Soldier wish to switch to any other OCC, standard multi-class rulings.