Forums of the Megaverse®

I'm curious as to how many GMs actually call for characters to use the Laser Systems (Communications: Laser) skill.

For years I've wondered why several skills are even in the skills section (Math, Basic and Math, Advanced especially) since they really don't add anything to the game (at least the games I run/play), and only seem to add to the time it takes to create the character in the first place.

I don't know, maybe I've been exposed to too much d20 system (which has it's own problems), but I'm wondering if it is time to consider renovating Palladium's skills section.

Rali wrote:I'm curious as to how many GMs actually call for characters to use the Laser Systems (Communications: Laser) skill.

For years I've wondered why several skills are even in the skills section (Math, Basic and Math, Advanced especially) since they really don't add anything to the game (at least the games I run/play), and only seem to add to the time it takes to create the character in the first place.

I don't know, maybe I've been exposed to too much d20 system (which has it's own problems), but I'm wondering if it is time to consider renovating Palladium's skills section.

why DON'T your have your characters use math?

Rali wrote:I'm curious as to how many GMs actually call for characters to use the Laser Systems (Communications: Laser) skill.

For years I've wondered why several skills are even in the skills section (Math, Basic and Math, Advanced especially) since they really don't add anything to the game (at least the games I run/play), and only seem to add to the time it takes to create the character in the first place.

I don't know, maybe I've been exposed to too much d20 system (which has it's own problems), but I'm wondering if it is time to consider renovating Palladium's skills section.

"I'm back from scouting the enemy, sir."
"Great! How many men do they have?"
"..."
"Well, how many?"
"More than ten."
"How many more?"
"... a lot?"
"You don't have the basic math skill, do you, private?"

Rali wrote:I'm curious as to how many GMs actually call for characters to use the Laser Systems (Communications: Laser) skill.

Every time it's necessary to use the skill.

In a Rifts setting it was used to set up a local area comms network.

Rali wrote:For years I've wondered why several skills are even in the skills section (Math, Basic and Math, Advanced especially) since they really don't add anything to the game (at least the games I run/play), and only seem to add to the time it takes to create the character in the first place.

I think it's pretty obvious why math is a skill. Others already pointed it out. Here's a couple others.
"Gasoline costs 100 credits per liter and I have 355 credits to spend."
"Wait a minute, I gave you a $20 and you only gave me $5 in change back. I should get $15."

Rali wrote:I don't know, maybe I've been exposed to too much d20 system (which has it's own problems), but I'm wondering if it is time to consider renovating Palladium's skills section.

I've never had a problem with the skills, really. I've even created some over the years.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:why DON'T your have your characters use math?

Basic Math is a skill that makes you look dumb.

Go to the market, buy a loaf of bread, a stick of butter, and a litre of milk.

How much does it cost? You'll only know 60% of the time (the average for first level characters).

Which means 40% of the time you could be getting ripped off and wouldn't even know. And you don't know because a skill like Basic Math forces you to roll on + / - . You can arbitrarily say, "well your character knows that stuff", but then what is the point of the skill? To roll against really high numbers? Only for multiplication/division?

And there are other factors for basic math making you look dumb too.
A genius with a 30 IQ still gets basic math wrong about 20% of the time (I think that's the percentage - don't have the book with me to check against). In essence it means that for him 2+2 = 4 only 80% of the time. Kinda dumb, eh?

Basic math (along with certain other skills, like pilot: robots and PA) should be a can-do / cannot do skill. Otherwise you just look dumb having it due to the rate of failure you're prone to.

Obviously there's some hyperbole involved here, but it's not far-off from the truth.

And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story. Skills are best served in three ways;

• To create character, beyond just personality, like using a home-brewed grooming skill to show your guy shaving with a straight-razor instead of some techno-auto-razor that performs the skill for you.
• To create or modify something, be it physical or meta-physical. You might create a house, or you might create a false persona; either way it's good to have skills that dictate how accurate/professional/beautiful you've done.
• To provide a mechanic for risk. Need to fly your jet through a canyon? Roll piloting. Need to calculate the trajectory of your rocket you strapped a test-pilot to? Roll advanced math.

These are my views on skills (useless or otherwise).

Dog_O_War wrote:Basic math (along with certain other skills, like pilot: robots and PA) should be a can-do / cannot do skill.

Every time a character counts the number of enemy soldiers you don't have the player roll math. If the character doesn't have math, he can't count the number of enemy soldiers; he'll have to find something else to convey the information.
Just like a character driving a car; you don't have the player roll every time he makes a right hand turn. But if the player doesn't have the pilot skill, he's not going to be able to pilot the car.

Dog_O_War wrote:Obviously there's some hyperbole involved here, but it's not far-off from the truth.

I disagree.

Dog_O_War wrote:And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story.

Like you said, it's a matter of playstyle.
Slowing down a game for trivial reasons is exactly what some player groups enjoy. As a result, the stuff is important to game's flow and story.

Natasha wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story.

Like you said, it's a matter of playstyle.
Slowing down a game for trivial reasons is exactly what some player groups enjoy. As a result, the stuff is important to game's flow and story.

Then include trivial stuff because you enjoy it, don't hoist it off on the rest of us as a skill a person must have.

And as to your other points; you're stating that most of the time you aren't rolling it anyways. Which is why I suggested it become a can do/cannot do skill.

Dog_O_War wrote:don't hoist it off on the rest of us as a skill a person must have.

I didn't hoist it off on anybody. I answered the OP's question.

Dog_O_War wrote:And as to your other points; you're stating that most of the time you aren't rolling it anyways. Which is why I suggested it become a can do/cannot do skill.

Yip. It seems to me that it's always been a can do/cannot do skill though....

Dog_O_War wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:why DON'T your have your characters use math?

Basic Math is a skill that makes you look dumb.

Go to the market, buy a loaf of bread, a stick of butter, and a litre of milk.

How much does it cost? You'll only know 60% of the time (the average for first level characters).

Only if your GM thinks that buying groceries is an unusually tricky task.
In which case, the problem is with the GM, not the skill.

And there are other factors for basic math making you look dumb too.
A genius with a 30 IQ still gets basic math wrong about 20% of the time (I think that's the percentage - don't have the book with me to check against). In essence it means that for him 2+2 = 4 only 80% of the time. Kinda dumb, eh?

It would be, if it worked that way, but it doesn't.
I think the only real problem here is that you don't understand the rules of the game.

And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story. Skills are best served in three ways;

• To create character, beyond just personality, like using a home-brewed grooming skill to show your guy shaving with a straight-razor instead of some techno-auto-razor that performs the skill for you.
• To create or modify something, be it physical or meta-physical. You might create a house, or you might create a false persona; either way it's good to have skills that dictate how accurate/professional/beautiful you've done.
• To provide a mechanic for risk. Need to fly your jet through a canyon? Roll piloting. Need to calculate the trajectory of your rocket you strapped a test-pilot to? Roll advanced math.

These are my views on skills (useless or otherwise).

Basic Math fits all of these.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:why DON'T your have your characters use math?

Basic Math is a skill that makes you look dumb.

Go to the market, buy a loaf of bread, a stick of butter, and a litre of milk.

How much does it cost? You'll only know 60% of the time (the average for first level characters).

Only if your GM thinks that buying groceries is an unusually tricky task.
In which case, the problem is with the GM, not the skill.

And there are other factors for basic math making you look dumb too.
A genius with a 30 IQ still gets basic math wrong about 20% of the time (I think that's the percentage - don't have the book with me to check against). In essence it means that for him 2+2 = 4 only 80% of the time. Kinda dumb, eh?

It would be, if it worked that way, but it doesn't.
I think the only real problem here is that you don't understand the rules of the game.

And the difference between counting your change and counting troops is....?
Your example is near-exactly the same as mine. The only real problem is that the skill is bunk in its use.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story. Skills are best served in three ways;

• To create character, beyond just personality, like using a home-brewed grooming skill to show your guy shaving with a straight-razor instead of some techno-auto-razor that performs the skill for you.
• To create or modify something, be it physical or meta-physical. You might create a house, or you might create a false persona; either way it's good to have skills that dictate how accurate/professional/beautiful you've done.
• To provide a mechanic for risk. Need to fly your jet through a canyon? Roll piloting. Need to calculate the trajectory of your rocket you strapped a test-pilot to? Roll advanced math.

These are my views on skills (useless or otherwise).

Basic Math fits all of these.

Says the guy who thinks that counting troop-numbers is a more valid use of basic math than counting change.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:why DON'T your have your characters use math?

It would only serve to slow down the game. So unless you're playing a game based on accountants and sales figures, you have a group of players from MIT, or your GM is a math geek, I don't really see what use it will play in the majority of games.

In it's defense, I suppose if you're an astronaut returning to earth in a Space Shuttle and who's found that they are off trajectory, having Math Advanced could come in handy to recompute a landing zone before your glide path drops you smack into LA traffic.

Natasha wrote:Every time a character counts the number of enemy soldiers you don't have the player roll math. If the character doesn't have math, he can't count the number of enemy soldiers; he'll have to find something else to convey the information.
Just like a character driving a car; you don't have the player roll every time he makes a right hand turn. But if the player doesn't have the pilot skill, he's not going to be able to pilot the car.

Ouch. That's pretty black-and-white. Unless you're playing a character that can't count past five, I'd say that anyone could count a number of enemy soldiers. Besides, counting is not a math skill. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc are math skills. Counting a group of soldiers would be more of a perception check than a math check; unless you are adding together several groups of enemy soldiers.

As for driving, with a little practice, anyone can get behind the wheel of a car and drive.

Natasha wrote:In a Rifts setting it was used to set up a local area comms network.

Couldn't you do the same thing with an Advanced Communications skill that also covered optics, cryptography, digital, etc?

Micromanaging skills slows down character creation and game play. Some may say that it removes colour from a character, but can't that be fixed with the characters background story?

Natasha wrote:I've never had a problem with the skills, really. I've even created some over the years.

Campaign/Game specific skills, if that's what you are referring to, shouldn't be counted as they are special cases.

Rali wrote:

Natasha wrote:Every time a character counts the number of enemy soldiers you don't have the player roll math. If the character doesn't have math, he can't count the number of enemy soldiers; he'll have to find something else to convey the information.
Just like a character driving a car; you don't have the player roll every time he makes a right hand turn. But if the player doesn't have the pilot skill, he's not going to be able to pilot the car.

Ouch. That's pretty black-and-white. Unless you're playing a character that can't count past five, I'd say that anyone could count a number of enemy soldiers. Besides, counting is not a math skill. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc are math skills. Counting a group of soldiers would be more of a perception check than a math check; unless you are adding together several groups of enemy soldiers.

In R:UE, counting falls under Math: Basic skill.
A Perception Roll might be to see if you count all of the enemy soldiers.

Rali wrote:As for driving, with a little practice, anyone can get behind the wheel of a car and drive.

If you've practiced enough to be basically proficient, then you should have the skill, and there are rules of the game that cover that. I suspect that's why it's generally a part of just about any O.C.C. skill list.

Rali wrote:

Natasha wrote:In a Rifts setting it was used to set up a local area comms network.

Couldn't you do the same thing with an Advanced Communications skill that also covered optics, cryptography, digital, etc?

Probably.

Rali wrote:Micromanaging skills slows down character creation and game play. Some may say that it removes colour from a character, but can't that be fixed with the characters background story?

Or with an O.C.C. skill.

In one of the books (I forget which one, Ninjas & Superspies maybe?) they give an example of knockout rules and say that the roll should be used in combat situations (ie, you have to roll the nat 20 to KO the mook with the nunchucks), but if your character is a fighter trying to KO an out of shape cabbie in a non-crucial scene, it's sometimes best to just say "yeah you KO the guy"
Seems like that logic would apply to stuff like math skills too.

Dog_O_War wrote:And the difference between counting your change and counting troops is....?
Your example is near-exactly the same as mine. The only real problem is that the skill is bunk in its use.

Wrong.
In my example, the guy didn't have the skill, so he couldn't count past his fingers.
In your example, the guy had the skill, but he still had to make a skill check for a basic function of the skill that doesn't require a roll.
Two very different situations.

If you don't have the skill at all, you can't perform basic functions of the skill.
If you DO have the skill, you can perform basic functions of the skill, and you have a percentage chance of pulling off more tricky stuff as well.

In your example, you had a SKILLED person making a percentage roll for a basic function of the skill.
That's not how things work.

Rali wrote:

Natasha wrote:Every time a character counts the number of enemy soldiers you don't have the player roll math. If the character doesn't have math, he can't count the number of enemy soldiers; he'll have to find something else to convey the information.
Just like a character driving a car; you don't have the player roll every time he makes a right hand turn. But if the player doesn't have the pilot skill, he's not going to be able to pilot the car.

Ouch. That's pretty black-and-white.

And it is correct.

Unless you're playing a character that can't count past five, I'd say that anyone could count a number of enemy soldiers. Besides, counting is not a math skill.

Rifts, 31
"Mathematics- Basic: Knowledge of basic math, including the ability to count, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and fractions."

(I'd let anybody count up to the number of fingers on their hands without the skill, but beyond that they'll only have a general guess.)

As for driving, with a little practice, anyone can get behind the wheel of a car and drive.

Not so much.
When trying to teach Africans to drive cars, for example, the British had a lot of trouble drilling into them notions like "speeding up to hit a pothole does not damage the car less."
Also, high-speed vision is acquired. Take somebody who has never been in a car before, put them inside and drive them around a bit, and their eyes can't track what's going on. To them, it looks a lot like they're making a Star-Wars-style Jump to Lightspeed.
Not to mention that a lot of the workings of a car are pretty much taken for granted by us, because we grew up in a culture that has so many cars we're all familiar with them.
We understand the gist of the various pedals, the steering wheel, and gear shift before we ever actually get behind the wheel, so it's pretty easy to pick up (more or less).
But for somebody completely (or almost completely) ignorant of cars, it's going to be tougher.

In any case, I would allow an unskilled person to steer a car, maybe drive an automatic transmission with some practice.
But any time a skill check was needed, they'd be in serious trouble, and they'd need to make checks more often simply because they're unskilled.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:And the difference between counting your change and counting troops is....?
Your example is near-exactly the same as mine. The only real problem is that the skill is bunk in its use.

Wrong.
In my example, the guy didn't have the skill, so he couldn't count past his fingers.
In your example, the guy had the skill, but he still had to make a skill check for a basic function of the skill that doesn't require a roll.
Two very different situations.

The situations were based on skilled/unskilled. If your troops-counter had the skill he'd still have to roll. If my change-counter didn't have the skill, his percentage of failure goes up from 40% to 100%. They weren't all that different.

Killer Cyborg wrote:If you don't have the skill at all, you can't perform basic functions of the skill.
If you DO have the skill, you can perform basic functions of the skill, and you have a percentage chance of pulling off more tricky stuff as well.

Dog_O_War wrote:but then what is the point of the skill? To roll against really high numbers? Only for multiplication/division?

Seems I said that already. And even then, this does not discount my genius example. Or the irrelivance of counting from 1 to 10 compared to counting from 10,001 to 10,010. It's a pointless skill that's better left to a can do/cannot do function, with advanced math being the skill you roll.

Killer Cyborg wrote:In your example, you had a SKILLED person making a percentage roll for a basic function of the skill.
That's not how things work.

Proof?

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Two very different situations.

The situations were based on skilled/unskilled. If your troops-counter had the skill he'd still have to roll.

Wrong.

If my change-counter didn't have the skill, his percentage of failure goes up from 40% to 100%. They weren't all that different.

Again wrong.

Killer Cyborg wrote:In your example, you had a SKILLED person making a percentage roll for a basic function of the skill.
That's not how things work.

Proof?

First and foremost, common sense.
You're falling for the trap a lot of people get into. You're looking at a vague section of the rules and choosing the way that makes the least sense, then complaining about all the problems that arise from taking that interpretation.
For the most part, Palladium doesn't mention when to use skills, leaving most people in the dark about when exactly they're supposed to roll those percentile dice.
This is bad on Palladium's part.
But left to their own devices, people decide for themselves when to roll those dice.
For example, when do you roll your "Pilot: Auto" skill checks?
When you're sticking the key in the door?
When you're turning the key in the door?
When you're opening the door?
When you're getting into the car?
When you're belting yourself in?
When you're putting the key in the ignition?
When you're trying to start the car?
When you're actually driving the car?
Every 1' of driving distance? Every 10'? Every 100'?

I'm betting that you've never made a player roll a skill check for every single one of these things.
You recognize that there are a lot of aspects of a skill that don't require an actual roll.
You, like everybody else, make a choice about when you think the appropriate time to roll a skill check is.
And for some reason, you're making choices that do not make sense to you.
The rest of us (for the most part) are making choices that make sense to us.

Which way do you think the creators of the game intended it to work?
Are we supposed to choose to roll skill checks when it makes sense to us, or when it doesn't make sense to use?

Common sense says that we're supposed to make skill checks when it makes sense to us, when more than a basic function of the skill is being enacted.
You don't have to roll Basic Math checks to count to three, but you have to roll basic math checks when counting enemy troops, for example.


Secondly....
CMOPs p. 115

Question One: "How do you roll against one of your skills to find out if it succeeded or not? I am currently playing with a character appropriately named the Night Beast. Night Beast has 49% skill in pilot, automobile. How do I know if he was able to drive the car or crash it? I get very frustrated in Road Hogs when I am unable to use a skill because I don't know how to roll against one."

Answer: The simple answer is that you roll a percentile. A result under your skill level (1-49) means your character succeeds at whatever is being attempted. Rolling a number above the skill level (in this case, 50-00) means that the attempt fails.

However, you don't roll all the time. You only roll when the character is facing some sort of challenge or difficulty. For example, let's say that Night Beast is planning to drive a car he's never driven before, say the latest luxury car from Detroit.
There are two possible situations.
In the first, the car is parked in an empty parking lot on a Sunday evening, he's got all the time in the world, and he can take a few minutes getting used to the controls, and then test driving the car around the parking lot. Does he have to roll? No! He already knows pilot, automobile, so he just has to spend a minute or two to get a feel for that particular car. Many cars have a different feel to them. If you're used to driving a big car, jeep, truck or van, there is a moment of disorientation when one drives a smaller car because the vehicle is much smaller and lower to the ground.
However, what if Night Beast is in hot pursuit of some bank robbers? He runs out of the bank and spots a friend of his. "Here, take my car," says the friend, tossing Beastie the keys. Same new luxury car, but now Night Beast is trying to operate a totally strange vehicle in a big hurry. In this case he might need a roll to start the car, another roll to drive it successfully, and perhaps a few more rolls during the pursuit, particularly when trying to make a special move, like a sudden turn.
Likewise, Night Beast driving his usual vehicle, in normal traffic, at normal speeds, will never have to roll against his skill. On the other hand, if he starts driving in a dangerous manner, or makes an evasive action, or if he has to avoid an unexpected hazard, then you'll need to roll against the skill.

Going to the grocery score and buying groceries does not count as a "challenge or difficulty" for most people.

Killer Cyborg wrote:First and foremost, common sense.

Yeah, yeah - I know. My whole point is that basic math is common sense.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You're falling for the trap a lot of people get into. You're looking at a vague section of the rules and choosing the way that makes the least sense, then complaining about all the problems that arise from taking that interpretation.

It is not I that falls into the trap. The skill is so simple that it makes the most sense to have it as automatic, and yet it has a percentage attached. Why? I still see your troops-counting examples below, but see the following.

Killer Cyborg wrote:But left to their own devices, people decide for themselves when to roll those dice.
For example, when do you roll your "Pilot: Auto" skill checks?
When you're sticking the key in the door?
When you're turning the key in the door?
When you're opening the door?
When you're getting into the car?
When you're belting yourself in?
When you're putting the key in the ignition?
When you're trying to start the car?
When you're actually driving the car?
Every 1' of driving distance? Every 10'? Every 100'?

I'm betting that you've never made a player roll a skill check for every single one of these things.
You recognize that there are a lot of aspects of a skill that don't require an actual roll.
You, like everybody else, make a choice about when you think the appropriate time to roll a skill check is.
And for some reason, you're making choices that do not make sense to you.
The rest of us (for the most part) are making choices that make sense to us.

That "sense" though is contradictory to the logic of the situation. For instance, counting troops is not the same as guestimating the troop-total for large numbers of visible troops (at camp or on the move), or the likely compliment of troops inside a Death's Head. That type of stuff is covered under advanced math (as it is algebra).
(continued below)

Killer Cyborg wrote:Which way do you think the creators of the game intended it to work?
Are we supposed to choose to roll skill checks when it makes sense to us, or when it doesn't make sense to use?

I'ma guess at them not taking into account the frivolity of certain skills, as it's apparent in other aspects of the skill section as well. Some skills certainly belong there, despite the amount of actual use they will see; but this skill, as well as things like the thread-titled Laser Communications are little more than space-wasters.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Common sense says that we're supposed to make skill checks when it makes sense to us, when more than a basic function of the skill is being enacted.
You don't have to roll Basic Math checks to count to three, but you have to roll basic math checks when counting enemy troops, for example.

(continued - this is the example I was speaking of earlier)
You're still making a zero-case for this skill. If there were three troops, you wouldn't need this skill. But if there were 6 or 11 (depending on how many arms you had), it then requires a roll? As I stated previously; when would it require a roll? When the numbers are really high? Then it becomes almost impossible to use this skill in a meaningful amount of time. If there were 200 troops on the move, it'd take you close to 5 minutes just to count them accurately - most people will take an estimate, which (again) isn't covered by this skill. As I stated earlier, counting your change is an equally valid option, and yet is a complete waste of time to bother rolling for. The same goes with counting large numbers of troops, only it's a waste of time from an in-game perspective, and not representative of what a normal person would do in that situation (guestimate).

Killer Cyborg wrote:Going to the grocery score and buying groceries does not count as a "challenge or difficulty" for most people.

Neither does counting from 1 to 1000, or coins versus people
Which has been my point the entire time.

Nevermind.

If you think a skill is useless, remove it from your campaign.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:First and foremost, common sense.

Yeah, yeah - I know. My whole point is that basic math is common sense.

But it's not; it's a skill.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You're falling for the trap a lot of people get into. You're looking at a vague section of the rules and choosing the way that makes the least sense, then complaining about all the problems that arise from taking that interpretation.

It is not I that falls into the trap. The skill is so simple that it makes the most sense to have it as automatic, and yet it has a percentage attached. Why?

Why not?

Killer Cyborg wrote:But left to their own devices, people decide for themselves when to roll those dice.
For example, when do you roll your "Pilot: Auto" skill checks?
When you're sticking the key in the door?
When you're turning the key in the door?
When you're opening the door?
When you're getting into the car?
When you're belting yourself in?
When you're putting the key in the ignition?
When you're trying to start the car?
When you're actually driving the car?
Every 1' of driving distance? Every 10'? Every 100'?

I'm betting that you've never made a player roll a skill check for every single one of these things.
You recognize that there are a lot of aspects of a skill that don't require an actual roll.
You, like everybody else, make a choice about when you think the appropriate time to roll a skill check is.
And for some reason, you're making choices that do not make sense to you.
The rest of us (for the most part) are making choices that make sense to us.

That "sense" though is contradictory to the logic of the situation. For instance, counting troops is not the same as guestimating the troop-total for large numbers of visible troops (at camp or on the move), or the likely compliment of troops inside a Death's Head. That type of stuff is covered under advanced math (as it is algebra).

Actually, that would be covered under the Intelligence skill.

But if you're looking at 5 transports with 20 people each, you need to know how to either count up to 100, or you need to know how to multiply 5x20.
So you need to roll for that?
That would depend on how much time you have, and/or how many of them are shooting at you.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Which way do you think the creators of the game intended it to work?
Are we supposed to choose to roll skill checks when it makes sense to us, or when it doesn't make sense to use?

I'ma guess at them not taking into account the frivolity of certain skills, as it's apparent in other aspects of the skill section as well. Some skills certainly belong there, despite the amount of actual use they will see; but this skill, as well as things like the thread-titled Laser Communications are little more than space-wasters.

You keep saying that Basic Math is a space-waster, but I keep showing that it's not.

As for Laser Communications, the only reason that's a space-waster is because AFAIK there aren't any laser communication devices in Rifts.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Common sense says that we're supposed to make skill checks when it makes sense to us, when more than a basic function of the skill is being enacted.
You don't have to roll Basic Math checks to count to three, but you have to roll basic math checks when counting enemy troops, for example.

(continued - this is the example I was speaking of earlier)
You're still making a zero-case for this skill. If there were three troops, you wouldn't need this skill. But if there were 6 or 11 (depending on how many arms you had), it then requires a roll? As I stated previously; when would it require a roll? When the numbers are really high?

Whenever the counting is a "challenge or difficulty."
Like driving a car, it depends on how much time you have and what you're dealing with.
If you're looking at a picture of 15 CS soldiers on parade, you can count them out without any trouble; there's no rush.
When you're catching a <1 second glimpse of 15 CS soldiers marching towards you, there's a rush.
You probably wouldn't need to roll in order to get a rough estimate ("a dozen or more"), but you'd need to make a check if you wanted to go for precise numbers.

Or, yes, when the numbers are really high.
If you're looking at 150 CS soldiers marching in formation, and you don't have a decent amount of time, you could make a skill roll then too.

Or if you're drunk.
Or if you're flying or driving past something and trying to count while on the move.
Or if you're trying to mentally add/multiply/divide large numbers in your head.

Or any other time where whatever you're trying to do with the skill could be considered challenging or difficult.

Then it becomes almost impossible to use this skill in a meaningful amount of time. If there were 200 troops on the move, it'd take you close to 5 minutes just to count them accurately - most people will take an estimate, which (again) isn't covered by this skill.

If you have more than 5 minutes, no roll is needed.
If you have less than 5 minutes, then a roll is needed.
Unless you're just going for an estimate, in which case the skill alone is enough without a roll.

As I stated earlier, counting your change is an equally valid option,

Only if you're in a big hurry, and/or somebody is shooting at you, or there are some other circumstances that make it an extraordinary situation.

and yet is a complete waste of time to bother rolling for.

I'm betting your characters don't often notice when local merchants rip them off.

The same goes with counting large numbers of troops, only it's a waste of time from an in-game perspective, and not representative of what a normal person would do in that situation (guestimate).

If you're guestimating, you don't need to roll, so there's no waste of time.
If you're trying to get precise numbers, then you need to roll, but either you need that level of precision so the roll is not unnecessary, or you don't need that level of precision and it's the character/player to blame for counting instead of estimating.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Going to the grocery score and buying groceries does not count as a "challenge or difficulty" for most people.

Neither does counting from 1 to 1000, or coins versus people
Which has been my point the entire time.

So you don't make a roll for those times; only roll when it's challenging or difficult.
It's pretty simple.

Dog_O_War wrote:Basic math (along with certain other skills, like pilot: robots and PA) should be a can-do / cannot do skill. Otherwise you just look dumb having it due to the rate of failure you're prone to.

I'd like to point out that according to the description of Mathematics: Basic I should have a pretty high %, but I still mess up or need a calculator every once-in-awhile.

I'm also guessing that since you consider the mecha piloting skill to be a can-do/can't-do then you'd likely consider Piloting: Automobile to be the same thing, but how many experianced drivers screw that up everyday?

I will agree with you that the skills should start off higher than they do. That's one of my few gripes about Palladium in general.

The Beast wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:Basic math (along with certain other skills, like pilot: robots and PA) should be a can-do / cannot do skill. Otherwise you just look dumb having it due to the rate of failure you're prone to.

I'd like to point out that according to the description of Mathematics: Basic I should have a pretty high %, but I still mess up or need a calculator every once-in-awhile.

I too use a calculator, but I don't need it. I'm betting you don't need it either, but use one to save time for large multipliers and divisions.
Only when I hit algebra, vectors, etc... do I usually require assistance. And your right; we do mess up once in a while; but is it worth noting that, "oh hey - I thought it was only 20 guys rather than 21" or "I forgot to add the tax on these groceries"?
That's what I'm getting at with the skill. You're almost never rolling it anyways due to the trivial aspect of it, but leaving it open with a percentage means that a vindictive or malicious GM could have you rolling for it all the time.

The Beast wrote:I'm also guessing that since you consider the mecha piloting skill to be a can-do/can't-do then you'd likely consider Piloting: Automobile to be the same thing, but how many experianced drivers screw that up everyday?

Have you read the description of Robots and Powered Armour?
Generally responds to the characters' own movements. That's a line right in the skill. When you fly a SAMAS, you're using Pilot: Jetpack. When you're flying a Dragonwing (I think this is the transforming one), you're using pilot: Jet. When you track targets on the suit's HUD, you're using sensory equipment. When you're using the wing-mounted mini-missiles on a Flying Titan, that's weapon systems. Using pilot: robots and PA almost never comes up. If you considered running to be a challenge, then you might have to roll the skill, but then again, only cripples consider running to actually be a challenge, for obvious reasons.

Automobiles do not respond in the same way a suit of PA does. And as far as robots are concerned, the book leads you to believe that they react with a similar fluidity as PA.

The Beast wrote:I will agree with you that the skills should start off higher than they do. That's one of my few gripes about Palladium in general.

Some skills just make you look dumb because there is no difficulty chart, and we must go by the GM's arbitrations on these matters. As good as my GM is, he never remembers to offer a bonus here and there for those trivial stuff.



Also, as a note; I never said Basic Math was useless and should be removed. I called it a skill that makes you look dumb because of the chance of failure. I think it should still exist, but it should be an auto-skill; something that you either know, or you don't. But then I get responses from people showing that they don't really know what would constitute what belongs under the domain of that skill. Responses like this;

When you're catching a <1 second glimpse of 15 CS soldiers marching towards you, there's a rush.

This has time being a factor of the math percentage. This falls under memory, or rather an intelligence check. A person with a photographic memory succeeds on this automatically; a person without does not fail because he cannot count, he fails because memories are not infallible. A person with 100% (2% above the usual max. of 98%) can still fail because he might not have seen all the troops in that quick flash. It's not that he couldn't count, it 'cause he doesn't have a photographic memory.

Besides the above points; why is it that so many of you are completely adamant that basic math isn't a pointless percentage, when all of you admit to having it be automatic most of the time anyways?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:First and foremost, common sense.

Yeah, yeah - I know. My whole point is that basic math is common sense.

But it's not; it's a skill.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:You're falling for the trap a lot of people get into. You're looking at a vague section of the rules and choosing the way that makes the least sense, then complaining about all the problems that arise from taking that interpretation.

It is not I that falls into the trap. The skill is so simple that it makes the most sense to have it as automatic, and yet it has a percentage attached. Why?

Why not?

It's never rolled. That's why not. And by your own admission, and the admission of others, you guys don't use it a whole lot either. And from some of the examples here in the thread, it's either misused, or used in situations that are trivial, but considered a "challenge" because you're counting people with guns Far as I'm concerned, basic math does not consitute "counting under fire" - that's more of a fear-save thing.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Actually, that would be covered under the Intelligence skill.

But if you're looking at 5 transports with 20 people each, you need to know how to either count up to 100, or you need to know how to multiply 5x20.
So you need to roll for that?
That would depend on how much time you have, and/or how many of them are shooting at you.

Again; basic math does not equate to a cool head under fire. Or even speed-counting. Like the micro-machines guy from those commercials in the early 90's, just because he can talk fast does not mean he has a greater grasp on the English language than an English professor. Just means he talks fast.
And to put this in a math-based comparison, just cause you used binary to get to 10 before I did using base-10, does not make you a better mathematician.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You keep saying that Basic Math is a space-waster, but I keep showing that it's not.

Wrong.

Killer Cyborg wrote:As for Laser Communications, the only reason that's a space-waster is because AFAIK there aren't any laser communication devices in Rifts.

Right.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Whenever the counting is a "challenge or difficulty."
Like driving a car, it depends on how much time you have and what you're dealing with.
If you're looking at a picture of 15 CS soldiers on parade, you can count them out without any trouble; there's no rush.
When you're catching a <1 second glimpse of 15 CS soldiers marching towards you, there's a rush.

**discredited in the post above**

Killer Cyborg wrote:You probably wouldn't need to roll in order to get a rough estimate ("a dozen or more"), but you'd need to make a check if you wanted to go for precise numbers.

Yay. a 40% chance for the average person to fail at counting to 15, and a 20% chance for the genius to fail counting to 15

Dog_O_War wrote:a vindictive or malicious GM

Thrash the GM, not the skill.

Natasha wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:a vindictive or malicious GM

Thrash the GM, not the skill.

He may only be feeling that way on a particular day because the players took advantage of him. Can't condemn a person for a single mistake, but you can help to prevent future ones.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Natasha wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:a vindictive or malicious GM

Thrash the GM, not the skill.

He may only be feeling that way on a particular day because the players took advantage of him. Can't condemn a person for a single mistake, but you can help to prevent future ones.

It was a light-hearted comment, but you have a point... the GM shouldn't repeat the mistake of being taken advantage of.

Um... for those who say basic math is common sense?
Ya.
Um...
How long do they teach basic math in school?
Do children learn it through osmosis or something where you're from?
Do you ever "fail a roll" irl, or are you always so great with it you never, ever make a mistake?

Dog_O_War wrote:

When you're catching a <1 second glimpse of 15 CS soldiers marching towards you, there's a rush.

This has time being a factor of the math percentage. This falls under memory, or rather an intelligence check.

So you'd rather somebody try to roll under their IQ score on percentile dice than to roll a Basic Math check?

A person with a photographic memory succeeds on this automatically; a person without does not fail because he cannot count, he fails because memories are not infallible.

1. How many characters in your games have photographic memories?
2. A person with a photographic memory will remember what he has seen, but he still has to count what he has seen.
Which means that he still has to count quickly, if the soldiers are walking towards him.

Besides the above points; why is it that so many of you are completely adamant that basic math isn't a pointless percentage, when all of you admit to having it be automatic most of the time anyways?

Most skills are automatic most of the time.
Why would that make the percentages pointless?
The percentages aren't there for "most of the time," they're there for the rest of the time.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:First and foremost, common sense.

Yeah, yeah - I know. My whole point is that basic math is common sense.

But it's not; it's a skill.

As has been pointed out, you really think that schools spend 8+ years teaching kids something that is already common sense?

Far as I'm concerned, basic math does not consitute "counting under fire" - that's more of a fear-save thing.

You're certainly free to make up whatever rules you want, but I'm discussing Palladium's rules.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Actually, that would be covered under the Intelligence skill.

But if you're looking at 5 transports with 20 people each, you need to know how to either count up to 100, or you need to know how to multiply 5x20.
So you need to roll for that?
That would depend on how much time you have, and/or how many of them are shooting at you.

Again; basic math does not equate to a cool head under fire.

The better your math skill, the less cool you need to keep.

Or even speed-counting.

Wrong.
Counting is counting.
The better you are, the faster you can do it well.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You keep saying that Basic Math is a space-waster, but I keep showing that it's not.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Whenever the counting is a "challenge or difficulty."
Like driving a car, it depends on how much time you have and what you're dealing with.
If you're looking at a picture of 15 CS soldiers on parade, you can count them out without any trouble; there's no rush.
When you're catching a <1 second glimpse of 15 CS soldiers marching towards you, there's a rush.

**discredited in the post above**

Wrong.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You probably wouldn't need to roll in order to get a rough estimate ("a dozen or more"), but you'd need to make a check if you wanted to go for precise numbers.

Yay. a 40% chance for the average person to fail at counting to 15, and a 20% chance for the genius to fail counting to 15

I believe you have mistaken eye-rolling for an argument.
Let me know when this is corrected.

Okay. It seems that any skill is as useful/useless as the GM decides to make them in their campaign, and their omission wouldn't change that.

Rali wrote:Okay. It seems that any skill is as useful/useless as the GM decides to make them in their campaign, and their omission wouldn't change that.

That is very much the case.
Well said.

killgore wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:Basic Math is a skill that makes you look dumb.

Go to the market, buy a loaf of bread, a stick of butter, and a litre of milk.

How much does it cost? You'll only know 60% of the time (the average for first level characters).

Which means 40% of the time you could be getting ripped off and wouldn't even know.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you actually went over your store receipts?
Think about it.

I do the math in my head before I get to the counter. Then I check my change. It's quick and easy to do because I have a good memory, and use counting tricks (like totaling 1.95 as 2 and then taking off the 0.05 after I've gotten an easy total).

Also, you're only pointing out that you'd be an easy mark

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:First and foremost, common sense.

Yeah, yeah - I know. My whole point is that basic math is common sense.

But it's not; it's a skill.

As has been pointed out, you really think that schools spend 8+ years teaching kids something that is already common sense?

Someone needs to go back to school
That's 12 years for nearly everyone in North America. You didn't really need to make that 12 into "8+", as adding 4 more didn't require an estimate or a guess. After 12 years of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, I kinda hope the basics of it are trivial and common sense - otherwise why did we just send our kids to school for those 12 years?

And as stated, most of the time the uses are basic (counting troops for example ), so why force a roll? Of course, saying this very line is just repeating myself, so the answer will invariably be redundant and predictable from you.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Far as I'm concerned, basic math does not consitute "counting under fire" - that's more of a fear-save thing.

You're certainly free to make up whatever rules you want, but I'm discussing Palladium's rules.

There is no ruling stating that basic math requires a roll when under-fire, or that you don't need to roll when things are considered trivial. That you're wanting to make people roll for trivial things when they might be shot at (though getting shot at is trivial for a merc., the person likely counting those troops) seems to be the only made-up rules here.


I would continue, but you're offering that your arbitrary rulings are greater than my own, or others as far as this discussion is concerned.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:As has been pointed out, you really think that schools spend 8+ years teaching kids something that is already common sense?

Someone needs to go back to school
That's 12 years for nearly everyone in North America. You didn't really need to make that 12 into "8+", as adding 4 more didn't require an estimate or a guess.

Kindergarten through 7th grade = 8 years.
In 7th-8th grade, some people have moved on to algebra, which is where Advanced Mathematics starts. By this time, they pretty much have Basic Math down.
On the other hand, sometimes people are still having trouble with counting, addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc., so they take more than 8 years to get Basic Math down.

Were you still learning basic math in your junior or senior year of high school?

After 12 years of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, I kinda hope the basics of it are trivial and common sense - otherwise why did we just send our kids to school for those 12 years?

And as stated, most of the time the uses are basic (counting troops for example ), so why force a roll?

As I already said; performing basics under unusual circumstances can be difficult, hence the roll.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Far as I'm concerned, basic math does not consitute "counting under fire" - that's more of a fear-save thing.

You're certainly free to make up whatever rules you want, but I'm discussing Palladium's rules.

There is no ruling stating that basic math requires a roll when under-fire, or that you don't need to roll when things are considered trivial.

The rule is that you make skill checks in any challenging or difficult situation, and only in such situations. I've told you where the rule is at, and I've quoted it for you.
You can deny the rule's existence, but that doesn't change reality.

Making a precise head-count of enemies when you're under fire is challenging and/or difficult (assuming there are more than a few out there).

I would continue, but you're offering that your arbitrary rulings are greater than my own, or others as far as this discussion is concerned.

I'm going by the book: you make skill checks when a situation is challenging or difficult.
If you don't think that counting enemies accurately when you're being shot at is challenging, then don't run things that way.
If you don't think that counting or basic math is EVER challenging or difficult, under any circumstances, then you're not thinking things through.

Dog_O_War wrote:I too use a calculator, but I don't need it. I'm betting you don't need it either, but use one to save time for large multipliers and divisions.
Only when I hit algebra, vectors, etc... do I usually require assistance. And your right; we do mess up once in a while; but is it worth noting that, "oh hey - I thought it was only 20 guys rather than 21" or "I forgot to add the tax on these groceries"?

That depends on the situation.

That's what I'm getting at with the skill. You're almost never rolling it anyways due to the trivial aspect of it, but leaving it open with a percentage means that a vindictive or malicious GM could have you rolling for it all the time.

So the rule is broken because a bad GM can screw it up?
I guess ALL rules are broken, then.

Meanwhile, read what you said: "ALMOST never rolling it."
Which means that sometimes, you do.
So there should be a mechanism in place for you to use the skill, whether or not you normally need it.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Dog_O_War wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:As has been pointed out, you really think that schools spend 8+ years teaching kids something that is already common sense?

Someone needs to go back to school
That's 12 years for nearly everyone in North America. You didn't really need to make that 12 into "8+", as adding 4 more didn't require an estimate or a guess.

Kindergarten through 7th grade = 8 years.
In 7th-8th grade, some people have moved on to algebra, which is where Advanced Mathematics starts. By this time, they pretty much have Basic Math down.
On the other hand, sometimes people are still having trouble with counting, addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc., so they take more than 8 years to get Basic Math down.

Were you still learning basic math in your junior or senior year of high school?

Learning - no. Practicing - yes. In school, as apart of the class. Infact I took alot of math in school, both during the time I was supposed to be in high-school, and outside of it. That's K-11 (which I took during school) that offered every course had basic math attached to it, and only with more advanced maths in grades 10, 11, and 12 (which I took after my high-school years as day/night courses) did they skip the simple stuff and move on to the complex items. I'm assuming that it won't deviate far from this (beyond semantics, such as calling grade 9 "high-school"). Am I wrong that almost every high-school offers 3 levels of math?

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Far as I'm concerned, basic math does not consitute "counting under fire" - that's more of a fear-save thing.

You're certainly free to make up whatever rules you want, but I'm discussing Palladium's rules.

There is no ruling stating that basic math requires a roll when under-fire, or that you don't need to roll when things are considered trivial.

The rule is that you make skill checks in any challenging or difficult situation, and only in such situations. I've told you where the rule is at, and I've quoted it for you.
You can deny the rule's existence, but that doesn't change reality.

Again, I didn't deny it - I only questioned your subjectivity of it.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Making a precise head-count of enemies when you're under fire is challenging and/or difficult (assuming there are more than a few out there).

Which is both subjective and arbitrary to assume that a person can count "a few" without rolls while under fire, but not could "more than a few" under the same circumstance.
Or that an unskilled user can count "a few".

Killer Cyborg wrote:

I would continue, but you're offering that your arbitrary rulings are greater than my own, or others as far as this discussion is concerned.

I'm going by the book: you make skill checks when a situation is challenging or difficult.
If you don't think that counting enemies accurately when you're being shot at is challenging, then don't run things that way.
If you don't think that counting or basic math is EVER challenging or difficult, under any circumstances, then you're not thinking things through.

Your not listening.
I'm saying that the skill does not come up often enough to constitute having it there as a rolled-based skill, not that it cannot be challenging or difficult - and you went so far as to state that you quoted me as saying such.

You've already stated that lack of uses is a disqualifier in your books (as per your comments about laser communications), I view this skill as the same, though I do see a need for it as a precursor to Advanced Math. That's why I believe it should be automatic.

Dog_O_War wrote:Learning - no.

Well, there ya go.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Making a precise head-count of enemies when you're under fire is challenging and/or difficult (assuming there are more than a few out there).

Which is both subjective and arbitrary to assume that a person can count "a few" without rolls while under fire, but not could "more than a few" under the same circumstance.
Or that an unskilled user can count "a few".

Virtually all skill checks are ultimately subjective.
One GM might believe that trying to start a car while being garroted from the back seat would require a roll, some might not.
Some might think that sneaking past a sleeping (or merely sleepy) security guard requires a skill check, some might not.
I don't see how Basic Math is any different from any other skill in that regard.

I'm saying that the skill does not come up often enough to constitute having it there as a rolled-based skill, not that it cannot be challenging or difficult - and you went so far as to state that you quoted me as saying such.

It comes up, therefore there is a need to have a mechanism for resolution.

You've already stated that lack of uses is a disqualifier in your books (as per your comments about laser communications),

Different situation.
It's not that a person with the laser communication skill wouldn't need to make checks, it's that there are no laser communication devices in Rifts that I'm aware of.
In any situation where the players would have access to such a device, the skill makes sense.

I view this skill as the same, though I do see a need for it as a precursor to Advanced Math. That's why I believe it should be automatic.

And I disagree with you, for the reasons I've said.
Sometimes you might need to roll a Basic Math check.
Whether it's often or not really doesn't matter, because there's no downside.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:why DON'T your have your characters use math?

Basic Math is a skill that makes you look dumb.

Go to the market, buy a loaf of bread, a stick of butter, and a litre of milk.

How much does it cost? You'll only know 60% of the time (the average for first level characters).

Which means 40% of the time you could be getting ripped off and wouldn't even know. And you don't know because a skill like Basic Math forces you to roll on + / - . You can arbitrarily say, "well your character knows that stuff", but then what is the point of the skill? To roll against really high numbers? Only for multiplication/division?

And there are other factors for basic math making you look dumb too.
A genius with a 30 IQ still gets basic math wrong about 20% of the time (I think that's the percentage - don't have the book with me to check against). In essence it means that for him 2+2 = 4 only 80% of the time. Kinda dumb, eh?

Basic math (along with certain other skills, like pilot: robots and PA) should be a can-do / cannot do skill. Otherwise you just look dumb having it due to the rate of failure you're prone to.

Obviously there's some hyperbole involved here, but it's not far-off from the truth.

And another point besides the above is that it slows down play for a very trivial reason. As some of the examples presented indicate, you're rolling on stuff that is unimportant to both the games' flow, and the story. Skills are best served in three ways;

• To create character, beyond just personality, like using a home-brewed grooming skill to show your guy shaving with a straight-razor instead of some techno-auto-razor that performs the skill for you.
• To create or modify something, be it physical or meta-physical. You might create a house, or you might create a false persona; either way it's good to have skills that dictate how accurate/professional/beautiful you've done.
• To provide a mechanic for risk. Need to fly your jet through a canyon? Roll piloting. Need to calculate the trajectory of your rocket you strapped a test-pilot to? Roll advanced math.

These are my views on skills (useless or otherwise).

Basic math would get a roll for something like adding up the box car numbers on a passing train. For basic stuff under ordinary circumstances, it's a gimme that the character is gonna get it right. Situational modifiers are a seriously wonderful thing for basic skills.

Just throwing my support behind Killer Cyborg, and as anyone knows it kills me to do so.

Basic Math: 60% does not mean that the player thinks 2+2=5 40% of the time. It means that under challenging conditions that would require a skill roll he may or may not (based on the roll) be able to come up with the answer at that time under those conditions. He can use another action and try again, or he can just wait until the external challenges have passed and he has plently of time to do the basic math (no roll needed).

If you have ever been in a high stress situation you can probably relate. No one forgets how to say "hello" under normal conditions. I've seen friends forget how to open their mouth when they meet women. For them Speech: Basic required a roll...and they failed.

Jesterzzn wrote:Just throwing my support behind Killer Cyborg, and as anyone knows it kills me to do so.

Ha, ha!
You died a little inside.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Virtually all skill checks are ultimately subjective.
One GM might believe that trying to start a car while being garroted from the back seat would require a roll, some might not.
Some might think that sneaking past a sleeping (or merely sleepy) security guard requires a skill check, some might not.
I don't see how Basic Math is any different from any other skill in that regard.

Well, I thought that was the point. If were going to get subjective, lets get subjective about something cool...rather than basic maths.

Unless Kevin thinks basic maths is kewl - in which case, oh, one of the cool things about Rifts is supposed to be basic math...I didn't realise that before.

Noon wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Virtually all skill checks are ultimately subjective.
One GM might believe that trying to start a car while being garroted from the back seat would require a roll, some might not.
Some might think that sneaking past a sleeping (or merely sleepy) security guard requires a skill check, some might not.
I don't see how Basic Math is any different from any other skill in that regard.

Well, I thought that was the point. If were going to get subjective, lets get subjective about something cool...rather than basic maths.

None of the skills are cool, only the situations your character finds himself in where he needs to use the skills.

I'm inclined to say that skill use tends to influence what latter situations occur. Cool sounding skills will influence cooler situations to occur. Dull skills influence duller situations. Situation doesn't pop up by itself - it's (presumably) partly determined by prior skill use.

Jesterzzn wrote:Just throwing my support behind Killer Cyborg, and as anyone knows it kills me to do so.

You fool! You've killed us all!

Jesterzzn wrote:Basic Math: 60% does not mean that the player thinks 2+2=5 40% of the time. It means that under challenging conditions that would require a skill roll he may or may not (based on the roll) be able to come up with the answer at that time under those conditions. He can use another action and try again, or he can just wait until the external challenges have passed and he has plently of time to do the basic math (no roll needed).

Your example is exactly the kind of simplicity that we've been talking about though.
See, his example was that in a stressful situation, I suddenly forget that there's a 13 in between 12 and 14 40% of the time. That I would need to roll to count 15 troops with guns.
The whys of this are beyond me. Near as I can figure, the only reasons I can come up with have nothing to do with the math skill directly.
Not seeing a dude has nothing to do with the math skill and would cause a mis-count.
Yeah, that's all I've got for a reason to fail counting to 15 in a "stressful" situation. Even if God himself were leaning over my shoulder giving me a critique as I did it, I simply cannot believe a person could forget how to count; it quite literally is thee most basic function of math that we learn; it is impossible to forget.

Jesterzzn wrote:If you have ever been in a high stress situation you can probably relate. No one forgets how to say "hello" under normal conditions. I've seen friends forget how to open their mouth when they meet women. For them Speech: Basic required a roll...and they failed.

Forgetting a formality does not equal forgetting the basics of the system. That is (to use your example), your friend might not be able to say hello, but I doubt he forgot how to say hello.


I know this from experience...

Here's some situations where a skill roll on Basic math would be appropriate instead of arguing about counting CS troops.

CS citizen informant and NGR special ops want to meet up. "Let's meet at 21:00 NGR time" comes the message.
Citizen. OMG 21:00? huh??? is that? 21:00 (military time) - 12 = 9:00pm.. NGR is 7 hours ahead of us. We meet up at 2:00pm MY time.
Every day I have to do this as my GF lives in Russia. I make my 'check' 95% of the time, but 2 days ago I called her an hour early, because I failed my roll
I know way too many people who can't figure out military time (add or subtract 12 if PM).

Oh god, I'm grocery shopping... in Moscow 1 credit = 30 rubles. If I pay 250 rubles for this bag of doritos am I being ripped off?


What if you try to send money to yourself via Western Union/Moneygram, bcause it is safer than carrying it, but they don't accept a ruble->dollar exchange and I have to convert it to Euros first (this has happened to me in Real Life) Ruble->Euro->Dollar

Change fractions to % ok most of us know 1/2 = 50%, 1/4 = 25% But would you rather have 1/3 or 3/8 of the pie? 3/4 or 5/8?

I have a metric wrench set, but the bolt to my car's oil tank is the English system.

How many chickens and sheep for that e-clip?

If his @#$% is 17cm is that big or small?

Her online profile says she is 85kg....

All the examples are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and fractions and I bet a lot of people who know how to count, graduated from high school and college would get them wrong. I for one have an easy time thinking scientifically in metric and 'real world' in english system. It is only because of my current relationship that I am understanding "I am 190cm tall" and able to convert back and forth with little thinking. That's where my basic math is going up levels

If my player can figure it out fine, if not and their character has the skill... roll 'em.

ZorValachan wrote:Here's some situations where a skill roll on Basic math would be appropriate instead of arguing about counting CS troops.

CS citizen informant and NGR special ops want to meet up. "Let's meet at 21:00 NGR time" comes the message.
Citizen. OMG 21:00? huh??? is that? 21:00 (military time) - 12 = 9:00pm.. NGR is 7 hours ahead of us. We meet up at 2:00pm MY time.
Every day I have to do this as my GF lives in Russia. I make my 'check' 95% of the time, but 2 days ago I called her an hour early, because I failed my roll
I know way too many people who can't figure out military time (add or subtract 12 if PM).

Oh god, I'm grocery shopping... in Moscow 1 credit = 30 rubles. If I pay 250 rubles for this bag of doritos am I being ripped off?


What if you try to send money to yourself via Western Union/Moneygram, bcause it is safer than carrying it, but they don't accept a ruble->dollar exchange and I have to convert it to Euros first (this has happened to me in Real Life) Ruble->Euro->Dollar

Change fractions to % ok most of us know 1/2 = 50%, 1/4 = 25% But would you rather have 1/3 or 3/8 of the pie? 3/4 or 5/8?

I have a metric wrench set, but the bolt to my car's oil tank is the English system.

How many chickens and sheep for that e-clip?

If his @#$% is 17cm is that big or small?

Her online profile says she is 85kg....

All the examples are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and fractions and I bet a lot of people who know how to count, graduated from high school and college would get them wrong. I for one have an easy time thinking scientifically in metric and 'real world' in english system. It is only because of my current relationship that I am understanding "I am 190cm tall" and able to convert back and forth with little thinking. That's where my basic math is going up levels

If my player can figure it out fine, if not and their character has the skill... roll 'em.

I've already stated this; I said it was trivial to include this stuff - which it is. It does fill the game out more for verisimilitude, but can be little more than an annoyance for some players.
As well, a trivial reason to roll a skill is not a good reason to have a skill.
Otherwise where's my shoe-tying skill, or my shaving skill?

Dog_O_War wrote:

ZorValachan wrote:Here's some situations where a skill roll on Basic math would be appropriate instead of arguing about counting CS troops.

CS citizen informant and NGR special ops want to meet up. "Let's meet at 21:00 NGR time" comes the message.
Citizen. OMG 21:00? huh??? is that? 21:00 (military time) - 12 = 9:00pm.. NGR is 7 hours ahead of us. We meet up at 2:00pm MY time.
Every day I have to do this as my GF lives in Russia. I make my 'check' 95% of the time, but 2 days ago I called her an hour early, because I failed my roll
I know way too many people who can't figure out military time (add or subtract 12 if PM).

Oh god, I'm grocery shopping... in Moscow 1 credit = 30 rubles. If I pay 250 rubles for this bag of doritos am I being ripped off?


What if you try to send money to yourself via Western Union/Moneygram, bcause it is safer than carrying it, but they don't accept a ruble->dollar exchange and I have to convert it to Euros first (this has happened to me in Real Life) Ruble->Euro->Dollar

Change fractions to % ok most of us know 1/2 = 50%, 1/4 = 25% But would you rather have 1/3 or 3/8 of the pie? 3/4 or 5/8?

I have a metric wrench set, but the bolt to my car's oil tank is the English system.

How many chickens and sheep for that e-clip?

If his @#$% is 17cm is that big or small?

Her online profile says she is 85kg....

All the examples are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and fractions and I bet a lot of people who know how to count, graduated from high school and college would get them wrong. I for one have an easy time thinking scientifically in metric and 'real world' in english system. It is only because of my current relationship that I am understanding "I am 190cm tall" and able to convert back and forth with little thinking. That's where my basic math is going up levels

If my player can figure it out fine, if not and their character has the skill... roll 'em.

I've already stated this; I said it was trivial to include this stuff - which it is. It does fill the game out more for verisimilitude, but can be little more than an annoyance for some players.
As well, a trivial reason to roll a skill is not a good reason to have a skill.
Otherwise where's my shoe-tying skill, or my shaving skill?

Just do my very first example:

CS civilian and NGR operative. How is that trivial?
The CS civilian informant is a buisnessman and has NEEDED knowledge. Something big and bad is going down in Chi Town that could affect the NGR-CS trade agreement on a major scale.

Your NGR guy has German time and military time drilled into his head.
The CS civilian has 12 AM hours and 12 PM hours in CS time drilled into his head.

The NGR guy gives the CS guy a coded message stating: a place, and the time 21:00 NGR to drop off the information.
This communication is 1 way, there is no way for the CS guy to ask for clarification.
If is definately in character and in game reality for the GM to give it like this. it's not a GM screw over.

In CS guy gets it. The player doesn't understand.
Another player says 'hey i think 21 is military time'
Maybe another says, yeah and NGR is probably on a different time than CS.
But the players can't figure it out quickly. You as the GM don't want to just give the answer to the players, but don't want the players sitting around arguing all day on it. Knowing or not knowing the answer could lead to very interesting outocome depending on if they make or miss the drop off. So you say roll 'em. So CS guy rolls his % to see if his character figures it is 2:00PM.

if he does, all might go as planned

If he fails. he is there an hour early? and hour later? do CS counter-ops pop up? The GM then has a great opportunity for chase, trying to find the NGR op. etc.

This is not trivial use of the skill.

For some that is trivial. For some that unacceptably slows their game down.

The problem as we're seeing is that what is trivial means different things to different people.

Dog_O_War wrote:If my player can figure it out fine, if not and their character has the skill... roll 'em.

I've already stated this; I said it was trivial to include this stuff - which it is. It does fill the game out more for verisimilitude, but can be little more than an annoyance for some players.[/quote]

Then some players can ignore it.

As well, a trivial reason to roll a skill is not a good reason to have a skill.
Otherwise where's my shoe-tying skill, or my shaving skill?

Since the skill would only be rolled in non-trivial situations, I don't get where you're coming from.

Noon wrote:I'm inclined to say that skill use tends to influence what latter situations occur. Cool sounding skills will influence cooler situations to occur. Dull skills influence duller situations. Situation doesn't pop up by itself - it's (presumably) partly determined by prior skill use.

Counting how many shots your enemy has left in his clip isn't cool, then charging in when he's out of ammo isn't cool?

It's not the skill, it's what the situation is and how you use it.