But we have no idea what Leadership (Tactics) *does*. It's just some random example specialization. It definitely *is* wrong for it to be Charisma if it's a Logic application, and there are cases of skills with multiple attribute pairings.

You could make an argument for it to be Intuition as well.

Being a Great Tactician isn't about charisma.

It's about Logic or perhaps Intuition.
Yes, great Tacticians are often charismatic, but that's really a side effect of being a good leader and not about their Tactical abilities.

I guess it depends if you're making up tactics on the fly or not. Intuition is awareness and speed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It's not an or so much as an and. If you remove Intuition, then you're removing creativity from the tactic or strategy. If you remove Logic, then you're removing the ability to think through the tactic or strategy to it's conclusion and likely result.

A logic based tactician or strategist would be by the book.

It’s one thing to be smart and initiative when it comes to coordinating your own actions, but cutting through the sounds of combat with a clear authoritative and encouraging voice is a Charisma based skill.

I’ve employed Tactics with the notion that it insures a mission is carried out with minimal problems by using it to prevent Glitches of teammates, as I stated earlier.

In fact the player with the high Leadership skill has gained Street Cred with a reputation of “you want a job to get done flawlessly? Hire Marko to lead them!”

Indeed. Direct Neural Interfaces do not exist.

Again, *if* that's even what Leadership (Tactics) is. I think that it makes the most sense for Leadership (Tactics) to mean 'in combat/action', and Leadership (Strategy) to be 'during planning', but that's just a ballpark guess, and the actual Tests would be something like 'Persuasion' anyway.

The problem is inventing an entire mechanic based on a specialization example. It's fine to make house rules, but I like to keep them well separate from the actual rules.

Back on the topic of Intimidation, I think that some people might be misunderstanding where the skill part of the skill fits in.

Just like how anyone can tell a lie, but not just anyone can make you believe that lie, anyone can make threats or mess a guy up. It doesn't take any skill to say, "If you don't _____, then I'll ______." The skill comes in looking into the person's eyes and dominating them. That's where the charisma comes in. The character who is doing the intimidating is going to make sure that the person talks, and, more importantly, that when they talk, it's not a line of crap. They'll make sure that the opposition backs down, and they'll make sure that it isn't a ploy to work in an ambush.

There's no special practice needed to smash a dude's fingers with the butt of your pistol, but to do in such a way that it reinforces your relative positions takes finesse. It's the difference between doing and saying something terrible, and being something terrible.

Well. That, and making the right threats, at the right time, believably. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It's a *skill*.

It's always nice if the only way to guess the game-mechanical uses of a skill is to look at the specialties for that skill.

More important.....

Why is Instruction an option for PCs? Come on, what % of PCs created have Instruction as a skill? Less than a fraction of a percent? It's also a very bland and boring skill. I don't see any potential for abuse in it.

I had one in SR2, as far as I know it was the only one in our gaming group that ever had it.

Fitted her role as a "Special Military Advisor" before her circumstances changed and she ended up in the shadows.

My Cyberlogician (SR4A) has it... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

How do you abuse Instruction?

Not sure you can. It's more a flavor skill, even if it does use up valuable BP.

A rare choice certainly, but not without applications.

I'd recommend it for –
– characters with high ratings in key skills (e.g. Dodge) to speed up the other PCs' advancement and reduce glitch probabilities
– characters in a magic-heavy team for the speedier sharing of spells
– characters with not a lot to do in their downtime besides make some extra cash off their abilities

And taking might even pay... Right place/right time karma for teaching a team mate a necessary skill for a job in record time?
Or because now the Charisma 1, troll gun toter, now has etiquette at 2 and doesn't screw up during meetings reducing everyone's pay by 1/2?
Or because there is now more reasons for the team to stick together?

I'd reward those actions, for sure. Hell, everytime he helps someone in training I would give the guy an extra Karma point for being a good team player, and chances for a second one for good roleplaying.

Its not as "exciting" as Firearms dice pool of over 9000, but it can give the players a very good reason for interesting intra party role playing situations.

This (emphasised section).

Leadership isn't about Logic or Intuition, it's about getting other people to agree and/or comply. It's incorrect to have a player roll Leadership (Tactics) to concoct a good plan. Specialisations cannot be separated from the base skill in this way – Leadership (Tactics) doesn't make one a better tactician just as Blades (Swords) doesn't make one a better swordsmith.

Well demonstrated.
Just as a high Blades skill allows a character to use the Sword to the utmost; Leadership-Tactics skill allows a character to use the “course of actions” to the utmost.
That’s why I use Tactics (in planned combat situations) to be used to prevent teammate Glitches – assuring everything goes according to plan, as oppose to creating the plan.

I do like that idea. It makes a supervisor-type team member useful.

You don't... Why would you want to?

Sadly, because Tutorsofts are so dominant, you can't really abuse it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Though if your group uses the skill learning rules. Getting extra dice from your instructor is very nice.

Because I find it greatly humorous to take a mostly useless skill and finding the one obscure overpowered way to employ that skill in order to break the game.

This may be a bit of a bad idea, but in one game I was playing, there were two equally valid plans at how to accomplish a run. The group couldn`t agree on which plan to use, so the GM got the two guys with the best charisma on each side, and had them use a leadership test, with bonuses from the other`s on that side as a possibility. This simulated a heated debate, and if they had it I would even argue that the tactics spec. could apply. The winner of the opposed test determined which plan we actualy did.

I know this isn`t the best way to do things, but it was a speedy, on the fly idea for an argument that was going nowhere. To each his/her own.