Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: flovor text vs die results
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
shardoglase
I'm not going to say its a problem because I have fun playing the game. But in this system the results you usually get from your dice dont seem to match the expectations from the flavor text. As an example a physical adept is supposed to be capable of things a mundane couldnt dream of pulling off. Then I look at imrproved ability and go at best 3 extra dice, 3 extra dice with a TN of 5 mean usually 1 extra success.

1 extra success thats not pulling off the fantastic thats being marginally better than the mundane, heck any time the mundane gets lucky(rolled good) he does just as good or better. So a pysad is slightly better than a mundane except when the mundane is having a fairly good day, not best day of his life just pretty good.

Heck the difference between top notch at a skill and the average in the skill is 3 dice which means 1 success which means very little. About the only time it seems to matter is when there are tons of penalties involved. The best dont seem to pull off the fantastic, the pull off the average in bad situations.

Again I'm not sure this is even a problem since we have fun, but it would be cool if the best could seem like the best more. If this does become a problem, I just dont know what to do. Drop the TN to 4, remove skill caps, return the improved ability power to pre-errata form where it could be up to skill level instead of up to 1/2 skill level. Maybe some of these, all of these.
Garrowolf
Since it's magic you could replace the extra dice with extra hits. You still have a chance of glitches and not meeting some thresholds but over all you would do better. I would reduce the number of dice they get verses hits or make it more expensive or something.
shardoglase
If it was just magic, I could do that. My point is it applies to lots of other things, a skill of 6 is the best of the rest, a skill of 3 is just professional. The best of the rest on average gets only 1 more success than mr average professional. It just seems kind of odd. Now sure the best might have good stats and be tweaked a bunch so this gap widdens. But I guess it just seems wierd to me that 3 extra dice the difference between a average pro, and mr best of the rest is so small in effect.

Its not effecting game play in any negative way that I'm aware of or at least it hasn't yet, it just seems a bit wierd. Maybe I'm just noticing it since no one has a tweaked out character there all just slightly above average pros. So far there havent been any instsant kills from 20+ dice master whatever. It is just a few extra dice one way or the other and whoever has the couple extra dice edge usually does a little bit better. But a few dice should seem like a lot since a few dice is the difference between average pro and best of the rest, a few dice is the most a physad is getting from improved ability. A few dice seems like it should be a big deal, but its not.
kzt
QUOTE (shardoglase)
If it was just magic, I could do that. My point is it applies to lots of other things, a skill of 6 is the best of the rest, a skill of 3 is just professional. The best of the rest on average gets only 1 more success than mr average professional. It just seems kind of odd. Now sure the best might have good stats and be tweaked a bunch so this gap widdens. But I guess it just seems wierd to me that 3 extra dice the difference between a average pro, and mr best of the rest is so small in effect.

It's an effect of using linear results. You get much different results in gurps or hero from a +3, where you are modifying the target number of 3d6 curve. (They are both more complex systems in many other ways also. The 15 point magician quality becomes a 100+ point set of powers in hero unless you fiat it, as one conversion did.)

A way to get a more dramatic effects from skills is to limit the attribute dice used to the level of the skill and limit total successes to skillx2 (see table on page 69). You also need to ensure that the typical 2-3 hits from a professional-veteran ARE enough to typically do the job under most circumstances that you'd expect a fairly competent person to be able to succeed.
laughingowl
Remember the intent is not a 'super-heros' game.

Magic isnt meant to be the 'end-all be all' but does make a person notably better.

look at any of the uber X threads and 90% likely it will be an Adept smile.gif (unless it is a full-blown mage).

Now I will say the hard-caps on SR do make it so that even elite prime+++++ runners are only moderately better then green runners in their 'focus', the primes are just ALOT more rounded out.

SR4 does help limit the 'super-hero' aspect that older verision could get with time/karma/money after character creation.
laughingowl
YEah the fixed caps do limit the range of 'newbie - professional - expert)

As mentioend, look at the table on page 69.


1) Consider the skill rating limits total hits line. This alone can make a HUGE differne in a skill 3 and a skill 6. on the potential for effect.

2) Look at changing the rule of 6. If you want 'professionals' to be better. Considering allowing: any dice from 'skills' (and possibly magic/ware/feats that add to skills) to always follow the rule of 6. (requires tracking attribute dice and skill dice seperately but gives 'skill' alot more bang for the buck).

3) Another option to open up the 'range' some is allow 'team-worker' test to be done by the same individual'. It can 'slow' the game down alot, unless carefully thought out and perhaps 'generalized'

But instead of just being a gun-bunny
Agility 9, Pistols 6.

Look at doing such things a:


Knowledge Skill: Close Quarters Combat Tactics

Now the 'Special Force Expert' Makes the first test and can get an extra die for his 'shots' due to better use/understanding of tactics.

It will slow the game down (a littel if you spend a fair amount of time planning the system up front and making it somewhat rigid) or lot (if you allow rolls (as oposed to automatic sucesses) and allow adlibing what skills might 'apply'

But can aid considerably 'expierenced' characters versus new green characters.

All (most obviously the last) would be house rules.. but have the base work laid out in RAW.....
Garrowolf
I saw a house rule somewhere that said your cap on your roll was your skill.

I personally limit the number of successes to the number of the dice pool but use a more cinematic rule of six. You always get to reroll 6s once but if you are using Edge then 6s are automatically two successes to the limit of the dice pool.

You could use your dice from the adept power like edge dice all the time. Basically think of the magical bonus to be guided more then normal effects.

You could change the ratio for trading hits if your skill is above say 4.

The other thing you could do is reduce the threshold on certain rolls for highly experienced characters or allow their rolls to have special effects.

Another thing you could do which might make things more complicated is get a different color dice for attributes then skills then lower the TN to 4 on the skill dice.

As for adepts being superhuman, cybered characters are much less balenced then adepts. They cost very little in karma to have much more. They are easier to upgrade and are harder to hurt. Besides Adepts are representing suerhuman characters in the first place. That's the point.

deek
In the RAW optional rules, it suggests having a skill limit to total successes of rating x 2. Serbitar suggested a rule of rating + 1, for the cap, which actually is a lot more realistic when you start looking at the numbers and probabilities.

In my current game, we have been using a skill cap of rating + 1. I just created a new positive quality that allows a character with the Aptitude quality to change the skill cap to rating x 2 (cost of 10 BP or 20 Karma).

This has worked great in our group. It really shows a difference between someone with a rating 1 skill and a rating 6. It also caps a defaulting skill to 1 total success. Which to me and my group, makes sense...
Lantzer
deek, bear in mind that those house rules mean that a character with no perception skill (who could still be tossing 6-9 dice due to Intuition and bonus dice) will be incapable of noticing a guy walking down the street.

A normal perception check has a threshold of 2.
kzt
QUOTE (Lantzer @ Oct 4 2006, 12:59 PM)
deek, bear in mind that those house rules mean that a character with no perception skill (who could still be tossing 6-9 dice due to Intuition and bonus dice) will be incapable of noticing a guy walking down the street.

A normal perception check has a threshold of 2.

That's why I noted that you had to fiddle with the thresholds. There are some odd things in there, and that is one.
deek
QUOTE (Lantzer)
deek, bear in mind that those house rules mean that a character with no perception skill (who could still be tossing 6-9 dice due to Intuition and bonus dice) will be incapable of noticing a guy walking down the street.

A normal perception check has a threshold of 2.

True, but I think there has to be some context around that. Someone with no perception, meaning they are defaulting, would have trouble seeing the guy walking down the street with other people around. If the guy was the only one on the street, I likely wouldn't force anyone to make a check.

I see what you are pointing out, but normally if something "requires" a perception check, it is not blatantly obvious. A perception check being rolled, to me, means it is something that a character wouldn't just notice, and therefore someone with no perception skill is defintely lacking in the ability to notice anything that is not right in his field of view.

Mistwalker
I have to agree with Deek,

For a lot of things, you don't need to make a perception check. Does the traffic sign have graffity on it? Yes. Is the cop armed? Yes, pistol in the holster.

But, you would need to be able to see/notice small details (perception). Hidden in the graffity is a message. The gun in the holster is the wrong type for Knight Errant.

It's all in the details.

Lantzer
A quibble, Mist - I was just going by the rules. Seeing/Noticing small details is actually a higher threshhold. Big obvious things are threshold 1.

You make perception tests when it _matters_ - for things that are easy to notice and and things that are not. When it doesn't matter you can hand wave it.

So for an example (I'm not sure on the precise thresholds - I dont have my book handy.)
So is the cop armed? 2 hits, sure.
3 hits - the holster is unbuckled and ready to draw
4 hits - its the wrong kind of gun

When the cop is in a crowd, add more hits to the threshhold.
If the cop has the new day-glow orange uniforms and is shouting into a bullhorn, subtract hits from the threshold.

Busy chatting up your Johnson at the time? -2 dice to the pool, but the threshholds don't change. Dark out? Noisy? subtract visibility penalties from the dice pool, but again leave the thresholds alone.
Crusher Bob
Your thresholds are way out of line, imho. getting 4 sucesses with any regularity would basically require the pinnacle of human perception (12 dice). The sucess percentages for 'profesional' skill level are:

0 ~9%
1 ~ 26%
2 ~ 33%
3 ~ 22%
4 ~ 8%
5 ~ 2%
6 ~ 0

So, someone whose job it is to notice stuff (like say, a bodyguard) would only notice that someone was openly carrying a weapon around 65% of the time.
WhiskeyMac
That makes sense though. You can't always see something everytime you look, even if you know it's there. Kinda like those magic eye puzzles or those flippable multi-picture collage things. The one that springs to mind is the old lady/young lady picture. I know both are there but it takes me time (more perception tests) to discern between the two (successes). I only called for perceptions tests if it was important to the storyline, the players requested more information about an area/target or I just wanted to make them sweat. biggrin.gif
Crusher Bob
From a game design point of view, I'm generally in favor of PCs with a professional level of skill in something doing simple things automatically. Imagine if you were in a game, had a 'prefessional' level of perception, and some guy openly carrying a weapon walked up to you without you noticing. Either the GM is screwing with you, or your professional level of perception just sucks ass. Your next character is going to have 'expert' levels of perception. Why? so you don't look like a gimp again.

This kind of feedback loop is what makes players want to have superhuman levels of skill in many things, haveing only professional skill is usually not good enough, even for simple things.
blakkie
QUOTE (Crusher Bob @ Oct 5 2006, 07:37 AM)
....the pinnacle of human perception (12 dice)....

I'd like to welcome you to the world of super duper contact lenses and keeno earbuds. Twelve dice is barely into decent territory, before Edge. Also although having boosted Intuition isn't particularly common it can be via spell, and there are other ways to torque up your Perception pool. Absurdly so if you are an Adept.

I'm not saying that the rules for detecting concealed weapons are good. Because I think they are an excellent example of how NOT to use the fixed TN system. Just saying that 12 dice isn't in anyway a pinnacle of anything other than mediocrity.
Crusher Bob
More than 12 dice is greater than human perceiption. If your adept has a perceiption of 20 dice, then he should be able to notice thing that an unmodified human has no chance of noticing.
Garrowolf
An adept with a 20 perception could even notice that he was a character in a RPG!


"Wait! I hear that strange dice sound in my head again!"

"That shouldn't have worked!??! Has somebody changed the rules of physics on us?"

"Has anybody else noticed that life seems to be running more stream lined but the available equipment in stores has dropped considerably?"

Inu
Just because it's possible to boost your dice pools up that high, doesn't mean the system should require you to do so... unless what you're doing is truly superhuman. That is the way of White Wolf, my frieds, where to guard against twinks they guaranteed that everyone would become one. We do not want to go that way.

So yes, while 20 dice is possible, even at chargen, I'd rather have a 'regularly achievable by a skilled yet normal, unmodified human' threshold be 1-3, not 4-5.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
Just saying that 12 dice isn't in anyway a pinnacle of anything other than mediocrity.

Hardly - it may not be the best you can get, but mediocraty is 2 dice: Intution 3 and no Perception.
blakkie
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (blakkie @ Oct 6 2006, 07:08 AM)
Just saying that 12 dice isn't in anyway a pinnacle of anything other than mediocrity.

Hardly - it may not be the best you can get, but mediocraty is 2 dice: Intution 3 and no Perception.

rotfl.gif Your top....clueless....post....ever.
Critias
Uhh, no, Blakkie. By definition, that's mediocre. That's the average. The human norm. An Intuition of 3, and no skill points -- ta-da, welcome to the world of mediocrity.

A 12 is the best 99% of humans will ever get at something. The other 1% will have the Qualities needed for a 14, instead (but statistically 2 dice isn't all that huge a difference, and not-really-ironically that's the original poster's point).

The core mechanic of the game, or at least the flavor text attached to that core mechanic, should be balanced not just around the uber min/maxed munchkin with every piece of gear, the best attributes, the most twinked out edges and flaws, and stacked technological and magical enhancements, but balanced around the "good but not ridiculously great" power scale. Why? Because all that magic and cyberware pushes you into the realm of the superhuman, by definition. And since we don't have those superhumans in real life, those superhuman skill levels shouldn't be required by the probability curve of a game system in order to pull of routine, or even difficult, tasks that people in real life are capable of.

If your average beat cop in real life can spot someone carrying a gun with fair reliability, for instance, then you average beat cop in Shadowrun (using the core stats given for an average beat cop) should be able to do the same. It shouldn't take a 7 attribute, a 7 skill, maxed out visual modifications through technology, a quickened spell providing further boosts, and the expenditure of an above-average Edge point to pull it off.
blakkie
QUOTE (Critias @ Oct 6 2006, 10:08 AM)
Uhh, no, Blakkie.  By definition, that's mediocre.  That's the average.  The human norm.  An Intuition of 3, and no skill points -- ta-da, welcome to the world of mediocrity.

Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training. As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.
QUOTE
A 12 is the best 99% of humans will ever get at something.

A couple hundred nuyen.gif gives +3 dice. So what about 9 dice? You know, roughly 1/2 of maximum augmented Skill + Attribute? nyahnyah.gif
Shrike30
QUOTE (dictionary.com)
Mediocre

me-di-o-cre  /midi-o-k-r/ [mee-dee-oh-ker]

–adjective
1. of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate. 
2. rather poor or inferior. 


QUOTE (blakkie)
Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training. As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.


Insisting that an average human "perceives" as well as a "professional" seems a little odd. Most people are not all that aware of their surroundings, since they don't believe they have a need to be.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training.  As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.

Better check again:
QUOTE (SR4v3 @ p. 108, Skill Ratings Table)
Rating 0 Untrained:
The general baseline of knowledge shared by society. This is not incompetence, it is the standard level of untrained knowledge held by any Joe Average.
GWCarver
Also, an actively perceiving character gets a +3 bonus. An average human with no skill would get 5 dice and a pro would get 9 with out any gear modifiers.

Though, I do agree it would be nice to have a slightly larger difference between a world class skill and a professional skill than just one average hit.
kzt
QUOTE (Critias)
And since we don't have those superhumans in real life, those superhuman skill levels shouldn't be required by the probability curve of a game system in order to pull of routine, or even difficult, tasks that people in real life are capable of.
[...]
If your average beat cop in real life can spot someone carrying a gun with fair reliability, for instance, then you average beat cop in Shadowrun (using the core stats given for an average beat cop) should be able to do the same.

That's been a traditional Shadowrun issue. SR1 designers seemed to have failed Intro to statistics. SR4 is better.


But cops are the obvious people who do have preception skill in real life. They train to see things that most people don't. And they do.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (GWCarver)
Also, an actively perceiving character gets a +3 bonus. An average human with no skill would get 5 dice and a pro would get 9 with out any gear modifiers.

Indeed. It is worth noting that Joe Average, if distracted, has no Perception Dice at all... except for things that stand out.
blakkie
QUOTE
QUOTE
QUOTE (blakkie)
Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training.  As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.

Better check again:
QUOTE (SR4v3 @ p. 108, Skill Ratings Table)
Rating 0 Untrained:
The general baseline of knowledge shared by society. This is not incompetence, it is the standard level of untrained knowledge held by any Joe Average.

I did. Apparently you didn't? rotfl.gif

But even setting aside that bizzaro section of descriptions the basic fact of reality of the game, the actual rules, is that somewhere in the 7-9 dice range is the border between mediocure and good (for Skill+Attribute alone). For pretty much any Skill.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
QUOTE
QUOTE
QUOTE (blakkie)
Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training.  As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.

Better check again:
QUOTE (SR4v3 @ p. 108, Skill Ratings Table)
Rating 0 Untrained:
The general baseline of knowledge shared by society. This is not incompetence, it is the standard level of untrained knowledge held by any Joe Average.

I did.

Try again.
And, while you are at it... think about what 'average' means.

QUOTE (blakkie)
But even setting aside that bizzaro section of descriptions the basic fact of reality of the game, the actual rules, is that somewhere in the 7-9 dice range is the border between mediocure and good (for Skill+Attribute alone). For pretty much any Skill.

Very funny.
If by 'mediocure' you mean 'solid', one could agree.
An Attribute of 4 and a Skill of 3 will get you far, an Attribute of 5 and a Skill of 4 even farer.
That matches up to the descriptions, too.
blakkie
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Oct 6 2006, 12:44 PM)
QUOTE (blakkie)
QUOTE
QUOTE
QUOTE (blakkie)
Last I checked 0 Skill was zippo training.  As in inferior. As in less than of moderate quality.

Better check again:
QUOTE (SR4v3 @ p. 108, Skill Ratings Table)
Rating 0 Untrained:
The general baseline of knowledge shared by society. This is not incompetence, it is the standard level of untrained knowledge held by any Joe Average.

I did.

Try again.
And, while you are at it... think about what 'average' means.

Oh I have. Average Joe is a figure of speech. It isn't saying that Average Joe always has every Skill at zero. Zero skill is the bottom of the ladder for Skill. It isn't a moderate amount, which is the meaning of mediocure. It is poor skill, which by definition is below mediocure.

It's great that the word twisting, out of context, cutting off his nose in spite of it Rotbart van Dainig is back. Whooooot!
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
But Average Joe isn't "average".

rotfl.gif
Of course, you are perfectly right:
Joe Average has 'standard' level of skill, which is 'normal' and thus, 'average'.
"Average" Skill Level, by the book, for starting PC and NPC however, is 'Professional' level of skill... as those are expected to be professionals.

QUOTE (blakkie)
Zero skill is the bottom of the ladder.

No, that's where the 'Unaware' level steps in...

QUOTE (blakkie)
It's great that the word twisting, out of context, cutting off his nose in spite of it Rotbart van Dainig is back. Whooooot!

Well, I humbly appreciate your try to tell us that Joe Average isn't average. grinbig.gif
blakkie
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Oct 6 2006, 01:00 PM)

QUOTE (blakkie)
But Average Joe isn't "average".

rotfl.gif
Of course, you are perfectly right:
Joe Average has 'standard' level of skill, which is 'normal' and thus, 'average'.
"Average" Skill Level, by the book, for starting PC and NPC however, is 'Professional' level of skill... as those are expected to be professionals.

You know what, some Average Joes are bouncers. As in this is their job. As in they get paid to notice. Sort of pros as it were.
QUOTE
QUOTE (blakkie)
Zero skill is the bottom of the ladder.

No, that's where the 'Unaware' level steps in...

I was just coming back to put Edit in that qualifier. I was pretty sure you'd bring it up since you are the king of nitpick to the point of losing perspective. rotfl.gif Yes, Incompetent, as in exceptionally clueless.
QUOTE
QUOTE (blakkie)
It's great that the word twisting, out of context, cutting off his nose in spite of it Rotbart van Dainig is back. Whooooot!

Well, I humbly appreciate your try to tell us that Joe Average isn't average. grinbig.gif

Having poor skill is Average Joe. It is ordinary person that happens to have no improvement in that particular skill. Once again poor isn't mediocure.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
Having poor skill is Average Joe. It is ordinary person that happens to have no improvement in that particular skill. Once again poor isn't mediocure.

'medicore' ranges about from 'moderate' to 'negligible'.
I don't really see it that far from 'poor', depending on the context.
blakkie
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Oct 6 2006, 01:13 PM)
QUOTE (blakkie @ Oct 6 2006, 09:09 PM)
Having poor skill is Average Joe.  It is ordinary person that happens to have no improvement in that particular skill. Once again poor isn't mediocure.

'medicore' ranges about from 'moderate' to 'negligible'.
I don't really see it that far from 'poor', depending on the context.

Ah yes, ranges! As in up to down, down to up. As in up to 7 or 9, because there is a whole lot of upside after that. And yes, on the bottom end butting up against poor. But for crying out loud, Attribute 3 and 0 Skill (meaning a 1 die penalty) doesn't strike you as poor?

I think I'll step off your Crazy Train now. wobble.gif sleepy.gif dead.gif
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (blakkie)
As in up to 7 or 9, because there is a whole lot of upside after that.

As in 2-4.

QUOTE (blakkie)
But for crying out loud, Attribute 3 and 0 Skill (meaning a 1 die penalty) doesn't strike you as poor?

Average capability indeed is poor.
Shrike30
Average capability is poor at accomplishing something complex. The average person is going to have trouble dinging a target at 400 yards with a rifle. The average person is going to have trouble driving their car at 30+ MPH on icy roads. The average person is going to have trouble running three miles in under half an hour without exhausting themselves. The average person is going to have trouble hacking a computer.

In the same way, the average person is going to have trouble reliably percieving things like open-carry firearms if they're not looking for them. As obvious as y'all think walking around with a gun on your hip might be, I've been amused at the number of times I've been doing it (in a house or other location where it's legal, mind you) and had a friend or relative say to me after half an hour or more "Oh! Have you had that on this whole time?"

People actively looking for something get that nice +3 modifier. Statistically, that works out to "Joe Average" being about as good at spotting things when he's looking for them as a professional is when he's just hanging out.

The frequency of spotting checks is also important here. If "Joe Average" only has a one in five chance of spotting something, it's not going to happen too often. But if he's re-checking every combat turn, the odds of him having found it within, say, a minute are pretty good.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Shrike30)
The frequency of spotting checks is also important here.  If "Joe Average" only has a one in five chance of spotting something, it's not going to happen too often.  But if he's re-checking every combat turn, the odds of him having found it within, say, a minute are pretty good.

Actually, in that case, the 'Try again' rule would result in the loss off dice, and eventual inability to find anything.
Shrike30
My understanding of the "try again" rule is that it's optional, and intended for situations where you're really meant to be judging if someone is *capable* of doing something or not.
Rotbart van Dainig
In fact it's a regular mechanic, but after a certain time off, there is no penalty.
Critias
Only in Blakkieland is Average Joe not actually average.
blakkie
QUOTE (Critias @ Oct 6 2006, 11:34 PM)
Only in Blakkieland is Average Joe not actually average.

Hrmmm, you replied before finishing reading the thread so far? love.gif

Or have you jumped on the Crazy Train by copycatting Rotbart's inability to process English. Twice i guess. Although you're not really needed Critias since Rotbart by himself seems to have more than enough Stupid to keep the boilers stoked and the engine a-chugging down the track. rollin.gif

After all Rotbart is STILL insisting that having so little ability in a Skill that some meger amount of godgiven natural talent that is possessed is then impeded by the ignorance of the Skill equates to a 'moderate' amount of ability in that Skill. Is that what you really are getting behind Critias? Hey, since I've never been given nor read instructions in parachuting nor practiced it in anyway I guess I have a 'moderate' amount of skill in that? dead.gif
Fortune
QUOTE (blakkie @ Oct 9 2006, 03:09 PM)
Hey, since I've never been given nor read instructions in parachuting nor practiced it in anyway I guess I have a 'moderate' amount of skill in that?

What they are saying is that you would be 'Untrained', just like almost everybody else in life is untrained in parachuting. In other words, in this instance, you'd be equivalent to Joe Average.
mfb
you guys are defining different terms. blakkie is defining the level of trained skill, and Rotbart is defining the total level of ability. they're two different things, in SR4. the average total level of ability for any skill is 0 points in that skill, while the average level of trained skill is 3 points in that skill. in other words, most people on the planet have 0 parachuting skill. but among those who have been trained in parachuting, the average is 3 skill.

as to what "mediocre" means, i'd say that it's the guys with 0 skill. the guys with training are the guys who know what they're doing--the guys with points in the skill. in a group of trained parachutists, a guy with only 1 or 2 skill is going to be looked on as mediocre, sure. but compared to the majority of the planet, he's above-average.
blakkie
QUOTE (Fortune @ Oct 8 2006, 11:30 PM)
QUOTE (blakkie @ Oct 9 2006, 03:09 PM)
Hey, since I've never been given nor read instructions in parachuting nor practiced it in anyway I guess I have a 'moderate' amount of skill in that?

What they are saying is that you would be 'Untrained', just like almost everybody else in life is untrained in parachuting. In other words, in this instance, you'd be equivalent to Joe Average.

They are mixing averages that are not equivalent, and then taking the second 'average' and bizzarely equating that to moderate. The people in an "Average Joe" catagory doesn't have the same rating for every skill. Zero Skill is what an "Average Joe" has if they aren't trained in any way in that particular Skill. Skill 0 isn't nessasarily the average of the Skill. Nor is the 'average' level of an ability over the entire population nessasarily anything resembling a moderate amount of skill.

EDIT: Yes, having no damn skill worth mentioning is often the "average" with many uncommon skills. Like piloting a jet fighter. But not being able to successfully buckle up your harness and close the canopy isn't a "moderate" amount of skill. Christ all-mighty.
mfb
QUOTE (blakkie)
Nor is the 'average' level of an ability over the entire population nessasarily anything resembling a moderate amount of skill.

you're right. th average level of ability over the entire population is zero skill.
Fortune
The term 'Joe Average' refers to the run-of-the-mill guy on the street. The term 'Joe Average Bartender' refers to a dude with an average ability in tending bar.
mfb
QUOTE (blakkie)
But not being able to successfully buckle up your harness and close the canopy isn't a "moderate" amount of skill. Christ all-mighty.

again, you're correct--someone who's unable to successfully buckle up would be "incompetent".

you're still talking about a moderate amount of skill, which no one else in the thread is. nobody cares what a moderate amount of skill is--everybody agrees, it's 3. okay? we're talking about moderate total ability in a certain skill--in other words, how many dice Joe Average rolls on a given skill. not Joe Averge Truck Driver, who probably does have a skill of 3 or so. just plain Joe Average, who drives his car with 0 skill, and gets by just fine.
Slithery D
And in the context of Perception, which I vaguely recall is what started this back in the Carter administration, average ability rather than skill is the appropriate metric when trying to set "realistic" thresholds for the Average Joe to notice something.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012