CofD and Professional Training

[Coin]

@Derp said in CofD and Professional Training:

To me, specialty stacking implies additional levels of specialization. So to use a fairly blah example:

Brawl: Street Fighting --> Cheap Shot
Weaponry: Knives --> Butterfly Knives
Academics: Philosophy --> Postmodernism --> 20th Century German Postmodernists

It implies that you are progressively narrowing your field of focus until you're very, very good with that one thing.

Except you're making an assumption based on the word use and your interpretation of its meaning, and not the actual example given, and the actual example given contradicts you, since neither Cardiology nor Surgery are progressions of each other.

[surreality]

@Derp said in CofD and Professional Training:

As for 'there are not a lot of things that grant mortals 9/8-again', bullshit. Sorry, but it is. Many firearms have these qualities, for instance, as well as do some less-gun-type weapons. There are merits that can give you 9-again on a range of things. The options are out there. They just tend to have a particular focus, and aren't quite as broad as some supernatural powers.

For combat builds, sure.

For social characters or crafters? Pretty much screwed. I played a lot of artists and performers.

A 9-again gun is not going to help me any (more than any other character on the grid who has one) or represent anything unique about my character at all.

[Ganymede]

@surreality said in CofD and Professional Training:

For social characters or crafters? Pretty much screwed. I played a lot of artists and performers.

Social characters have Conditions to inflict. Or, at least, in theory they do. And crafters? Fuck, White Wolf/Onyx Path was never good with fleshing those rules out.

Hence, as you said: homebrew.

[surreality]

@Ganymede PT was kickass for entertainers and artist types. Seriously. It did a fair job of giving them a bit of a leg up -- and it was pretty much the only way mortals were getting any kind of bonus for stuff like that, re: 9-again/etc.

People get caught up in the combat aspects, and understandably so, but really... the combat stats tend to have equipment (as mentioned) that isn't terribly fancy-pants that gives the same bonuses and whatnot and are available to everyone.

Anything but combat, and you're kinda fucked, which reinforces some of the very problems we're always bitching about. Combat has solutions. Anything else? Not so much.

[surreality]

Addendum: Conditions can come from combat/etc., too, in addition to tilts. And some of the tilts are whoa.

[Derp]

@Coin said in CofD and Professional Training:

since neither Cardiology nor Surgery are progressions of each other.

Except that's just your interpretation of it. Given that both of them use medicine, cardiology could easily be seen as a specific subset of surgery, which in itself is a specific subset of medicine. So yeah, they could logically follow in exactly that manner. Just because you don't see one as a progression of the other doesn't mean that others don't, or the writers didn't.

Or surgery could be a subset of cardiology. Either way, the actual thing you are doing is a very focused subset of the overall skill, which is reflected in your specializations. And the reason they stack. You are very good at this one specific thing. But the key words here are specialization and specific -- specializations should be, you know. Specialized. Not the overly broad stuff we see that are just re-names of the skill.

[Ganymede]

@Derp said in CofD and Professional Training:

@Coin said in CofD and Professional Training:

since neither Cardiology nor Surgery are progressions of each other.

Except that's just your interpretation of it.

Except that it isn't an interpretation. Surgery and cardiology are two completely different topics. And they are two different skills from two different bases of knowledge.

Surgery is a skill. It rests on basic medical knowledge, but it is a skill. Not all cardiologists have that skill, and not every surgeon has a working knowledge of cardiology. There are cardiac surgeons, just as there are orthopedic surgeons. And, in fact, cardiac surgeons are rare, because you need to spend an awful lot of time -- and probably a fellowship -- just to be recognized as such a specialist.

If anything, accuracy demands that surgery and cardiology not stack. If you want to be a cardiac surgeon, you'd probably need both specialties -- and probably have some sort of penalty given the difficulty of cardiac surgery.

This is an aside. If I had a point, it is that stacking specialties is a subjective call. Parties to the roll can agree to it; staff can rule on it; or you can simply forbid stacking, which is what I'd do to short-cut the sort of opinionated argument above.

[The Sands]

I don't think Professional Training is in and of itself broken. I think it does have some flaws that need to be patched with houserules but the core concept after that isn't so bad. In it's own way it is sort of like specialization. You take Professional Training as a Doctor and now it is cheaper for you to advance your Doctor skills and that actually makes some sense. If I'm a Doctor I can probably pick up the intricacies of some subfield of Medicine than I can probably pick up the intricacies of a revolver over other firearms (in other words, the specialties for my field are cheaper than if I'm purchasing other specialties willy-nilly).

There's a little truth to the question of why buy Contacts when you get 2 contacts with your first dot of PT. Well, for one thing you can't raise the number of contacts any further. If I want a third contact I have to buy Contacts. Also, those two contacts have to be related to my field. Now the connection can be somewhat loose since if I'm a doctor at a hospital I can take the guy who works in the IT department and the head of the Hospital's legal department as contacts to help me out with computer and law issues, but I can't take Joe the Illegal Black-Market weapons dealer (of course you'll get some players who try and shoehorn Joe in by saying Joe is a janitor at the hospital who knows how to get his hands on some guns, but you just say 'No' when they try and do that).

The things that need to be 'patched' with houserules are that I would probably take away Rote and 9-Again with combat skills (and possibly with supernatural abilities). I think that the author when they wrote up Professional Training was a bit careless and didn't really think about people using those for combat (or powers). For 3 points I can get a 9-Again on two complete combat skills. There are 2 point merits that will give you a 9-Again but they don't even extend to an entire skill. They tend to extend to subsets like spears.

I know some people will say that makes those professions that have combat skills worthless because now only one of their skills benefits from Professional Training, but that's not true. The third and fourth dot benefits can still be applied to combat skills meaning you can get a discount on buying one (cheaper to raise your PT by one dot and then buying the asset skill point) and your specialties for your combat skills becomes cheaper. It may not be enough that without PT you are horribly gimped (which is sort of the idea) but it isn't anything to sneeze at, either.

[ThatOneDude]

When games have no PK, why does PT benefits matter? Everything at that point is just story/RP. Why is it a bad thing if a PC that has a back story as a soldier is able to roll 9-again with any firearm (due to year and years of training and experience) and then if he really focuses on the shot, he can do exceptionally well (rote)? What does it hurt other than furthering the story?

[The Sands]

@ThatOneDude said in CofD and Professional Training:

When games have no PK, why does PT benefits matter? Everything at that point is just story/RP. Why is it a bad thing if a PC that has a back story as a soldier is able to roll 9-again with any firearm (due to year and years of training and experience) and then if he really focuses on the shot, he can do exceptionally well (rote)? What does it hurt other than furthering the story?

Why make the person roll at all in such a case? Why not say he just hits? Or give him an extra 10 dice because he was a solider?

And no, I don't actually think what you were asking was a bad question and I'm just giving you a snarky answer. I'm using what is called Reductio ad Absurdum which is a method for illustrating a logical flaw by carrying it to an extreme conclusion. In essence it matters because combat is a significant part of any game. Giving significant bonuses in combat for extremely low prices, even if that combat does not ever occur between PCs, is unbalancing.

Now I'm not going to debate whether or not the bonuses from PT are significant or not since everyone's mileage may vary but I will point out that the argument is being made that as the rules sit it is practically a requirement which would seem to prove that the bonuses are significant.

But what about allowing those bonuses for non-combat skills? Well, I don't think anyone would argue that a game becomes imbalanced because someone is able to sing really well or paint very nice pictures. Even in the case of skills likes Athletics the fact that a character has a significant advantage in climbing might help someone really shine during a 'Cliffhanger' storyline but unless your entire campaign is going to be based around a Sylvester Stallone movie the bonus probably isn't going to unbalance anything.

[Derp]

@The-Sands said in CofD and Professional Training:

But what about allowing those bonuses for non-combat skills?

You know, if there were ways to influence the world around you through these skills, especially on a MU, I'd be less against PT. But since Mental and Social combat is largely ignored on most MU settings, and is held as a cardinal sin if used against a PC because 'omg my agency', this makes using it for the physical skills -even more- unbalancing, even if it isn't used against PCs.

Not that any WoD games currently in play forbid PvP, that I'm aware of. It doesn't have to be about PK, either. The fact that these things get way more mileage from Physical Skills is partly due to the rules of the games, and partly due to MU culture, but either way we shouldn't be encouraging this sort of unbalanced behavior unless we're going to populate every grid on every game with professional soldiers everywhere.

[Arkandel]

@ThatOneDude said in CofD and Professional Training:

When games have no PK, why does PT benefits matter?

Oh, they matter.

Dick measuring contests always matter.

[A. Meowley]

@Derp

Now this could just me being all green and naive and stuff, but... Why is it that some people are so anti-Social Combat? I've tended to approach social dice rolls/reactions as being flexible, but still important. If a soldier gets an Exceptional to cut my PC with a switchblade or whatever, regardless of 'omg my agency', I'm going to include an appropriate description of events in my next pose. I expect the same for Mental and Social rolls.

But in my actual experience, I've witnessed some Players just flat out ignore Social rolls*, as if they are of zero consequence. Stuff like:

• Exceptional Intimidation vs failed contest by the PC with Composure 2? 'You don't scare me, in fact <string of insults>!'.
• Good Subterfuge vs a 0-suxx contest? 'There's something shifty about that guy!'.
• Empathy to suss out PC motivations or glean info about the hierarchy within a group? HAH. As if.

Allow me to put my cop uniform on and say: maybe it's just bad RP, or at least conflicting styles. Because the Players who can 1) understand that conflict and tension and failure can create interesting opportunities for play and character development, 2) use dice to add a randomised element to their creative writing, almost like an improv prompt, are usually playing the more compelling characters and able to support plotlines which are rich, unexpected and collaborative.

Meaning sometimes ya push, sometimes ya pull: but it's all a matter of figuring out how to tell a story, not necessarily your story.

But I dunno. I'm probably burnt out on experiences where Fancy MacNeverlose is willing to overlook dice results, mechanics and thematic setting in order to come out on top as the realm's Most Best Fellow, with their unwavering fearlessness (WP: 3) and wisdom (literally kicking a wasps nest) and social astuteness (wasp nest is owned by a known Sensitive & Vengeful Wasp Lord).

It really breaks thematic immersion for me, and can make developing Social PC and investing in social-focused Professional Training feel like a huge waste of time. Nobody ignores L5 damage! Why, why is it so hard to express your PC feeling the sting of a Exceptional Intimidation or whatever?

(*Major caveat: anything to do with seduction and PCs. If both Players haven't consented to this? Fuck. That. Noise. Use that shit on NPCs if you must, and throw it in between consenting players for funsies if you want to randomize how suave/gawky your PCs are acting in the moment, but for the love of Glob, don't pull that nonsense on the unsuspecting. Maaaaajorly creepy x infinity.)

[Ganymede]

@A.-Meowley said in CofD and Professional Training:

Now this could just me being all green and naive and stuff, but... Why is it that some people are so anti-Social Combat?

Social combat often deprives a player of agency over their character, and there are a substantial number of people uncomfortable with this for a variety of reasons.

[surreality]

Re: the agency argument in general: like most things, there are reasonable and unreasonable objections people might make.

There are the shitheads who can't ever imagine they'd be intimidated, but there are also the shitheads who think it's niftyfunkeen to totally rewrite another player's character entirely to suit their whim and into something that other player no longer has any interest in playing with a sketchy interpretation of the rules as their excuse.

I have no sympathy for either sort of shithead and think both need to grow up and learn to play nice with others.

The agency argument typically comes up the most often with seduction for all the reasons, though. The most attempted, and the most objected to.

I don't see how PT factors in especially on this front any more than any other merit that would grant a bonus to social skills, and there are plenty of those from various game editions already, and there's not a general public outcry about every single social merit that grants a bonus, many of which are a lot more broadly applicable than what you'd likely set up for a PT merit.

[A. Meowley]

@Ganymede But doesn't ignoring a game's Social mechanics deprive me-as-a-Player agency over my PC, if I've invested in Socials? That makes me uncomfortable too... Of course, it's then kinda like a Sen's paradox situation.

Holy crap. I'm starting to understand why people would favour creating Physical focused PCs, or default to combat or (eek) PK in order to resolve situations that (most probably) could have a diplomatic solution somewhere if they used Social Combat instead...

[Arkandel]

@Ganymede said in CofD and Professional Training:

Social combat often deprives a player of agency over their character, and there are a substantial number of people uncomfortable with this for a variety of reasons.

That is quite true. However then either social stats shouldn't exist (or be undervalued compared to their physical/mental counterparts) or they need to be enforceable like everything else.

Ignoring stats mustn't happen.

[Derp]

@A.-Meowley said in CofD and Professional Training:

Major caveat: anything to do with seduction and PCs. If both Players haven't consented to this? Fuck. That. Noise. Use that shit on NPCs if you must, and throw it in between consenting players for funsies if you want to randomize how suave/gawky your PCs are acting in the moment, but for the love of Glob, don't pull that nonsense on the unsuspecting. Maaaaajorly creepy x infinity

My ow two cents here -- seduction doesn't have to be about sex. I agree that it shouldn't be an easy ticket to TS, or whatever, but these should be equally valid just based on intrigue. Seduction is a valid way to convince someone to do something. While, sure, some creepers just use it as a sort of 'Fuck Me' Golden Ticket, there are other ways in which this can be used which are perfectly justifiable. Seduction, for instance, has been successfully employed by KGB agents to recruit people into affairs. They even had names for people specifically trained to do this (women were Swallows, men were Ravens). So really, there has to be some leeway given even in these situations, but you have to have staffers that are willing to draw a line in the sand as well. The problem with this is twofold, however. You surely have the creepers who use this, but you also have the players who are just staunchly unwilling to go along with it for whatever reason, even when the dice and circumstances and whatnot all say that this should be a valid outcome.

So, really... how do we solve this in a way that makes the actual art of seduction useful for game purposes?

[Ganymede]

@A.-Meowley said in CofD and Professional Training:

But doesn't ignoring a game's Social mechanics deprive me-as-a-Player agency over my PC, if I've invested in Socials? That makes me uncomfortable too.

It should because you're right. Don't mistake my explanation as condoning the rationale.

---

@Derp said in CofD and Professional Training:

So, really... how do we solve this in a way that makes the actual art of seduction useful for game purposes?

The system wonk that I think will work is as follows:

1. Players can enforce the results of social rolls regarding their own PC and how others perceive them. You roll to seem sincere or to fool someone into thinking you're trustworthy? That other player has to go along with it.

2. Players cannot enforce the results of social rolls to coerce other PCs to act in a certain fashion. But if you succeed in the roll, and the other party decides not to roll with it, you can take some sort of bonus or reward, like a Beat in CoD/GMC games.

[Arkandel]

I also think seduction/mind control/abuse is a paper tiger in our community. Yes it has happened but it's rare, and there can be plenty of safeguards against these cases. No one is suggesting we don't honor grapple rolls because they can be used to justify rape, after all. The vast majority of cases wouldn't have anything to do with teh sexz0rz.

But all this is a very long-standing debate on MSB and for good reason; figuring out how to use social stats, especially in cases of PC vs PC, is very tricky. Even the best implementations I've seen on MU* so far were basically utilizing them in +jobs (or the equivalent, i.e. not in real time and going through staff) but I've never seen one that satisfied me for in-scene conflict resolution.