Do we need so many skills?

While I can see your point, LK, in the grand scheme of things even with some new skill-type Power cards added, the ration of non-combative to combative Powers will be fairly minuscule. Right now, we're trying to see if we can generate enough new, useful Power cards to warrant a new Power deck of skill-type Powers. One thing that we'll NOT be doing is promoting any card glut. Bear in mind that all the submitted Powers still have to go through "the WM Wringer" (and some may even need a redesign) so it will not devolve into merely a function of a cardboard carbon copy of X or Y card. ;)

In submitting the concepts I am, I'd point out that I am precisely trying to do three things:
1.) Stick to the K.I.S.S. rule - there isn't a Biologist, Chemist, or Physicist card suggested for this reason. It's all covered under "Scientist," even though those disciplines are VERY different, because there's no need mechanics-wise to break it down that far.
2.) Stick to things that Players might realistically want to have. You'll notice that I haven't suggested a "Cook" or "Farmer" card. What I *have* suggested are ways for players to make items they might want to have, more political specialization for players who want a more in-depth political game (which was specifically requested), a card to allow players to teach one another things in-game (an explanation for story swap trading!), and so on. I'm not submitting things simply for the sake of submitting them - specifically I would play any of the cards I've suggested, and have tailored them to fit many archetypal characters in "modern" as well as "classical" RPGs to make sure I'm not just throwing junk out there.
3.) Create 36 cards in total. There's the real rub of the matter, if you're talking about glut - because WMS needs to be able to turn a profit off what it's selling, it needs to make the deck large enough to justify creating a deck of professions and other non-combat stuff. I'm trying REALLY HARD to fill the need without getting into unnecessary or over-specialized skills, but I recognize it's entirely likely that some of my cards may fall into the category of "probably not going to make the cut." That's why I *urge* you to suggest anything you can come up with as far as alternatives or things I might have missed that constitute interesting skills/professions and aren't, as you put it, glut. I want the Wandering Men to have PLENTY of options to dig through in putting a "non-combat, everyday living" deck together. If not a one of my card suggestions makes it in, I'll be just fine with the result as long as the deck actually comes together and is released sooner rather than later. Since this is one of the most common complaints I hear from my players and my area retailer, I just want this problem *resolved.*

On a further note, one of the reasons I have many suggested skills that are essentially a rip/rewrite of Mechanic is so that they can fit with these two powers. Since they turn repairing and creating objects into hot swaps, I need a set of skills to pair with those cards to explain why one person is making a set of hydraulics while another is making smoke grenades and another is making an axe. I also wanted to make sure that my "new" profession suggestions followed up in form and function with the one profession card which currently exists: Mechanic.

Exactly, MHM...and, BTW, that's one of the beauties and terrors of Untold from a development standpoint - making things modular (i.e. thinking WWAAAYYY ahead into the future - remember - no new "rule sets" allowed) enough to stand the test of time, while at the same time, making sure Powers work across the board in any world, any time, any tech-level, etc...

Quite a challenging thing, I assure you. ;)

It's clear to see that cards can be hard to design for this game since a point on this game is that it can cover multiple universes/genres. For now though I'd stick to cards that work best in Splintered Serenity. There ARE going to be cards that won't make much sense in other universes as they're written. Things like Toa Quotes and the like. You don't necessarily have to make a fantasy version of them, but there's no real reason to fit these cards to fantasy when a fantasy setting doesn't exist yet. When that comes around you can make a different card that does different things that would make more sense in that setting.

Well, you can't really just create another copy of the card for a new setting: that would be card glut. Cards like skill-type Powers, those need to work anywhere, anytime - as they are going to be transportable across settings and genres.

If the flavor quotes don't work, we're aren't really worried about that...if the card works, its easy enough to ignore the flavor quotes. ;)

How many skills exist in a game, and how many of them are a reasonable number for a character, have been staples of debate from the dawn of RPGs. Games range from minimal skills (original DnD really had none, BEMCI had only a few) to over-the-top (Rolemaster Standard/FRP and GURPS, I'm looking at you). I tend to like games that are middle of the road, at the level of Science and History (but with optional specializations under them).

If Untold is to be truly modular, then it should be possible to have a range of cards covering the scale -- on the other hand, managing that would be difficult. Now, if skill cards had information on them about their intended or expected granularity (something like Coarse, Medium, or Fine), then a GM could easily specify which skills cards mattered in their campaign.

GURPS was precisely the offending system I was thinking of when images of too many skills flashed before my eyes. I quit buying sourcebooks because the style of campaign I ran (contemporary, conspiracy, espionage, horror, scifi, light magic and psionics) led me to new releases where the first third (maybe two-thirds) of the book was material I already owned. What is different about "Weirdness Magnet" in this book versus all the others in my library?

Maybe I'm just a cart-before-horses kinda guy. I think I'm looking for guiding principles before jumping into suggesting cards:

• Keep cards broad in application (similar to MHM's idea in offering "scientist" instead of dozens of fields)
• Avoid duplication in MAG boosting cards (don't introduce both "scientist" and "scholar" to help Mind-based skill checks)
• Try to develop cards that do more than just boost MAG but...
• Keep the rules simple and elegant - a cool power is useless if the rules for it don't fit on a single card

Maybe I'm trying to figure out what Untold really needs in skills, or more importantly, what Untold needs from skills. I've done fairly well drawing up characters just using aspects, traits, and the basic skills already out.

Hey, and don't knock "cooking" as a skill - I had a DnD campaign that was food based. The Christmas adventure one year was 50ft tall Gingerbread golems. =)

"Maybe I'm trying to figure out what Untold really needs in skills, or more importantly, what Untold needs from skills. I've done fairly well drawing up characters just using aspects, traits, and the basic skills already out."

What we are currently missing is basically craft-related powers and the "you *can* do this" nudge to get people thinking along the lines of possibilities in professions and skills. I've had more than a handful of people basically ask me "so, all you do in this game is fight?" because they see little-to-no evident non-combat skills. One of my friends even joked that Untold evidently works in "Zelda world" where food and ammo pop out of the bodies of stuff you kill because there are no set rules for obtaining them. That's essentially the issue - players want to *see* this stuff covered. While you are ABLE to build a scientist using Smart and Mind Aspects, there is nothing outright SAYING how you can and so there is an assumption that what you can't see is not there. While books are able to spend chapters basically saying "this is all the stuff you can do with the rules as we've given them to you," all we've got are cards - and so we need cards or something else to essentially point out "YES, THIS IS POSSIBLE" because I can't always be standing next to the stand of product to explain that the GM and players can communally decide these things for themselves.

Of course, the other part of this sort of conundrum is a simple one - if I have to tell potential customers to make a rule up for themselves, they can create their own house rules in the systems they already have for free and thus will be less likely to buy a new one. In order to sell them a new game, I need to convince them that the new game is better out-of-the-box than what they've already got for themselves. The more I can present complete top-to-bottom concepts and the less I have to suggest potential buyers handle on their own, the more likely I've sold the game to someone. The nice thing about the cards, additionally, is that there's no NEED to buy into the additional skills unless you WANT them. If you just like running "run and gun" adventures, and have no need for general non-combat skills... if you've created your own set of house rules regarding non-combat skills and have no need for new cards... if you otherwise just don't want these cards... then you can stick with what you've got already and not spend the extra bucks on ink and paper you're not going to use. Unlike GURPS, these rules are in a stand-alone box all by themselves and are being made specifically for additional sale to answer a number of requests for their existence. They *aren't* packed into everything, or even necessary for basic play. Don't want them? Save your cash.

As far as my rules design philosophy goes... it's basically that I want to avoid the following ever being a realistic conversation over one of my cards or rule-sets:

"I do [insert ridiculous thing]."
"No, you don't."
"Yes I do! Where does it say I can't?"
"Where does it say you CAN?!"
"Well, it doesn't say I CAN'T - so I am."
"Nuh-uh."
"Yeah-huh!"
"I'M TELLING MOM!"

As it currently stands, with Smart 6 and Mechanic there's nothing saying you can't build a Gundam and crush anything and everything in the universe under your boot. There's nothing that even says you can't build a Gundam in an HOUR. It's left to individual groups to, frankly, argue out on their own what is possible - and few people like having those arguments, because there generally are no winners. That's why I like hashing out specifics, at least when it comes to numeric issues; if you don't need them, you can ignore them. If you *do* need them, however, you can't really ignore their absence.

Folks thinking you can build a Gundam in an hour is apparently why we need that Common Sense card... LOL!

Another point laid out that came up in some discussions is that these cards help solidify your character. The point came up that, yeah, you can make amazingly unique characters, but there aren't any cards that really flesh out their persona. The idea that came up was more or less story swap cards that told your story. Let's say you have a churl that's built tough and packs a punch. All game long he's smashing up bad guys and taking names. Now let's say when everything's done and over with and you're at camp and all of a sudden this churl has a feast in front of you because he's actually a better cook than a fighter. That really fleshes out a character. Suddenly you don't keep the churl around because he's The Incredible Hulk, but because you actually like the guy. And what's his story? Maybe he was the cook of his tribe when a rival faction came in and started killing folks and he HAD to take up arms. Maybe he doesn't even like fighting and just views it as something that needs to be done and therefore does it.

So, y'see, suddenly your character has changed (potentially) QUITE dramatically just because he has 'cooking' as a skill.

Alright, I'll admit that I do not fully understand some of the arguments going on here. I've played very few RPG's and most for not very long because I couldn't get into them. And I've tried telling Ben this but he keeps telling me that I don't understand. So I'll post it here to see what you guys think. And I will admit that I could very well be wrong or not understand.

Alright, when I say that I like playing non-combative characters, there are cards currently out there that allow for this. My Klik, that I can make up to 100 UP has a few pieces on him that allow for some combat, but then he has things like MicroGear Medic Disc, a card to pick locks, a card to build things, etc. Very cool cards that allow him to do things besides fight. He does have Saw and Claw Shears which give him some ability to fight.

So my thing is, I'd like to see more cards that allow for someone to be non-combative. I'll use the scientist example because its the one Ben and I are arguing about. MHM has suggested a card for scientist. I could see that. But what I'd really like to see is the stuff a scientist would use. Just because you have a card that says, "Hey, I'm a scientist!" doesn't mean that you have the necessary stuff a certain scientist would need. If I played a scientist, I might carry around a small chemistry set, collection jars, nets, rope, magnifying glass, dissection kit, etc. That's the kind of cards I'd like to see. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean I have everything a scientist would need. But just because I have it, doesn't mean I am a scientist. Now, you could make having the scientist card a prerequisite for certains things like a chemistry set or viles of acid or something. But I feel like you should have something other than or in addition to a card that says "scientist". My other argument is the Locksmith. Just because you are a Locksmith doesn't mean that you have all that you need to pick a lock. And just because you are not a Locksmith doesn't mean that you can't pick a lock. Perhaps, if you are Locksmith and you have a Lock Picking kit, then you are guaranteed to pick that lock. But if you are just a Locksmith and you have to find the materials needed to pick lock, then you are likely but not guaranteed. And if you have the Lock Picking Kit but are not a Locksmith, then you might or might not unlock that door.

To me, this would make sense. I would be kind of like growing. Maybe you obtained a Lock Picking Kit from somewhere, so you find someone in a nearby village that can train you to become a LockSmith. Or, if you have random things that allow you to make things like small acid bombs to blow up doors, or acid to eat at locks or something, but then as you grow, you have been trained as a Scientist and that essentially gives you a bonus to what you have.

Like I said, I may not understand, and that's fine if I don't. I just want to bring this up to see what other people think. I don't necessarily want to have the skills "Teacher", "Scientist", "Locksmith", etc. I want the ITEM cards that these skills would use. And then to add on to them or make them stronger or more likely to succeed, then add the skills. Give me the Lock Picking kit first, then I can train to be a Locksmith. Give me a chemistry set, a dissection kit, collection jars, etc., and then I could train to be a scientist. Instead of having a "Farmer" card, give him a shovel, a hoe, burlap sacks, maybe the ability to carry extra food or something. Provide the cards that would make that character and then later add on the Skills cards that would make that character even better.

Ok, first of all...nerdgasm over the thought of Untold AND Gundam...head exploding from the sheer AWESOMENESS of that comment...Anyways...

Ok, I can admittedly see all the points being made here. I agree with LK that we don't need a bagillion skill cards (even though I'd personally love to see a Historian card). But I definitely agree with MHM that we need cards to tell people what they can do. I've had the same issues with players that MHM has, and it has boiled down to me having to say "Because I'm the GM and I say no". I also agree with Dovebear about the tools/items that different things would be required for, etc.

That being the case, I definitely think this concept needs to be streamlined and focused. We don't need ten thousand skill cards, true. But we definitely need some skill cards. And yes, cards that are similar in nature, such as Scientist or Scholar should have similar traits, boosts, MAG, etc., because they are essentially the same thing.

Thats my 2 UP anyways...

"I could see that. But what I'd really like to see is the stuff a scientist would use. Just because you have a card that says, "Hey, I'm a scientist!" doesn't mean that you have the necessary stuff a certain scientist would need. If I played a scientist, I might carry around a small chemistry set, collection jars, nets, rope, magnifying glass, dissection kit, etc. That's the kind of cards I'd like to see. Just because I'm a scientist doesn't mean I have everything a scientist would need. But just because I have it, doesn't mean I am a scientist. Now, you could make having the scientist card a prerequisite for certain things like a chemistry set or vials of acid or something. But I feel like you should have something other than or in addition to a card that says "scientist". My other argument is the Locksmith. Just because you are a Locksmith doesn't mean that you have all that you need to pick a lock. And just because you are not a Locksmith doesn't mean that you can't pick a lock. Perhaps, if you are Locksmith and you have a Lock Picking kit, then you are guaranteed to pick that lock. But if you are just a Locksmith and you have to find the materials needed to pick lock, then you are likely but not guaranteed. And if you have the Lock Picking Kit but are not a Locksmith, then you might or might not unlock that door."

Y'know, I've been pushing for something exactly like this for awhile - generic items like "a ladder" or "a rope" or "a set of tools, generic to my profession" are indeed very important for a game like this, and I've been told that there is a deck of that sort of thing in the works for the future. The reason I'm submitting the skills first? I've been asked to. They want a "Professions and Skills" deck, so I'm making professional and general-use skills. Are "mundane equipment" cards something I really, *really* want? Absolutely. That way I can have my length of rope and nobody can argue that I have that length of rope, because I have the card that says I have said rope. But this comes first, because I was told to do this first.

(For what it's worth when it comes to your example, though, the "Horological Instruments" Power Card in Clockwork Components constitutes the tools for Lock-picking.)

Don't forget these skills don't really GUARANTEE anything, they just give a lovely boost to any checks involving the field. A novice lock picker could get lucky (literally meaning they roll higher) than a trained professional with those cards, but it's not likely to happen very often.

These cards mean: "Hey, I have the experience and/or knowledge of this field" which means two things. They're more likely to succeed in that field, and that they somehow studied or otherwise learned the information in that field, which is story and character development.

"That being the case, I definitely think this concept needs to be streamlined and focused."

Oh, absolutely. But that's the job of the designers. MY job, at the moment, is to give them as much stuff as I can conceivably manage while keeping things quality so that they HAVE the ability to streamline and make the decisions about what they like best. That's why I keep trying to get other people to contribute to the brainstorming - because this is basically brainstorming. Do I think that all these cards are going to necessarily make it in? Heck no, which is why I'm still throwing ideas out there despite the fact that I've already come up with 36 concepts. I *want* the stuff that they don't like or think fits in the system well to be cut out and the core to be streamlined to as solid a 72-card deck as possible. That's just not my job.

There are plans to have item cards, of course. However, you have to understand that given the fact that Splintered Serenity is a high-action, heroic-type game, there was never an intention to create cards like shovels, rope, etc. If your character needs those things, they get them and use them - but what use is a shovel to someone who can move earth? What use is a rope to someone who can fly, etc?

It's the genre of the game that defines the cards needed. If we had a "Caveman" genre game, then things like Hemp Rope and Flint and Steel would be very useful and needed cards (and they may well be made one day) however, you're not likely to see them in Splintered Serenity. Bear in mind, however, that once we make them, that's not to say that you cannot USE them in Splintered Serenity, of course.

That being said - just like Professions and Skills - if there's enough a a defined need for these sorts of item cards, we'll consider them now. However, I for one (personally) don't want a "burlap sack" card. I mean, comeon! That's what roleplay's all about; do we REALLY need a CARD for a burlap sack?!?!? :P

Soap Ashy. I think one of the points of generic cards is to say "I have this so shut it". On the flipside it also lets the GM go "You don't have the soap card so no soap. Now shut it." Likewise a player goes "I have a ladder!", you go "Ok, you have a ladder, what do you do with it?" "I climb this 300 foot wall!". Obviously that's just dumb but having the card not only let's players say "I have it" and the GM say "No you don't" when they don't, but it allows players to know HOW MUCH of the resource they have available. It's not the magic rope of infinite length. It's 75 feet. Like that.

But yeah, Burlap Sack is kinda silly.

I have a HILARIOUS story I need to tell about Soap and gaming.

HIL. LAR. RIOUS.

I guess I've just been blessed when it comes to gaming, but all of my experiences have been seasoned with a healthy dose of common sense. I mean, what Player is really going to try and convince ANYONE that they've been carrying around a 300' ladder for the whole game? I mean COME ON. No game in the planet is going to have rules to cover that sort of craziness...

A player tells me, "I have a ladder."

I ask, "Really, where are you carrying it?"

Player blinks.

Problem solved.

OR

A player tells me, "I have some rope".

I say, "Ok. You have 50' of rope."

Problem solved.

I don't need rules, or a book, or a card to help me with this.

Also, what ever happened to Rule 0? You know, "The GM's always right?"

That's great for our games and all that, but we're on the sales side of this at the moment, not the player. MHM for instance had a person argue real-life physics with him in a session. Even I'm prone to asking tons of questions when it comes to details. Just a thing to keep in mind when making these cards. "Rope - a rope anywhere from 30 - 100 feet in length" It doesn't take a lot of writing or space and it clarifies things so you don't go and get the "uber rope of awesomeness". From what I've seen, it never hurts to put that 'common-sense' clause in your rules. You don't want the orbital dog cannon or the peasant railgun.

Also, don't forget the newbie GMs.

"You've got rope."

"Well how long is it?"

"I dunno. It just says you have a rope. I guess it's however long you want it."

I had a similar incident when I let my players come up with their motives in an adventure. The results were bad. VERY BAD.

Makes me want to start a School for GM's... :(

In my experience, at the point where you have to resort to Rule Zero you're already at the point of having broken Rule One - "Have Fun" - because you've had to argue with the group about what is and isn't possible in the game by the rules. If you're using "Rule of Cool" effects in some major parts of the game universe, you have to expect that many people will think something along the lines of "this is cool, and the game doesn't say I can't do it, so I should be able to do it." There are no carrying capacities for a 750lb. giant metal man, and he's a giant metal man, so why COULDN'T he be carrying 500ft of rope?

This is why I like concrete rule-sets on stuff like this. I have something I can point to and say "rules say so" and the discussion is over - no muss or fuss. If I then *want* to apply the "Rule of Cool" I can simply ignore them when I want to... but when it comes to something that could be argued, I like to have something to instantly defuse the argument before it happens or gets to the point where people aren't having fun with it because they're involved in an argument. You'll notice, specifically, that even when I leave something up to GM discretion in a card rule (which I try and do a lot) - I'll still say on the card that it's up to GM discretion. Why? So that if it comes to an argument over the rule on the card, I (or the GM) can point to it and say "rules say so."

Given that I have one player in my gaming group who likes to drive 18-wheelers through any loophole he can get away with, and M^3 as well - who likes to know EXACTLY what is possible or not possible in any given situation BEFORE stating what he'll do (because he wants to be able to do the most effective or tactically-sound thing in that situation, which honestly you can't fault anybody for)... I like being able to have specific rules to resort to when I need them. It keeps the game running smoothly, and maximizes the amount of actual PLAYING we get to do.

MHM, LOL! I couldn't remember what it was called and I wasn't near the cards. Well, I think that the skills cards you are coming up with are great. It will make a great deck. I guess I, thinking the way I do, would think that the item cards to make said skill would be more important. I personally would go for the item deck before the skills deck, though I do think that both are going to be necessary (at least for me).

And no, you do not need a burlap sack card. But maybe its a Mary Poppins kind of a sack. It allows you to carry more than the Highbred next to you because of its magical properties that the L'Na gave it. And I understand where you think this is a Heroic kind of a game. But maybe that's the problem? I thought this was an essentially anything goes kind of a game, but Splintered Serenity is the setting. So if I want to play a Churl scientist that carries around rope, magnifying glass, dissection kit, chemistry set, and maybe a few other things that could be more weapon-like but would be something a scientist would use (machette (sp), anyone?). But I feel like in the true genre of role-playing, there needs to be options for anything anyone might want to do. If I'm a Churl farmer with no magical ability working in his field when he is suddenly transported to the Great Machine, there is a good chance he's going to have a hoe, shovel, or both in his hand. Now, he might eventually get rid of them. But they do make good weapons and you use what you have. And you say that if I want a shovel, then there is a shovel. But is that fair? I mean, if I'm an NAU and I want a bazooka, does that mean I get one? No. So I think that while a shovel might be at the bottom of the line of cards you want to create, if people want this stuff, then you need to give it to them. This game was supposedly designed to listen to its players. Players are asking for this stuff. We want to see item cards that would allow us to do things besides fight. I understand that some might be more important than others, but rope would be a necessity for me. If I'm a good climber, I still think I'd have rope on me. I could use it on others in my party, or to tie up that creature we were fighting, or use it to carry something large on my back (assuming I have the strength to do it). I understand that you do not want card glut, but I feel that some things might be important. I've even heard people arguing about having something on them that there isn't a card for and no real explanation for how they obtained it. So if there is a card that is either free or 1UP then that might help solve some issues.

And I kind of agree with M3 on this. If there is a card that says, I have "such and such", then it limits how much of it you have, maybe even the type (there are a dozen kinds of rope, not that we need that, but I'm just saying), and how it can be used. There could be something like a quad card for rope. 1 UP gives you 50 ft, 2UP gives you 100, 3 UP gives you 150, and 4 UP gives you 200. Or something like that. If you have binoculars, then it increases your vision up to 100 ft, and so on. Make it quad. That way, a human that wants to stay human (no Klik parts of L'Na powers) can have some abilities through the items that he/she carries. And if you quad it, you can limit how much of something someone has or how far someone can see or go. That way, there need only be one rope card or whatever. But the GM doesn't necessarily get to say "You don't have rope" or "You only have 50ft".

The example I'm about to give is a great example of why mundane cards are important to players.

So...I've got a couple of Highbred decks coming my way. And I'm definitely going to put them to good use. Now, my Highbred might carry two different rifles, or a rifle and a side arm, or two side arms, depending on UP and the like. But one card I want my Highbred to carry is a knife. Knives are always useful. Besides stabbing nasties, it can cut rope and other bindings, whittle wood, carve meat, etc. My Highbred needs a knife. Luckily, we already have a Knife card. But what about a Rope card? Or Flashlight card? What is my Highbred supposed to do if he stumbles into a really dark cave and doesn't have a flash light?

I know that "mundane" cards are boring, but Dovebear has the right of it. Save a tree and print them on quad cards (a wonderful way of conveying mundane info such as stats) and don't worry about Flavor quotes or texts, just the basic game information. I mean, really, what do you need to say about rope besides how much of it there is and how strong it is? You could even make it extremely cheap. 10 ft could be 0 UP, 20 ft 1 UP, and so on.

And Dovebear is also right. Your very loyal and helpful fan base obviously wants these things. So, why not?

Rather than having cards for each individual item, instead have kits - You could have an explorer's kit, which contains rope, lantern, flint & steel, etc. You could have a scientist's kit which contains the chemistry kit, dissection kit, various vials and flasks, etc. And so on. That way people could have the basic supplies as cards without having to print tons of cards. Or...remember those printable cards you mentioned creating at some point? Could you create item cards that GM's could print from the internet for use in campaigns? That way, if a GM needed a "rope" card, he could print it and use it but you wouldn't have to make it into a deck. Most gamers I know love free stuff, and if they found out that item cards were free, I think they'd jump for it.

I agree with Melissa on this one. It's a good idea. Kits sound really good.

I like the idea of making those item card freebies for download. Would folks be ok if they did not have art?

Also, please note that some of these Powers (like a Chemistry set, for instance) WILL be cards. I thought I said that above, but anywho... Some of them already ARE cards, they've just not been released yet. :P

I like that, Ashy. Besides, who needs art work for Rope?

What do the others say? :D