No Levels for Familiarities

[Metaphysician]

What do you think of this rule??

 

Me, I think it renders familiarities almost useless, an 8- is practically a desperation roll.

[Sean Waters]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

...but the alternative is that people will buy skills for one point and make up the difference with levels. It could work out much cheaper that way. Having said that, it probably wouldn't happen often as, in many games, it is worth the extra 2 points to have the 9+char/5 bonus. Superhero games it would be rare, heroic games it might happen more often.

 

I would say there is no easy answer without changing the system a bit. A number of htreads have kicked around a number of ideas recently. I doubt allowing levels to apply to familiarities will tip a game over. Try it and let us know.

[Zed-F]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

You don't buy the familiarity for the 8- roll. You buy the familiarity to say 'I know at least something about this.' Then when the situation where that skill would be useful arises, the GM gives your PC extra information that the other PCs that don't have any skill in the area at all don't get. You as a player use that information to further advance the plot.

 

Relying on an 8- roll is a desperation move, true. OTOH, if there is little possible downside and the skill doesn't take a problematic amount of time to use, then why not. If the GM will let the other players make an INT roll, he'll probably let the PC with the familiarity make both an INT roll and the familiarity roll.

[Sean Waters]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

You don't buy the familiarity for the 8- roll. You buy the familiarity to say 'I know at least something about this.' Then when the situation where that skill would be useful arises, the GM gives your PC extra information that the other PCs that don't have any skill in the area at all don't get. You as a player use that information to further advance the plot.

 

Relying on an 8- roll is a desperation move, true. OTOH, if there is little possible downside and the skill doesn't take a problematic amount of time to use, then why not. If the GM will let the other players make an INT roll, he'll probably let the PC with the familiarity make both an INT roll and the familiarity roll.

 

Great. Now I feel all munchkiny.

 

Seriously though: good point. It is seasoning, not the main course.

[OddHat]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

It works well enough if you allow some level of use for a skill that is not dependant on an actual roll, and/or extra time to make a roll. In my own games, a cop with an 8- Streetwise could take five hours or so to look through records and ask around to find a potential informant, gaining an effective +5 to his streetwise roll and raising it to 13 or less. A cop with 13 or less streetwise could just think for a few seconds (one phase) and realize that Jimmy the Fink might be a good informant for this sort of case. The 8- Streetwise cop wouldn't need to make a roll to realize that empty looking buildings near China Town with addresses hand-pasted on green doors are generally brothels, while the 13- streetwise cop wouldn't need to roll to know that most of those brothels are run by the Korean mob under Mr.Ill. Both would need to roll low to see if they knew exactly who was running a particular brothel (and I'd need to decide if that was a reasonable thing for the cop to figure out with a simple skill use), or they'd need to investigate.

 

If you're not willing to give a skill some utility without a roll, then yes, 8- is almost worthless, and allowing skill levels to add to it might be a valuable fix. OTOH, you would hit a break point where buying everything as a familiarity and then buying large numbers of skill levels would make sense, and that point would come very early (after only ten skills if Overall levels are added to 8- rolls). INT would also start to give less value for the cost. I'd have to think about whether I wanted skills to be that cheap in my game.

 

In the Real World , I'm not Streetwise compared to a cop or a criminal, but I'm confident I could locate many sorts of illegal businesses in a day or two if I needed to, in any city where I spoke the language. That feels like the Everyman version of Streetwise to me.

[Trebuchet]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

In our Champions campaign we often use Familiarities as "prequels" to buying the full Skill. IOW, buy Fam: Combat Piloting 8-, play a few game sessions that way, and then spring for the full DEX-based version for 2 more points. This feels more realistic than just magically getting a full-blown skill overnight. We don't require it, but we do recommend it. A number of the players (including myself) do it this way to enhance role-playing.

 

Obviously this would not apply to Everyman Skills such as Stealth.

[ghost-angel]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Familiarities are almost never rolled in our games, all they represent for us is that the character knows something about the subject, or has a basic understanding of what one is supposed to do. But they haven't quite got it to the practiceable level yet.

 

Mechanically, considering you get a Familiarity for 1 point and 2 more gets the full skill which is usually an 11- (or higher). Why would you buy SLs for a Fam? not cost effective.

 

As for adding a 10ptSL (or any other level) you already have to a Familiarity, the Skill Levels often represent you knowing enough to go look in the right places first, not second (most of the time) - with something you just barely know anything about you really wouldn't know where to start with what you're trying to accomplish.

[Wilfred_Death]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

What do you think of this rule??

 

Me, I think it renders familiarities almost useless, an 8- is practically a desperation roll.

Wow, must have ruthless GM....

Look at the skill modifiers table.

 

The "Security Expert Hero" PC with the 16- Lockpicking Skill can open a door in probably a 1/2 Phase..

 

The 'Average Joe' Professional LockSmith on the other hand probably only needs an 8- FAM Lock Picking. He's got PS LockSmith 11-.

A Truck FULL of Tools, "Lock Picking For Dummies", And A Phone to call for advice on those tricky locks.

 

So he is Picking the Lock to Someone's home as they lost their Keys....

+3 , Routine Lock

+1 to +3 (+2 ) Extensive Knowledge from PS LockSmith

+2 Top Flight Lock Smithing Tools - Speciality Picks

+ 3 Extra Time 5 Minutes

Hmm - 17- Roll to Open the Lock ( Or thereabouts depending on GM )

 

ME personally don't know Zip about LockPicking, I don't have FAM: LockPicking 8-

So I have to use a Hammer...................

 

I get that from my players sometimes : - "i don't have a 16- Skill at Blah... I can't do anything.... Whine...":eg:

"That 25 Point Normal Is turning Over your Secret Hideout, Look She's got your Bat-Corder, and She's Forcing your DNPC into your truck.... but you can track them down with your 20- Deduction Roll":)

[MisterBaldy]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

In our Champions campaign we often use Familiarities as "prequels" to buying the full Skill. IOW' date=' buy Fam: Combat Piloting 8-, play a few game sessions that way, and then spring for the full DEX-based version for 2 more points. This feels more realistic than just magically getting a full-blown skill overnight. We don't [i']require[/i] it, but we do recommend it. A number of the players (including myself) do it this way to enhance role-playing.

 

Obviously this would not apply to Everyman Skills such as Stealth.

I would tend to agree with you, in principle, about your explanation. It makes very sound reasoning for character development.

 

Afterall, just because you have the Experience Points to purchase something, does not imply that your Game Master must allow it.

 

Keeping the balance of "character development" must be at the forefront of any good campaign...wouldn't you agree?

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Yep. As others have pointed out, Familiarities are supposed to represent a bare minimum of knowledge. Being able to apply levels to them defeats the purpose of spending more points to increase the skill, because it would be much cheaper to purchase all skills at the Familiarity level (and not to put any points at all in "Everyman skills") and just buy a few 10pts levels to cover the rest.

 

The situational modifiers such as using proper tools, taking extra time and difficulty mods are usually enough to bring the skill to a more reasonable level. My own personal difficulty mod chart looks like this:

 

Routine: +5

Very Easy: +4

Easy: +3

Moderately Easy: +2

Light: +1

Moderate: +0

Slightly Hard: -1

Moderately Hard: -2

Hard: -3

Very Hard: -4

Extremely Hard: -5

Incredibly Hard: -6

Sheer Folly: -7

Why Bother?: -8

Are you Insane?: -9

Virtually Impossible!: -10 or more.

 

Thus, anything that is Moderately Easy or easier is quite doable with a familiarity...which is just about how it should be. (a familiarity at the Moderately Easy level has a 10 or less or about a 50/50 chance of success)

[Trebuchet]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

I would tend to agree with you, in principle, about your explanation. It makes very sound reasoning for character development.

 

Afterall, just because you have the Experience Points to purchase something, does not imply that your Game Master must allow it.

 

Keeping the balance of "character development" must be at the forefront of any good campaign...wouldn't you agree?

We also check with fellow players to see if a new Skill purchase will tread on their character's toes. I plan to buy Stealth for my MA soon, but I first asked our resident ninja-type's player if he had any objections. He had none, so I'll be OK to buy it as soon as my PC has the XP needed. If he had objected, I wouldn't buy it.

 

Player interaction can be as important to a campaign's success as character interaction.

[Markdoc]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Just sayin..'

 

I use/allow FAM's as already discussed here - it gives an indication of something the characters knows a bit about. Since "easy tasks" don't generally require a roll, 8- gives you that. For non-combat tasks, where time is not essential, they are also quite useful.

 

However, I have toyed with the idea of allowing skill levels to apply because it's one way of dealing with the guy who wants to be come a skill monster - which otherwise is really expensive.

 

Crunch the numbers. To have 10 skills at 9+5/CHA (basically a min of 11-) costs you 30 points if bought straight. If they are all in a tight group, 10 FAM's plus 3 x 5 pt levels is 25 points to get to 11- each, if they are not 10 Fams plus 3 x 10 point levels costs 35. Granted the 10 point levels have utility all on their own, but in general buying lots of FAM.s plus levels is not a great way to spend your points, even if it were permitted, unless you wanted LOTS of skills at a moderate level.

 

cheers, Mark

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Just sayin..'

 

Crunch the numbers. To have 10 skills at 9+5/CHA (basically a min of 11-) costs you 30 points if bought straight. If they are all in a tight group, 10 FAM's plus 3 x 5 pt levels is 25 points to get to 11- each, if they are not 10 Fams plus 3 x 10 point levels costs 35. Granted the 10 point levels have utility all on their own, but in general buying lots of FAM.s plus levels is not a great way to spend your points, even if it were permitted, unless you wanted LOTS of skills at a moderate level.

 

cheers, Mark

 

The 10pt Levels have dual purpose in that they also replace 8pt CSL's, so you are saving a crapload of points if you go that route.

 

10x3pt skills (30)

3x8pt CSL's (24)

total: 54pts

 

10x1pt Fam (10)

3x10pt Overall Levels (30)

total: 40pts

 

A 14pt savings!

[Black Rose]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

I've long felt that Skill Levels should be allowable for Familiarities; I'd limit them to 11- max, though, since you really don't want to overshadow people who actually bought the skill up the "proper" way. I might even say that, for purposes of getting information, a Fam+SL is less informative than a full skill. YMMV. I've tried to come up with an appropriate solution to a 2-pt skill; I'm leaning towards 10-, since it's noticably better than 8-, but not so good as 11-.

[ghost-angel]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

I've long felt that Skill Levels should be allowable for Familiarities; I'd limit them to 11- max' date=' though, since you really don't want to overshadow people who actually bought the skill up the "proper" way. I might even say that, for purposes of getting information, a Fam+SL is less informative than a full skill. YMMV. I've tried to come up with an appropriate solution to a 2-pt skill; I'm leaning towards 10-, since it's noticably better than 8-, but not so good as 11-.[/quote']

This isn't too bad of an idea, but I would cap it at 10- ... no matter how good your universal skillset is it just can't make up for actually knowing the subject at hand - which includes knowing how to look up things properly, how to get the needed fact effectively, etc...

[StGrimblefig]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

I have always been of the opinion that Familiarity rolls should be for information only, unless the player can explain to my satisfaction that having heard or read about combat piloting techniques (e.g. at a party or in a magazine) gives him any real ability in a cockpit.

 

A Familirity is not a skill. If you want to really do what the skill includes, buy the skill.

 

Given that, it does not make sense to allow skill levels to apply.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

How about a comprimise?

 

Skill Levels can only offset penalties when applied to familiarities. PSL is about a -1/2 lim if you wanted to just buy your skill levels that way in the first place.

 

Contingency Man

+6 Overall Levels (60 active points), Only to offset penalties -1/2; 40 points.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Here’s how I look at it. Most real world people, at least most guys, would have Familiarity with Auto Mechanics. They can change the oil, change a tire, change a tail light and check things like the break fluid level and power steering fluid all without making a roll. Changing disc brakes would require a roll, although with extra time and maybe a manual you would get a decent bonus. All that with just a familiarity.

 

Now if you wanted to do things like change the transmission, do major work on the engine, etc. that is where you would need the skill Mechanics.

 

Just my two cents.

[Vanguard00]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

In our Champions campaign we often use Familiarities as "prequels" to buying the full Skill. IOW' date=' buy Fam: Combat Piloting 8-, play a few game sessions that way, and then spring for the full DEX-based version for 2 more points. This feels more realistic than just magically getting a full-blown skill overnight. We don't [i']require[/i] it, but we do recommend it. A number of the players (including myself) do it this way to enhance role-playing.

 

Obviously this would not apply to Everyman Skills such as Stealth.

I usually follow this line of reasoning myself. If it makes sense, I think a Familiarity roll is very appropriate as a prequal for a full-blown skill.

 

I also include a touch fo the following for RP purposes:

 

You don't buy the familiarity for the 8- roll. You buy the familiarity to say 'I know at least something about this.' Then when the situation where that skill would be useful arises' date=' the GM gives your PC extra information that the other PCs that don't have any skill in the area at all don't get. You as a player use that information to further advance the plot.[/quote']

 

Lastly, to address the topic, I only allow "Overall" levels to affect Familiarity rolls, and only if it's reasonable, practical and advances the storyline (or at least doesn't hinder it).

[prestidigitator]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Remember also that Familiarities can be used for Complimentary Rolls (where failure usually doesn't do anything bad; it just doesn't add anything to the primary roll). This can be a really nice way to specialize a primary Skill without making you an expert at another Skill.

 

For example, if I have Security Systems, I might be an expert in mechanical traps and tripping mechanisms (Familiarity with Mechanics) and electrical mechanisms (Familiarity with Electronics), but not be quite so good with radio-activated alarms (Systems Operation) or optical triggers (SS: Optical Physics). Even so, I don't have to be an expert electrician or mechanic.

[Black Rose]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

This isn't too bad of an idea' date=' but I would cap it at 10- ... no matter how good your universal skillset is it just can't make up for actually knowing the subject at hand - which includes knowing how to look up things properly, how to get the needed fact effectively, etc...[/quote']

For a while I've felt that a Familiarity represents "knowing some stuff about N" where N represents any given topic. Note I said "some stuff" - with the full skill, you know enough to be able to predict and guess, but with a Familiarity you have some facts and formulae, maybe a little personal experience. But you are not trained.

[zornwil]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Oh, I hate the broken-record syndrome, but, anyway, as I've said before, for a particular character concept, a generalist/dabbler who believed he was excellent at everything and tended to be lucky sometimes, I allowed familiarities with skill levels up to but not exceeding 10-. It was cool in play.

 

But I think the basic rule is good. And a good rule to break as needed.

 

All the rules are guidelines. They demonstrate the appropriate method and, stated or unstated, indicate where abuse or breaking the system can occur by not using them. A difficulty in rules interpretation and GM judgement is that some rules are hard guidelines which really shouldn't be tampered with or the system starts to break down while most rules are softer, and allow for some variance. I think this is a rule that allows for variance, but like most rules I don't feel the system needs to go into further detail and it can be left to the GM/game. Hence my statements in the preceeding paragraph.

[pinecone]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

I've always allowed Overall levels to modify Fams, and still do...and nobody has been hurt yet...it might be a deal buster in a Heroic games but 10 points is a bunch a points in Heroic anyway.....I've even seen Cramming: any Int skill and levels with all Int skills as a built in computer and no fires broke out....YMMV...

[Sean Waters]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Oh, I hate the broken-record syndrome, but, anyway, as I've said before, for a particular character concept, a generalist/dabbler who believed he was excellent at everything and tended to be lucky sometimes, I allowed familiarities with skill levels up to but not exceeding 10-. It was cool in play.

 

 

 

The key word here being 'believed'. This is not about skill levels, it is Psych Lim: delusional about abilities (common/total) 20 points

[Sean Waters]

Re: No Levels for Familiarities

 

Hmmm. I suppose the other approach is you just scrap familiarities.

 

Then the minimum spend is 2 points for an 11- you CAN add skill levels to, or 3 points for 9+CHAR/5 (ditto).

 

Problem solved*

 

 

 

 

 

 

* well, if not solved, then fatally distracted