[Rq-rules] Re: Background Experience

[Lev Lafayette]

--- alan richards <alanjrichards at googlemail.com>
wrote:

> >
> > From: Lev Lafayette <lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au
> >
> >
> > I've never been entirely happy with the background
> > experience system in RQ III. This is simply
> because
> > the percentages are static (30 percentiles per
> annum)
> > regardless of capacity and ability to learn, and
> the
> > gains are likewise static (30 percentiles to
> skills
> > rating 05% or 60%).
> >
> > The following is a simple modification I've added
> that
> > seems to be working without much trouble.
> >
> > For every year of the chararacter's life over 15
> they
> > receive INT*2+POW skill points (average 30).
> >
> > They also receive the equivalent of 3 years worth
> for
> > the period prior to 15 (I don't have automatic
> > percentages for cultural skills - these two have
> to
> > purchased).
> >
> > Skills may be purchased at a 1:1 basis to 50%, 1:2
> > basis to 75%, 1:3 basis to 90% and 1:4 basis from
> then
> > on.
> >
> > It's pretty quick 'n' easy and seems to work.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> 
> 
> 1. I am a big fan of starting background experience
> at age 10 not 15. And
> likewise not inflating cultural skills. (Query: In
> canon RQIII I think that
> only Weapon Skills have a cultural base all others
> are common to all members
> of a species?)

True that.

> I usually insist that the 5 Years
> between 10 and 15 are spent
> in a randomly rolled background and the 'standard'
> 2d6* years may be spent
> in a background (or backgrounds) of the player's
> choice.
> 
> *actually 2d6-2 as I roll human age as 2d6+13. There
> is no compelling reason
> for this the spread is just more pleasing to my eye.

That's probably not so bad either.

> 2. (Int+Int+Pow) points per year instead of 30.
> It doesn't float my boat.
> For a start 'average human' Int in RQIII is 13 so
> your 'average' human
> character would have 36 points per year not 30. So
> only use this if you want
> to inflate the number of skill points received
> (which is not necessarily a
> bad thing).
> Secondly it seems clunky to me.

How is it clunky? It just means that they have a
variable number of skill points to spend rather than a
fixed amount.

Not everyone learns at the same rate and it's probably
largely due to intelligence and partially due to
motivation (POW).

> I suppose I'd prefer (Int x3) points per year. But
> that is even worse in
> terms of inflating skill points(!)
> 
> Inspired by the old RQIV:AiG (Adventures in
> Abbreviations) I like being able
> to start characters off at different levels of
> experience and power. And do
> this by varying how many skill points a character
> has per year over 10 (or
> 15 if you prefer)
> 
> Untrained         0  (they're like untrained dude)
> Novice             15
> Trained            30
> Skilled             45
> Expert             60
> Master             75

I'd rather use these as representative of power level
(which they are very good at).

> 3. 1:1 basis to 50%, 1:2 basis to 75%, 1:3 basis to
> 90% and 1:4 basis from
> then on.
> Blurgh, Yuck. I hate it. I must be missing something
> here coz a rule like
> this seems to find its way into most people's House
> Rules for RQIII. I
> really cannot be bothered with double-entry book
> keeping. That being said
> your version seems to be as good as any other.

I've encountered versions which are harder ;-)

The basic idea is that skills are relatively easy to
pick up and get harder as the percentages go up. Not
something really simulated in the current (RQ III)
occupational experience rules.

And I must say that I'm thoroughly charmed by the fact
that one can still reasonably call RQ III "current"
without sounding silly after 22 years!

All the best,


Lev


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/