Incompetent starting characters

[Balbinus]

One of the things I've found a little frustrating in HQ is how often it seems that truly innovative mechanics are married to remarkably traditional roleplaying assumptions.

One such assumption is the hoary old cliche that characters start out incompetent over time growing to great power.  Nothing intrinsic to the HQ engine requires this, but the way the game is set up this is how it works.

One Mastery is defined as Journeyman level of ability.  In other words, a professional at something but not an outstanding professional.  Looking at the example resistance ratings this is about right, a character with a single mastery can expect reasonably to accomplish most of the time fairly ordinary tasks (utterly routine ones not needing a roll of course) for someone of their profession.  Example NPC resistances also support this, typical Dara Happan soldiers varying between 17 and 18W.  Crafting simple tools is 14 to 20, actually a challenge for a beginning PC craftsman.  Journeyman equating to a mastery makes sense in the light of those resistances.

However, characters don't start at that ability level.  A starting character does not have mastery for example in their occupational keyword.  They are not yet of journeyman level in their chosen occupation.  A character who is a Hoplite soldier is not a journeyman hoplite able to achieve with a good success rate the kind of challenges the average hoplite can be expected to surpass.

Instead, the starting hoplite is a novice hoplite, a green and inexperienced one who in a straight fight with the average hoplite will get beaten very soundly.  A craftsman who struggles to consistently succeed in making simple tools.

Why?  Why should it be that way?  Why have this powerful and flexible engine married to the hoary old idea of beginning incompetence?

The system is a bit incoherent on this point (in the ordinary English sense).  In places it talks about starting characters being local heroes but not yet larger heroes, someone who is not yet of journeyman ability in more than a handful of traits is unlikely I would have thought to even be a local hero, the average local guy is better after all.  The Advanced Experience section talks about middle aged characters starting with relatively few additional levels of ability, still surprisingly incompetent.

Unfortunately, the fact that ability is measured in masteries makes all this far from initially apparent.  A starting character with two or three masteries sounds impressive, it is only when you realise that those two or three abilities are the only things he is competent at you realise how inadequate he actually is.  

Anyone have any feel for why the game does this?  Is it just the old chestnut of starting off unbelievably incompetent so that you can become unbelievably powerful in time?  Thoughts?

[Ian Cooper]

Anyone have any feel for why the game does this? Is it just the old chestnut of starting off unbelievably incompetent so that you can become unbelievably powerful in time? Thoughts?

Just expectation I suspect. There were a lot of complaints from folks during the HW era that beginning PCs were too powerful or advanced to quickly in campaign play. People were emotinally wedded to the model of farmboy becomes a hero (and in some sense HQ does draw on this Campbellian Journey of the Hero motif).

There is an advanced experience rule. See the index for the entry but it IIRC +1 to keywords per extra year of age, and in the example the narrator gives the player points to spend on keyword increases. So the system does define a way of doing it.

[Der_Renegat]

I was very confused with the whole meaning of masteries, too. In the end i think, you shouldn´t really take it too literally with the journeyman and mastercrafter description - see it more as an aid, something that might help you, to get a grip on the powerlevel.
Some other point for me was that the default resistance of 14, means a tendency for the resistance to "win". If you have no masteries and succeed the resistance is very likely to beat you (70%).
Thats why i wondered if a default resistance of 10 would have been more appropiate, because i found it more logical, if you succeed that your chances of really winning against the resistance would be fifty-fifty.
But as i see it, its a part of the gamedesign:
a successs versus a failure is a minor victory
a success versus a success is a marginal victory
if you have no training (no W) and succeed and the resistance, too, you get the smallest result possible.
all the best
Christian

[simon_hibbs]

However, characters don't start at that ability level.  A starting character does not have mastery for example in their occupational keyword.  

True, but they can be if they want to be. All characters get 20 points to spend on increasing their starting abilities, so for example they could easily start with 17W in one ability, or 7W in two of them, etc.


Simon Hibbs

[Balbinus]

However, characters don't start at that ability level.  A starting character does not have mastery for example in their occupational keyword.  

True, but they can be if they want to be. All characters get 20 points to spend on increasing their starting abilities, so for example they could easily start with 17W in one ability, or 7W in two of them, etc.


Simon Hibbs

Sure, but that doesn't make them a journeyman in that occupation still by any means.  They are someone who has reached journeyman ability in some few aspects of their occupation but not nearly all.  In most things associated with their occupation they are still pretty incompetent.

[Der_Renegat]

In most things associated with their occupation they are still pretty incompetent.

Another explanation might be how much education you can really find in your world compared to our modern world.
Today we have books available everywhere, trade corporations and standards for education and quality. But that was not the case in other times, where education was based on what somebody could teach you. And basic knowledge was not so widespread in comparison to today.
So no mastery means quite unprofessional work, while one mastery had some formal training or broad experience which might be rare.

Christian

[Balbinus]

In most things associated with their occupation they are still pretty incompetent.

Another explanation might be how much education you can really find in your world compared to our modern world.
Today we have books available everywhere, trade corporations and standards for education and quality. But that was not the case in other times, where education was based on what somebody could teach you. And basic knowledge was not so widespread in comparison to today.
So no mastery means quite unprofessional work, while one mastery had some formal training or broad experience which might be rare.

Christian

I take your point, but surely a journeyman smith is a journeyman smith.  That wouldn't be that rare.  Similarly a journeyman level potter would not be that rare a thing.  Journeyman isn't that high a threshold after all.

The real problem though is that the typical starting character faced with relatively low level resistances fails to a degree which makes him look incompetent.  Whatever the reason that strongly limits potential character concepts.

[soru]

Some other point for me was that the default resistance of 14, means a tendency for the resistance to "win".

Where did you get that from? I thought the default resistance was 6?

soru

[Balbinus]

I have it as 14 too, 6 is default for characters without a relevant trait I think.

[Paul Watson]

Yeah, the default is 14. I can't supply a page reference, as I don't have the book at my office.

I wrote up a simple program to determine the odds of various abilities vs. various resistances. Here's a sampling which I think is relevant to this discussion:

13 vs. 14: 47.5% chance of any victory
17 vs. 14: 49.0% chance of any victory
5W vs. 14: 54.25% chance of any victory
7W vs. 14: 57.0% chance of any victory

For the curious, my program can spit out a report for any arbitrary ability vs. any arbitrary resistance showing odds for any victory, any defeat, ties, and each level of victory and defeat. I have a table showing this data for 6 vs. 6 on up to 10w2 vs. 10w2. I'd rather not post it here as its pretty big (a smidge over 2000 lines), but I'll email it to anyone who would like a copy.

And having said all that, let me add that I'm not entirely happy with the competence level of the default starting PC. For one thing, I'd like to eventually see the players getting their characters to the point where, for example, the theists can learn cult secrets. Even for someone totally focussed on that goal, it requires a huge outlay of HPs.

I'm giving serious thought to employing one or more of the suggestions given in the GM advice section. I'm toying with having PCs start with 20 in their keywords, 17 in other abilities, and 30 points to spread around. I may even go teeny bit (1 or 2 points) higher.

Take care,
Paul Watson
_|_

[simon_hibbs]

Sure, but that doesn't make them a journeyman in that occupation still by any means.  They are someone who has reached journeyman ability in some few aspects of their occupation but not nearly all.  In most things associated with their occupation they are still pretty incompetent.

I'm not sure that a journeyman is expected to be at that level in every ability within a keyword. One or two should be enough IMHO, after all not all journeymen in a craft will have identical specialisations and whatnot. Functionaly, a character with a 17W in Close Combat but 17 in armour polishing, etc, is competent at the thing weaponthanes need to be competent at.

More generaly, I would dispute that a character with 17W in anything likely to be useful in the game is in any way a weak character. Limited perhaps, over-specialised even, but not weak.


Simon Hibbs

[Mike Holmes]

No, default level of ability is 6. Ability is resistance in most cases. For Magic use, the default is 14. Big difference.

I have a reconciliation viewpoint on this. The characters are somewhat incompetent, yes, just quite believably incompetent.

First, Max, does being a Journeyman really mean that someone knows how to do the entire profession at Journeyman level? I think not, actually. Each skill in an occupation keyword is sort of a specialization. Thus if I have some of the abilities associated with the keyword, then I think that people would consider me a Journeyman. Because I would focus on those tasks, and "fake" the rest with my 17.

I think this is perfectly representative of the 17 year old guy who just finished with being an apprentice, and is now a journeyman. In addition, if you really want to, you can take a +4 on five of the abilities in question, most of the keyword, and be almost the equivalent of a 1w Keyword. Sure there's all the "inbetween" stuff that's not covered by the listed Abilites. But, again, I think that the difference between 17 and 13 statistically (true novice level), not to mention 6, makes the character competent in these matters, effectively. In a very real world "we all mess up occasionally" sort of way.

(ever notive how the level of the Ability rating actually neatly coincides with the age of characters. If you assume that a starting character is 17, then it all makes a lot of sense. At 13, the character became an apprentice. At 17, he's not really a journeyman, but has some skills that would seem to approach it. Give him four more years, and at 21, he's a real journeyman in every way. Neat. Takes being a 40 year old vetran to have "seen it all.")

So, yep, farmboys all to start. Their "heroism" such as it is, is a budding thing at this point indicated by all the HP they have. Again, if that's not what you want to play, as I and others have pointed out, there are actual rules in the book for dealing with that option. Yes, they're not the default, but they work just as well (in fact I'm starting to really like the Advanced Experience stuff).

So I don't see the problem. If you want more experienced characters, then do it. Are farmboy starting characters a hoary cliche of RPGs? Yep, sure are. Good thing the game gives you a way out of that cliche.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

The above cross posted with Simon - we're saying a lot of the same stuff.

OTOH, Simon, 17W isn't available to the starting character. Limit of 10 points on any one Ability. Still 7W is probably better than 97% of the populace in that ability. Enough to be a young protagonist developing into the clan's next heroic defender.

The only sin I see in all of this is that the book wasn't more explicit that starting characters were inexperienced. That should have been with the system with a page reference straight to Advanced Experience. Better yet, they shouldn't have tried to hide the Advanced Experience section back in the narrator rules - should have been right up front with the other chargen as a normal option.

Mike

[Balbinus]

Thanks guys, I'm going to increase the PC's starting abilities a bit as per the Advanced Experience rules and then just retcon it.

The problem really isn't with the rules as Mike points out, it's with a certain lack of advice for new GMs to the system.  Although an experienced GM, I was completely surprised by the degree to which beginning characters are novices and I think that it is something which could have more attention drawn to it.

Mike, that competency/age parallel is interesting and very useful, thanks for that too.

[Mike Holmes]

I agree that the starting level of ability should have been clearer. But it is what it is, and you were able to suss it out. So I think it's a small matter. Again, if the Advanced Experience part had been up front, I think that would have helped a lot.

Mike, that competency/age parallel is interesting and very useful, thanks for that too.

Breaks down big time for elves? Can't have Elrond with a 10W300 in anything. :-)

That's supposed to be humorous, but I do think that, as others have pointed out. After a certain point, things become somewhat more difficult to obtain level to level. That is, it takes more than just a year of age to become a hero. So only some years count. So to speak. Or, rather, the GM should only give Advanced Experience for age very carefully after a point. In fact, I think it should start right off. Going with what me and Simon were saying, I think that the broad base of Ability for things really doesn't progress nearly at the rate of other narrow Ablities. Enough so that even a year is a bit too much for "realism's" sake. So only give that rate out with good narrative reason. Otherwise I think that a break of ten years between play might only be good for a couple of levels of Keyword in many cases. YMMV.

Mike