TL Tedium

mike wrote:
> If the TL8 expects this manual typewriter to do all the
> things a DTP prog is made for then fire 'em quick
>
>> All these can be worked around by the TL 8 secretary but it is going to
>> take time and lower their efficiency for awhile.
>
> Lower the efficiency is fine, but i don't see as it
> translates into lowering skill, or even worthy of being
> dubbed a different skill.
> Take Computer Programming, that uses keyboard skills.
> Should they get 'Typing: Word processor' skill by proxy?

No. I know a lot of programmers that can not type but use the hunt and
peck method. Personally, I learned to type on a manual typewriter over
40 years ago. It still took me time to learn what I have learned of
word processing even though I program computers for a living. I figure
that the time I spent learning how to do the most common tasks amounts
to learning the skill at TL7/8 in GURPS.
The thing to remember about the rules are that they are guidelines for
the GM to use. A GM could decide that the TL8 secretary has no problems
figuring out the TL6 typewriter and let it go at that. Or they could
decide that the TL8 word processor skill is inapplicable to the TL6
typewriter and require the secretary to learn a new skill. Or they
could apply a penalty for a short time.

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 21:46:28 +0000 (UTC), Bent C Dalager
<bcd RemoveThis @pvv.ntnu.no> wrote:

<<<#>>> mike refering to a Typewriter emulating DTP.
>> If all you are attempting is well within the realm of a
>> normal typewriter, you would not need most/all of that.
>
>Probably not, but the seasoned MS Word user would expect them to be
>there and trip up after writing half a page and suddenly realizing he
>cannot simply reformat his paragraph but would have to write the
>entire page anew to achieve that. The seasoned typewriter user, on the
>other hand, would be instinctively aware of this and so would put more
>thought into the structure of the page before typing it in the first
>place.
>
>The MS Word expert might not realize how to set the tabulators on the
>typewriter (or may not even realize that it is possible) and may
>either spend considerable time trying to figure this out, or else
>spend more time manually lining up his columns neatly and probably
>miss them once or twice. This adds to his time use and also detracts
>from the result.

Umm, yes. but that is why i suggested Int rolls might be
useful. Not everyone would fall into those traps, would
they?
Having said that, i find myself showing people at work how
to do the basic of things. then again i'm the only one who
types with all fingers....

>>in fact i said somewhere that you would
>> expect to be slower, but not necessarily worse.
>> Which could be that minus.
>
>Well, yes, in GURPS you get to choose whether you want to be slow or
>sloppy though

Not realy a choice that, then. my defalt will be 'take
longer at new tasks.'

>> It's not the magnitude of the penalty, it is its existance
>> that's sand in my gears.
>
>You have really admitted to the reasonableness of the penalty when you
>say that you would expect the high-TL user to be slower. This is the
>most immediately obvious effect of a -1 penalty for someone who has
>the time to do the job properly.

But the penalty comes from your skill, and that doesn't
chime well in my mind. Someone shouldn't become (closer to)
inept when they are normaly competent.
That is like a good Juggler suddenly becoming 'all thumbs'
to exaggerate a tinsy little bit

>>>Generally speaking, an alien device created for a different species in
>>>a different language would not give a -1 penalty.
>>
>> No, but to have to buy the skill for each TL you intend to
>> visit seems very unjustified.
>
>You don't have to buy it for each TL. Foo/TL5 defaults to Foo/TL6 at
>-1. You only have to buy it if you want to get serious about it and
>master the other TL. Most people won't bother.

I wonder what that means, a Foo/TL5 at -1 still gets all the
benifits of the TL6 enviroment they are in?
That's quite good.
Unless i am reading you backwards. Am i?

>The master marksman with Guns/TL8-20 is still going to fire at
>Guns/TL5-17 - which is quite respectable and calls for some special
>circumstances to justify buying up Guns/TL5 further. The penalties in
>question just aren't dealbreakers in those situations that I think you
>are thinking about. In many cases they're not even annoying.

I suppose so, at skill that high
I'm not used to characters that proficient

>Cheers,
> Bent D
Ta,
Mike

On 2008-12-04, mike <mikespam.DeleteThis@invariant.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 21:46:28 +0000 (UTC), Bent C Dalager
><bcd.DeleteThis@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote:
>>
>>The MS Word expert might not realize how to set the tabulators on the
>>typewriter (or may not even realize that it is possible) and may
>>either spend considerable time trying to figure this out, or else
>>spend more time manually lining up his columns neatly and probably
>>miss them once or twice. This adds to his time use and also detracts
>>from the result.
>
> Umm, yes. but that is why i suggested Int rolls might be
> useful. Not everyone would fall into those traps, would
> they?

Why introduce even more rolls for this? The player is already rolling
for his skill so this takes care of the random element. The reduced
chance of success is handled by the malus. If it's an IQ skill then
the character's Int is also taken into account. If it's a DX skill
then just accept that GURPS isn't a simulation.

>>Well, yes, in GURPS you get to choose whether you want to be slow or
>>sloppy though
>
> Not realy a choice that, then. my defalt will be 'take
> longer at new tasks.'

Surely it would also depend on the situation? If your report is on a
deadline you may not have the time to spare, you may even have to rush
the job for further penalties (B346).

And, of course, others may want to prioritize differently from you as
a matter of course.

>>You have really admitted to the reasonableness of the penalty when you
>>say that you would expect the high-TL user to be slower. This is the
>>most immediately obvious effect of a -1 penalty for someone who has
>>the time to do the job properly.
>
> But the penalty comes from your skill, and that doesn't
> chime well in my mind. Someone shouldn't become (closer to)
> inept when they are normaly competent.

The penalty doesn't come from your skill so much as it is applied to
it. I really don't see this argument at all. Are you also opposed to
unfamiliarity penalties? Situational penalties? When a shooter incurs
a -1 penalty for darkness, do you see this as him "becoming more
inept"? This is not how I am reading the situation at all.

> That is like a good Juggler suddenly becoming 'all thumbs'
> to exaggerate a tinsy little bit

A good juggler doesn't become all thumbs from a -1 penalty. So long as
we are dicussing word processors and typewriters, this is the scale
we're at. For -3, -5 etc. the examples we would have to employ would
also make it clearer what the hurdles are for the unaccustomed: a word
processing expert may not have the muscle training or patience
necessary to hand-write a document with quill and ink and tire so fast
he's either going to produce an unreadable mess or else have to use
many times the normal time writing the document. If he is even capable
of producing legible handwriting in the first place.

Note, though, that neither Writing nor Artist (Calligraphy) are TL
skills so our examples are probably terrible anyway :-/

>>You don't have to buy it for each TL. Foo/TL5 defaults to Foo/TL6 at
>>-1. You only have to buy it if you want to get serious about it and
>>master the other TL. Most people won't bother.
>
> I wonder what that means, a Foo/TL5 at -1 still gets all the
> benifits of the TL6 enviroment they are in?
> That's quite good.
> Unless i am reading you backwards. Am i?

Someone with the skill Foo/TL6-15 defaults to having Foo/TL5-14 so
would roll against 14 in a TL5 context.

Someone with the skill Foo/TL5-15 defaults to having Foo/TL6-10 if
it's an IQ skill or Foo/TL6-14 if it's not. Note that in the latter
case at least, short-term unfamiliarity penalties probably also apply.

>>The master marksman with Guns/TL8-20 is still going to fire at
>>Guns/TL5-17 - which is quite respectable and calls for some special
>>circumstances to justify buying up Guns/TL5 further. The penalties in
>>question just aren't dealbreakers in those situations that I think you
>>are thinking about. In many cases they're not even annoying.
>
> I suppose so, at skill that high
> I'm not used to characters that proficient

Lower skilled characters may or may not want to take steps to get
bonuses when working with unfamiliar equipment. Compensating for a -1
is usually trivial, -3 doable and -5 somewhat tricky.

Cheers,
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd.DeleteThis@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:34:33 +0000, mike
<mikespam.TakeThisOut@invariant.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:


>>But if you think
>>there isn't a lot that a TL 8 metallurgist doesn't know about the
>>hands on work of a TL 4 blacksmith, you are sorely mistaken.
>
>That's very good! I had to go and think a bit.
>So let me ask, would you ever have a TL8 metallurgist act
>like a TL 4 blacksmith?

Yes I would. His priority would be trying to improve metal-working
and in order to do that, he'd have to have a firm grounding in what is
actually possible then and there. You can't just go around telling
the locals the melting point of aluminum because that won't do them
any good. Their forges can't achieve that heat. He'd have to
reinvent the blast furnace. Did you ever read the story about the
time-travelling engineer who ends up with a bunch of vikings and his
over-ambitious attempts to improve their technology all go awry?

I think though that I wouldn't represented a broader tech base of
knowledge with a separate skil, but with a perk.

mike schrieb:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:45:33 +0100, Tobias Heidelmann
> <tobias.heidelmann.RemoveThis@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>
> <<<#>>>
>> somehow still stubbornly refuse to believe that, try using an old
>> typewriter for your next letter instead of sending an email. And see how
>> fast you can type.
>>
>> Tobias.
>
> He he, i have an 'unfair' advantage with that, i have owned
> all three, pure manual typewriter, electric and 'puter with
> word processor program
then i really cannot understand you. You should know the difference
between the machines. -1 to skill is perfectly ok. And if you take your
time with the old machine, it is the same skill level.

> Sadly, I’m also a bit dyslexic, so i prefer the computer
> because it compensates for my failings.
>
> Mike : -)
>
>> And see how fast you can type.
> Anyhow, what's the rush ?

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:15:57 +0100, Tobias Heidelmann
<tobias.heidelmann DeleteThis @alice-dsl.net> wrote:

<<<#>>>
>then i really cannot understand you. You should know the difference
>between the machines. -1 to skill is perfectly ok. And if you take your
>time with the old machine, it is the same skill level.

I'm not sure i can explain it properly.
If i let you know what i'd have done instead it might help?
I would have, had i been the GM, not applied the minus one
for similar tech.
I would have added the time (with no bonus) and if
applicable noted there could be problems later (upped the
malf for example) to represent the inexperience with the
'lowtech' equipment and its possible misuse, but not if they
made the Int checks (two or three at most).
'Hitech' equipment might be able to do more than the
character realises at the time, but otherwise acts as good
quality tools (not enough for a bonus), an Int or two rolls
to realise how it can help, for a cut in time (they would
have normaly) taken or/and an improved result/product.

Now that makes sense to me, so do you see
where i'm coming from ?

****
I don't suppose there is an advantage that already exists
that can nullify this tech penalty ?

Mike : -)

On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:02:22 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"
<_mwryder.DeleteThis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

mike >>
>> Lower the efficiency is fine, but i don't see as it
>> translates into lowering skill, or even worthy of being
>> dubbed a different skill.
>> Take Computer Programming, that uses keyboard skills.
>> Should they get 'Typing: Word processor' skill by proxy?
>
>No. I know a lot of programmers that can not type but use the hunt and
>peck method.

Evil mode: Give em a speed penalty ] /evil

>Personally, I learned to type on a manual typewriter over
>40 years ago. It still took me time to learn what I have learned of
>word processing even though I program computers for a living. I figure
>that the time I spent learning how to do the most common tasks amounts
>to learning the skill at TL7/8 in GURPS.

But you can use the keys, as can i. So would you agree that
we have a headstart in word processing?
That seems to be missing. Or more likely it's me missing
something. Again. <sigh>

>The thing to remember about the rules are that they are guidelines for
>the GM to use. A GM could decide that the TL8 secretary has no problems
>figuring out the TL6 typewriter and let it go at that. Or they could
>decide that the TL8 word processor skill is inapplicable to the TL6
>typewriter and require the secretary to learn a new skill. Or they
>could apply a penalty for a short time.

I think i go for the last two. An all new skill, or a short
term penalty.

Thanks,
Mik

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:32:27 GMT, David Johnston
<david.TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:

>>>But if you think
>>>there isn't a lot that a TL 8 metallurgist doesn't know about the
>>>hands on work of a TL 4 blacksmith, you are sorely mistaken.
mike>>
>>That's very good! I had to go and think a bit.
>>So let me ask, would you ever have a TL8 metallurgist act
>>like a TL 4 blacksmith?
>
>Yes I would. His priority would be trying to improve metal-working
>and in order to do that, he'd have to have a firm grounding in what is
>actually possible then and there.

Humm. Nice plan that. It assumes very long term residence,
and that you'd be permited to do it, could be game reasons
why you wouldn't be.
I was assuming the inverse: short stay, and trying to
convince another that it is your forté, hiding your higher
level.
Can you emulate the TL 4 skill with the TL 8 version?

>Did you ever read the story about the
>time-travelling engineer who ends up with a bunch of vikings and his
>over-ambitious attempts to improve their technology all go awry?

No, tried to search Ask for it but all i did find was a
"Time-Travelling Cat and the Viking". I like stories of this
ilk, could you give me a little more to narrow it down?

>I think though that I wouldn't represented a broader tech base of
>knowledge with a separate skil, but with a perk.

Oh? You've 'perked' my interest, hows it work?

thanks, very interestinig stuff.
Will chew it over the weekend.

mik

mike wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:02:22 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"
> <_mwryder DeleteThis @worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> mike >>
>>> Lower the efficiency is fine, but i don't see as it
>>> translates into lowering skill, or even worthy of being
>>> dubbed a different skill.
>>> Take Computer Programming, that uses keyboard skills.
>>> Should they get 'Typing: Word processor' skill by proxy?
>> No. I know a lot of programmers that can not type but use the hunt and
>> peck method.
>
> Evil mode: Give em a speed penalty ] /evil
>
>> Personally, I learned to type on a manual typewriter over
>> 40 years ago. It still took me time to learn what I have learned of
>> word processing even though I program computers for a living. I figure
>> that the time I spent learning how to do the most common tasks amounts
>> to learning the skill at TL7/8 in GURPS.
>
> But you can use the keys, as can i. So would you agree that
> we have a headstart in word processing?
> That seems to be missing. Or more likely it's me missing
> something. Again. <sigh>
>

I don't think someone that can use a keyboard has any real head start in
using a word processor. I don't know if you have ever tried to use
Office 2007 but I gave up as it slowed me down so much trying to find
the right commands. The same occurred when I first started using word
processors, starting with a pure DOS program. It was faster some times
but having the full control of a typewriter was sometimes much faster.
Especially with tasks such as addressing envelopes. I still use a
typewriter for that:)
The TL penalties are to keep someone like a Civil War gunsmith repairing
a Vulcan mini-gun as easily as the 1865 Gatling guns he is familiar
with. The same with a modern doctor trying to operate in a Civil War
battlefield without his drugs and tools.


>> The thing to remember about the rules are that they are guidelines for
>> the GM to use. A GM could decide that the TL8 secretary has no problems
>> figuring out the TL6 typewriter and let it go at that. Or they could
>> decide that the TL8 word processor skill is inapplicable to the TL6
>> typewriter and require the secretary to learn a new skill. Or they
>> could apply a penalty for a short time.
>
> I think i go for the last two. An all new skill, or a short
> term penalty.
>
> Thanks,
> Mik
>

On 2008-12-05, mike <mikespam.TakeThisOut@invariant.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 00:30:32 +0000 (UTC), Bent C Dalager
><bcd.TakeThisOut@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote:
>
>>
>>Surely it would also depend on the situation? If your report is on a
>>deadline you may not have the time to spare, you may even have to rush
>>the job for further penalties (B346).
>
> If i'm that bad with the tools in use, they better add
> someone to use it on my behalf

Who is "they"? If you have the luxury to hire someone else to do the
job for you then the problem doesn't really exist in the first place.

> Rushing on a new device would slow you down all the more,
> confuse and demoralise.

Or else just produce an inferior result.

>>And, of course, others may want to prioritize differently from you as
>>a matter of course.
>
> They can, I might wish it were possible to accomidate them.
> But if they think this can be sprung onto someone cold, and
> expect anything at all sensable/useable or just 'at all'
> they are dreaming.

I have no idea what you mean with the above.

>>The penalty doesn't come from your skill so much as it is applied to
>>it. I really don't see this argument at all.
>
> Thing is, they made this a skill. And the system notes it
> costs cp to learn. Every Tech level another skill, so it's
> more cp.

Only if you insist on learning them all. Generally speaking, however,
that is a silly approach. Instead you default them off of the skills
that you /do/ have.

> I'd just have been happier if it were simply a
> skill now available at this TL, and given it a different
> name.

How would this work?

>>Situational penalties? When a shooter incurs
>>a -1 penalty for darkness, do you see this as him "becoming more
>>inept"? This is not how I am reading the situation at all.
>
> Applies equaly to all, anyone shooting back suffers the
> same. Again i'm fine.

This would depend entirely on the situation. You may be standing in
the light while your enemies are in the dark. In this situation you
get a penalty but they do not. Or perhaps everyone is in the dark but
your enemies have some sort of nightvision ability.

>>Note, though, that neither Writing nor Artist (Calligraphy) are TL
>>skills so our examples are probably terrible anyway :-/
>
> Yes, and i doubt the word processing Skill default to/from
> Writing or Artist

There isn't a word processing skill. You would use Writing for that
much of the time.

>>Someone with the skill Foo/TL5-15 defaults to having Foo/TL6-10 if
>>it's an IQ skill or Foo/TL6-14 if it's not. Note that in the latter
>>case at least, short-term unfamiliarity penalties probably also apply.
>
> I see, Is that Foo/TL6-10 correct? (I don't own the book you
> see. I just borrow it now and then.) That's quite a jump!

When trying to use IQ-based skills from a TL higher than your own you
get -5 per TL difference, so yes.

Cheers,
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd.TakeThisOut@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:35:46 +0000, mike
<mikespam.TakeThisOut@invariant.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 00:30:32 +0000 (UTC), Bent C Dalager
><bcd.TakeThisOut@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote:
>
><<#>> mike>>
>>> Umm, yes. but that is why i suggested Int rolls might be
>>> useful. Not everyone would fall into those traps, would
>>> they?
>>
>>Why introduce even more rolls for this? The player is already rolling
>>for his skill so this takes care of the random element. The reduced
>>chance of success is handled by the malus. If it's an IQ skill then
>>the character's Int is also taken into account. If it's a DX skill
>>then just accept that GURPS isn't a simulation.
>
>I suppose it's because i see only some people would have a
>problem, and the Gurps approach is 'everyone has the
>problem'.

A success is a success. If you are skilled enough you will have no
problems.

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:35:47 +0000, mike
<mikespam DeleteThis @invariant.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:32:27 GMT, David Johnston
><david DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
>
>>>>But if you think
>>>>there isn't a lot that a TL 8 metallurgist doesn't know about the
>>>>hands on work of a TL 4 blacksmith, you are sorely mistaken.
> mike>>
>>>That's very good! I had to go and think a bit.
>>>So let me ask, would you ever have a TL8 metallurgist act
>>>like a TL 4 blacksmith?
>>
>>Yes I would. His priority would be trying to improve metal-working
>>and in order to do that, he'd have to have a firm grounding in what is
>>actually possible then and there.
>
>Humm. Nice plan that. It assumes very long term residence,
>and that you'd be permited to do it, could be game reasons
>why you wouldn't be.

The example that came to my mind was a Banestormed modern person.

>I was assuming the inverse: short stay, and trying to
>convince another that it is your forté, hiding your higher
>level.
>Can you emulate the TL 4 skill with the TL 8 version?

At a minus 7 from skill or default from IQ, whichever is better.

>
>>Did you ever read the story about the
>>time-travelling engineer who ends up with a bunch of vikings and his
>>over-ambitious attempts to improve their technology all go awry?
>
>No, tried to search Ask for it but all i did find was a
>"Time-Travelling Cat and the Viking". I like stories of this
>ilk, could you give me a little more to narrow it down?

All I remember is that the moral was "You can only railroad when it's
railroading time".

>
>>I think though that I wouldn't represented a broader tech base of
>>knowledge with a separate skil, but with a perk.
>
>Oh? You've 'perked' my interest, hows it work?

Perks are used to give minor bonuses. You could use one to broaden
the TL range of a skill.


>
>thanks, very interestinig stuff.
>Will chew it over the weekend.
>
>mik

mike schrieb:
> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:15:57 +0100, Tobias Heidelmann
> <tobias.heidelmann.TakeThisOut@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>
> <<<#>>>
>> then i really cannot understand you. You should know the difference
>> between the machines. -1 to skill is perfectly ok. And if you take your
>> time with the old machine, it is the same skill level.
>
> I'm not sure i can explain it properly.
> If i let you know what i'd have done instead it might help?
> I would have, had i been the GM, not applied the minus one
> for similar tech.
> I would have added the time (with no bonus) and if
> applicable noted there could be problems later (upped the
> malf for example) to represent the inexperience with the
> 'lowtech' equipment and its possible misuse, but not if they
> made the Int checks (two or three at most).
The -1 to skill gives you more flexibility. It allows the character to
complete his task faster while accepting possible mistakes. And all with
just one die roll.
Why exactly intelligence checks? this makes no sense. If the character
knows this particular skill at IQ+4, it should reflect. It should be a
skill roll by all means. (supposing typewriting is an IQ based skill,
which i would argue against, but i am too lazy to look up the rules,
maybe it is IQ based).
So, according to your solution the character needs to pass one or more
IQ rolls (which he is more likely to fail than a check in a skill he is
more profient with) and still a skill check to see if he makes any
mistakes. This is much more complicated. And what exactly is the
benefit? All you want to answer is the question if the character can
cope with unfamiliar (older or newer) tech. A single skill roll (with
maybe a modifier) is more than sufficient for answering the question.

all the above is true for vaguely familiar tech.

If however you are dealing with completely alien technology, like
handing a caveman a TL12 multi-purpose portable scanning device.. well..
then i would generally rule that this tech cannot be understood bacause
it is so far from anything familiar that not even an IQ check is
adequate. Even if the caveman has IQ 20. The underlying concepts are
just too strange.


> 'Hitech' equipment might be able to do more than the
> character realises at the time, but otherwise acts as good
> quality tools (not enough for a bonus), an Int or two rolls
> to realise how it can help, for a cut in time (they would
> have normaly) taken or/and an improved result/product.
>
> Now that makes sense to me, so do you see
> where i'm coming from ?

yeah, i guess from happy-die-rolling-country?

You want to replace a single skill check with up to three separate die
rolls. THIS seems tedious to me. I really can see no benefit in the
additional rolls. It just lowers the character´s chances of success. A
skill is usually higher than the underlying attribute. Having to pass
two IQ checks and a skill check instead of a skill check actually lowers
chances of success.

Take the secretary. Lets assume IQ 10 and typewriting/TL8 14. According
to the rules she has to pass a check against 11 in a TL6 environment if
she is in a hurry.
You on the other hand demand up to three checks against 10 if she is in
a hurry (any maybe still a skill check to determine if she types correctly).

An IQ-roll is only neccessary if the skill does not exist in a higher
TL. E.g. someone who only communicates with a computer verbally (say TL
10) and is totally unfamiliar with the concept of a keyboard (lets not
argue if this is likely or not). If such a person wants to use a
typewriter an IQ-check might (depending on and modified for
circumstances) be neccessary. But after that if the persons wants to
type he should use the skill at default.

T.


>
> ****
> I don't suppose there is an advantage that already exists
> that can nullify this tech penalty ?
>
> Mike : -)