Something that I don't think was covered, adding a penalty for unskilled checks kinda screws you over for char generation. The basic implication when building a character is that starting out the challenges are such that you don't need to be trained in a skill to succeed. Thus you can put most of your points into attributes since you won't be raising them often later. Once you add a penalty then you pretty much either screw the guy who bought attributes over skills or screw the guy who doesn't want a penalty so invest in skills at the cost of not having good attributes.

That isn't to say that there aren't task that maybe one should be skilled at before performing, but that's kinda what the black dice are for. But the game inherently assumes that early challenges are more along the lines of things that can be accomplished without needing skill ranks. Penalties disrupt this basic assumption in char generation.

Except you do need to be trained in Planetary Pilot to even use a jetpack. So the concept of specific Skill ranks that represent a higher degree of required training to even attempt something is a layer of granularity that is included RAW in that example.

I think a GM wanting to add things along that line is well within the bounds of acceptable thinking, plus if houserules are laid out at CHARGEN no one is screwed. They're simply presented with additional house rule prereqs.

A Setback for unfamiliar ships is actually a great idea! Obviously it would go away fairly quickly, but starting out, that's fairly genius!

Also, the system makes the assumption that the character have a good basic "users" knowledge of the universe. Most people know some random tidbit of information about a lot of things like:

LA is big and in California and has Hollywood as a suburb

New York City is made up of 5 smaller cities or "Burroughs"

Also, take computers, most people can turn one on and use the programs on it at a basic level.

Driving, most people can get in a car or small truck and drive it in normal to severe weather conditions and at normal speeds. Compare this to a race car driver or a professional trucker who operate their vehicles much closer to the vehicle limits then a normal driver (find the Shaq vs. episode where he went head to head with Dale Ernhardt Jr on a small track).

Driving, most people can get in a car or small truck and drive it in normal to severe weather conditions and at normal speeds. Compare this to a race car driver or a professional trucker who operate their vehicles much closer to the vehicle limits then a normal driver (find the Shaq vs. episode where he went head to head with Dale Ernhardt Jr on a small track).

I do have a "however" to this:

A person can spend every day of their life, from the day they gain their license to the day they die, driving, and may be considered competent or very skilled drivers. If they spent all that time driving an automatic shift, however, and if they had to jump into the seat of a manual shift without proper instruction, they might find they're having more trouble than they are used to. Because even though a manual and an automatic share many of the same basic principles and all must follow the rules of the road, they do differ in what you have to do to actually drive a car. Somebody ignorant to how a manual works might not even be able to start the car, not knowing how to accelerate properly might cause the car to stall (this is especially problematic on a hill, as you could roll backwards and cause an accident), and not knowing how to shift properly can cause damage to the transmission itself. And not all manuals share the same layout. I had a stick shift that required you to pull a switch to shift into reverse. To a casual observer (even somebody who could drive stick, as my brother-in-law found) there didn't even look to be a switch.

Now, expand that kind of scenario to a galactic civilization, with untold millions of different possibilities instead of two.

Something that I don't think was covered, adding a penalty for unskilled checks kinda screws you over for char generation. The basic implication when building a character is that starting out the challenges are such that you don't need to be trained in a skill to succeed. Thus you can put most of your points into attributes since you won't be raising them often later. Once you add a penalty then you pretty much either screw the guy who bought attributes over skills or screw the guy who doesn't want a penalty so invest in skills at the cost of not having good attributes.

That isn't to say that there aren't task that maybe one should be skilled at before performing, but that's kinda what the black dice are for. But the game inherently assumes that early challenges are more along the lines of things that can be accomplished without needing skill ranks. Penalties disrupt this basic assumption in char generation.

Except you do need to be trained in Planetary Pilot to even use a jetpack. So the concept of specific Skill ranks that represent a higher degree of required training to even attempt something is a layer of granularity that is included RAW in that example.

I think a GM wanting to add things along that line is well within the bounds of acceptable thinking, plus if houserules are laid out at CHARGEN no one is screwed. They're simply presented with additional house rule prereqs.

That sounds like a rules exception as opposed to an indication that in general there should be penalties for unskilled checks. I'm not arguing that there should never ever ever be some kind of negative thing going on when you do something unskilled, just that a hard and fast penalty undermines the basic assumptions that character generation is based on, namely you don't need skills starting out and it's better to focus on attributes.

Are there situations that could change this? Sure, I don't know the jet pack rules off the top of my head but they sound like a good time to have a rules exception. And there are logical situations where not having Medicine should matter. But those should be case by case situations that are handled based on the merits of what's going on as opposed to a stead fast rule that penalizes people always.

And while announcing the house rule at char gen lets the players know in advanced it still screws them over. The char generation rules itself are built on the assumption. Changing the rule undermines that basic assumption and still screws them over. Knowing about it in advance doesn't change that.

Most of the basic rules are built on this assumption that you don't always need skills to succeed and/or do well. From character generation to how challenging something should be to combat to the pre generated adventures to NPC stat blocks to the dice themselves. You can't change one aspect without considering how it affects the rest of the inner game balance.

Driving, most people can get in a car or small truck and drive it in normal to severe weather conditions and at normal speeds. Compare this to a race car driver or a professional trucker who operate their vehicles much closer to the vehicle limits then a normal driver (find the Shaq vs. episode where he went head to head with Dale Ernhardt Jr on a small track).

I do have a "however" to this:

A person can spend every day of their life, from the day they gain their license to the day they die, driving, and may be considered competent or very skilled drivers. If they spent all that time driving an automatic shift, however, and if they had to jump into the seat of a manual shift without proper instruction, they might find they're having more trouble than they are used to. Because even though a manual and an automatic share many of the same basic principles and all must follow the rules of the road, they do differ in what you have to do to actually drive a car. Somebody ignorant to how a manual works might not even be able to start the car, not knowing how to accelerate properly might cause the car to stall (this is especially problematic on a hill, as you could roll backwards and cause an accident), and not knowing how to shift properly can cause damage to the transmission itself. And not all manuals share the same layout. I had a stick shift that required you to pull a switch to shift into reverse. To a casual observer (even somebody who could drive stick, as my brother-in-law found) there didn't even look to be a switch.

Now, expand that kind of scenario to a galactic civilization, with untold millions of different possibilities instead of two.

And each of those conditions is already covered in RAW via the addition of Setback to the roll.

Don't forget that the difficulty system starts at 'simple' and doesn't require a roll. And as each difficulty level is subjective, what is simple for one character may be moderate for another and would require a roll. I look at this on a case by case basis but generally don't adjust the difficulty unless I get a feeling that a character wouldn't' know how to do something. And then I might just add set-back dice to a roll or flip a destiny point.

As my players have focused on developing certain skills I have actually stopped asking them to roll for things that they would probably now find to be a simple task. So I guess that means that I have gone the other way, instead of punishing chararacters that don't have ranks in a skill I reward players that have invested in a skill by not making them roll for tasks all of the time. This not only speeds up the game but also shows that buying skill ranks to a high level is a worthwhile endeavour.

Generally speaking, the disadvantage you get from not having ranks in a skill stems from the fact that you cannot critically succeed at it and will have more chance of failing than succeeding, especially at lower levels for the stat.

Now granted, that doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't get setback dice for reasons related to a lack of training. A mechanic can't do their job properly without the right tools, which adds setback die. Someone who doesn't even know what tools they would need and just kind of muddle around using whatever they think might work would probably get more setback die. Similarly, someone who doesn't have access to the proper databases might have a hard time researching a subject. But someone who doesn't even know what the right database would look like is in danger of using the wrong database and drawing incorrect conclusions.

However, the scenario you noted (having 4 ability dice and thus being expected to do things untrained) isn't unreasonable. Remember that 2 is average, 3 is above average. Having a 4 is exceptional, representing a lot of untapped potential. Even untrained, characters who have a 4 in a stat are just naturally that good. You'd still throw in setback die where appropriate, but keep that in mind.

Except you do need to be trained in Planetary Pilot to even use a jetpack.

In fact, the rules do not ask for "ranks" or "training" explicitly; they only speak of the skill being "required". It's up to debate, whether it is doing so to make clear what skill should be applied, when a check becomes necessary.

Correct me, if there's been a clarification by the developers contrary to my interpretation.

In game terms, I have zero ranks in Mechanics. But I can still make my mechanic friend's job easier by holding a flashlight wherever he tells me. Thus, I impart a Boost die to his efforts.

That is what "unskilled assistance" is supposed to represent. You're just an extra pair of hands that has a 1/3 chance of not making any difference anyway.

So...IMO, that house rule is unnecessary.

Not in my experience. Holding the light isn't worth a blue die. Helping him find the bolts gone missing would be a separate task using perception... after he rolls that despair for lost parts.

My experience is that unskilled help is usually more hassle than help. Especially for mechanics.

Because doing you work in the dark makes things easier than the unskilled person holding a flashlight so you can actually see what you are doing...Said no Mechanic ever.

The guy holding the flashlight isn't adding a blue die for helping. He is cancelling a black die for poor lighting. If the lighting is good enough or the mechanic sees in the dark well enough he's no help at all.

As a GM I give setbacks for use of an untrained skill according to the type task and its relation to the characters career/specialization. You can have natural talent to fly, but it doesnt mean that you will jump right into X-Wing and fly it without some problems due to the lack of familiarity with starship instruments. I would give two or three setbacks to an archeologist, but only one to a mechanic. I would give no setbacks if a PC has the skill as a career skill but no ranks.

I've been thinking about this too. I feel like the best way to add a subtle penalty, is to just upgrade it once. I feel like being untrained in something means you're much more likely to not know how to put back a piece of technology, or properly suture a wound. I don't care how smart you are, I'm going to be worried if a nuclear physicist is trying to heal my critical injury, Or my doctor is trying to repair a hyperdrive.

Also the upgrade from a purple to a red doesn't increase the chances of failure that much. It just adds that opportunity for a critical complication.

this.

Few thoughts.

What is the purpose of adding unskilled penalty? Is it to make game more realistic? (IMO, bad option. This game is not anyway about realism.) Is it to give better challenges to your players? (Good, go for it.) Is is game balance issue? (is there imbalance?) I.e. what are you trying to fix? I'm NOT implying to any solutions which these questions. If it works for you, great, use it.

Personally I don't like the idea of default unskilled penalty. On the other hand, giving situational penalties on unskilled tests may be good thing (I often give some penalties to skill checks anyway). Personally I would disallow unskilled tests in certain situations. E.g. if PC wants to do brain surgery to other PC (or himself) but has no appropriate skill, "no you need to get him/her to proper doctor". Except when it would be better to game for PC with unskilled test to succeed at that task. IMO it's always situational. Setback die or difficulty upgrade (from destiny point) might also be appropriate. I always feel a bit pressed to use destiny points, because PCs use them fairly freely and I don't want them to run out of those, so unskilled use might be one good situation (but always situational, never as a rule) to flip those. Or setting stupendous difficulty instead of saying it's impossible, might be also sometimes appropriate. "Ok, so you want to slice BoSS database without computer skill to change the ships transponder code. Ok, difficulty is 5 red." I really like the upgrading option, for those situations I have the need to make the check slightly harder, because it adds the despair possibility.

When I first read EotE book, I was really happy when I found out there was no special unskilled penalty. I think it makes game flow more freely.

I'd call it a mix of balance and verisimilitude.

The latter is what lets us build a world that is believable and engaging, the former what keeps players on a similar footing with each other so that no one feels left out or useless.

The thing is, as of right now, attributes affect a great deal of skills. Being highly agile makes you a great sneak, a great shot with every ranged weapon there is, AND a great pilot. It also makes you a great tightrope walker. That is a LARGE spread of abilities, and I don't think it's unfair to throw in setback dice on the ones that are untrained noncareer skills to represent the fact that that while you have a lot of untapped talent in that areas, it IS untapped. A career skill I would be more hesitant to throw in setback dice for not having a rank; to me that represents something you've had training in, but haven't really invested any time or practice. On a similar token, a noncareer skill with ranks in it would represent something you've learned on your own, represented by the extra XP you had to invest to get those ranks.

Overall, it's really not any different from any other case of "add setback dice when appropriate." Someone who is untrained and unskilled in an area is going to have a harder go of it. About the only thing I'd sub in for adding setback dice would be upgrading the difficulty to introduce Despairs into the mix, since someone trying to accomplish certain tasks with no training certainly opens up a lot of opportunities for catastrophic failure.

Few thoughts, again. Below is list of how many skills are based on which characteristic as default.

AGI 7
BRA 4
CUN 5
INT 11
PRE 4
WIL 3

So, penalizing unskilled usage may penalize most PCs with high INT, next high AGI, etc. So question also is, do you as GM want to encourage PCs take as many skills as possible to one, or invest in only few. Again, neither is inherently better or worse. I'm just trying to outline, and understand (for myself), the good and bad aspects of penalizing unskilled skill usage.

Characteristics indicate raw talent. Someone smart is going to be able to figure out things quickly without formal training. A strong person can punch really hard without being taught martial arts. And so on. This doesn't seem unfair. Why shouldn't an untrained genius be potentially better at computer usage than a person of average intelligence with some formal training?

Keep in mind, lacking a skill point doesn't mean having a complete unfamiliarity with an activity, or no prior experience. It just means no formal training, or a lack of extensive practice at it.

On the other hand, an unskilled person will never, ever roll a Triumph no matter what (without flipping a DP or getting a boost some other way). Which is pretty limiting. So the advantage of having at least one rank in a skill is to have even a chance for a Triumph, which is a big deal.

It seems to work well as designed to me.

At a glance scathing tirade seems like a powerful ability, so I did some test rolls with a coercion check with 2 yellow and 2 green , it was just to see he often someone could trigger No Escape, which requires 2 advantage , the difficulty is two purple, and with the this dice pool I suspected it would trigger most of the time. Why is this relevant you might ask.

Well green dice have more success than purple have failure and as a result purple have more threat than Green have advantage. Also as has been pointed out Yellow have more chances of a double result , more advantage and less chance of a wipe on the dice.

The net result of this is that rolling X green vs X purple is weighted toward success with threat. In fact what happens when you increase X is that the likelihood and consistency of success increases as does the magnitude, similarly increasing the value of X has the effect also of increasing the likelihood, consistency and magnitude of threat being rolled. Without the yellow dice from skill ranks or additional blue dice to counter this it is quite difficult to overcome.

Moving back to the example I give above, you might find it hard to believe but outnumbering the purple dice by 2 and having 2 yellow in the pool I , as you would expect succeeded often on the coercion check but getting 2 advantage maybe occurred once every 6 or so rolls. Not what I expected. Sometimes you would get an anomalous roll of 5 or 6 but usually it would be blank or 1 threat that would come up (on the threat/advantage side normally I would get 3 or more success)

The upshot of this is the natural ability may not be enough to avoid threat with a check with equal purple or even 1 or 2 less when compared with green. This is the hidden cost of not having skill ranks. I'd personally leave untrained checks alone, that being said, completely unfamiliar technology should throw in setback. So this should be thrown in on occasion by GMs anyway. This could have the knock on effect of making knowledge skills more useful.

You jump into the strange wheeled and foul smelling vehicle, and you see an odd assortment of levers, pedal, dials, levers and switches make an appropriate knowledge check. The only clue to it's origin is that the word Ford is etched, in basic,at the back of it.

Knowledge (core) 4 purple, success, you have heard of type of odd vehicle before and you know a little of how it works, make you pilot(planetary) roll.

Knowledge (outer rim) 2 purple you remember being shown one of these vehicles when you landed on Tatooine where it was used on the rock plains, it is called a petrol car.

Knowledge (underworld) or streetwise with Talk the Talk 2 purple, Billy the fish , your Mon Cal wheel man drove one of these on your getaway, when he was shot you had to jump in and take over and you are familiar with it make a normal roll

Knowledge (Education) 3 purple , you studied this on your dissertation about backwater transport and even visited a museum where they had one on show along with a simulator

You failed your roll - you have no idea how to operate this thing, you starrt flipping switches and levers ina nearly vain attempt to get this working make your pilot roll with 1 increased difficulty.

Successful rolls get a normal roll, failure gets the difficulty increased by 1. 1 or 2 threat add 1 or 2 setback, 3 threat (or a despair if you flipped a DP on the knowledge check, you naughty Gm) upgrade the difficulty and get some red in there, or an combination thereof, so failed roll of 7 threat would be 2 upgrades 1 setback and an increased difficulty (remind me not to accept a car ride from this player, I'm not liking the look of his luck)

So normally it's not an issue for most mundane or familiar things ,but does allow the gm to offer the a player a penalty for dealing with the completely unfamiliar fairly and spicing things up at the same time. Also keeps it in line with the rules, and may even mean that the knowledge geek (yeah, you,the doctor at the back) may be the better driver on this occasion putting everyone out of their comfort zone if the situation demands it and reminding people that it's not always a good idea to overspecialize.

Of course your mileage may vary (pun intended)

Here’s what Litheon’s dice calculator says about the probabilities of rolling two yellow plus two green and two purple, and hitting the target of two Advantage or more:

$ ./dicecalculator.rb -D:PPAADD -T:AA

++++RESULTS for Dice Pool: PPAADD++++
Total Chance of Success: 79.87%
Total Chance of Advantage: 62.22%
Total Chance of Threat: 18.0%
Total Chance of Failure Symbol: 7.75%
Total Chance of Reaching Target (AA): 39.48%
Total Triumph Chance: 15.97%
+++++++++++++++

$ ./dicecalculator.rb -D:PPAADD -T:SAA

++++RESULTS for Dice Pool: PPAADD++++
Total Chance of Success: 79.87%
Total Chance of Advantage: 62.22%
Total Chance of Threat: 18.0%
Total Chance of Failure Symbol: 7.75%
Total Chance of Reaching Target (SAA): 24.78%
Total Triumph Chance: 15.97%
+++++++++++++++

The figures in the first lot were what I was expecting, but the results I was getting closer to the 25% on the second set , may just have been my luck but I tried about 2 batches of 20 rolls.

From my latest Session Zero sheet:

Skills

• Knowledge skills may be used untrained, but the difficulty for using these skills untrained is increased by 1 to represent a lack of basic understanding of the subject.
• Astrogation, Computers, Mechanics, Medicine, Piloting (Planetary), Piloting (Space), and all combat skills may be used untrained, but the difficulty for using these skills untrained is upgraded by 1 to represent the inherent danger of using such skills without proper instruction.
• When making a Medicine check to heal a critical wound, if the acting character does not have Medicine trained, the difficulty is upgraded by the number of critical injuries the injured character has suffered.

The idea wasn't to make it a more realistic game as much as make it grittier. I think it worked well.