So I've got a big homebrew I've been working on. It's starts as ancient fantasy setting (late bronze, early iron age). A campaign will eventually morph into "sandal punk" with some early steam technology when remnants of a bygone era are rediscovered. Mechanics (renamed Crafting) is going to be an important skill as various advances are discovered such as steel, gunpowder, and steam.

Crafting (Mechanics) covers way too many actions. Crafting could be used to build and repair - weapons, armor, boats, large ships, a keep, a bridge, a catapult, a bombard, a zeppelin, a matchlock pistol, etc, etc. Thus, I started going with Crafting being an ability to do basic crafts and repairs, but talents are needed to unlock further advanced or specialized abilities. This got me thinking that other skills that cover a long range of things could benefit from the same sort of house rule, which I've dubbed "Familiarities" for now. For example, Riding is basic mount riding. You find a flying creature? Well you need the Sky Rider talent to be able to use Riding on it safely.

So, the question. I've thought of doing this in two different ways. One would be to limit a player from even attempting a certain ability without having the appropriate familiarity talent. A character with Crafting could not decide to use it for building a ship without the Shipwright talent, for example. Each skill that has familiarities will point out what can and can't be done without the appropriate talent. That's Option 1.

Option 2 was brought about when I thought of how players will always want to attempt things regardless pointing out, "but why can't I try with some sort of penalty?" So, with Option 2 I've thought of giving a penalty for some skill's abilities unless you have become "familiar" by picking up a talent for it. So, Crafting could be attempted to repair the big naval vessel without the Shipwright talent, but there will be a penalty.

What penalty? At first this seemed to be the thing to throw a Setback at. But, with more consideration I figured it needed to be more harsh. With just a Setback, a high skilled Crafting character may not bother with specializing and spending XP on certain crafting talents. It's just a Setback die that a Crafting 4+ character will brush aside as a nothing. So, I've thought I might give the base "unfamiliar" penalty an automatic Failure result. Even a seasoned crafter won't like to add an automatic failure when he finds himself commonly performing an unfamiliar ability, and thus consider investing in the appropriate talent.

Thoughts? Confusions?

Talent's should feel impactful. Those that get the most scuff when I run are those that make certain skills Career. Investing in a talent that only gives your player permission to creatively engage in your session feels bad. So I says "nope" to Option 1. As for Option 2, I would suggesting checking out the Crafting and Vehicle-Building rules in realms of Terrinoth and the Expanded Player's Guide, respectively, and modify those to your needs. Rules for "realism" in an RPG game can be replaced with "consistency" and no one will know.

26 minutes ago, HaphazardNinja said:

Investing in a talent that only gives your player permission to creatively engage in your session feels bad. So I says "nope" to Option 1.

I have to admit I was weighing heavily towards Option 2, thanks for an additional vote that way which could help me decide.

26 minutes ago, HaphazardNinja said:

As for Option 2, I would suggesting checking out the Crafting and Vehicle-Building rules in realms of Terrinoth and the Expanded Player's Guide, respectively, and modify those to your needs. Rules for "realism" in an RPG game can be replaced with "consistency" and no one will know.

This is one of the reasons I'm here. Terrinoth explains that Mechanics (Crafting) covers "very different trades", but offers absolutely nothing to counter that problem. The vehicle rules in the EPG are for the GM to design new vehicles. There's nothing to help with differentiation of Mechanics. Thus, I came up with "familiarities" for skills, not just Mechanics.

In your opinion, is automatic 1 failure too harsh?

Yes, it is. Add Threat, Difficulty, and/or Setback (In decreasing severity).

In our games, we add setback dice for unfamiliar conditions (that would cover your flying mount situation or building a boat when you're used to carts). After the character has tried it out, it is no longer unfamiliar, and they do not have the setback dice on future rolls. If I want to emphasize that something could really go wrong, I spent a story point to upgrade the difficulty.

If you truly believe that way too many things are covered under one skill in your campaign setting, then break them out into separate skills. This is already modeled by the many types of Knowledge in Terrinoth, or the different ways combat skills are handled in the Core Rulebook. I've played games with Melee, Ranged-Light, Ranged-Heavy, and Gunnery. I've played ones with Melee-Light, Melee-Heavy and just Ranged. I've heard of other people including Powdered weapons as a separate skill or Artillery weapons that are based on Intellect. In your situation, maybe you want Crafting (Mechanical) and Crafting (Steam)... or some such division.

17 hours ago, jendefer said:

In our games, we add setback dice for unfamiliar conditions (that would cover your flying mount situation or building a boat when you're used to carts). After the character has tried it out, it is no longer unfamiliar, and they do not have the setback dice on future rolls. If I want to emphasize that something could really go wrong, I spent a story point to upgrade the difficulty.

My original thoughts started along this line. But, I feared keeping track of what a character was familiar with or not. I kinda wanted something that is marked on the character sheet to keep track. Perhaps I shouldn't worry about it so much. But, I've toyed with it enough that my "familiarity" system is now imbedded in my character creation. A character's background and career/template specialties have familiarity options to choose from. As in a character could pick "Smith" as a background familiarity in order to use Crafting for making weapons of war and armor, not just basic tools, without an unfamiliarity penalty. These familiarities could also be picked up during play through talents or just GM fiat if the character has done something long enough to become familiar. Then, check the category off on the character sheet to help recall what the character is familiar with.

For example, I would probably add a setback or difficulty die for a Streetwise attempt in a new town. After a bit of time spent there, remove it, like you suggested. But, during character creation the character could purchase the "Tier 1 Well Traveled" talent that removes this unfamiliar penalty in towns the character could have visited before gameplay (so not a secret city hidden in the mountains). This same talent could also be granted perhaps by a Nomad background or selection of a traveling career such as a Merchant or Minstrel. I like these added details that helped describe what the PC was before gameplay.

17 hours ago, jendefer said:

If you truly believe that way too many things are covered under one skill in your campaign setting, then break them out into separate skills.....In your situation, maybe you want Crafting (Mechanical) and Crafting (Steam)... or some such division.

I had considered this also, but had issues. The campaign starts with the idea that steam-era tech has been lost, but is awaiting re-discovery. So, a character could not purchase Crafting (steam) or Crafting (firearms), for example, during character creation. But, it could be something that could be picked up later when discovered. So, you might have a character who wants to be a tinkerer start with Crafting (mechanical). He becomes a master smith and tinkerer investing lots of XP in that route. Then one day he comes upon the remains of a partially sunken and half-destroyed ironclad. During exploration of the remains, and perhaps some dice rolling to understand what he has found, he has a eureka moment and starts the process of building his own experimental steam engine. This master tinkerer with Crafting (mechanical) 5 would then be allowed to purchase Crafting (steam) at level 1. All of the XP put into his previous Crafting skill would give him no advantage over another character who had the same discovery but never put any XP in Crafting (mechanical) at all. He's already invested heavily in what is just a support skill (not a magical skill, melee, ranged, etc) and now has to start all over if he wants to expand on his tinkerer into steam tech....then he finds an old musket and has to invest even more?

Thus, birth of a "familiarity" system. Crafting could be the only skill, but discoveries could lead to slowly becoming familiar (removing penalties) for things like steam tech, hot air balloons, firearms, gunpowder, etc.

My hope was for a simple/elegant enough familiarity system to allow it to be used for other skills. For example, suppose a character had invested quite a bit in Gunnery which is used for such things as catapults and ballista on their sailing ship. Then, his buddy the master tinkerer discovers gunpowder and firearms tech and builds a small but crude bombard. The Gunnery character would not need to invest in a new Artillery skill. But, could invest some in-game narrative and XP in becoming familiar with the Bombard/Mortars familiarity. Until the character was familiar, I could be adding a penalty (setback or difficulty die) and possibly having fun with upgrading a roll. Despair? You lit the fuse at its base, the bombard went off before you could aim it, and you just blew a hole in your ship's deck. The master tinkerer yells at the gunner explaining to aim first, and light the fuse at the tip, so I don't upgrade during the next shot. Once the gunner is familiar though, he could be using the XP invested in his Gunnery skill to full affect without any penalty dice applied.

EDIT: Thanks for the input!

I see what you are saying now, and the consideration you have put into it. It sounds like good reasoning for developing this game mechanic in your setting. I do see your point of not wanting all one's ranks in a skill to "go to waste" when a new skill is opened up.

36 minutes ago, Sturn said:

A character's background and career/template specialties have familiarity options to choose from.

If there are just a handful of specialties for each skill, then that is something I could get behind as a player. Perhaps I am a bit scarred by my years and years of playing GURPS where there were so many, many skills and subskills that as a player I felt like I could never gain any ground. Like I'd have Chemistry, but the GM would call for a Pharmacology roll, so that was a Chem roll with a heavy penalty. Or I had Acrobatics but the GM wanted an Aerobatics roll, so again, Acrobatics at a stiff penalty. I felt like I was often being told to make rolls that were just outside my skillset, no matter what skills I invested in. If the players know upfront about the familiarity system and there are a reasonable number of familiarities for each skill, then that would address the sort of concerns I would have about how to spend my XP.

As for what your familiarity grants a player... I am the sort of GM that allows players to try things, regardless of whether they have ranks in a skill. I don't think you should disallow a character from trying a check if they are unfamiliar, so your option 2 above seems good to me. If you think setback dice for unfamiliar rolls aren't scary enough, I would go for upgraded difficulty myself, rather than just adding an automatic failure to the roll, as the opportunity for despair raises the stakes.

I am wondering about how you intend familiarities to be purchased, whether you are considering them to be Talents, or whether they are their own XP spending category. If they are Talents, then they will occupy slots in the Talent pyramid. If they are their own category, will they have a flat purchase price? Or will they have their own pyramid? (Kind of like in Star Wars, where buying into additional specializations had an increasing cost?)

Thanks for pointing out that you understand some of what I'm going for. I was beginning to think I'm just mucking things up for no benefit. Note: Edited this several times, ended up using it as a working draft for changes to my main document.

6 hours ago, jendefer said:

As for what your familiarity grants a player... I am the sort of GM that allows players to try things, regardless of whether they have ranks in a skill. I don't think you should disallow a character from trying a check if they are unfamiliar, so your option 2 above seems good to me. If you think setback dice for unfamiliar rolls aren't scary enough, I would go for upgraded difficulty myself, rather than just adding an automatic failure to the roll, as the opportunity for despair raises the stakes.

Since my original post, I've been doing the math on the dice trying to see what I like. Upgraded vs. Setback has little difference for Success. They are nearly the same chances of success. Upgraded just adds some danger with the Despair possibility, but success chance is almost the same.

Yes the automatic failure is way, way too harsh. I've completely pitched that after running the numbers.

So, I'm currently thinking if you're Very Unfamiliar, add 2 Setback. Once you are Somewhat Unfamiliar, add 1 Setback instead. So, a couple stages when you are becoming familiar. Some familiarities may start at already Somewhat Unfamiliar. For example, Survival in terrains you are not used to begins at Somewhat Unfamiliar, there's never a Very Unfamiliar penalty.

Once you are completely Familiar, no penalty at all. This will be the default for basic actions for a skill. Only the specialized unfamiliar stuff will have the Setbacks. How to remove them? I've been thinking various methods. First, you can be granted familiarities during character creation as I've mentioned. Next, the GM can simply decide the player has increased in familiarity based upon gameplay. This could be just from repeated use, or spectacular use (you succeed while rolling a Triumph, so typically only for skills you have ranks in). Finally, I have a few talents if you want to invest XP and a slot in it (which I've answered in more detail below your next question).

Upgrades I want to add only for certain actions. And after running the numbers, I think they will simply be added to whatever unfamiliar level you are on, not a replacement, to keep it simpler.

STANDARD UNFAMILIARITY

• Unfamiliar 2: Add 2 Setback Dice.
• Unfamiliar 1: Add 1 Setback Die.

DANGEROUS UNFAMILIARITY

• Unfamiliar 2: Add 2 Setback Dice AND Upgrade.
• Unfamiliar 1: Add 1 Setback Dice AND Upgrade.

This may sound harsh at first, but it's not after running it through a genesys dice calculator. So consider a PC rolling 3 Greens and 1 Yellow vs. 2 Purple. With default familiar actions, 76% Success. While very unfamiliar (Unfamiliar 2) but not dangerous, 62% Success. It hurts, but not by a huge amount. Dangerous and Unfamiliar 2? 56% Success, plus 8% Despair. I personally like those numbers.

Again these penalties won't be applied for everything the skill does, just specialty areas that everyone won't automatically know. So, back to the Crafting example. Crafting will be able to do quite a few things without penalty - smith some basic tools, build a raft, repair a boat, build a small foot bridge, build a wooden hut, dig a small tunnel to escape a jail, repair basic armors such as leather or heavy clothing, fix a broken wagon wheel, etc. Want to forge a sword or plate armor? You can try but only with an Unfamiliar 2 penalty (add 2 Setback) unless you pick up the Smith familiarity somehow. Want to build a sailing ship? Shipwright or penalties. Oversee construction of a small keep or catapult? Engineer or penalties.

I think I'm liking this the more I fiddle with it.

6 hours ago, jendefer said:

I am wondering about how you intend familiarities to be purchased, whether you are considering them to be Talents, or whether they are their own XP spending category. If they are Talents, then they will occupy slots in the Talent pyramid.

Originally (months ago) I had tons of talents to unlock familiarities until I realized the problem you already noticed. It could be a problem with filling up the pyramid too much. I even experimented with "tierless talents" until I realized it was too complicated. I mentioned some of my fix above. Familiarity can be granted during character creation or during gameplay without expenditure of extra XP or a pyramid slot. Career and Background (a house rule) has an added benefit of granting some free familiarities during character creation. I plan on a custom character sheet with a place below each skill to note familiarities. Not all skills with have them. The only skill that may have several is Crafting, so I think I can make it fit.

I WILL have some talents regarding familiarities. But, I've tried to make them somewhat more useful so they are actually worth the XP and pyramid slot. For example, the Sea Dog talent. It gives several familiarities: Shipwright - using Crafting on large ships, Sea Traveler - using Geography (a lore skill) in non-frontier sea lanes, and Sailor - using Operating, Athletics, Coordination actions when controlling a ship. One talent, that could be only Tier 1, to remove unfamiliar penalties across several skills for a character who is building a pirate or sailor PC. Sea Dog can be purchased at anytime, and could be granted during character creation - you choose a sailing background or career type, for example (I'm not yet sure if I like the idea of granted talents during character creation, I may just limit it to checking off familiarities under skills, not giving a free talent).

There are some actions I won't allow at all at first. This is reserved for undiscovered mysteries. Gunpowder, Steam, dark Sorcery, those sort of things. A character won't be able to even attempt to use Alchemy to make gunpowder, if the character doesn't even know what it is. That will require "Discovery" first through finding some ancient lore, extensive experimenting, researching, etc. Once the character has discovered the idea, only then can she attempt the action of mixing up some gunpowder with Alchemy, at first while with Unfamiliar 2 and dangerous (upgrade). Fun, fun.

Thank you, thank you for the input. This has got me tweaking things already for the better.

5 hours ago, Sturn said:

Thank you, thank you for the input. This has got me tweaking things already for the better.

No problem. When people present new mechanics, I always wonder whether something already exists to handle their need. But if what exists doesn't suit your purposes, making something new to fit with the rest of the existing rules and trying to balance it is a worthy effort. Plus, you can only do so much planning... eventually, you have to try your system out with players in an ongoing game to see if it stands the test of time and really addresses all your concerns. Good luck when that time comes!