Which RPGs best model real-world skill development?

[Committed Hero]

GURPS' combination of skill defaults (ie, letting one skill stand in for another at reduced efficiency), plus the way it charges more XP for more complex skills, colors my answer.

 

[Celebrim]

I feel like it's a sensible rate for academic skills being studied in a calm situation with a lot of time doing other things, but a rather low rate for practical skills being used in real situations on a daily basis. For example, people in WW2 went from never having flown a plane to the greatest pilots on the planet, capable of incredible feats, in a lot less than 4 years.

Traveller's inability to distinguish routine (which teaches only slowly) from high stress/high activity environments is one of the many things I hold against what could be a really great system. The way the CharBurner works should not necessarily reflect the most intense possible training, either focused or "on the job". It's fine to separate the mundane from the unusual or the heroic.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Traveller's inability to distinguish routine (which teaches only slowly) from high stress/high activity environments is one of the many things I hold against what could be a really great system. The way the CharBurner works should not necessarily reflect the most intense possible training, either focused or "on the job". It's fine to separate the mundane from the unusual or the heroic.

Part of it is, of course, that when Trav was created, the mechanics were such that there was a very strong incentive not to let players get their skill values up too much. I just think that would have been better served by having advancement done in micro-increments so it didn't do so rather than, effectively, saying no one ever learned in the field.

 

[mmadsen]

I asked Qwen: if you use the 5th edition of Dungeons and Dragons and you scale it towards real-world realism of skill development, what is the highest level a fighter could reach?

There’s an actual field of motor learning that studies how people learn physical skills like sports or martial arts. A game like GURPS models the learning curve of each skill individually. D&D clumps skills into classes with a shared level.

That’s a simplification that isn’t terribly unrealistic, but then the bulk of D&D’s system strays away from modeling reality, with hit points, AC unrelated to fighting skill, ability to hit only loosely tied to skill, etc.

Try modeling a fencing match between a master and a student. In real life, the master should hit 19 times out of 20, the student one time in 20. That’s just not how D&D works.

 

[TreChriron]

In GURPS, 200 hours = one skill point. That seems like a pretty good measuring stick to me. Of course, for cinematic adventures, I doubt we would care.

 

[aramis erak]

Since so much of experience and development is subjective, I consider them only in relation between in Char Gen and In Play.
GURPS 1e⋯3e do so only in Character Gen, and only when the skill limit option is used... then, in play XP is MUCH faster than CGen.

I find that Burning Wheel feels more realistic, but I don't think the math actually works out that well in play, tho it's relatively close.

Most Non-port editions of Traveller all have issues... CT, the rate in play is 1/2 or less the CharGen values...
MT, it's quite possible to raise faster, but it requires using the skill consistently... and some luck.
TTNE, it's a straight XP to buy abilities and breaks in play, largely upon GM's rate of XP award.
T4: in play accelerates growth... but not as fast as TTNE. And bad rolls can result in really slow advancement.

BRP derived: varies. I'm most familiar with Pendragon and ElfQuest.
EQ, the rate of in play skill total gains really doesn't match the character gen, but it matters little, since there's no balance to speak of.
Pendragon: I found that in play generally exceeded Char Gen rates in 3rd/4th... until 4.1 (Saxons!, Book of Knights) tripled the gain options in Char Gen. It does peak out, and slows a lot... what it doesn't do is reflect that humans have a harder time learning as they age as a general rule; it's minor, but KAP campaigns can run enough time past the characters for it to matter, but it doesn't tie to the experience rules.

 

[aramis erak]

Part of it is, of course, that when Trav was created, the mechanics were such that there was a very strong incentive not to let players get their skill values up too much. I just think that would have been better served by having advancement done in micro-increments so it didn't do so rather than, effectively, saying no one ever learned in the field.

No edition has no advancement...
CT's is just insanely slow - 8 years to perma-lock a skill in play, vs 4 or fewer in CGen (it's 1 year if using Bks 4,5,6,7, or 9 Character Gen. Man, 40 years of CT only running "Books" to Book 8, it feels so odd to include the new Book 9: Pirates) To be more clear: you get the skills at 4 years, but have to continue to study for 4 more to not risk losing them. One attribute works similarly.

On the other hand, Not a few people note that there's nothing stopping the GM from hitting the career tables at the end of 4 years character time... which CT characters can wind up doing in serious campaigns. Other peoples', not mine. I think my longest covered about 3 years of Character time.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No edition has no advancement...
CT's is just insanely slow - 8 years to perma-lock a skill in play, vs 4 or fewer in CGen (it's 1 year if using Bks 4,5,6,7, or 9 Character Gen. Man, 40 years of CT only running "Books" to Book 8, it feels so odd to include the new Book 9: Pirates) To be more clear: you get the skills at 4 years, but have to continue to study for 4 more to not risk losing them. One attribute works similarly.

I don't consider "training" and "learning by doing" the same thing, and was talking about the latter.

On the other hand, Not a few people note that there's nothing stopping the GM from hitting the career tables at the end of 4 years character time... which CT characters can wind up doing in serious campaigns. Other peoples', not mine. I think my longest covered about 3 years of Character time.

That would be better than nothing, but it still produces an abrupt jump when the gains should probably be spread out. And as you say, that's a long time.

 

[aramis erak]

I don't consider "training" and "learning by doing" the same thing, and was talking about the latter.

CT is the only one without experience rules. MT and T4 are learn by doing & learn by training. TNE is spend experience.
T20 is, of course, d20 skills and feats.

 

[Thomas Shey]

CT is the only one without experience rules.

And that was the one I was referring to. Note the phrase "When Trav was created."