Yes, Nikolaj, you did just miss me; but I would not have spotted your post about walking had you not mentioned it afterward. I hesitate to give you much above average, but then, that's in part because I barely give myself much above average, and I've hiked through the Rocky Mountains with several days' gear and supplies doing eighty miles in about a week, plus portaged canoes on many several mile paths. I do note that my speed is a bit above average (which is separate from the SAL), about four miles per hour (not anymore, I think, but that's because in my old age my asthma has impacted by stamina). Thus I would need something akin to that kind of walking experience to be persuaded that anyone approached "average professional", and competitive walking for the higher professional levels.
I should probably mention for John's sake that in creating initial scores I am far more interested the level of ability displayed than in the amount of practice cited. Sure, if someone tells me that he has been practicing his martial arts style for twenty years I will consider that in setting his SAL, and on that basis might push him into the expert range at least on the base skills; but if he's not a black belt, that's not going to happen, no matter how long he has been practicing. After you are "in the verse" the only way I can assess your rate of improvement is by tracking your practice or, on occasion, recognizing that a new use indicates a better understanding or level of control of the skill. Thus the fact that you walked thousand of miles over thousands of hours over the course of your life means very little to me. For another example, most people who swim at all have probably swum many miles over the course of their lives, but that does not mean that they could all swim one mile without a break. I have twice accomplished that, swimming one mile, and am confident (even in my current condition) that I could do so again, and thus I feel with that plus my certifications in advanced swimming and lifesaving (both BSA and Red Cross) that I should be a low-level professional swimmer. I'm not much impressed that someone had a swimming pool in his back yard and played in it every day from March 1st to October 30th, and will probably give that person a top amateur rating absent any evidence of better. I am not persuaded that such a person could swim a mile. On the other hand, if he gets into a place where he can create a viable training program in a pool, and he does so and follows it, I will give him the benefit of assuming that he can become a 2@1 swimmer who could swim a mile even without evidence he has ever done so.
And that's why simply having walked a lot in your life does not make you a high level professional or expert walker.
Thanks for letting me clarify that. Now let me see what I can do with thread posts from Michael, Maxx, Nikolaj, and John 2.
Michael hopes to see his reflection in a babbling brook, which I know from experience is not so simple--one needs to find a smooth relatively calm corner with an adequate amount of sunlight. That means a general effects roll, for which the roll is 19. I'm also giving him an intuition check on the teeth question, because he probably can't see it but he could feel it. Rolls are 9+17=too high, so he's not going to learn anything that way.
Maxx rolls 96 on his latest chemical analysis variant, but it probably is not a botch and might even be a success, given the limitations and bonuses. Let me check the math. The skill bias is 9@1, but since it is limited to density we'll give it a +10SM. He also has included a 4-minute preparatory concentration, which is treated as three doublings, +30. That means the skill has an inherent +40 SM; his BRA is 1@10 and his bias 10@1 and the world bias is 15@, so he has 176-91 for his chance of success, which is not good enough for his roll at 85%. He also intends to try the supported balance beam walk again the next day, and rolls 43, which is still above his modified 27% chance of success. Oops--he has to recreate the bar to be able to walk on it, so I'll have to roll that first, which is 46, pretty likely given his 2x10@ bias+1@10 BRA plus any SAL, so he's good for that.
Nikolaj has suggested that I might be scheming something based on my presentation of Kathrine Kucher, and I object that I am not scheming. I know that he means nothing sinister by it, only that he sees machinations pushing in a particular direction. Let me say for clarification that I do not scheme. I create characters, and try to make them believable and interesting, and sometimes that means they might be attractive. I figure that the daughter of the wealthy owner of the ranch is going to be of a particular type with variations, and I attempt to communicate that. Some of the points here are that being wealthy she can afford to look good, and being the daughter of the head of the ranch she will be expected to maintain a pleasant but strong and possibly aloof appearance. She also has power, because of her family, and that gives her confidence. She is also quite accustomed even at her age to men showing particular interest in and courtesy toward her--it would be a real coup to become the son-in-law of the ranch owner, but a disaster to lose the job for overstepping a line. She thus has expectations about how she will be treated, and a strong sense of self that does not easily capitulate to the attentions of others. These are the points that matter in my mind to creating Kathrine Kucher; the rest flows from it.
He gets a 10 GE roll on what happens next in his conversation with the girl; that's going to play quite well for him for now.
Derek's 2@6 SAL is with a laser blaster, which is distinct from a laser pistol, so he's only 1@10 with that. That's still an example, and Derek does have a 1@8 teaching SAL and a 2@3 Tech BRA, so the numbers are 20+18+12+John's 12@1 tech bias +2@2 BRA+the 14@ world bias against a 12@1 target skill bias. We'll cancel the 12@1's against each other and that gives us 86% chance to learn this skill, he rolls 53, a 1@2 Use Laser Pistol T12@1.
I'm recalling information from a previous GE roll, 15 for whether there were fire extinguishers that he might use for propulsion.
--M. J. Young