I'm currently writing the character generation procedure for a contemporary-era, real-world game I've been working on for some time.  I need help with a rather fundamental question.  Here's the situation...

The character creation system offers personal experience for the character from among 10 detailed careers, four of which are military (army, navy, marines, air force).  In the course of random character generation, a character may end up with experience in as many as five different careers -- statistically, this would be rare, and most characters will have experience in only two, maybe three careers.  So, it's feasible that a character could end up with career experience in all four branches of the military.

Now, I know that it's not unheard of for someone to serve in two different branches, usually through separate enlistments, but would it even be possible to serve in all four branches?  How improbable would it be to serve in three?  What are the conceivable circumstances for serving in more than one branch?  I mentioned multiple enlistments above, but what about transfers?

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;237646I'm currently writing the character generation procedure for a contemporary-era, real-world game I've been working on for some time.  I need help with a rather fundamental question.  Here's the situation...

The character creation system offers personal experience for the character from among 10 detailed careers, four of which are military (army, navy, marines, air force).  In the course of random character generation, a character may end up with experience in as many as five different careers -- statistically, this would be rare, and most characters will have experience in only two, maybe three careers.  So, it's feasible that a character could end up with career experience in all four branches of the military.

Now, I know that it's not unheard of for someone to serve in two different branches, usually through separate enlistments, but would it even be possible to serve in all four branches?  How improbable would it be to serve in three?  What are the conceivable circumstances for serving in more than one branch?  I mentioned multiple enlistments above, but what about transfers?

!i!

Serving in two different branches - either by separate enlistments or commissions or by transfers - is not unknown. It would be conceivable to
see serving in three separate under special circumstances, such as when the USAF branched off of the army, or when the UK's RFC (Army) became the RAF (Air Force) and then split into the RAF and FAA (Fleet Air Arm). Four branches, however, would be an almost singular case.

-clash

Hrm.  That was my impression.  This is most displeasing.

What about service on special detachment?  I believe that there's a little of that going on between the US Navy and the US Marines (though I can't think of specific examples).

Hey, here's another option.  Rather than detailing each of the four branches separately, among which there is considerable overlap in training and duties, detail the nature of the operations themselves.  That is to say, rather than Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force, careers would be described as Aerial, Naval, and Ground Forces.*  That way, winding up with all three might indicate a single career in the Marines (mechanised infantry, air corps, and amphibious assault) or Navy (aircraft carrier and naval base) or whatever.

!i!

(*Because, really, when rolling up a character for Traveller -- and, yes, that's basically what this is all about -- how many of you rolled up a character in the Army instead of the Marines?  I don't recall ever rolling up a character in the Army, but I had plenty of Marine grunts.)

I've known a number of folks who served in two branches.  Usually they got out and were civilians for awhile then came back in the military (either reinlisted or went to OCS) in the second branch.

I've never known anyone who was in more than 2 branches.  While someone wouldn't be a member of 3 or 4 branches, they could certainly be working closely with them- either at someplace like the Pentagaon or a regional command center/joint task force, etc.

Quote from: Ian Absentia;237668Hrm.  That was my impression.  This is most displeasing.

What about service on special detachment?  I believe that there's a little of that going on between the US Navy and the US Marines (though I can't think of specific examples).

Hey, here's another option.  Rather than detailing each of the four branches separately, among which there is considerable overlap in training and duties, detail the nature of the operations themselves.  That is to say, rather than Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force, careers would be described as Aerial, Naval, and Ground Forces.*  That way, winding up with all three might indicate a single career in the Marines (mechanised infantry, air corps, and amphibious assault) or Navy (aircraft carrier and naval base) or whatever.

!i!

(*Because, really, when rolling up a character for Traveller -- and, yes, that's basically what this is all about -- how many of you rolled up a character in the Army instead of the Marines?  I don't recall ever rolling up a character in the Army, but I had plenty of Marine grunts.)

That's a very good alternative, Ian. It looks solid, and really more descriptive.

-clash

I can speak to the Navy - Marine Corps connection.  

Corpsmen (medics) are Navy sailors assigned to Marine Corps units.  All Chaplains working with Marines are Navy as well, as are all the doctors, dentists, nurses at a hospital on a Marine Corps base.  

And of course, Marines and Sailors work closely together aboard ship, but medical and Chaplains corps personel are the ones most likely to be actually assigned to a Marine unit.

The Joint Arms Control Integration Group (JACIG) is the UK Military group for making sure that weapons and processes are implemented in the same manner across all of the UK armed forces. If you work for JACIG, you're enlistment/commission is with a single branch (Army, RAF, Royal Navy) but you actually work in amongst the other two: Army officers find themselves chundering over the railings of battleships, for example.

Joint operations is becoming more common now that the HM Armed Forces are gearing more for Rapid Reaction.

Another area where there is a blanket service is the Military Police Guard Service (MPGS), which maintains security across most of the UK Base entry points. They are both none of the branches and all of them at the same time.

I like your idea of simplification. There is no need to go into detail unless you are trying to accurately model an armed force.

Quote from: Rob Lang;237841I like your idea of simplification. There is no need to go into detail unless you are trying to accurately model an armed force.

Perhaps more importantly, the original plan modelled one particular armed force -- the US model to be precise.  It might have broken down a little if someone was trying to model the UK services that you described, for instance.

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;237668Hey, here's another option.  Rather than detailing each of the four branches separately, among which there is considerable overlap in training and duties, detail the nature of the operations themselves.  That is to say, rather than Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force, careers would be described as Aerial, Naval, and Ground Forces.*  That way, winding up with all three might indicate a single career in the Marines (mechanised infantry, air corps, and amphibious assault) or Navy (aircraft carrier and naval base) or whatever.

!i!

If you really want to streamline it, call it a Military Career, and let them pick their branch.  There are very, very few job categories that are only in one or two services.  No amphibious assault teams in the Air Force, for example, but the Air Force does have a special forces group.  No ground troops in either the Navy or the Air Force, also.  The examples are fairly obvious, and any common support job would exist across all branches.  They all have cooks, administrative staff, medics and hospital support staff, and so on.  For a rather broad category of job classification, the branch they served in would be for flavour only.

Quote from: StormBringer;238158No ground troops in either the Navy or the Air Force, also.  The examples are fairly obvious, and any common support job would exist across all branches.  They all have cooks, administrative staff, medics and hospital support staff, and so on.

Using this as an example, I was thinking that, if you wanted a Navy sailor as a character, and you came up with a result of "Ground Forces", you'd assume that your experience was support or administrative, not as combat troops, and you'd be free to interpret the results accordingly.

   Example: I rolled up careers that indicate both Aerial Forces and Ground Forces.  I can interpret that in a number of different ways.  Maybe my character was a grunt in the Army who later shifted into airborne cavalry, or a Marine grunt who qualified for the aviation division.  Or maybe he's an Airforce airman who did a rotation on base security.  The only military career that seems like too much of a stretch is the Navy.

That help explain what I'm thinking?

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;238205Using this as an example, I was thinking that, if you wanted a Navy sailor as a character, and you came up with a result of "Ground Forces", you'd assume that your experience was support or administrative, not as combat troops, and you'd be free to interpret the results accordingly.
   Example: I rolled up careers that indicate both Aerial Forces and Ground Forces.  I can interpret that in a number of different ways.  Maybe my character was a grunt in the Army who later shifted into airborne cavalry, or a Marine grunt who qualified for the aviation division.  Or maybe he's an Airforce airman who did a rotation on base security.  The only military career that seems like too much of a stretch is the Navy.That help explain what I'm thinking?

!i!

Ok, I was thinking you were looking for a kind of list of what careers would be appropriate for a given branch.

In your example, you can pretty easily swap out Navy for Air Force if you are talking about base security.  I assume you are kind of abstracting 'ground forces' to mean 'good with a gun', so it would work either way.  Your example is really about the only one you are going to have a bit of a problem with.  In broad terms, the Army is the ground troops for the Air Force, and the Marines are the ground troops for the Navy, but only because of tradition and logistics.  If you are looking for a 'soldier' when you mean 'ground forces', you may need to stick with the Army Paratroop idea if you get Aerial and Ground forces as a career.  The Air Force has Para-rescue and Combat Controllers as special forces, but like all special forces, they aren't usually involved in the main fighting force operations.  Although they are just as well trained as regular troops, you may not want a crap load of ex-special forces characters running around, if it will put Rambo-like ideas in your players' heads.  

In my expirence two branch characters are not all uncommon. However, there is no real legal impediment to greater cross branching. I recall one fellow who had more or less covered all branches, though primarily through reserves... technically, counting reserves and active this guy had... as I recall... six branches.

Using the US model, however, don't forget the Coast Guard is it's own branch.


Now on to why this is uncommon, and how you can restrict it in games reasonably.

First of all most of the time your enlistment is fairly long. People age differently in the military. Thirty is middle aged, forty is 'old' and anything older is 'crusty right hand of God' or 'Decrepit' take your pick.  Depending on how long your 'careers' are going to be, making a requirement to stick out at least two terms (or dishonorable discharge after one...) might be a reasonable requirement.  Note that that would obviously cause one to be ineligable for future military/government careers. Thus by restricting the ability to change careers willy nilly, and also a presumptive denial of service beyond a certain age you can cut down realistically the ability to collect careers without actually doing anything shady.

Secondly: Career progression. Hopping branches may SEEM like a good idea, and many career based games do reward it with 'free training' it seems like. In reality, it will negatively impact your promotions and therefor ultimately your pay. Essentially you would be starting each new branch at or near the bottom of your career path with no seniority at all on any promotion lists you'd be eligable for. Some rank carry through is possible, but not garaunteed. I know a guy who went from O-3 in the navy to E-5 in the Army in what has to be one of the biggest clusterfucks of salvage operation...

This is particularly true of officers, mind you.  Officer promotions tend to be brutal, and career altering affairs (note the last example: Failing his promotion of O4 ended his career, denying him retirement, jumping ship seemed the only way to salvage his retirement, and it meant a massive paygrade cut to pull it off. Sadly it was unnecessary.... but thats another story...)

Quote from: Spike;240330Using the US model, however, don't forget the Coast Guard is it's own branch.

D'oh, I forgot "the Shield of Freedom".  Established before the US Navy, if I recall correctly.  In my defense, I was Traveller-esquely bundling them under the over-arching rubric of "Navy" (or "naval forces" in my possible new direction).

I've been playing with both possible directions, and I haven't clearly decided which works better for this game.  Playing with the odds, it is generally very unlikely to wind up with more than three of the military careers.

!i!