Audrey St. John:I think the problem here is assuming because he excels at one aspect of a skill that he must automatically have a 5 and that's not the case. Mulder's lack of knowledge about major religions and cryptozoology as well as the aforementioned points that he knows nothing about magical rituals would preclude him from having a 5 Occult rating. He doesn't write on the occult subjects he does know and other occult experts do not consult him for his expertise. I'd probably give him a 4 by virtue of his photographic memory coupled with his extensive research into extraterrestrial and secret government projects. I also wouldn't give him a 5 rating in Investigate. If he's solved the case within the first 15 minutes, then he's done so with the information presented to him by those who already did the investigative legwork for him. So he shows up and already knows what he's looking for because he decided what happened and anything to the contrary is just a distraction. That makes him a great analyst but not a great investigator. I'd give him a 3. Scully does more actual investigative work than he does.
I'd be inclined to give Mulder a 3 in Occult and a couple Specializations (Parapsychology, Occult Conspiracies), but I guess I can see a 4. He also has Politics 1 with a Specialization in Conspiracies. I agree with the 3 Investigate.
Audrey St. John:5 Investigate - Sherlock Holmes maybe. He's consulted by people all over the world, he does his own investigative work himself then applies deductive reason from there instead of forming a conclusion then collecting evidence. Detective Bobby Goren maybe. He's skilled at interrogating witnesss, picking apart inconsistancies in their stories and figuring out what happened based on forensic evidence presented.
Yeah, I'd give Goren a 4, with specializations in crime scene analysis, profiling and logical inference. He also has Intimidation (Interrogation, Leading Questions) 3, Academics (Psychology) 3, the Encyclopedic Knowledge Merit and that Merit (Well-Traveled) from Reliquary that grants partial fluency in a crapload of languages from cheap.
Audrey St. John:The general treatment procedure used House is that the patients he treats don't respond to traditional care in the first place. And much of it is just "Let's see if they respond to this treatment... no? Try this then." until he kills them or cures them. He's killed a fair amount of patients so I wouldn't say he has a 5 Investigate either. A 5 in Occult would depend largely on the setting. Imhotep from the Mummy could possibly qualify. He was a high priest, capable of enacting rituals to resurrect the dead, summon undead creatures, demonstrated control over the four elements and had more than a passing familiarity with some of the religious customs of the Hebrews. Dr. Doom and Dr. Strange from Marvel comics could also qualify. 5 Investigate - Sherlock Holmes maybe. He's consulted by people all over the world, he does his own investigative work himself then applies deductive reason from there instead of forming a conclusion then collecting evidence. Detective Bobby Goren maybe. He's skilled at interrogating witnesss, picking apart inconsistancies in their stories and figuring out what happened based on forensic evidence presented. Though honestly I'd be more likely to give them 4s with specialties and allow them to situationally use cross specialties from other skills. Sherlock Holmes diminishes his potential by indulging his cocaine and opium addiction and Detective Goren quite frankly isn't infallible with his interrogation and character observations.
Hivemind:Yes. The way I tell my players is that at "3" you are very good at what you do- you have trained very hard and had some good experience in what you do."Wesley Snipes- martial artist" or "Shia LeBouf- acting". At "4" you are well known throughout the field and it should be reflected in your character's daily routine. - you are the "Jason Statham" or "Edward Norton" of your field. At "5" your name should be synonomus with what it is you have a 5 in- you are the "Bruce Lee" or "Robert DeNiro" of your field. These examples are OF COURSE interchangeable- but we all in my group are in agreement about those examples- ( well I personally can't stand LeBouf- but whatever)
Innerlight:Also we have to contend with the universes they live in. In some of the worlds they live in Supernaturals are more common so knowing about supernaturals is more common then other setting. Giles deals with creatures that are actually very public compared to Mulder or Bobby so for them to know what something is is actually more of a feat then Giles Speaking of Giles I stated the people from Angel
Daeva Dude:Thing with Giles, yes, the supernatural is more accessible than in some other settings, but Giles has an incredible working knowledge of a lot of things, including ritual magic, how to activate an array of magical items, secret societies and so forth, plus the ability to recognize, translate and in some cases speak some dead (and even extradimensional) languages.
Innerlight:So to have a 5 in something you have to be supernatural that's what it seems like it boils down to with your rationale for having a 5 in something. Their are no Doogie Housers in the world. Seems like you have to be famous and supernatural to be excellent at something, and you can't ever consult people. Though that's just what it seems like, I'm sure that's not exactly what you meant. I give super hero's 6's in things because they're usually better than a person could be in real life