Standard-issue talents

[Avianmosquito]

So, I've been making a game for a while, and one thing I've been toying with the idea of doing is listing standard-issue talents for NPCs that fill various jobs, so even though they aren't all taken from the same template they can at least have a few things in common that they need to do their job. While ideally a GM should know that certain talents are requirements for certain roles, they don't always think of it and these guidelines should (hopefully) steer them in the right direction so they don't make NPCs that couldn't actually do their stated job.

For example, a modern soldier without the "Extreme Prejudice" talent would have a complete psychological breakdown after one battle, as assassin without the "Sociopath" talent couldn't make a living off the whole murder thing, and a conman without the "Audacity" talent just doesn't have the confidence to brazenly lie to people. These NPCs can't actually do what they supposedly do for a living, and when I've handed the game off to somebody else to GM all of these examples have come up. So, do you think that giving such guidelines will actually fix that problem, or will it be a complete waste of time because nobody will read it?

[steelsmiter]

So, do you think that giving such guidelines will actually fix that problem, or will it be a complete waste of time because nobody will read it?

Played GURPS long enough to say that I don't think nobody will read it. Usually other games reserve that sort of baseline "do a job" handwavium gets thrown about for things that won't put you in significant danger or be a significant part of the adventure/their character. The most notable exception I'm aware of being Savage Worlds Professional Edges, which mostly give narrow circumstances in which they grant +2, with a few like Wizard-which grants another fairly specific bonus-and McGuyver, which pretty much unlocks the ability to McGuyver stuff.

Could go either way I guess. Depends what you do with it maybe?