Jump to content
D6 Online 3.0
Sign in to follow this  
BadColor

Question about riding

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone!

 

I'm new to D6, and while reading D6 Fantasy I've met a little detail that, IMHO, is a mistake.

 

I'm talking about a Alternate Attribute Option, where there is a statement concerning Riding skill:

 

Riding: Agility for using mounts as a means of transportation;

Agility for evaluating a mount or another’s style

 

As far as I'm concerned, there should be two different attributes mentioned here. I believe first example (using mounts as transportation) is right, while second (probably) should mention some other attribute (Intellect?)

 

Is there some *official* version of this rule? Or, if there isn't, how do you rule this out? I'll appreciate any opinions or ideas =)

 

Thanks in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the board! The second example is definitely a mistake as that clearly has nothing to do with Agility. I looked in my files and I couldn't find any official or unofficial errata that corrects that. As a GM I'd probably go with Acumen for "evaluating a mount or another’s style", but applications of the Alternate Attribute Option are ultimately GM discretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to the board! The second example is definitely a mistake as that clearly has nothing to do with Agility. I looked in my files and I couldn't find any official or unofficial errata that corrects that. As a GM I'd probably go with Acumen for "evaluating a mount or another’s style", but applications of the Alternate Attribute Option are ultimately GM discretion.

 

Thanks for greeting =) I thought about using Acumen or Intellect for the second example but ultimately decided to consult more experienced GMs before decicing once and for all. I believe Acumen is the best choice. Thank you for advice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings.

 

I don't know much about the rules (or riding for that matter), but it sounds good to me just as it is.

How would you probably evaluate a mount or style? by experience, right? So if you know how to ride, you probably can say if a horse (if you use horses) is good and well trained, or things like that.

 

And if you split it, you'll need to develop 2 separate skills.

 

Again, I know little about rules so this is just a layman's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, having your Attributes and Skills separate. For example, bows. You have 4D in your bows, 2D+2 in your Dexterity and 3D+1 in your Strength. You can add the 4D to Dexterity for your attack or to your Strength for distance/damage, however you wish. So, you attack a giant at short range, you add 1D to Dex for attack and 3D to Str for damage.

 

Like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one way to do it. Completely floating skills is the extreme version of the Alternate Attribute Option. The Option is a compromise between two opposites: completely unmoving skills and completely free-floating skills.

 

Personally I like the Alternate Attribute rule, as an option. In my game, especially for action on the fly, it is important for all skills to "default" to a specific attribute. When in doubt or in a rush, you just stick with the default attribute. But if it really makes sense for a particular use of a skill to be based on an alternate attribute (other than the default) and discussion of the switch won't bog down the spirit of the adventure at that point, then I may allow it.

 

But the OP just had a simple question about an example of an optional rule to the traditional "skills default to one attribute". The discussion of completely free-floating skills is probably best in its own topic (in fact it's likely there is already a thread or two about it here if you didn't want to start a new one.)

Edited by Whill
(typos)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, having your Attributes and Skills separate. For example, bows. You have 4D in your bows, 2D+2 in your Dexterity and 3D+1 in your Strength. You can add the 4D to Dexterity for your attack or to your Strength for distance/damage, however you wish. So, you attack a giant at short range, you add 1D to Dex for attack and 3D to Str for damage.

 

Like that?

Not loving it. You would need a bow with a stronger pull to get extra damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, I would only use the riding score as a modifier to a "trading" check when the character was buying or selling horses. YMMV.

 

I'm fond of doing stuff like that on occasion. I think I got the idea from Star Wars d20 - IIRC they called it "skill synergy". But the basic idea is that one skill use can get a little boost from another skill relevant to the particular skill check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm fond of doing stuff like that on occasion. I think I got the idea from Star Wars d20 - IIRC they called it "skill synergy". But the basic idea is that one skill use can get a little boost from another skill relevant to the particular skill check.

 

Yeah, I can't remember where I saw the discussion of that. R&E or d6 Space? maybe the d20 fantasy SRD. Anyway, it simplifies skill descriptions a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...