> I don't see how the question is one of "more" combat skills. This
> is, after all, a game in which the number of possible ability tags
> is (almost, and practically speaking) unlimited -- why should it be
> a matter of game design philosophic faith that There Can Be Only
> One "hurting people" skill? Nor do I think it's likely to create
> more than one "combat skill" _per character_.
Well a "normal" character can currently start with two (or maybe "both" ) combat skills - Close Combat and Ranged Combat. There was a suggestion somewhere (and it may have been on RR's "GLORWAR" list) that a third ability "Group Combat" should be added (this would be where fyrd combat, shield wall combat, etc would go) the theory being that someone who is a good swordsman may find themselves constrained by needing to hold a place in formation, and/or someone perfectly capable of holding their place in a mob may be less efficient if cornered alone...)
I could see an argument for further dividing "Close Combat" into "Armed Combat" and "Unarmed Combat" (so your master fencer isn't also a master Sumo wrestler). Adding "Mounted Combat" as a seperate ability would get around the "problem" of assigning a penalty to a Grazlander when forced to fight on foot.
But if you had those options I'm sure most people would want to have some sort of score in most, if not all of them to start with, even if they don't regularly increase more than one.
I can't really see the benefits of dividing the combat skills down any further than this ...
Tommy the Trollkin
Armed Combat 13 (Club, Spear and shield)
Unarmed Combat 12(Bite)
Ranged Combat 14 (Thrown Rock, Sling)
Group Combat 17 (Trollkin Mob)
Mounted Combat 8 (Hambeetle Lance)
???
Powered by hypermail