<snip>
> Those who insist on using such skills directly can take two actions. If
> you plough using 'Strong' instead of 'Plough' augmented by 'Strong', for
> example, you should (a) suffer a hefty penalty (-20? why not?) and
> (b) suffer dire consequences for failure (minor defeat - broken
> plough?).
Very nicely put.
<snip>
> (1) I have never liked 'Close Combat' and insist on proper weapon
> skills,
> with improv modifiers for other related skills. CC always seemed an
> unnecessary rules clutter to me. The difference in practice has been
> almost negligible...
Do you mean that you use direct
Sword & Shield
Brawling
etc...
skills instead of a general cc with style definitions? That certainly is one way to go.
In fact, even if we have an �berskill of CC at 3 HP/level it doesn't mean a characer couldn't have, say
Staff fighting 17 without a CC skill.
Gives more variety, I think. CC is a useful skill for a warrior, but an Issaries Goldentongue, for instance, will do well enough with just a staff skill.
-Adept
Powered by hypermail