Re: Starting an argument

[Steve Ames <steve@ns1.cioe.com>]

Wright... your supposed to say "Were you smoking crack last night? That
stuff will never work because it makes sense. Isn't done. Don't need that
new fangled playing stuff... also what happens if the opponents go first?
Or they get the flip flop? Huh? What happens then?"

You gotta work on this argument stuff. Agreement is counter productive.

					-Steve

> *looks at the spew*  *nod* works for me.  any detractors?
>
> Wright
>
> > > Time draws nigh.  Does anyone have any solid suggestions for
> > > the defensive skill?  as well as for the 'fighting school specialties'?
> > 
> > Woa! This is a pretty loaded topic, good one Wright.
> > 
> > I'm leaning toward the defensive skill to be built into your weapon
> > skill. Make the player track it. It works like this:
> > 
> > You roll the number of dice you want versus your weapon skill, you
> > then make an absurd statement such as:
> > 
> > "I made a 4 die check -vs- my long sword. I'm going to make three atacks,
> > the first attack will be a precise attack and I'm holding back 1 die for
> > defense next round. First two attacks go to opponent A, third to opponent
> > B."
> > 
> > 4 dice: 2 dice for the 2 extra attacks
> >         1 die for that precise attack (adding +2 to the first to hit roll)
> > 	1 die held in reserve for defense (adding +2 to DVs)
> > 	split-attack is free with multi-attack these days
> > 
> > That sounds like a lot but won't really take any more time than the
> > way things are now, because it'll come out as:
> > 
> > Player: "The first two, on opponent A, are CDV 28 and CDV 21"
> > GM:	Hit, Miss - roll damage, the third?
> > Player: "CDV 22 on opponent B"
> > GM:	Miss
> > 
> > No difference between the above scenario and the way we already run 
> > things. The next round:
> > 
> > GM: "Does a CDV 19 hit you?"
> > Player: "Normally yes, but I have that die of defensive so it takes a 20."
> > 
> > Not a big deal. Notice also above that I've utilized the concept of
> > "split dice" to do more than one sub skill at a time. No extra overhead.
> > 
> > As for schools. Love the idea. I don't think it should have any rules
> > impact at all (ie requiring or modifying rules). Combines with the
> > 'teaching' skill, schools are a must for anyone who wants to become
> > even close to a master... economically.
> > 
> > Specialties should maybe be just what that schools teacher is a
> > supreme master in. Obviously he doesn't waste a lot of time teaching
> > the long sword if he's a grand master of the shank. Social pressure
> > should be applied here. I think that going to two schools at once
> > might be "dishonorably" and cause one to be expelled. Hence people who
> > choose a school have recognizable preferences for certain weapons,
> > that's what they are taught. After they have gone as far as they wish
> > and are released from their school, perhaps they can learn something
> > new and balance themselves out a little better.
> > 
> > The book specifies one week per rank to learn a skill. This doesn't
> > really allow a lot of time away from your teacher to dork with other
> > skills. Your spare time might let you pick up hobby type skills
> > (a minibolt or lamp here, some tracking there, a bit of wrestlng,
> > etc...) but little time to master a serious skill.
> > 
> > Yeah! Long ass spew postings. Love 'em!
> > 
> > 						-Steve
> > 
>
>