Re: on skills

[Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>]

I can see and agree with that, however, for the precise and lethal
option, does the bonus damage apply to all attacks? or just the first?
I'm personally in favor of all of'em, but... I can see arguments
for only the 1st, mainly raw lethality.  But the warrior/marine
who does a +2 to all attacks still isn't getting as high a max
damage as doing an extra attacks, less he makes a hell of a skill check.
Instead he's mainly just increasing his average damage.  *shrug*
like i said, I prefer to all attacks for simplicity, but I'm not
real caring other than just wanting a decision. =)

Wright


> More effective? Not really. We all know that in almost every situation
 multi-attack is better than anything. Why ever use precise attack? Buy
> your mod up another point or two and get that +2 on _ALL_ of your swings.
> 
> More flexible, most definately. I don't see a base cost increase. I don't
> see buying subskills seperately (which would require rule changes).
> 
> Keep it simple. Saying that you can't do something is just as complex as
> saying you can't. You want to go with what is natural and intuitive, thats
> simple. I find it natural to roll the number of dice I want versus a
> skill based on what I want to do.
> 
> 1 die for an extra attack
> 1 die to get a +2 on the first attack
> 1 die to get a +2 to the first attacks damage
> 1 die for some defense
> 
> If I just lay it out like this most people will assume they can split
> dice.
> 
> Given this I would ditch the effective attack. Its a compromise and a
> complication if split dice are allowed. If you roll 1 die you can get
> +2 to hit _OR_ to damage. If you roll 2 dice you can get +2 to hit
> _AND_ to damage (equivelant to a two die effective attack currently).
> 
> Simplify...
> 
> 						-Steve
>