Re: move through

["Kris Ames" <kris@cioe.com>]

actually my I wanted option 1 to allow multi attack if you had the
skill to pull off a 2 d check against skill with an additional die
per extra attack.  I Joe warrior wants to move 1/2 his speed (more
than the 1/4 so need to use sub skill move through) but he also
wants to have 3 attacks so he must roll 4d6 Vs his skill to do the
move through and the two extra attacks.  If he fails all he does is
close the distance between him and his opponent.

I just view the acceptation of can split dice on subskills but can't
use some subskills in conjunction with others as getting a little
complex.  Obviously one exception does not make things complex, but
over time with things having multiple subskills and some not working
with others could be a hassle.

----------
> From: Steve Ames <steve@ns1.cioe.com>
> To: gmlist@cioe.com; lhjanney@adpc.purdue.edu
> Subject: RE: move through
> Date: Friday, August 21, 1998 2:27 PM
> 
> > I like Kris's suggestion of a combination of 1 and 4, but I
can't
> > bring myself to agree with the idea that you could still get
more
> > than one swing/attack in.  Move through is just that,
run/fly/ride
> > along, slash and continue.  A red-tailed hawk only gets one
> > chance to grab the rabbit (unless the stupid rabbit is actually
> > running along the same direction of the hawks' flight, that is).
> 
> Kris jump in if I've got your intent wrong. I believe her
suggestion
> of options 4 and 1 still limited things to one attack. Basically
its
> option 4 (one attack if you move) but with option 1 thrown in to
say
> that someone with skill could move even further (closer to their
full
> movement) and still get the one attack. No multiple attacks would
be
> allowed here (except in the case of quicken or other such magics).
> This should be a pretty firm belief overall, agreed.
> 
> > On a side note, except for certain sub-skills, I like the idea
of
> > splitting the dice pool on a successful weapon's skill check. 
Just
> > so the group has my two cents on that one.
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> > Finally, if a combination of 1 and 4 turns out to be too complex
for
> > the system and thus wouldn't pass Dan, I'd back option 1 with
the
> > caveat that monsters would need to purchase skills for their
natural
> > weapons and other appropriate skills would be created for other
> > valid situations.  I would have sided with option 4, but I feel
that at
> > least some practice would be necessary to actually move 1/4 
> > speed and not have it affect your action.
> 
> Noted. Thanks for the input... now if everyone else would provide
theirs
> so we could get a consensus to vote on? (hint hint to you lurkers)
> 
> 						-Steve