[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Move Through Take 2
I think it should be 10' per die, and that it should be a subskill of the
warrior skills. It's going to make it that much easier for the GM AND the
party if only the warriors are the ones doing move through. 8-12 ppl
zipping all over the whiteboard sounds like an adjudicators nightmare.
This would also reflect the fact that warriors have spent some time
learning how to use this skill effectively. I know I've been a bit wishy
washy on this, but ppl keep coming up with good ideas. >:P Everyone being
able to do that sounds like too much of a power jump to me. If we put the
1/4 move thing into effect, my powers of prestidigitation forsee a whole
shload of mutates for increased movement.
Joel
P.S. I like dice pool splitting, too.
On Tue, 1 Sep 1998, Kris Ames wrote:
>
>
> > The problem is... any interruption undoes the spell casting.
> People have
> > even tried to specify the thought trigger on an effect to be
> identical to
> > the thought of casting lightning bolt, and this didn't work. So
> it has
> > nothing to do with the coincidence thought per se, and the
> decision to
> > walk, to watch for pot holes, etc would disrupt spell casting.
>
> Several of us do not believe that ANY (AKA ALL) interruption undoes
> spell casting. Some of the newer precedents and rules have only
> been in play for the past couple of years. Basing the argument on
> how someone else ruled something is not necessarily a way to
> convince everyone. I think several of us are trying to evaluate
> things from an entire "does this make since and play well
> perspective" not necessarily from the "the book says this or so and
> so said no this won't work". Read up on the post where Wright and
> subsequently I posted the section on concentrating on a spell and
> movement. Concentrating on CHANGING a spell effect in my mind is no
> more taxing than casting the spell in the first place (in my
> opinion), But as I said in my previous post we are not discussion
> mage skills here we are now back to only discussing the move through
> skill for warriors.
>
>
> >
> > I would like to see the skill just a warrior skill. This from the
> fact
> > that the testing was done by non weapon's masters, just athletes.
> I would
> > view the ability to move and attack like a mod. Like a skill, not
> a
> > function of weapon skill.
> >
>
> Hmm.. I think a lot of discussion has gone on on this and the
> general consensus was make it a subskill of the weapon skill. Am I
> wrong on this everyone?
>
> >
> > On another note of my own, if people are going to base this stuff
> on split
> > dice, then a lot more arguement is coming up.
> >
>
>
> I think some people like the split dice idea. Because it in some
> respects limits people from taking 6 extra attacks because they
> could do a lethal attack and take a couple of swings or do a move
> through and have an extra swing. It just would provide a lot of
> flexibility without a lot of complexity or added power. But once
> again, this isn't a discussion on dice pooling, it is a discussion
> on the move through skill. Dice pooling or a similar mage skill is
> another discussion.
>
>
> Okay everyone, Orion, Greg, Joel, Joe, John, Lyle, Jamie, and any
> other list lurkers...You have all been fairly silent on the move
> through issue over the past couple of days. What are your current
> thoughts?
>
> 1. Should the move through be just get to move 10' per die of move
> through (no 1/4 movement "freebee")?
> 2. Should it be a subskill of the weapon skill?
>
> Only one or two people having a discussion leads to two people
> coming to an agreement and 20 other people disagreeing.
>
> -Kris
>