NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5711293" data-attributes="member: 54877">Sure, Riding skill is debatable. It could easily go either way, skill or something else mechanically, and ideally which would depend upon what other skills are in the game. Some form of Appraisal/Mercantile ability is similar in that respect. This is an area where consistency is important, too. If you decide to be more expansive, and include Riding, then you need Appraise or Mercantile, and the other borderline things. If you decide to go minimalist, then those things need to be all kept out of the skill system, and then handled elsewhere (whether mechanically, or by fiat, or whatever). But by the time we get to discussing performance, crafting, and the like, we are way outside the debatable arena. Whatever importance these things have, mechancially they are not comparable even to Riding, let alone Sneaking, in anything remotely approaching the mechanical center of D&D. They are so outside the range, that things like "Use Rope" can sit clearly in the middle--notably more fiddly than Riding, but more likely to matter than them. One of the reasons that people have objected to having them represented mechanically at all is because of their poor handling thus far. I freely admit to having a kneejerk reaction against "Profession" skills (but not performance or craft skills) because of the numerous times they have been so poorly done. I've looked at the design and thought, "Would have been better to have left it out altogehter. Then, if I run a campaign where that matters, I won't have to tear out the drek before I can build something worth having." It's like someone installed a pipe organ in a new homes' guest bathroom, in case a potential buyer wanted a conservatory.</blockquote>

Verification