Riding

[Nightshade]

In the new BRP campaign that just started this weekend, we notice that if you're using the optional skill base modifiers that there's a conflict in what's listed as the modifier; the skill entry says Communication, but the table and the character sheet say Physical. While I can see an argument for the former, the latter seems the likelier case. Anyone know for sure?

Also, given it appears to be physical, do I assume the rule limiting mounted combat to the weapon skill or the Riding skill is talking about the actual skill value, not the modified skill? Otherwise any armored knight is pretty much useless in combat on horseback because of the Physical penalty for his armor.

[Thalaba]

In the new BRP campaign that just started this weekend, we notice that if you're using the optional skill base modifiers that there's a conflict in what's listed as the modifier; the skill entry says Communication, but the table and the character sheet say Physical. While I can see an argument for the former, the latter seems the likelier case. Anyone know for sure?

Also, given it appears to be physical, do I assume the rule limiting mounted combat to the weapon skill or the Riding skill is talking about the actual skill value, not the modified skill? Otherwise any armored knight is pretty much useless in combat on horseback because of the Physical penalty for his armor.

I meant to reply to this last night with my book in hand - but I forgot so I'm going by memory which could be muddled by RQ3 and houserules.

Ride should be a physical skill, not a communication skill.

The limiting rule doesn't limit riding to your weapon skill - it limits weapons skills (and other actions performed while riding) to your RIDE skill. I would say that this is your RIDE skill plus your PHYSICAL modifier. Using RQ3 encumbrance rules (and I assume this is the same with the BRP option that mimics them) your encumbrance is not deducted from ride, only affects your Dodge, Sneak, Jump, and Swim (and spirit magic).

I really don't remember how armour penalties work from the BRP book, but I would assume they don't affect your RIDE. Perhaps someone can confirm this.

[Nightshade]

I meant to reply to this last night with my book in hand - but I forgot so I'm going by memory which could be muddled by RQ3 and houserules.

Ride should be a physical skill, not a communication skill.

The limiting rule doesn't limit riding to your weapon skill - it limits weapons skills (and other actions performed while riding) to your RIDE skill. I would say that this is your RIDE skill plus your PHYSICAL modifier. Using RQ3 encumbrance rules (and I assume this is the same with the BRP option that mimics them) your encumbrance is not deducted from ride, only affects your Dodge, Sneak, Jump, and Swim (and spirit magic).

I really don't remember how armour penalties work from the BRP book, but I would assume they don't affect your RIDE. Perhaps someone can confirm this.

Armor penalties and other encumbrance (I make the distinction because armor encumbrance isn't factored in, you use the specific armor penalty instead) affects all Physical skills, not just the old list. That's why the issue came up.

(And I didn't mean ride was limited to your combat skills, but that combat skills were limited to their own value or ride whichever's lower).

I can quite see being in armor or heavy encumbrance having some effect on ride rolls, but if the modified roll is what's used as the weapon limiter, that's a problem.

[Atgxtg]

I would think that it would make sense not to apply the FULL physical penalty to a mounted character. The horse is the one carrying the weight and doing all the running.

Perhaps split the penalty in half and apply it to both the rider and the mount?

[Thalaba]

Armor penalties and other encumbrance (I make the distinction because armor encumbrance isn't factored in, you use the specific armor penalty instead) affects all Physical skills, not just the old list. That's why the issue came up.

Now that I have my book....

I see that in the armour table on p. 259 it lists the armour with a skill modifier to Physical skills, or Perception for helmets, etc. On p.261 under Skill Modifier it says "this modifier is applied to any listed skills (or skills within a category), and the GM may apply it to any other appropriate skill".

On page 203 "Armour: Skill Penalties: Armour can inhibit certain skills...particularly the Agility roll or other physical actions such as the Climb, Jump, Stealth, and Swim skills. Some armour descriptions in chapter eight include negative modifiers to these skills. Weapon skills are unnafected." (emphasis mine).

I'm pretty sure the intent is to only have these skills affected by the armour penalty, and others at GM discretion. You are right that the wording in the armour table section would suggest it applies to all physical skills, but I don't believe that's the intent.

It's one for the errata, for sure.

[Nightshade]

I'd be just as likely to assume the line you quoted is a cut and paste from an old version of the rules, as the Physical skills note is repeated in a couple places. But as you say, its not particularly clear which to look at, or whether even if it applies to all Physical skills, that effects the weapons cap (which could be based on the normal skill, not the modified).

Maybe I should post this and my skill question over on RPG.net; Jason seems to be more active over there than here.

[Nightshade]

I would think that it would make sense not to apply the FULL physical penalty to a mounted character. The horse is the one carrying the weight and doing all the running.

Perhaps split the penalty in half and apply it to both the rider and the mount?

There's already a rule about this for general encumbrance, but it doesn't seem to effect the armor penalty specifically.

[Jason D]

Ride should be a Physical skill. I think Sam's reasoning for making it a Communication skill was that it involved empathy with the mount, but it ultimately should have fallen under the Physical category.

Ride should have a note exempting it from Physical (armor) penalties from armor. The mount is assumed to be doing the footwork, so armor penalties shouldn't apply. GMs may wish instead to halve armor penalties or lessen them by some degree, if desired. I would humbly suggest a -5% penalty for Light burden armors, -10% penalty for Moderate, and -15% penalty for Cumbersome. Perception modifies for armor are unaffected.

Use of any Physical or Combat skills while mounted should be limited to the modified Ride skill. For example, if the Ride skill is 50% and the PC is making an Easy roll, then the max of any appropriate skill is 100%. If the Ride roll is Difficult (1/2 chance), then the max is 25%.

This re-enforces the concept that mounted combat is a highly specialized set of skills. There is a reason that historic cavalry drilled extensively on horseback, and the Ride skill-enforced maximum on skills is to support that.

As with all rules, however, the GM should use common sense when applying skill penalties and modifiers.

[Nightshade]

Ride should have a note exempting it from Physical (armor) penalties from armor. The mount is assumed to be doing the footwork, so armor penalties shouldn't apply. GMs may wish instead to halve armor penalties or lessen them by some degree, if desired. I would humbly suggest a -5% penalty for Light burden armors, -10% penalty for Moderate, and -15% penalty for Cumbersome. Perception modifies for armor are unaffected.

Use of any Physical or Combat skills while mounted should be limited to the modified Ride skill. For example, if the Ride skill is 50% and the PC is making an Easy roll, then the max of any appropriate skill is 100%. If the Ride roll is Difficult (1/2 chance), then the max is 25%.

This re-enforces the concept that mounted combat is a highly specialized set of skills. There is a reason that historic cavalry drilled extensively on horseback, and the Ride skill-enforced maximum on skills is to support that.

As with all rules, however, the GM should use common sense when applying skill penalties and modifiers.

The only problem we had with it locally was the combination of it being a Physical skill and, by the book, impacted by armor and other encumbrance; given the values assigned for heavier armor that would have made it require mounted knights to have Riding excessively higher for fighting on it to be viable. If encumbrance (or even just armor encumbrance/penalties) are ignored for this purpose, the other penalties aren't a big deal; in most cases you'd probably get the same or similar penalties on the weapon skills in the same situation anyway.