michigan's page

So instead of the human commoner knowing how to use longbows or broadswords, they know how to use repeating crossbows and two-bladed swords?

Exotic weapons are suppossed to be rare. Martial weapons are commonly carried military arms, and I see no problem with humans knowing how to use one or two in order to defend themselves.

Dwarves and Elves had had this option for years... Elves received longsword, shortshort, longbow and shortbow for free back in AD&D, where Weapon Proficencies for any class (including Fighters!) was a very precious resource.

King Edward I of England (r. 1272–1307) mandated that his subjects practice with the longbow. Switzerland has long made use of citizen militias, famopusly all well trainned in the halberd (also called the Swiss Voulge). Scottish Highlanders in the 1600's were well known for their Lochaber Axe...

In a world of dragons, ogres, and wargs I'd expect every NPC to want to keep a weapon close at hand.

Equipment in D&D has never been especially granular, like it might be in Shadowrun say... There isn't Horseman's Full Plate Armor or Footman's Chain Hauberk. There is just one type of any give armor from a mechanical standpoint. From a narrative perspective, I just kind of assume that a dedicated calvaryman is going to purchase wear appropriate armor.

That said, I have no problem seeing Ride folded into Handle Animal. But I have maintined for years that no game system needs more than ten to twenty skills.

(As an aside, if you are comparing RenFaire jousting to actual jousting, you're losing out. One is an weekend entertainment, the other was a bloodsport. Comparing jousts to warfare also loses out, one was a sport the other was warfare.)

No. Good god no.

Vitality/Wound Points do nothing but make it easier for the player characters to die, add complexity to combat (which is complex enough), and require me as GM to spend extra time when making my notes for every monster they'll fight.

I agree that Ride should not have an Armor Check Penalty. Of course, it was the only Dex based skill that did not have a penalty. It is much 'simpler' to say 'all strength and dexterity based skills suffer an armor check penalty. I like the ease of that.

Many, if not most, of the uses of the Ride skill fall into the catagory of "trick riding." These are all feats of coordination, timing, andflexibiltiy on the rider's part... not so much the mounts. Hence, Dexterity makes the most sense imho.

However, I see no inherent difficult in having Ride be an exception to the armor check penality rule. It's only one skill out of, what, thirty total? One needs to be able to remember all the other uses of the skill anyway, and to be honest, the only way I or any of my players can remember armor check penalties is with the little superscript notation of our character sheets.

Men have been wearing heavy armor and charing into combat on horseback for a few dozen centuries now. I think we've more or less proven that it doesn't get signifigantly harder for a properly trainned calvaryman...

And if you ask me Armor Proficency + Ride Skill = Proper Training.

Are we forgetting that if you loose your Arcane Boned iem you have to make an incredibly difficult Spellcraft skill check to cast any spell ever?

Lose you Familar, and no harm done. Lose your magic wand and you are screwed.

Darn it! I'm in Lansing. So close, and yet so far....

Still, I wouldn't mind the possibility of a semi-annual pilgrimage or even 4 times a year if I can stretch it.

I'm also in Lansing. I would really grove on a Pathfinder Society game being put togther for the Lansing-and-points-west area.