Are there any guidelines for skills modifying other skills, in an extended test scenario. For example: Bran has the Light-footed gift, which means he's got a +10 to his Dancing skill. If he wants to Romance a lady, it would seem a good idea to sweep her off her feet with a Dance or two first, yeah? So if he makes his Dancing roll, how will that impact his ability to Romance? I might propose something like:

Crit: +5 to use of next skill in the same endeavor
Success: No mod (Success is its own reward)
Fail: No mod (Failure is penalty enough)
Fumble: -5 to use of next skill in the same endeavor

Is this too generous? Unnecessarily complex?


T.

Are there any guidelines for skills modifying other skills, in an extended test scenario. For example: Bran has the Light-footed gift, which means he's got a +10 to his Dancing skill. If he wants to Romance a lady, it would seem a good idea to sweep her off her feet with a Dance or two first, yeah? So if he makes his Dancing roll, how will that impact his ability to Romance? I might propose something like:

Crit: +5 to use of next skill in the same endeavor
Success: No mod (Success is its own reward)
Fail: No mod (Failure is penalty enough)
Fumble: -5 to use of next skill in the same endeavor

Is this too generous? Unnecessarily complex?


T.


I do like this, occasionally.

It's a good way to make players think about their skills, and a good way to reward clever use of skills. You can also reward players that have invested in "useless" skills: "Okay, you wan't to Dance with the Duchess? You have to Flirt to get her attention!".

I would say it is an unneccesary roll, since it only generates a modify 1/10th of the time.

I would say if a situation depends on more than one skill, such that BOTH skills are REQUIRED, either apply a penalty unless the second skill succeeds (For example, fighting at night: -10 on combat rolls unless an awareness roll succeeds each turn), or don't allow a roll on the important skill unless the supporting skill is succeeded first (Valour rolls to face monsters - you cant get into combat until you have eventually succeeeded a valour roll).

There are situations that are complex enough that one roll is never enough. Your example of romance is a very good one. These require a number of separate rolls, each in a separate scene. Each success contributes to winning the ladies heart, and failures might cause obstacles or make her cool towards you. You dont win someone's heart with a romance roll. You keep their interest with a variety of different courting behaviours - sometimes an entertaining pastime (dance, falconry etc), sometimes a heroic deed (carry the lady's favour in a tournament, send her the shields of foes you have defeated in her name, etc.).

Romance, Combat, Hunting, Battle, managing a manor - these are all examples of situations in the rules that depend on more than one skill or trait, and you can see how a variety of skills/traits can be used over time, towards the overall success of the endeavour.

Most of the time, players are making single, independent rolls that stand alone. Do they entertain the court? Do they spot the secret entrance? Do they leap into the sadlle clumsily? The players might argue that some other skill will provide a bonus - but your job as GM is to choose which rating is most appropriate, and that's the one they roll. If it does makie sense that more than one skill applies to the situation, just choose which is most important and have them roll that, OR (I do this often), let them choose which of the relevant skills to roll. The rules again present many such situations like this - Examples: entertain the court - some will use Play Instrument, others Orate, etc. Or, getting information: some will use Intrigue and mingle with nobles, while others might try to pick up gossip from the peasantry using Folk Lore.

As you can see, you dont need to add extra rules to pendragon to account for such situations. The examples I've presented are all in the rules already, and showcase different ways you can approach these situations.

Thanks, guys!


T.