From:	shadowrn@*********.com (Christian Casavant)
Subject:	Complementary Skills
Date:	Wed Mar 13 04:40:01 2002

Damo,

> Um, not that I think this rule is a bad idea, but I was wondering why you
> considered that you were "especially tolerant and permissive" for allowing
> it? It's probably worse in many circumstances than the 1 success for every 2
> Complimentary Skill successes rule that's in the book. But, OTOH, I guess
> that in some circumstances (mainly very low TNs) it's actually better. So it
> probably evens out, and it actually involves less maths ;-).


I'm not toleralant and permissive for letting this pass, I'm kind as a
GM because I reward my players for clever ideas. For example (as in a
previous thread), I would have allowed the turning of the door
invisible to see he target through it the first time. I'm not a big fan
of convuleted rules debate during game. I would have entertained
arguments after and possibly allowed/disallowed the thing to happen
again. (After all, I'm not the type to let myself get walked on by my
players either...)


> OTOOH, it doesn't really help answer the original proposed question. A
> Stealth Test has _no_ TN. It is an Open Test. So even your rules do not
> cover the situation, as the Complimentary Skill roll is unable to generate
> successes, and thus unable to add dice to the actual Skill Test.


Fair enough. Make an arbitrary TN for the complementary skill and roll,
add successes to active skill. TN of 4 assumes 50% success which is
essentially what Marc suggested I think. I personally think that's a
bit too many additional dice, but not uncommon with Athletics/Dodoge.
Or you can make TN 6 making it unlikely they'll get extra dice.

Or, give your player 1 extra die and explain that it's an open test and
so difficult to quantify.

Xian.