Basic Fantasy RPG Core Rules 3rd Edition

[Sir Bedivere]

What I am suggesting is that their is a difference between what a thief can do and what a non-thief can attempt.

This makes a lot of sense (though I think using extreme examples results in silliness), and if the rules were written that way it would make the thief class better, in my opinion.

In most cases I am in complete agreement with you about no GM is wrong for doing things differently than another. There is one exception though. I will say that any DM that says a PC can't attempt something is doing it wrong. Its not the DMs job to decide the choice of a PC unless that PC is charmed or something. Its their job to decide the outcome of that choice. So if someone wants to attempt a thief skill there is nothing in the rule book that says they can't attempt it. What exactly is a thief skill is up to the GM to decide.

It would be nice to have some guidelines on that. For example, we might have a non-thief try a thief skill. We might also have a magic-user just decide to put on leather armor and try to use a crossbow in a fight. It would be helpful to have a suggestion for how to handle these situations if we aren't just going to say no.

[Hywaywolf]

There aren't any rules or examples in place to tell you how a PC should ride a horse, row a boat, haggle for goods, etc. Some things a GM just needs to know or learn on the job. We could fill the core rules with helpful examples, but I still think its better to build a GM supplement rather than bloat the core rules.

[chiisu81]

Agreed. It's one thing to spend a few words explaining specific skills/traits of a class, but if you try to expand that to examples of what all any PC can do, you're just veering too close to including a full-blown skills system, and that's not what BFRPG should have.

[Fabio_MP]

I'm still waiting to see a clean, presentable explanation that doesn't grow the rules any.

what do you think of something like this in the ability rolls section?

Situational bonus and penalty should also consider if the character is used to do that action or not, if his class give him some familiarity bonus, if some special training is needed. For example all character are used at normal adventuring chores so if they usually ride horses the GM should the character rolls only in exceptional situations (the GM should consider giving fighter a +3 class bonus), trying to hide where the terrain permits it (thief should hide automatically in this situations or have a great bonus to their thief ability, +50% or the like), trying to search a book in library (wizards and other scholars should get the +3 class bonus), a thief will have a +3 bonus if trying to get information in a shady inn without being noticed, and so on.

[dymondy2k]

Chris.. I did see something missing in the core rules, or at least I thought it was missing. You give a miles per day for boats etc, any chance you could do the same with the horse drawn vehicles as well like Wagon, Chariot, Carriage.. Maybe based on a 10 hour travel day.

[Solomoriah]

You'd get that from the regular overland travel movement table, with the usual terrain adjustments. Waterborne movement is different, as explained in the rules.

[dymondy2k]

Whats the parentheses around the movement rates for?

[Joe the Rat]

Turning radius,I believe. Wagons don't turn on a copper.

[Solomoriah]

Not "radius" per se, but rather the distance that must be moved before making a turn. It's in the optional Maneuverability rule.

[SmootRK]

I was just looking up something and found only sparse description of the time increments used in the game. Rounds=10sec in combat. While the info is sorta there spread to different parts of the book, I think the section for Encounters might benefit from having a paragraph to itself that discusses the different increments and their relationship to each other... in one spot.

If one did not have prior gaming (specifically using these related games/editions), then one might be confused as to what to use. A simple referable paragraph would alleviate that.