Re: Horses?
 

I agree completely, whence the lengthy explanation in my post. I hope that I can get that into print at some point.

Re: Horses?
 

I don't get your argument here.

"It would be useful in GURPS, therefore it can't be DFRPG. It would be useful in GURPS, therefore it can't be GURPS DF."

This-does-not-follow.

Things from DFRPG can be useful to people who aren't playing anything dungeon and/or fantasy. Or GURPS related at all, really.

They probably don't care about gryphons, but a lot of DF8 Treasure Tables is handy just in historical games - doesn't mean DF8 has to immediately be exiled from the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy line forever.

GURPS has a long and honoured history of producing products with lots of general usability. I don't see why the DFRPG line can't produce things of general usability either.

Dungeon Fantasy Monsters is clearly full of things that would go great in a Bestiary, as are GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Monsters 1, 2, and 3 - doesn't mean they must immediately and henseforth declare too good for Dungeon Fantasy.

Re: Horses?
 

It wouldn't follow, were this my argument, instead of the strawman argument you just made up to put in my mouth.

My argument is, since it isn't obvious:

1) As Kromm just said, the DFRPG is for going into a dungeon, slaying monsters, and taking their stuff. It's a little hard to take your mount into a dungeon. While not having horses in the set is an oversight so long as Riding (Horse) is on a few templates, there is a reason why someone might leave it out. There aren't even basic rules for mounted combat in Exploits.
2) GURPS Dungeon Fantasy is about doing the same, with the exceptions being that you also can go into the wilderness, track monsters back to their lairs, slay them, and take their stuff, and also tap into the rest of the GURPS line. There are already rules for using mounts in combat and in the wild in the Basic Set and DF 16 that are more than enough for a DF game, wherein most combat won't happen while mounted, much less with everyone mounted. Even in GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, horses are mostly a way of speeding up going from point A to point B, and bearing more stuff.
3) What you're proposing is more an expansion of the riding, mounted combat, and Animal Handling rules, with a few magic items and fantastic mounts thrown in. You could cut this as part of GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, I suppose, though, to borrow from your own argument, you seem to be missing that products pitched at one sub-line (say, GURPS Zombies: Day Zero) also have support for other sub-lines. There are fantastic martial art styles in GURPS Martial Arts, which is fine; the focus is the rules, not the trappings.

Re: Horses?
 

Your argument absolutely wasn't obvious. But I think there was some confusion about what I was suggesting for the product.

I didn't say "expansion" or elaboration or what have you on the rules for riding and mounted combat. I just said to put them in - "them" being the stuff out of Basic Set, possibly modified and cut back as appropriate for DFRPG. I certainly didn't mean to propose they be made more complicated than they already are (I think that they're already a bit fussy).

Because I was specifically proposing a DFRPG product about how to ride a horse, since that bit was missed, the core material has to be "how to ride a horse". GURPS already has that.

If SJG doesn't intend on issuing an errata to eradicate the Riding skill from the DFRPG, which they don't seem to be indicating is the plan at the moment, then something needs to be done with them, and that can either be a Pyramid article just repeating the rules and providing the statblock for "a horse", or it can be a PDF book, at which point including all the rideable animals from the Basic Set seems the bare minimum to get the pagecount up to a useful level.

Even adding some riding animals not covered in the Basic Set doesn't make this a book that's some kind of Bestiary book. if you jamn a lot in, that's great, but as I was pitching a Dungeon Fantasy RPG book, I put the emphasis on things that are of more immediate interest to DFRPG that aren't Bestiary material, because they're also needed to meet the core need of "how to ride a horse". Much of the equipment is going to be repeated whole cloth from Low Tech and Basic Set, again because it's not in DFRPG at all. That's not new GURPS material, that's old GURPS material.

After that, treasure like magic items and spells is a core DFRPG (and GURPS DF) interest, and I'm of the opinion that anywhere you can squeeze in a new potion, four magic items, and a handful of spells is probably the right place. Those would be totally new, and of use to DFRPG players and GURPS players.

This wouldn't even be "compling GURPS rules about riding that are all over the place", GURPS rules about riding are pretty much all in the Basic Set; DFRPG doesn't use techniques so the stuff from Martial Arts is largely irrelevant.

The problem with the idea of "Well we can write it for GURPS and therefore it will still be good for DFRPG" is that this is very much the opposite of the stance SJG have taken. They're pushing very hard to keep the GURPS from leaking into this forum, and making the DFRPG stuff not require GURPS stuff. Releasing a book designed specifically to plug a hole in the DFRPG that doesn't exist in GURPS under the GURPS banner is perverse.

Re: Horses?
 

Thanks for acknowledging the oversight. Your explanation of what to expect from a horse is great because it quashes my reflex to import full GURPS horse/riding rules that we really don't need.

Re: Horses?
 

Pointless reminiscence: Back in the day, as one of a group of teens still figuring out D&D, I talked the DM into letting my fighter ride his warhorse all throughout the dungeons, lance-charging dragons in their 10'x10' rooms for ridiculous damage. "The rules don't say I can't do that..."

That was before we realized what a DM/GM is actually for. : )

Anyway, I agree with the wish for some simple expansion in the future, fleshing out horses in DFRPG-appropriate detail. And some non-horse mounts, including weird ones. Because fantasy.

Re: Horses?
 

I actually think the quick and dirty rules given under the ride skill are just about all the riding rules you really need.

All we'd need to ride horses into battle are horses to ride into battle. And maybe saddles and such to up the riding skill so it's less of a drag on combat skills.

Including lances would complicate things, but there are no lances in DFRPG, so it's a non-issue.

Re: Horses?
 

To be fair, players will try to get away with anything. I never had a player ask to ride a mount in tunnels . . . However, I did once have a group try to roll ballistae on wheels (like this, I guess) – yes, plural, as in a pair of them – around a dungeon. Perhaps at some future date, a supplement can cover battlefield fun in general: horses in barding with lance-wielding riders, small siege weapons, battering rams, etc. as well as spear-carrying hirelings. Heck, forges and anvils for crafting right there on the spot! At a sufficiently over-the-top power level, these things become practical.

I'm sure the knights would appreciate it . . . They get the fewest special tricks, so it would be fun to turn Born War-Leader into something worrisome.

Re: Horses?
 

I'm always happy to own up to errata and oversights. Not happy that they happen, but willing to acknowledge the fact.

Re: Horses?
 

The mounted Knight charging a Dragon is almost iconic and would be cool. Something to consider for that outdoor supplement.