Skills - maybe this game isn't what I'm looking for

[borithan]

Originally Posted by adaman14

I have just started playing GURPS and really thought it would be the RPG for me but now I am not sure. I have DX 11 and Riding Horses as a skill. Every time I mount a horse I need to check my skill?

I was checking to see "is that right?" and yes, the skill write up technically suggests this. However, as people said:

1) there should almost certainly be positive modifiers to this. If it is a riding animal it will gives at least +1 for having the "Mount" skill, and if it is *your* mount and you keep good care of it you are likely getting another +5, and even if it isn't in most non-stressful situations you are likely getting +4. (edited because I was working on a presumption that you has skill 11, and I realise that wasn't actually what you said!).

2) the GM shouldn't be asking you to roll *every* time you mount. Only when it is important, like mounting an animal in combat (where the time pressure matters), or where failure is likely to have a dramatic effect. Even if you wanted to enforce riding rolls for normal day to day riding it is probably best to treat it how it is suggested a job roll or commuting roll is treated, ie, you roll once for an entire month, with failure meaning some minor setback, and only a critical fail suggesting there is anything major going to have happened.

The main issue is the number of rolls you are being asked to make, which isn't an issue with the system itself (though it may be impacted by the GM's confidence with the system, if this is the first time they have run GURPS, for example). If the GM did the same in D&D (for example), the chances of even a skilled character failing an average check are higher than you might expect. While the DCs have generally been lowered in 5th edition, the whole "take 10" mechanic (equivalent of the +4 for un-stressful situations in GURPS) doesn't technically exist except as a Rogue class feature. An good skill for a common person would likely be +5 and even on a DC 10 check that leaves a 25% failure chance. Of course the game doesn't actually expect you to roll for every little thing.

1 in 3 chance to fail and then what happens if I fail?

You don't mount the animal and waste some time. This might matter in combat (the bad guys have more time to catch up with you, you have left yourself in a vulnerable position etc). It would likely only be a critical failure that there would be any consequence other than wasted time (fall when almost mounted, or maybe the mount bolts while you are half mounted and might fling you and drag you... but even then you probably get another chance to mitigate the failure somehow).

Dang, a normal person without the specific skill fails to even mount the horse 95% of the time?

So a normal riding horse has Mount 11, which they average with the unskilled rider's default of 5, making an effective skill of 8. Now, arguably the first time you are riding a horse it will not be stress free, so you might not get that full +4, and the mount isn't likely to know you that well, so you almost certainly won't get you a +5 for that. However, a proper riding instructor will probably be nearby to keep an eye to make sure the horse is calm (and to reassure you too), probably have allowed the horse to acclimatise to you a bit, so you probably still get some bonus (+2 maybe?) and the very least will probably preventing any negative modifiers come in to play. And a lot of new riders will quite possibly fail their first attempt, but not so badly that they end up flat on their arse, and will take a few tries to get on. Once they get used it, even if they don't qualify for a point in the skill they probably qualify for getting the +4 for un-stressful circumstances... just don't go riding anywhere that might be stressful (effective skill of 8 is *not* something you want to be testing).

That the chance of a unskilled rider mounting an untrained horse in unsupportive circumstances is very low is kind of fair enough. That kind of thing would be actively dangerous.