Initiative Systems in BRP

[Lloyd Dupont]

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Ah, okay. Basically the AC formula. Although I'd be tempted to let both sides roll and let the higher roll win. I'd even drop initiative and go with that for melee combat too. It really simplifies a lot of stuff. 

Mm... my current idea is just to replace the resistance table. Yeah it does look like AC in D&D but resistance already works like this!
As far as I understood it, only the defender roll on the resistance table... which usually happen after a successful attack skill...

Was not planning to replace normal skills contest, like sword fighting, with it. one big difference is that at equal skill it's always 50% chance of success, whereas with attack and parry both say at 100%, it's a lot of stalemates...

 

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Okay, still a bit confused, as there have been multiple ways to handle opposed rolls. . For iFor instance is is DEX 10 vs. DEX 15 on the resistance table (so 25/75%) with 1/10th the skill thrown in i.e so 90% vs 20% would be (10+9) =19 vs (15+2) =17 on the resistance table ), or 25vs 75 with a 7% shift for the difference in skill, or  is it something like an opposed 50%+10th skill vs 75%+1/10% skill roll.

You got that right, so I am not sure what confuses you... although.. some of the thing you typed are confusing too....

let's have 2 examples:
Young Swordsman: DEX 16, Sword: 45%, against old master: DEX 9, Sword: 113%.
If the young swordsman tries to disarm the master (luckily succeed attack and master fail defence) then it's Attacker: 16+4 = 20, Defender 9+13 = 22. i.e. Defender has 60% chance (or 22+D20 >= 31)
(mm.. I wonder if the skill should really be used there as a bonus.. there was already a skill contest to get an attempt)

Powerful Wizard vs Experienced Adventurer
Wizard: POW: 20, not so well know spell: 60%, against Experienced Adventurer: POW: 15, Willpower: 85%
Wizard succeed at spell, Adventurer should save, i.e. roll on the resistance table with Defence 15+8=23 vs Attack: 20+6=26
i.e. defender has 35% to resist (or 23+D20 >= 37)

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by Lloyd Dupont

[Atgxtg]

3 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Mm... my current idea is just to replace the resistance table. Yeah it does look like AC in D&D but resistance already works like this!
As far as I understood it, only the defender roll on the resistance table... which usually happen after a successful attack skill...

Yeah,, but if you are replacing that with a D20 roll then you could just go with D20+modifiers for both sides and use an opposed roll. That might be a nice option to have. I was thinking of doing something along those lines for a game where only the players roll and the NPCs just get 10+their modifiers. 

3 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Was not planning to replace normal skills contest, like sword fighting, with it. one big difference is that at equal skill it's always 50% chance of success, whereas with attack and parry both say at 100%, it's a lot of stalemates...

Yeah, BRP wasn't really designed for opposed rolls. That's why I'd avoid them if possible. 

3 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

You got that right, so I am not sure what confuses you... although.. some of the thing you typed are confusing too....

Just that there are several ways to apply it.

3 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

let's have 2 examples:
Young Swordsman: DEX 16, Sword: 45%, against old master: DEX 9, Sword: 113%.
If the young swordsman tries to disarm the master (luckily succeed attack and master fail defence) then it's Attacker: 16+4 = 20, Defender 9+13 = 22. i.e. Defender has 60% chance (or 22+D20 >= 31)
(mm.. I wonder if the skill should really be used there as a bonus.. there was already a skill contest to get an attempt)

I though you were just using for initiative, not for the success chance. If so I suggest just putting skill on a 1-20 scale instead of percentiles, and maybe coverting the whole game to work that way. You get a good deal of flexibility that way. 

3 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Powerful Wizard vs Experienced Adventurer
Wizard: POW: 20, not so well know spell: 60%, against Experienced Adventurer: POW: 15, Willpower: 85%
Wizard succeed at spell, Adventurer should save, i.e. roll on the resistance table with Defence 15+8=23 vs Attack: 20+6=26

i.e. defender has 35% to resist (or 23+D20 >= 37)

 

Okay. It works. 

[Lloyd Dupont]

3 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I though you were just using for initiative, not for the success chance. If so I suggest just putting skill on a 1-20 scale instead of percentiles, and maybe coverting the whole game to work that way. You get a good deal of flexibility that way. 

Using that for initiative was an idea that only come to me in a thread barely a few hours ago! (and not quite sure about it yet)
My plan was, so far before that, only to use that for modified resistance rolls.  

4 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Okay. It works.

Glad you see it too now!

[DreadDomain]

 

On 10/28/2020 at 5:43 AM, Atgxtg said:

Thanks DreadDomain,

It's an interesting idea to tweak the SR system that way, especially when handling modern firearms, many of which can empty their magazine in under 12 seconds.

Ringwolrd used to add the full Action Rank (but it was just a DEX SR but with a wider scale) and allow for rollover.  For instance a character with a DEX of 13  would have an Action Rank of 4, and could draw a weapon on 4 impulse, aim in for action 4 impulses (impulse 8 ) and shoot the weapon on impulse 9 (a minor action taking only 1 impulse), then aim again to impulse 13, and shoot again on impulse 14.

I suspect some variation on that idea would probably work out really well. 

That would also work. Just for the record, I do not necessarily only want super simulationist systems. What I described above was only a way for us, back in the days, to make RQ3 combat more fun and more believable within the context of a 12 seconds Melee Round. For RQG, which doesn't really try to model movement in combat, I rather think of the Melee Rounds as "an undefined, elastic period of time where everything happens almost simultaneously".

I also like the Pendragon-style everything happens at once.

[Atgxtg]

6 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

 

That would also work. Just for the record, I do not necessarily only want super simulationist systems. What I described above was only a way for us, back in the days, to make RQ3 combat more fun and more believable within the context of a 12 seconds Melee Round. For RQG, which doesn't really try to model movement in combat, I rather think of the Melee Rounds as "an undefined, elastic period of time where everything happens almost simultaneously".

I also like the Pendragon-style everything happens at once.

Me too. There are lots of different ways to do things in an RPG. That's one of the reason why there can be so many different RPGs. 

[Kloster]

11 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

 

That would also work. Just for the record, I do not necessarily only want super simulationist systems. What I described above was only a way for us, back in the days, to make RQ3 combat more fun and more believable within the context of a 12 seconds Melee Round. For RQG, which doesn't really try to model movement in combat, I rather think of the Melee Rounds as "an undefined, elastic period of time where everything happens almost simultaneously".

I also like the Pendragon-style everything happens at once.

What we did is use RQ3 RAW, forcing players and GM to be creative in the use of maneuvers to beat others. This was intellectually very interesting.