Resistance Table use over 21

[Squaredeal Sten]

What do you do when you have a roll on the resistance table and one side (or both sides) has a value over 21?

Examples,

● Calculating the knockback roll for two large opponents in accord with the written formula on  p, RQiG page 224:  STR + SIZ vs. STR + DEX. 

For example an adventurer STR 17 SIZ  15 , total 32 vs. an NPC STR 11 DEX 11, total 22.

I have a problem applying this to very high values, where it seems to have exaggerated and disproportionate  effects  - see examples below.

● An Adventurer  with POW 18 tries to cast Disruption or Befuddle… on a Dream Dragon which may have POW as high as 24, or on a Dryad whose POW can be as high as 28.  Or a shaman whose effective (corporate) POW including his fetch might be as high as 42, maybe higher.   

I can see three ways of adjusting to get onto the table:  Adapt to the table by subtraction or division, or apply the written formula.

I am not happy with taking the method most beneficial to the adventurer, because I want to apply a method consistently across situations.  Sometimes the higher POW will belong to a friend, sometimes to an enemy.

 

Which method do you use?  Or do you use a different method that I have not thought of?

 

Examples:

 

        Method A:   Follow the written formula on RQiG page 145. 

and use 50% - the difference between active and passive values x 5%?

Given  the Adventurer knockback attempt above, 32 vs. 22,  the stronger and larger larger adventurer has a success chance of   50% + 160% - 110% = 100% chance of success.

Given Adventurer POW attempt above, 18 vs. Dryad 28, the formula  for chance of success would be

50%+ 18x5% - 28x5% 

= 50%+90%-140% = 0% chance to succeed.

 

This seems to me to have exaggerated knockback effects when applied to two entities that are much higher than 21 in the particular characteristic. For example between two dinosaurs  of average size for their species, (Bestiary pages 110-111), one Allosaur  (active) STR 86 SIZ 50 and one Brontosaur STR 62 DEX 4,

the balance is in favor of an attacking Allosaur, 136 vs. 66, the difference is 70 and the chance of the Allosaur’s success is 50%+ 680% - 330%= 400%.

even though the Brontosur is larger, SIZ 72. 

I can’t visualize this tackle – but apparently Rules As Written, it’s a winning tactic for the Allosaur.

 

But if the Brontosaur manages to try knockback first (admittedly unlikely given the DEX difference) the stats are Brontosaur (active) 62+72= 134 vs.. Allosaur 86+13 = 99.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and the Brontosaur has a 50%+ 670% - 495% = 225% chance of success.

Definitely the Brontosaur should tackle.  But due to the listed Strike Ranks, given 5 SR for the downed one to stand up,  it seems unlikely to ever get to trample, just to continue knocking the Allosaur down.

 

Method B:  Subtract the difference between the higher characteristic and 21, from both sides.

So

Given Adventurer  32 vs. 22, you subtract 11 to get 21 vs. 11, a 100% chance of success.

Given Adventurer 18 vs. Dryad 28, you subtract 7 to get Adventurer 14 vs. Dryad 21, a 15% chance.

 

Method 😄 Divide both characteristics by a number.

Given Adventurer  32 vs. 22, divide by 2 to get 16 vs. 11, a 75% of success.

Given Adventurer 18 vs. Dryad 28, divide both by 2, to get Adventurer 9 vs. Dryad 14, a 25% chance.

 

Which method do you use?  Or do you use a different method that I have not thought of?

[Rodney Dangerduck]

A or B are both correct.  Whichever math is easier for you. 

You messed up the Adventurer vs Dryad math in part B.  The correct result after subtracting 7 from both is 11 vs 21, a 0% chance 

Note that 1-5 always succeeds, so "0%" is really 5%.  Likewise, "100%" is really 95%.

[Soccercalle]

I always take 50 +  (PCs stat - opponents stat) x5

When you never needs to use a table. It's easy to remember that an advantage of 3 (ex 16 vs 13 or for that matter 116 vs 113) gives you a 65% chans of success. (As 3x5 is 15 and 15 + 50 is 65).

A disadvantage of 2 (ex 12 vs 14 or 89 vs 91) gives you a 40% chans of success. (As -2x5 is -10 and -10 + 50 is 40).

Edited November 14, 2022 by Soccercalle

[Kloster]

2 hours ago, Soccercalle said:

I always take 50 +  (PCs stat - opponents stat) x5

This is also what I do.

[Andrew M]

I never bother looking at the table and just the formula, and would use it regardless of the numbers involved.

However for something like Brontosaurus vs Allosaur roles , I may in fact just assign arbitary values as it is not a PC involved dice roll and the system is based around human levels of characteristics and a PC dinosaur is an unnusual thing

[DreadDomain]

A and B are correct. However, when it comes to the allosaurus vs brontosaurus example, the problem is that STR and SIZ follow a progression that often other characteristics do not follow (except when magic is involved). A slam between the two would be better represented by a STR+SIZ vs STR+SIZ (I have a hard time picturing a brontosaurus trying agily to avoid or deflect a slam).

 I suspect the official answer would be the rule do not work as it was not intended to be applied to such a situation.

[Squaredeal Sten]

17 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

A and B are correct.....(I have a hard time picturing a brontosaurus trying agily to avoid or deflect a slam).

 .....

That's exactly my problem with it, or one of my problems anyway.  At high levels the linear relationship gives effects that challenge the suspension of disbelief. 

At more or less human level, say 20 vs 10, the formula essentially says that with a 2:1 rato you have a lock on whatever you are doing.  But at high levels a much smaller ratio between opponents will give equally certain results.

And if as Rodney Dangerduck indicates 5% is always a success, then in extremity a duck has a 5% chance of knocking an allosaurus down.  Not a bad tactic if you are in the situation of going hand to hand with one, as it would essentially be an enhancement to the Divine Intervention that should come next.

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Squaredeal Sten
spelled 'allosaurus' and "that" right.

[PhilHibbs]

Characteristics are supposed to be somewhat exponential, so a difference of 10 is a huge difference at any scale. The SIZ chart in RQ3 had each point of SIZ being slightly more than the last point, so the scale accelerates gently until you get to 100 whereupon it's flat. So that doesn't really back up the exponential theory.

Just another example of how the rules don't really scale that well. But they don't need to. They work well enough that you can play a game and have fun and kill a giant monster. What's not to love?

[soltakss]

The Resistance table falls down at high levels, so I rarely use it.

 

But for the OP's question, I usually use A, or extend the table so I get values that work easily.

[DreadDomain]

6 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

That's exactly my problem with it, or one of my problems anyway.  At high levels the linear relationship gives effects thar challenge the suspension of disbelief.

The real challenge is that some characteristics appears to be mechanically linear in that they do not represent anything measurable (DEX, CON, INT, POW, CHA) while STR and SIZ are somewhat exponential. From roughly each +8 difference you are twice a strong (+16 is four time as strong). If the resistance table is used to pit linear characteristics against linear characteristics, it generally works. If it pits exponential characteristics against exponential characteristics, it generally works. If it mixes the two, like in your example, it falls apart at higher level.  

6 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

At more or less human level, say 20 vs 10, the formula essentially says that with a 2:1 rato you have a lock on whatever you are doing.  But at high levels a much smaller ratio between opponents will give equally certain results.

In a contest of STR vs STR or STR vs SIZ, it actually works very well. Each +8 is a doubling of strength or size. Someone with STR 18 arm wrestle someone with STR 10, is twice as strong and has 90% chance to win. Someone with STR 86 arm wrestle someone with STR 78 is twice as strong and has 90% chance to win.

6 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

And if as Rodney Dangerduck indicates 5% is always a success, then in extremity a duck has a 5% chance of knocking an allossurus down.  Not a bad tactic if you are in the situation of going hand to hand with one, as it would essentially be an enhancement to the Divine Intervention that should come next.

Depending on different play styles, some might see these unbeliveable results as a feature and an opportunity for good narratives. I personally don't and would reserve the right to ask the player to give a very good, interesting and exciting explaination on why it worked, or call it a fail anyway. 

5 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

so the scale accelerates gently until you get to 100 whereupon it's flat. So that doesn't really back up the exponential theory.

This is one of the two BRP "features" that I detest. The exponential progression should continue forever. Luckily, the bug happens so high in the curve that it is rarely a consideration.

[whitelaughter]

on a similar subject, how do augments interact with the minimum 5% chance?

Suppose you are so outclassed that your base chance of success is -10%, giving you the 5% minimum. Will a successful augment of 20% increase the chance to 25%, or does it run off the base, and so you now have a 10% chance?

A combination of ritual practice and augment could hit 90%+, so against a powerful opponent this is a huge difference!

[Kloster]

59 minutes ago, whitelaughter said:

on a similar subject, how do augments interact with the minimum 5% chance?

Suppose you are so outclassed that your base chance of success is -10%, giving you the 5% minimum. Will a successful augment of 20% increase the chance to 25%, or does it run off the base, and so you now have a 10% chance?

A combination of ritual practice and augment could hit 90%+, so against a powerful opponent this is a huge difference!

I would say it would bring you to original chance +20%, with a minimum of 05%, so in this case 10%.

[DreadDomain]

5 hours ago, Kloster said:

I would say it would bring you to original chance +20%, with a minimum of 05%, so in this case 10%.

Same here. The guaranteed success and failure ranges are meta rules that come when everything else have been considered but before the gamemaster rules the attempt too silly or too easy, foregoes the roll and tell you what happen.

[MJ Sadique]

On 11/14/2022 at 6:00 AM, Squaredeal Sten said:

What do you do when you have a roll on the resistance table and one side (or both sides) has a value over 21?

Examples,

● Calculating the knockback roll for two large opponents in accord with the written formula on  p, RQiG page 224:  STR + SIZ vs. STR + DEX. 

For example an adventurer STR 17 SIZ  15 , total 32 vs. an NPC STR 11 DEX 11, total 22.

I have a problem applying this to very high values, where it seems to have exaggerated and disproportionate  effects  - see examples below.

Which method do you use?  Or do you use a different method that I have not thought of?

 

Method A:   Follow the written formula on RQiG page 145.
Method B:  Subtract the difference between the higher characteristic and 21, from both sides.
Method 😄 Divide both characteristics by a number.

 

Which method do you use?  Or do you use a different method that I have not thought of?

 

 

Both methods ARE FALSEs and incorrects... which creating those exaggerated effects

Original table is ONE characteristic VS ONE characteristic :

• Cha1 vs Cha2 : 50% +5% per Delta (Cha1-Cha2) ie POW 18 vs POW 24 : 50 + 5% x |18 -24|  = 50 + 5% x 6 = 50% +30 %

Original table with TWO characteristics VS TWO characteristics :

• Cha1+Cha1' vs Cha2+2' : 50% +5% per Delta (Cha1+1'-Cha2+2') ie 18+18 vs 24+24 : 50 + 5% x |18x2 -24x2|  = 50 + 5% x 6 x2 = 50% +30% x2

==> This is where your "exaggerated and disproportionate  effects" came from, so do not use it. Also the substract 21 method just hide the problem, the divide by 2 will stop working if it is One Characteristic vs TWO characteristic (surprise charge STR+SIZ vs SIZ) or even a group fo 3 vs group of 5 test.

Which method do you use?

Like most, I don't use the table since the mathematic calculus is easy : "50% +5% per delta".

As per Original table for 1 vs 1 Characteristics

1. Better : RQ method for Cha1 vs Cha2 : 50% +5% per Delta (D100 scale/roll, Active player make the roll, 1% chance of Draw)
2. Faster : HeroWars/Heroquest method for  Cha1 vs Difficulty (D20 roll/scale, Active player make the roll, 1/20 chance of Draw)
3. Stronger : For group/complex tests Cha1 vs Cha2 : Cha1 + 1D10 vs Cha2 +1D10 (D20 scale, each player make a "secret roll" and tell result or lower value, around 1/10 chance of draw at max)

In case of multiple characteristics, I add a simple step but very important one.

1. Better : RQ method but best Characteristic for test and others ones as bonus (like passion or affinity). It's still within RQ rules !
2. Faster : HeroWars/Heroquest test with a bonus +1 to +5 for a supporting chac/skill/spell. It's still within the HW/HQ rules !
3. Stronger : Just use the sum of all charac + 1D10 per charac : Σ Cha + D10 vs Σ Cha + D10.

For the stronger method, you can change the 1D10 to 1-3 D6 for tampering or rising the random/luck effects. 1D6 is ok for low levels, realistics or basic situation and 3D6 is better for heroic deeds, very randomly situation or fantasy bonus (Like Divine Intervention/Inspiration). It's the only way to tamper with your RNG to avoid "exaggerated and disproportionate  effects".

Edited December 1, 2022 by MJ Sadique
some tiny mistake and mispelling :p

[Eff]

I think that the given example of knockback suggests that the knockback rule might be best adjusted into an average of the two characteristics rather than their addition, or that it should be something like STR+SIZ vs DEX+SIZ, so that having a large size advantage translates into being harder to knock down.  But setting that aside, I think the overarching question is "What do we want these rules to enable and constrain?" For example, in the POW vs POW contest, I think the answer for how to produce results is dependent entirely on whether we want magical faceoffs to be primarily about who can muster the most POW, and as such make getting into one with a dream dragon, a shaman, or a dryad a very bad idea, or if we want them to be more unpredictable and thus make it less of a bad idea to try and Disrupt or Befuddle a dragon. 

An additional method, Method D :

For the purposes of the Resistance Table, characteristics higher than 21 are treated as if they are 21. 

So for our adventurer versus dryad situation, of 18 vs. 28, this would resolve to 35% chance of success in POW v. POW contention, and the advantage of superhuman POW is that you have more MP and a greater ability to cast spirit magic, but not advancing out of the Resistance Table's domain. This method's main effect is that active defenses remain equally important for major magical combatants, because they can't rely on the passive POW protection going beyond the ability of ordinary humans to reach, but they still have a greater reserve for making use of those active defenses.