MRQII is now "wayfarer"

[Atgxtg]

RQII had something similar in just one skill, lock picking. But in that case the amount over 100% of the locksmith's skill was simply deducted from the lock picker's chance. I think I prefer that approach, penalising both seems like a game device more than a measure of what 100%+ skills can do (unless there's more to it than that, I haven't read MRQ2).

I believe RQ2 used something similar for Stealth skills, too. The MRQ method has it's pros and cons. Forone thing it messes up the critical anf\d failure chances. That isn't always right. For example, just because a mid-ranked amateur chessplayer (50%) is playing against a grandmaster (160%) doesn't mean that he would start doing fool's mate.

[Atgxtg]

Let me make sure I've got this straight. Let's say I have a TOTAL skill level of 45% in Athletics in BRP. I roll percentile on an Athletics check and roll a 32. This is a success in BRP. With a total of 45% in this skill I'd need to roll a 01-03 to roll a crit. I'd need to roll a 01-09 for a special success. I'd need to roll a 89-00 for a fumble result. Is this correct?

Almost.

1) First off there is no "Athletics" skill in BRP. Run, Swim, Jump, and Clime are all separate skills.

2) The crtical chance would be 02%, not 03%. In BRP you round to the nearest, so you won't hit 03% untl you reach a 50% skill. To make it easy:

<30% - 1%

30%+ = 2%

50%+ = 3%

70%+ = 4%

90%+ = 5%

(110%) = 6%

For higher values you can use the chart above and add 5% for each 100%. Just remember that you need at leat 10% over 100 to go from 5% to 6%. That is becuase BRP always gives you a 1% chance of getting a critical even if you skill is very low.

3) The fumble chance is 97-00, not 89-00. The fumble chance in BRP is 95%+ the Critical Chance (max 00).

[Camillus]

It isn't "penalising both" really, because you are already penalised by having your skill over 100 largely wasted in an opposed contest. The winner is the person who succeeds with the highest die roll, which means if you don't do something about it, people with skills over 100 have no relative advantage other than their crit chance. By reducing both, you let the highest skilled person keep their advantage, whilst the lower skill person loses out. For example, if I have 150% and you have 100%, the only difference is in my higher crit chance. However, if we reduce you to 50% and me to 100%, I'm now guaranteed a win if I roll between 51 and 95 (and you don't crit). So I'm not being penalised at all. Except, I suppose, if it's a combat then my chance of getting an "Ignore Armour" CM is reduced, as that only happens on a crit. Still, you're defending yourself so that's how it works out. 10% chance is still ok.

The way I do it for skills over 100% is to allow both characters to add whatever their skill over 100 is to their roll (obviously only natural 00 counts as a fumble). So the character with a skill of 150% would add 50 to their roll in any opposed test. It has the advantage that critical and special ranges stay the same and there's no subtraction steps involved for anyone.

[frogspawner]

Rounding up and rounding down is easy enough to do in your head. What I did was to produce an Excel spreadsheet...

But, guys... no rounding is necessary. There's no need to find the exact special/critical chances by dividing the skill. A simpler way is to multiply the number rolled by 5 (or 20) - if the result is less than the skill, then it's a special (or critical)...

[daddystabz]

Then I'm completely confused because I used the chart in the book to calculate this all. I used Athletics as a skill even though it doesn't exist in BRP because you can create your own custom skills and I'm used to having it as an option from MRQII. Perhaps I should have chosen something different.

Here is how I got my results:

Using the BRP big golden book's own Skills Results table if my skill level is 45% and I roll percentile with a result of 32, I cross reference the 45 skill on the chart and see that a 32 result is just simply a success. Looking at the columns though on this same chart it explicitly states that a 01-03 would be a critical, a 01-09 a special success, and a result of 98-00 would be a fumble.

P.S. On my previous example I meant to say 98-00 for fumble, not 89-00...bad typo! hehe

Almost.

1) First off there is no "Athletics" skill in BRP. Run, Swim, Jump, and Clime are all separate skills.

2) The crtical chance would be 02%, not 03%. In BRP you round to the nearest, so you won't hit 03% untl you reach a 50% skill. To make it easy:

<30% - 1%

30%+ = 2%

50%+ = 3%

70%+ = 4%

90%+ = 5%

(110%) = 6%

For higher values you can use the chart above and add 5% for each 100%. Just remember that you need at leat 10% over 100 to go from 5% to 6%. That is becuase BRP always gives you a 1% chance of getting a critical even if you skill is very low.

3) The fumble chance is 97-00, not 89-00. The fumble chance in BRP is 95%+ the Critical Chance (max 00).

Edited May 27, 2011 by daddystabz

[Thalaba]

First off there is no "Athletics" skill in BRP. Run, Swim, Jump, and Clime are all separate skills.

This is true, but BRP BGB is intended to allow you to do what you like with skills. If you prefer to have a single Athletics skill to cover all of those, there's nothing to stop you from doing so. GMs should tailor the skill list appropriately to the game they want to run.

The crtical chance would be 02%, not 03%. In BRP you round to the nearest, so you won't hit 03% untl you reach a 50% skill. To make it easy:

<30% - 1%

30%+ = 2%

50%+ = 3%

70%+ = 4%

90%+ = 5%

(110%) = 6%

For higher values you can use the chart above and add 5% for each 100%. Just remember that you need at leat 10% over 100 to go from 5% to 6%. That is becuase BRP always gives you a 1% chance of getting a critical even if you skill is very low.

3) The fumble chance is 97-00, not 89-00. The fumble chance in BRP is 95%+ the Critical Chance (max 00).

This is correct according to the text in the book, but not according to the Skill Results table on Pg. 172 and 384, for a total combined skill of 45% the crit would be 01-02%, special is 01-09%, and fumble is 98-100%.

The chance of a critical or a fumble change for every full 20% you have in a skill (01-20/21-40/41-60/61-80/81-100 Etc.) and the change of a special changes for every full 5% you have in a skill.

To determine if you got a critical, round up to the nearest full 20% and divide by 20. For s special, round up to the nearest 5% and divide by 5.

The hardcover supposedly has the errata in it - I'm not sure which way they went with this in that book. I've got the softcover.

Personally, I prefer the round-up method because it's much more logical and easier for me to calculate in my head. Daddystabz, it's your game, do it how you like.

[Atgxtg]

Then I'm completely confused because I used the chart in the book to calculate this all. I used Athletics as a skill even though it doesn't exist in BRP because you can create your own custom skills and I'm used to having it as an option from MRQII. Perhaps I should have chosen something different.

Here is how I got my results:

Using the BRP big golden book's own Skills Results table if my skill level is 45% and I roll percentile with a result of 32, I cross reference the 45 skill on the chart and see that a 32 result is just simply a success. Looking at the columns though on this same chart it explicitly states that a 01-03 would be a critical, a 01-09 a special success, and a result of 98-00 would be a fumble.

P.S. On my previous example I meant to say 98-00 for fumble, not 89-00...bad typo! hehe

Ah, the 89+ was a typo. That explains it.

As for the difference between my results and the chart, well apparently they changed the table in BRP. It used to be the way I mentioned in RQ3, and is apparently supposed to be that way by the text. The difference lies in how they did the rounding. By the rules, rounding is to the nearest (that is one of thie standards for the system) v, but the table rounded up.

Bu, like Thalaba says, you can certainly follow the table if you want and round up. The differnce will only be 1%.

As long as that 89-00 was a typo , you are doing fine.

[Bleddyn]

So we are still discussing "wayfart"? Somebody needs to find the BRP one ring to " Rule them all.....and in the darkness bind them".

Like I said in a post to Peter Nash MRQII had such a nice ring, like BRP.

[daddystabz]

I have the hardback BRP book so I hope the errata is contained within it. I'm somewhat familiar with BRP but much more-so with MRQII. This is my first complete read-through of the BRP big gold book, hardback edition. I didn't notice from just reading in the book but noticed in our discussion here that it seems to be quite possible to roll a result that is both a special and crit at the same time. I need to get further in my BRP reading, hehe.

Edited May 27, 2011 by daddystabz

[Thalaba]

I have the hardback BRP book so I hope the errata is contained within it. I'm somewhat familiar with BRP but much more-so with MRQII. This is my first complete read-through of the BRP big gold book, hardback edition. I didn't notice from just reading in the book but noticed in our discussion here that it seems to be quite possible to roll a result that is both a special and crit at the same time. I need to get further in my BRP reading, hehe.

Out of curiosity, in the hardback edition, does the text in the SYSTEM chapter (and the examples) for specials and criticals still tell you to 'round normally', or to 'round up'?

[daddystabz]

The book introduces the Skill Results Table on page 172, which is the table I've been using in my example above. On pg 175 of the same chapter on System its definition of Special Success is a roll < or equal to 20% of target. Round fractions using normal rounding. It then gives the following example: A roll against a skill rating of 68% yields a special success on a 14 or less (68/5 = 13.6, rounding up to 14).

It defines Critical Success on the same page as roll < or equal to 5% of target or basically 1/20 of the skill rating. Use normal rounding. It then gives the following example: A roll against a base chance of 68 yields a critical success on a 3 or less (68/20 = 3.4, rounded down to 3).

So it seems the book allows for 2 methods of determining success levels. You can do it in your head and get an exact result, like the examples above or you can use their chart on page 172 and get a somewhat more forgiving and less exact result. I prefer the chart personally and I know for sure my players will as well. We have one math challenged player in particular that comes to mind. However, I vastly prefer how MRQII handles levels of success to BRP.

Edited May 27, 2011 by daddystabz

[ewilen]

The chart is pretty clearly a typo/goof. Why would someone use a chart to summarize a method that's easier to calculate in your head, and not the method that's harder?

That said, I would just go with whatever works for you, as long as you're consistent.

Edited May 27, 2011 by ewilen

[sdavies2720]

So we are still discussing "wayfart"? Somebody needs to find the BRP one ring to " Rule them all.....and in the darkness bind them".

Like I said in a post to Peter Nash MRQII had such a nice ring, like BRP.

I only just now (that it's too late) realized that MRQII could be pronounced as "Murky." Better voicing than "Burp."

Steve

[rust]

For me the abbreviation "BGB" for BRP's core rules is bad enough, because here it

is the abbreviation for "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch", our code of civil law. There ha-

ve already been some occasions where a text mentioned some paragraph or quo-

te from our civil law and I tried hard to remember from which part of the BRP ru-

les that could have come, or why Jason Durall had written a chapter about inhe-

ritance or beekeeping into the BGB ...

[camazotz]

The chart is pretty clearly a typo/goof. Why would someone use a chart to summarize a method that's easier to calculate in your head, and not the method that's harder?

That said, I would just go with whatever works for you, as long as you're consistent.

Tell that to my wife, and see if you live...

(She's very happy because I ran a 2nd edition AD&D Ravenloft game on Saturday, and for the first time in fifteen years since she started gaming she suddenly figured out how to calculate THAC0, and actually understood it; this was a HUGE moment for her, she was very proud of herself; she'll probably experience the same Aha! moment with BRP's resistances one day in the far future, as well).

[daddystabz]

I don't think the chart is a typo at all of that entire column would have to be wrong. I think the chart is simply intentionally not as pinpoint accurate and a tad more generous. That is ok with me.

[PhilHibbs]

I don't think the chart is a typo at all of that entire column would have to be wrong. I think the chart is simply intentionally not as pinpoint accurate and a tad more generous. That is ok with me.

A summary chart that is "a tad more generous" than the rules are should at least point that out. Otherwise, you'll have some players calculating it in their heads using the old RQ3 chart they have lying around because they noticed the BRP chart is wrong, and others using the more generous BRP chart without noticing it. When they notice, the ones using the proper rules will feel cheated, especially if they've been in conflict with the other player. An incorrect chart about something so fundamental to the game system is a bit of a catastrophic error. If Mongoose had made that mistake, they'd never hear the last of it.

[daddystabz]

You get no argument from me there. I don't think it is a mistake because every entry on it for Special Success is calculated this way.

A summary chart that is "a tad more generous" than the rules are should at least point that out. Otherwise, you'll have some players calculating it in their heads using the old RQ3 chart they have lying around because they noticed the BRP chart is wrong, and others using the more generous BRP chart without noticing it. When they notice, the ones using the proper rules will feel cheated, especially if they've been in conflict with the other player. An incorrect chart about something so fundamental to the game system is a bit of a catastrophic error. If Mongoose had made that mistake, they'd never hear the last of it.

[PhilHibbs]

You get no argument from me there. I don't think it is a mistake because every entry on it for Special Success is calculated this way.

Calculated what way? Specials and crits are all calculated rounding up on the BRP chart. Are you saying it isn't a mistake because all of it is wrong rather than just part of it? It would be very bizarre indeed if they changed the method of calculation for part of the chart, so consistency is not evidence of deliberation.

[KingSkin]

According to the hardcover they're calculated using 'normal rounding' so it'll either be rounded up or down depending on the size of the fraction. It's not a straight 'always round up or down' situation although that would possibly make it easier to do on the fly.

I wanted to avoid players having to do all of that during the game though as my group are of somewhat mixed mathematical ability and some people just struggle with it. To get around it I just added in sections on my character sheet for players to enter their special, crit and fumble scores so they've always got the info there in front of them.

[daddystabz]

Look at the chart in the book. I believe the last time I looked at it the calculations were not as precise than if you did it by calculator for special success, etc. They do indeed mention they use normal rounding in the book. The chart works off ranges of numbers. For example, let's say you have a 45 in a skill. You roll a 23 on the percentile dice. You look the result up on the chart. The chart says you score a crit on a roll of 01-03, a special success on a result of 01-09, a fumble on a result of 98-00. In this example you rolled a result of 23, thus giving you a success only.

Calculated what way? Specials and crits are all calculated rounding up on the BRP chart. Are you saying it isn't a mistake because all of it is wrong rather than just part of it? It would be very bizarre indeed if they changed the method of calculation for part of the chart, so consistency is not evidence of deliberation.

[PhilHibbs]

Look at the chart in the book. I believe the last time I looked at it the calculations were not as precise than if you did it by calculator for special success, etc. They do indeed mention they use normal rounding in the book. The chart works off ranges of numbers. For example, let's say you have a 45 in a skill. You roll a 23 on the percentile dice. You look the result up on the chart. The chart says you score a crit on a roll of 01-03, a special success on a result of 01-09, a fumble on a result of 98-00. In this example you rolled a result of 23, thus giving you a success only.

Yes, I know that. I'm not sure what I'm failing to get across, but I do understand how the chart is built. What I'm trying to ascertain is, why do you think it is deliberately wrong rather than just a mistake?

[daddystabz]

I haven't done the calculations to check but it seems to me the ranges for crits and special successes are a bit too liberal than if you did the exact calculation yourself for a given skill level. This is somewhat implied due to the fact the table doesn't list a single number and give its exact calculations for crit/special/fumble but rather uses ranges of numbers instead.

[PhilHibbs]

I haven't done the calculations to check but it seems to me the ranges for crits and special successes are a bit too liberal than if you did the exact calculation yourself for a given skill level. This is somewhat implied due to the fact the table doesn't list a single number and give its exact calculations for crit/special/fumble but rather uses ranges of numbers instead.

The fact that the table is grained at 5% intervals means that it must be rounding up. If it were rounding down it would have to be 0-4, 5-9, 10-14 etc., but as it's 1-5, 6-10, 11-15 then it must be rounding up. If it were rounding to nearest, it would have to be split like the AHRQ3 chart which is 1-7, 8-10, 11-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-27, 28-29, 30, 31-32, etc. because the crit and special chances change at different points.

And in case you think it's only a small change, when comparing a mixed skill range of people using different methods, half of the people using the chart have a higher crit chance than they should have, which is a huge advantage. What would you pay to increase your crit chance by 1?

[daddystabz]

But there is nonetheless....it's in the book. The chart is there and is meant to be possibly used by players/GMs and is always rounding up while the game states you are to use normal rounding rules. Weird, isn't it? As long as a group picks one method and everyone adheres to it/sticks with it, then it isn't really an issue. If I had my way Special Successes would be eliminated altogether and crits would be 10% of skill level, how it all works basically in MRQII, but alas. Crits are not going to be a common occurrence either way, no matter how you choose as a group to do your rounding. The key is for the GM to communicate to the group as a whole how the rounding will be done and then make sure everyone adheres to it. Either use the chart or do it manually yourselves but make sure everyone is on the same page.

Edited June 7, 2011 by daddystabz