RosenMcStern Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 A question: was our "Go Off Topic" skill roll opposed or simple? Because we sound like we rolled a critical success. Not really. If you run the other guy through, make a definitive point, or dance well, you do so regardless of how and what the other person does. It's sorta like grading on a curve. The point is that while this may be true about making a point in a speech, it is NOT true in combat. It simply is not true that your clever swordfighting maneuver has a value of its own, independent of your opponent's defense. You may like it or not, but in combat your clever move means absolutely nothing if not compared to your opponent's move. Think of a football match: you may shoot randomly from your side of the field, but the goalkeeper is distracted and your score. You calibrate a perfect shot from a few metres, perfectly on target, a few millimeters from a wood, but if the goalie is as quick and nimble as a cat he will catch it, and all you get is an applause (maybe, because I guess the goalie gets the applause in this case!). This is how it works in reality, and how it works in opposed rolls: what you perform does not really matter, only the comparison of the two performances produces the result. Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 There's no immediacy to that. It's not you doing something - it's the system's mechanics doing it. The feel is wrong. Well, I see no difference between the two methods in this. When you roll for a simple success, it still is not you doing things, but the system mechanics. Also, if you think of the RQ3 combat model, this "it is not you but the mechanics" applies even more heavily. In RQ3, critical hits do not go through by means of outmanoeuvering the parry, but by overcoming the parry AP. That is, the game uses this to emulates the fact that your superior skill will at some point overcome your opponent's inferior ability to defend himsef. And this is NOT what happens in reality: you do not usually overcome parries by making contact and doing critical damage. It is a RQ3 abstraction. How does this not feel "artificial and a game construct" for you? Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Well, in a fight your moves have no meaning without the other guy's moves... I don't feel it that way. It's the sporting ideal that how well you perform, essentially against yourself, matters most - not beating the other guy. Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) A question: was our "Go Off Topic" skill roll opposed or simple? Because we sound like we rolled a critical success. All credit to you for our success in this, Rosen. You dig at me, how can I not respond? It'd be rude. PS: I think the OP now has answers he's happy with, so we're free to 'have fun'. Edited September 16, 2012 by frogspawner PS Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 But I don't think it's too far off-topic. Off-topic would be "What's the price of a Praxian Riding Ostrich?" (Seriously, I could do with an answer!) Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 I don't feel it that way. It's the sporting ideal that how well you perform, essentially against yourself, matters most - not beating the other guy. This may be true if your game is about sports. If it is about combat-for-life, things work differently. And let us not deprive Atgxtg of his merits for our fantastic performance in Offtopic, either. Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rust Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 It's the sporting ideal that how well you perform, essentially against yourself, matters most - not beating the other guy. Still, the winner of the race is determined by comparing the runners, and if one does not beat the other guy(s) one loses, no matter how well one performs ... Quote "Mind like parachute, function only when open." (Charlie Chan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Just to be briefly back on topic, here is a rpg.net thread that might shed some light on why nit-picking so much about sword stats may not be so useful. Broadswords vs Longswords vs Bastard Swords vs Two-Handed Swords vs etc Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rust Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Just to be briefly back on topic, here is a rpg.net thread that might shed some light on why nit-picking so much about sword stats may not be so useful. Yep, one can either use a very small number of generalized abstract values, or one risks to enter "Oakeshott territory" with different stats for each his- torical type of sword: The Oakeshott Sword Typology ... and these are only the most common medieval European ones ... Quote "Mind like parachute, function only when open." (Charlie Chan) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 A question: was our "Go Off Topic" skill roll opposed or simple? Because we sound like we rolled a critical success. The point is that while this may be true about making a point in a speech, it is NOT true in combat. Sure it is, If one guy gets shot or run through he's still dead, even if he was doing something fancy. And there are situations where both guys manage to kill each other. Since we are looking at what is "true" with opposed rolls and SR, we should do it with the idea of alternating attacks. Realistically, people don't take turns in combat. One guy or the other gets the upper hand and tends to be on the offensive until the other guy gets an opportunity to take the advantage. It simply is not true that your clever swordfighting maneuver has a value of its own, independent of your opponent's defense. You may like it or not, but in combat your clever move means absolutely nothing if not compared to your opponent's move. Think of a football match: you may shoot randomly from your side of the field, but the goalkeeper is distracted and your score. You calibrate a perfect shot from a few metres, perfectly on target, a few millimeters from a wood, but if the goalie is as quick and nimble as a cat he will catch it, and all you get is an applause (maybe, because I guess the goalie gets the applause in this case!). This is how it works in reality, and how it works in opposed rolls: what you perform does not really matter, only the comparison of the two performances produces the result. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Also, if you think of the RQ3 combat model, this "it is not you but the mechanics" applies even more heavily. In RQ3, critical hits do not go through by means of outmanoeuvering the parry, but by overcoming the parry AP. That is, the game uses this to emulates the fact that your superior skill will at some point overcome your opponent's inferior ability to defend himsef. And this is NOT what happens in reality: you do not usually overcome parries by making contact and doing critical damage. It is a RQ3 abstraction. How does this not feel "artificial and a game construct" for you? That is only one possible interpretation of the result. The RQ3 method could also, and I think more accurately be interpreted as an attack punching through a shield or other object. That's the thing about RPG combat. There is a lot of wiggle room as to how it is abstracted and what is "really" going on. There are multiple ways on interpreting things, and it all depends on what seems right to individual groups. IMO RQ/BRP should just use success levels, but that's just my take on things. I don't mind the blackjack mechanic without the roll low success levels. It's the mix that I can't stand. Especially since it screws over the underdog, and low roll doesn't screw over the higher skilled guy the way everybody thinks, becuase they always overlook all the failures the low guy is going to roll.. But everyone's view here is just as valid. So if one guy prefers RQ3 style, another RQ2, another Elric! another MRQ so be it. It's not really a problem, unless we end up gaming together. It does hurt BRP a bit, since it fragments the fanbase, but, thanks to all RPGs now having multiple editions, the same is happening to every other RPG. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallsgothi Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 Well you are neglecting to consider one of the options, you are not required to oppose your opponents roll, he can roll his attack, you can roll yours, no dodge, no parry Just faith in the gods an your armor... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 ...despite it sounding like a wild guess, I'm thinking 100 Lunars for your average riding ostrich is about right. Quote Britain has been infiltrated by soviet agents to the highest levels. They control the BBC, the main political party leaderships, NHS & local council executives, much of the police, most newspapers and the utility companies. Of course the EU is theirs, through-and-through. And they are among us - a pervasive evil, like Stasi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Well you are neglecting to consider one of the options, you are not required to oppose your opponents roll, he can roll his attack, you can roll yours, no dodge, no parry Just faith in the gods an your armor... That is not an option in RQ/BRP. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zit Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Citation of old RQ2 about rules: "If you are an experienced FRP gamer, take those portions you can use and ignore the rest. Like any FRP system, these can only be guidelines. Use them as you will" RQ2 was such a great game. Quote Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The running campaign and the blog  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Citation of old RQ2 about rules: "If you are an experienced FRP gamer, take those portions you can use and ignore the rest. Like any FRP system, these can only be guidelines. Use them as you will" RQ2 was such a great game. Yup. Let me clarify. Ignoring defense completely and just have faith in the gods or the armor is not a workable option in RQ/BRP. Unlike level based RPGs, the hit points are low in BRP, and characters are expected to rely on parry and dodge skills in combat to protect them., If you were to ignore defense completely and just have faith in the gods or the armor, you couldn't get a sustainable game. At least, that's my opinion as an experienced FRP gamer. My experience tells me that is not a viable option with this system. While I don't like the blackjack method in conjunction with success levels, it is a viable working option. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallsgothi Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 I'm not advocating that you ignore every strike and pray armor holds, but there are situations where a player should be willing to risk the damage in order to get his strike through. I checked the rules, there is nothing that says you absolutely must parry, or attempt to parry every attack I can foresee where a player with superior initiative will hold action in order to attempt a simultaneous strike, knowing he may well die in the action, self sacrifice for the greater goal and all.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 I'm not advocating that you ignore every strike and pray armor holds, but there are situations where a player should be willing to risk the damage in order to get his strike through. Sure. But by the rules, there is no real reason or benefit to giving up you defense. You don't get anything for it, and the defense if "free". About the only benefit I can think of is when using SR and attacking on the run. You can run by the guy and try to get an attack in before he can strike. I checked the rules, there is nothing that says you absolutely must parry, or attempt to parry every attack Nope. In fact, you might not be allowed to parry more than one attack if you aren't using the -30% rule. I can foresee where a player with superior initiative will hold action in order to attempt a simultaneous strike, knowing he may well die in the action, self sacrifice for the greater goal and all.. I can't. It would always be better for the character with supeiror intiative to strike his foe first and end it before the opponent gets to attack. Or do you mean a situation where a character is fighting a mook, and wants to wait until later in the round, when a more dangerous foe is going to move in? But, by the rules, there isn't any real reason or benefit to giving up your defense. Attack on the run is about it, although there was some powerful magic in old RQ (Beserk) that could give a reason. Matbe if there was an all out option where a character could give up his defense to improve his attack. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zit Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 By the way, can somebody explain to me why a defender can chose not to parry when the attacker missed his attack ? After all, when your opponent starts trying to place a blow, you decide to parry before you know if he succeeded or not. I always considered that the player shall decide before the attack roll if he parries or not, giving him a chance to fumble: isn't it more logical? Quote Wind on the Steppes, role playing among the steppe Nomads. The running campaign and the blog  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallsgothi Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Well in RQ6, you can parry an attack which missed, which greatly increases your change for getting defensive special effects, which offer a decided advantage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 By the way, can somebody explain to me why a defender can chose not to parry when the attacker missed his attack ? After all, when your opponent starts trying to place a blow, you decide to parry before you know if he succeeded or not. I always considered that the player shall decide before the attack roll if he parries or not, giving him a chance to fumble: isn't it more logical? Well, two reasons in game. The first is to save your parry for a different attack. The second was to prevent yourself from making things worse. The idea is that the defender reads the attack, knows it isn't going to come close, and doesn't waste his parry. But... ---some of us think the defender would be committed to act before he can tell it would be a miss. Quote Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallsgothi Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 both options are equally vaild depending on who is the attacker/defender Cinematically speaking you see both cases often in movies and books thematically speaking, in a true life or death fight, most people would parry, and think it was thier awesome parry that caused such a horrible miss logically RQ6 encourages the parry since if you successfully parry a missed attack you get 1 special effect, and depending on your success, may get 2 effects which include compless surrender, disarm opponent, injury damage weapon, entangle, and many other possible effects Being defensive does not mean losing all offensive capability Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.