Opposed skill rolls

[Gollum]

Each individual skill roll should have independently defined effects.

There are still situations in which actions are not independant. Someone who is trying to do something while another one is trying to prevent him from doing it. Then, the success of one means the failure of the other.

What I really like with the Basic System is the fact that each die roll can be interpreted for what it is before determining who won: critical success, special success, ordinary success, ordinary failure or fumble... It really allows a huge number of different interpretations of how the winner won.

Edited February 22, 2013 by Gollum

[tooley1chris]

The opposed skill mechanic is the same mechanic used in the Attack and Defense Matrix on page 193 of BRP.

Arthur Reyes created a cool opposed skill chart so you can just follow the chart and not have to do any thinking:

Opposed Skill Rolls - Downloads - Basic Roleplaying Central

And Silent Bob wins! This is just what I need! Thanks for the link and the work from Reyes!

[frogspawner]

Then, the success of one means the failure of the other.

OK, but aside from ones covered by STRvSTR, POWvPOW etc, I can't know of any right now. Examples, please? But even then, I'll almost certainly prefer to Keep It Simple than get into OR confusions.

What I really like with the Basic System is the fact that each die roll can be interpreted for what it is before determining who won: critical success, special success, ordinary success, ordinary failure or fumble...

Absolutely. To me though, Opposed Rolling spoils that.

[Gollum]

OK, but aside from ones covered by STRvSTR, POWvPOW etc, I can't know of any right now. Examples, please? But even then, I'll almost certainly prefer to Keep It Simple than get into OR confusions.

Stealth vs Listen or Hide vs Spot are two good examples of that. The first character tries not being noticed while the second one tries to notice him.

Absolutely. To me though, Opposed Rolling spoils that.

Not really. It doesn't prevent you to begin with an interpretation of the rolls as if it was ordinary actions. But it also gives you a solution to know who win when both rolls are sucessfull or failed.

[Gollum]

And Silent Bob wins! This is just what I need! Thanks for the link and the work from Reyes!

Fine. I was sure that someone would give you the solution you needed. The Basic system often has several solutions to solve a problem. So, not finding the one which fits to your manner of running game is not usual.

[Rob]

Getting a bit confusing now

Remember that if Or has you a bit stumped, there is an entry on spot rules. Don't be afraid to find a way to deal with opposed rolls if you're unsure of the outcome, just make sure it's consistent.

[frogspawner]

Stealth vs Listen or Hide vs Spot are two good examples...

[Opposed Rolling] doesn't prevent you to begin with an interpretation of the rolls as if it was ordinary actions.

One guy Specials Hide and says "I've hidden really well". T'other guy ordinary-succeeds Spot - so he didn't quite look hard enough to see someone hidden really well. That's fine.

But under O.R. it means the first guy *didn't* hide 'really well' - because the other's roll would downgrade the Special to a mere Success. To me, that feels wrong (and incidentally violates causality). And the feeling is important.

Also - Draws Happen. Opposed Rolling seems driven by an unnecessary urge to find an outright "Winner" - more often than is desirable or realistic.

[Rob]

Also - Draws Happen. Opposed Rolling seems driven by an unnecessary urge to find an outright "Winner" - more often than is desirable or realistic.

But isn't that down to the GM, to decide when it is and isn't appropriate?

[tooley1chris]

One guy Specials Hide and says "I've hidden really well". T'other guy ordinary-succeeds Spot - so he didn't quite look hard enough to see someone hidden really well. That's fine.

But under O.R. it means the first guy *didn't* hide 'really well' - because the other's roll would downgrade the Special to a mere Success. To me, that feels wrong (and incidentally violates causality). And the feeling is important.

Also - Draws Happen. Opposed Rolling seems driven by an unnecessary urge to find an outright "Winner" - more often than is desirable or realistic.

But in a game of hide and seek, there is always a winner...

[frogspawner]

But isn't that down to the GM, to decide when it is and isn't appropriate?

Of course, but above that the GM decides which system is appropriate. I think it's easier to have a system of Independent Rolls (which could be combined fairly easily, if a short-cut seemed appropriate). A system of Opposed Rolls is harder to disentangle into separate effects. So IRs give the GM more choice. (Although personally, I'd prefer IRs in every case I can imagine). PS: Bought marshmallows today.

But in a game of hide and seek, there is always a winner...

Combat isn't decided by just one roll on each side (necessarily) - so why should Hide-and-Seek contests be decided more quickly? I think thiefly-types are short-changed by that. They should be able to enjoy dramatic nuances similar to combat ("It's looking this way now... better freeze!" etc). Also, multiple rolls makes sneaking less 'chancy' for the higher-skilled - improving thiefly life-expectancies...

Edited February 22, 2013 by frogspawner
PS

[Atgxtg]

But in a game of hide and seek, there is always a winner...

But not always an "instant" winner.

Sometimes somebody manages to stay hidden for a bit, but eventually gets spotted.

[Gollum]

One guy Specials Hide and says "I've hidden really well". T'other guy ordinary-succeeds Spot - so he didn't quite look hard enough to see someone hidden really well. That's fine.

But under O.R. it means the first guy *didn't* hide 'really well' - because the other's roll would downgrade the Special to a mere Success. To me, that feels wrong (and incidentally violates causality). And the feeling is important.

Yes, that is why I never use this rule of reducing or improving the levels of success... Except during combats, of course, where you have to roll damage and, so, to know what you will exactly roll: critical damage, special success damage or normal damage. The combat chart handle that very well.

But outside of combats, it is useless. A simple comparison perfectly makes the job. The character did hide very well and the spotter may have found him if he didn't. But because he did hide very well, the spotter didn't find him. The GM can describe it slowly, with a lot of suspense, especially if he rolled the dice secretly for the spotter...

Also - Draws Happen. Opposed Rolling seems driven by an unnecessary urge to find an outright "Winner" - more often than is desirable or realistic.

It all depends on the situation. In some situation, indeed, there is no urge to find the winner. In this case, you can just rule that when both characters get the same level of success or failure, their relative position remains unchanged and, then, roll again.

But sometimes, the opposition takes place in the middle of a combat, with a lot of other rolls to do... The character is trying to move silently to the back of his foe, for example... Then, if you have to roll dice several time just for the oppostion, it becomes boring.

That is why comparing the level of success (without reducing or improving them) is, in my humble opinion, the better way handle things. Each success or failure is interpreted for what it is but you still have a winer.

[soltakss]

One guy Specials Hide and says "I've hidden really well". T'other guy ordinary-succeeds Spot - so he didn't quite look hard enough to see someone hidden really well. That's fine.

But under O.R. it means the first guy *didn't* hide 'really well' - because the other's roll would downgrade the Special to a mere Success. To me, that feels wrong (and incidentally violates causality). And the feeling is important.

Imagine this with 4 people, one hides and rolls a special, three try to Spot and two roll normals, one fails. What does this mean? The ones who failed don't see anything anyway, the one who succeeds would have seen a normal roll, but don't see the hider.

Also - Draws Happen. Opposed Rolling seems driven by an unnecessary urge to find an outright "Winner" - more often than is desirable or realistic.

For some things, yes. But in a binary effect like hide and seek there should be a winner. In that case, the Hide is the winner as it is the default. In other cases, the GM should decide which skill defaults to be the winner.

[Gollum]

Imagine this with 4 people, one hides and rolls a special, three try to Spot and two roll normals, one fails. What does this mean? The ones who failed don't see anything anyway, the one who succeeds would have seen a normal roll, but don't see the hider.

Yes. Here is a perfect example where comparing results is much easier than reducing them by the success of others...

Now, imagine than 6 player-characters are trying to hide while 10 non-player-characters are trying to find them... Rolling once for each character and comparing the results becomes obviously the easiest way determine who finds who exactly.

The combat chart is fine when there is only one character vs only one other (which is always the case with attacks and defenses - because each attack is handled separately).

But other kinds of oppositions may involve several people at the same time. And in the example above, making a roll to see if each non-player-character spot each one of the player-characters would require 60 rolls!

[SDLeary]

Imagine this with 4 people, one hides and rolls a special, three try to Spot and two roll normals, one fails. What does this mean? The ones who failed don't see anything anyway, the one who succeeds would have seen a normal roll, but don't see the hider.

To me, this situation would mean that while the Sneaky One didn't get spotted, the guards that made their roll are now looking in the direction of them, and perhaps talking amongst themselves what it was that they saw and whether they should pursue it further. Think seeing movement out of the corner of your eye, but turning and finding nothing there. This could also have the side effect of "pinning down" the Sneaky One so that they can't move closer to their intended goal; perhaps having to head back to the party to try and find another avenue of advance.

For some things, yes. But in a binary effect like hide and seek there should be a winner. In that case, the Hide is the winner as it is the default. In other cases, the GM should decide which skill defaults to be the winner.

Hide and Seek is far from binary. As a kid, didn't you ever get pinned down with the the Seeker essentially standing right next to you and you unable to move? While you haven't been spotted, your still kindof pinned. Something of a stalemate until the Seeker moves on.

SDLeary

[silent_bob]

To me, this situation would mean that while the Sneaky One didn't get spotted, the guards that made their roll are now looking in the direction of them, and perhaps talking amongst themselves what it was that they saw and whether they should pursue it further. Think seeing movement out of the corner of your eye, but turning and finding nothing there. This could also have the side effect of "pinning down" the Sneaky One so that they can't move closer to their intended goal; perhaps having to head back to the party to try and find another avenue of advance.

Hide and Seek is far from binary. As a kid, didn't you ever get pinned down with the the Seeker essentially standing right next to you and you unable to move? While you haven't been spotted, your still kindof pinned. Something of a stalemate until the Seeker moves on.

SDLeary

No offense guys, but you are over thinking this issue. Just use Arthur Reyes's chart to resolve the skill contest and move on. Otherwise your going to bog the game down.

Here is a link to Arthur Reyes's chart:

Opposed Skill Rolls - Downloads - Basic Roleplaying Central

[SDLeary]

No offense guys, but you are over thinking this issue. Just use Arthur Reyes's chart to resolve the skill contest and move on. Otherwise your going to bog the game down.

Here is a link to Arthur Reyes's chart:

Opposed Skill Rolls - Downloads - Basic Roleplaying Central

Not really, sometimes you want to increase the difficulty a bit for dramatic effect. Now I certainly wouldn't use something as what I described above for the Street Urchin to snag a meat pie from a stall at the local market, but I probably would during the characters final assault/advance to the Evil One's dastardly lair. Especially if the Evil One had Goons... sorry GOONs... on the lookout for the PCs.

SDLeary

[frogspawner]

Think seeing movement out of the corner of your eye, but turning and finding nothing there. This could also have the side effect of "pinning down" the Sneaky One so that they can't move closer to their intended goal...

Exactly.

Yes, that is why I never use this rule of reducing or improving the levels of success... But outside of combats, it is useless.

Glad to hear it!

Except during combats, of course, where you have to roll damage and, so, to know what you will exactly roll: critical damage, special success damage or normal damage. The combat chart handle that very well.

No offense guys, but you are over thinking this issue. Just use Arthur Reyes's chart...

For me, charts get in the way and spoil the feeling of "immediacy". Effects of Crit/Spec/Normal hits can be defined independently of Parry/Dodge counter-effects. So every player knows what he's done as soon as he himself has rolled. I don't play RQ/BRP to end up playing MERP.

But sometimes, the opposition takes place in the middle of a combat, with a lot of other rolls to do... it becomes boring.

But combat is very time-critical: if the Sneaker gets 'pinned' for even just one round, that may spell death for his hard-pressed chum in the melee!

Imagine this with 4 people...

Oh, I know very well that the "multiple spotters" problem is another aspect that hasn't been properly solved - yet. But I think that's a separate issue.

[Gollum]

But combat is very time-critical: if the Sneaker gets 'pinned' for even just one round, that may spell death for his hard-pressed chum in the melee!

Right. But how do you exactly determine that a character is pinned? Does every equal level of success or failure means that the sneaker is pinned?

[frogspawner]

Right. But how do you exactly determine that a character is pinned? Does every equal level of success or failure means that the sneaker is pinned?

Suggestions welcomed! As stated earlier, I haven't yet worked out that much of the method satisfactorily. But at least the principle of Independent rolling is now established!

[SDLeary]

Right. But how do you exactly determine that a character is pinned? Does every equal level of success or failure means that the sneaker is pinned?

You could do it that way. Personally, I would use Blackjack resolution for this. If both the Guard and the Sneaker made their rolls, it would depend on how.

Guard- Highest roll AND under skill

Sneaker- Under skill

Result- Guard cannot see Sneaker, but knows the general area they saw movement well enough that they are probably heading in that direction, calling their chums to follow them. An active search ensues, and Sneaker must try to evade the guards. Or perhaps the guard or guards don't move out, but are actively scanning the area, pinning down the Sneaker from any more advance.

Guard- Under Skill

Sneaker- Highest roll AND under skill

Result- Guard saw movement out of the corner of their eye and is now actively scanning the area and perhaps asking others if they see anything, but they probably blow him off and tell him that he is seeing things. Ridicule ensues and the noise level among the guards increases, granting the Sneaker a bonus to their next roll or rolls.

Otherwise, normal success/failure applies.

SDLeary

[Atgxtg]

Suggestions welcomed! As stated earlier, I haven't yet worked out that much of the method satisfactorily. But at least the principle of Independent rolling is now established!

I have a method for handling this but its a bit of a radical departure from the rules as written.

[axe-elf]

Personally I use the resistance table for all opposed rolls. I think success levels for opposed rolls are cumbersome. The resistance table method gives the lower skill quite a big chance, but for our group that is OK.

Still, the simplest way to solve opposed rolls would be that each part rolls d100 and add their skill, highest sum wins. I wonder why this method was not mentioned in the golden book.

[frogspawner]

I have a method for handling this [Hide v Spot etc] but its a bit of a radical departure from the rules as written.

Heavens preserve us from anything... "radical" !!! <succumbs to attack of the vapours>

[Gollum]

I read again the rules and this thread, very carefully, and thought a lot about it... Here are some comments I would add...

1) About ruling that the lowest result on the dice is the winner.

Yes, but the 'luck of the dice' has a charm of its own, and one of the things which makes this system great. An expert has a much better chance of succeeding at an action than a newbie, but the newbie can still pull it off and beat an expert, depending upon the luck of the dice.

Is it realistic? Yes, certainly.

I fully do agree with the fact that the better doesn't always win.

But this still remains the case with the usual opposition rules. The character with the lowest skill can make a critical success or a special success... And even with an ordinary success, he can still roll higher than the better.

Now, the chance are lower. And this is realistic too.