Gollum Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 2) Does ruling that the lowest roll wins give an edge to the lowest skill? No it doesn't. I did a thread on that a long time ago. The supposed edge to the guy with the lower skill is illusionary. I do not agree. Of course, if there are several rolls in a raw, this edge will disappear. But if there is only one roll, things will be very different. Suppose that the player with the skill of 20% rolls a 10. If you consider that the lowest roll wins, the guy with a skill of 80% has only 9% chance of winning the opposition (any roll from 1 to 9). If you consider that the higher roll wins, he has 70% chance to win (any roll from 11 to 80). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 (edited) 3) About the reduction of success... 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. After reading the rules again, I suddenly realized that it does not really reduce the success of the winner. It is just designed to allow to calculate easily the relative success, which is very different. Saying that a special success vs. a success is like a normal success doesn't mean that the first character didn't score a special success; it just means that because of the success of the second one, the first character wins as if he rolled a success vs a failure (and not as if he rolled a special success vs a failure). When dealing with a sneaker vs a spotter, it is not really important. Except for the description of what happens... But when dealing with a car chase, for instance, it becomes important! The speed with which one car get closer or farer from the other is not the same. Edited February 25, 2013 by Gollum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 But at least the principle of Independent rolling is now established! So, this principle of independent rolling is not anymore etablished for me... indeed, the rules, when best understood (by myself) sound much better that they first appeared... And "calculating" the relative level of success with success reduction or improvement doesn't prevent from reading the rolls as they are first! Even if the relative success of a critical success vs a special success, for instance, will be exactly the same that the one of a success vs. a failure, the description and what happens exactly won't necessarily be the same. - Critical success vs. a special success: the sneaker succeeded to hide incredibly well but, because the spotter was very aware, he almost found him... "I was sure this guy was in the surrounding!" - Success vs. failure: the sneaker hide quite well and the spotter found nothing "No, guys. He is not here. Let's looks somewhere else." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 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 Yes. I find this fine. The pinning situation may occur when the relative success is nul. Success vs. success, special success vs. special success. It makes sense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 2) Does ruling that the lowest roll wins give an edge to the lowest skill? I do not agree. Of course, if there are several rolls in a raw, this edge will disappear. But if there is only one roll, things will be very different. Then you're wrong. Sorry, this isn't a matter of opinion but of mathematics. Suppose that the player with the skill of 20% rolls a 10. If you consider that the lowest roll wins, the guy with a skill of 80% has only 9% chance of winning the opposition (any roll from 1 to 9). If you consider that the higher roll wins, he has 70% chance to win (any roll from 11 to 80). THere is a lot wrong with your argument and math. You take a very specific case and ignore the rest of the situation. Let's say the guy with 20% rolls an 01. THe guy with 80% has NO CHANCE of winning! By your thinking that's horribly unfair to the higher skilled character, right? Wrong. The 80%er's overwhelming edge is all those times when the 20% guy doesn't roll and 01. Need more proof. Consider adding guy C to the example, with a 79% skill. Now by your thinking guy A would win more against guy B (the 80% guy) than guy C (the 79% guy) because of his great advantage by rolling low. But he doesn't win nearly as many contests as guy C. Why? Because of all the times the 20% guy fails to make his skill roll. Everybody seems to ignore that. They also seem to ignore critical and special successes. Even with low roll, the 80% guy has a 16% chance of getting a special, which is nearly as good as the 20% guy getting any sort of success at all. If you want I can put up a spreadhseet for you that shows the actual odds of winning. And you can see how much of a difference low roll wins makes and who actually gets hurt worse. High roll wins hurts the low skill guy a LOT more than low roll wins hurts the higher skilled guy. Now 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 February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Heavens preserve us from anything... "radical" !!! <succumbs to attack of the vapours> By radical I mean that it doesn't follow the usual success levels, although it could be modified to do so. It uses the tens digit (with modifiers) as the result/effect/damage/etc. A failed roll is result/effect zero. Specials and critical get a modifier to the effect. It's simple to work out, easy, fast, eliminates some secondary rolls, but is a significant change from standard BRP. I've been working on a variant system that uses this idea/mechanic to handle everything. 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...
Gollum Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) Then you're wrong. Sorry, this isn't a matter of opinion but of mathematics. I do agree. It is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of mathematics. But, precisely, I am mathematically correct. I do agree with you on the fact that an example is not a proof, though. And since my scientific studies are far away now (about 25 years ago), I'm not anymore able to write down the equations... But we can solve this question with another method. So, just let's scan all the possible results! 20% vs. 80%... If 20% (I name the characters and players by their percentage; it will be more easy) failed his roll, no matter the method (the lowest score win or the highest win). In all cases, the chance that 80% win the opposition will be exactly the same. The difference will appear if 20% scores a success. When the lowest score rolled on the dice wins the opposition, the chance that 80% wins or ties are the following ones... 20% rolled a... / Chance of 80% to win or tie 1 / 1% (to tie) 2 / 2% 3 / 3% 4 / 4% 5 / 5% 6 / 6% 7 / 7% 8 / 8% 9 / 9% 10 / 10% 11 / 11% 12 / 12% 13 / 13% 14 / 14% 15 / 15% 16 / 16% 17 / 17% 18 / 18% 19 / 19% 20 / 20% Average / 10.5% When the highest score rolled on the dice wins the opposition, the chance that 80% wins or ties are the following ones... 20% rolled a... / Chance of 80% to win or tie 1 / 80% 2 / 79% 3 / 78% 4 / 77% 5 / 76% 6 / 75% 7 / 74% 8 / 73% 9 / 72% 10 / 71% 11 / 70% 12 / 69% 13 / 68% 14 / 67% 15 / 66% 16 / 65% 17 / 64% 18 / 63% 19 / 62% 20 / 61% Average / 70.5% So, there really is a difference. There is a lot wrong with your argument and math. You take a very specific case and ignore the rest of the situation. Let's say the guy with 20% rolls an 01. THe guy with 80% has NO CHANCE of winning! By your thinking that's horribly unfair to the higher skilled character, right? No. I'm not thinking at all that it is Horribly unfair. As you said it, there is a lot of chance that 20% fails his roll. So, the difference is not huge. But taking the lowest score rolled on the dice as the winner still gives an edge to the lower skill that it wouldn't have otherwise. Need more proof. Consider adding guy C to the example, with a 79% skill. Now by your thinking guy A would win more against guy B (the 80% guy) than guy C (the 79% guy) because of his great advantage by rolling low. No... Don't exaggerate what I'm saying. Of course there won't be a true difference between 79% and 80%. 79% are almost the same scores! But if the highest score is 80%, the lowest may range from 1% to 79%. And in all of these cases, there will be a difference similar to the one I described above. Which will end, in the average, with a statistical difference. This is mathematically indisputable. But he doesn't win nearly as many contests as guy C. Why? Because of all the times the 20% guy fails to make his skill roll. Everybody seems to ignore that. I don't ignore that. And I even precised in my post that you were right when there are several rolls. But I'm speaking about when there is only one roll. And, when dealing with opposition, one roll may decide whether the characters will survive a danger. A Hiding-80% character is trying to hide himself in the forest... A terrible but Spot-20% monster is looking for him... The dice are rolled... Just once. They also seem to ignore critical and special successes. Even with low roll, the 80% guy has a 16% chance of getting a special, which is nearly as good as the 20% guy getting any sort of success at all. That's right. My calculations above don't take the chance of special and critical success. But I'm almost sure that it won't change the results a lot. At any rate, it won't reverse the fact that taking the lowest score as the winner gives an edge (a little but real edge) to the lowest score. If I rule that when the two characters get the same result, they roll again, this edge disappear. And if I rule that the highest score wins, the edge goes to the higher skill. This is all what I'm saying. And this is mathematically indisputable. If you want I can put up a spreadsheet for you that shows the actual odds of winning. Why not? It will clearly show what I'm saying. Just compare the highest score win, the lowest socre win and nobody win (they roll again). And you can see how much of a difference low roll wins makes and who actually gets hurt worse. High roll wins hurts the low skill guy a LOT more than low roll wins hurts the higher skilled guy. Of course. I don't dispute that. And it is a good manner, in my humble opinion, to make things a bit less aleatory. Edited February 26, 2013 by Gollum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axe-elf Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Sorry for intervening, but I find the discussion interesting But taking the lowest score rolled on the dice as the winner still gives an edge to the lower skill that it wouldn't have otherwise. But still, the higher skill score always have a higher chance to win an opposed skill test, if I understand you right? Actually, I think this comes down to taste: How much should a high skill help you in a contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) Sorry for intervening, but I find the discussion interesting Which explains why I post... And don't hesitate to do mathematics! But still, the higher skill score always have a higher chance to win an opposed skill test, if I understand you right? Actually, I think this comes down to taste: How much should a high skill help you in a contest. Yes, I fully do agree. The higher skill still has a higher chance to win. And this is a matter of taste. But to choose wisely, knowing the mathematical repercussions helps. – Do you want that the higher skill has even higher chance to win (to reduce random)? The higher score on the dice win the opposition. – Do you want that the lower skill has a bit higher chance to win (to give more suspense to the situation)? The lower score on the dice win the opposition. – Do you want the odds to remain unchanged? Nobody win when the same level of success is scored. Edited February 26, 2013 by Gollum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogspawner Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 By radical I mean that it doesn't follow the usual success levels, although it could be modified to do so. It uses the tens digit (with modifiers) as the result/effect/damage/etc. A failed roll is result/effect zero. Specials and critical get a modifier to the effect. It's simple to work out, easy, fast, eliminates some secondary rolls, but is a significant change from standard BRP. I've been working on a variant system that uses this idea/mechanic to handle everything. OK, then it's probably not for me - I still haven't given up hope of finding some variation of the standard BRP system that'll do the job. But don't be afraid to publish! If everyone hates it, you can say it was my idea... 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 February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I do agree. It is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of mathematics. But, precisely, I am mathematically correct. I do agree with you on the fact that an example is not a proof, though. And since my scientific studies are far away now (about 25 years ago), I'm not anymore able to write down the equations... But we can solve this question with another method. So, just let's scan all the possible results! 20% vs. 80%... If 20% (I name the characters and players by their percentage; it will be more easy) failed his roll, no matter the method (the lowest score win or the highest win). In all cases, the chance that 80% win the opposition will be exactly the same. The difference will appear if 20% scores a success. When the lowest score rolled on the dice wins the opposition, the chance that 80% wins or ties are the following ones... 20% rolled a... / Chance of 80% to win or tie Average / 10.5% When the highest score rolled on the dice wins the opposition, the chance that 80% wins or ties are the following ones... 20% rolled a... / Chance of 80% to win or tie Average / 70.5% So, there really is a difference. I cut out the tables to trim this down, but you math is off if a few ways. First off, as I've stated repeatedly, but which everybody seems to miss is that you are dealing with a fairly small subset of possible results. So your 60^ difference is nowhere near as significant as you make out. Player A rolling 20% or less and player B rolling 80% or less onl;y happens 16% of the time, so your big 10 vs 70% difference is much less than 60%. Secondly, you ignore the success levels. Now the 80% guy gets a special success (or better) whenever he rolls 16 or less. That means he is going to win most of the time even if the 20% guy rolls lower. If you go with high roll wins on top of that, you practically give to the 80% guy. He will only lose on a "both succeed" result when he rolls a 17-19, and the 20% guy rolls 18-20. All told the chance of the 20% guy winning, with high roll wins is somewhere around 6% and the 80% guy wins around 94%. Thirdly, and this is a problem with opposed rolls in general with % dice, the 80% guy's chance of success goes over 80% here. The guy's chance of success goes up BECAUSE he is opposed, and that's just wrong. No. I'm not thinking at all that it is Horribly unfair. As you said it, there is a lot of chance that 20% fails his roll. So, the difference is not huge. But taking the lowest score rolled on the dice as the winner still gives an edge to the lower skill that it wouldn't have otherwise. What "edge"?. THe reason why the low guy is winning those rolls is because if he rolled over 20 he'd have lost. You can't judge the odds by one small subset of possibilities. Like I wrote earlier, if the 20% guy rolls an 01, the 80% guy has no chancing of winning. Is that unfair ? Of course not. With 20% vs. 80$ the 70% guy is going to win the majority of the contests (64%+) before we even look at tied success levels. With success levels he's up around 80% even with low roll wins. So what "edge" does the 20% guy have? No... Don't exaggerate what I'm saying. Of course there won't be a true difference between 79% and 80%. 79% are almost the same scores! But if the highest score is 80%, the lowest may range from 1% to 79%. And in all of these cases, there will be a difference similar to the one I described above. Which will end, in the average, with a statistical difference. This is mathematically indisputable. I'm not disputing that there will be a difference. I'm disputing that roll low gives an unfair edge to the lower skilled character. It doesn't. What happens is that the bulk of the lower skilled character's wins come from the contested regions. The 20% guy has only a 4% chance of winning by success (or better) vs.failure. He deserves a better chance than that. But with high roll wins and success levels, the 20% guy is going to loose nearly all of the contested rolls. I don't ignore that. And I even pressed in my post that you were right when there are several rolls. But I'm speaking about when there is only one roll. And, when dealing with opposition, one roll may decide whether the characters will survive a danger The odds are still in favor of the higher skilled character. THe are calculated for one roll. A Hiding-80% character is trying to hide himself in the forest... A terrible but Spot-20% monster is looking for him... Yes, and if you go with high roll wins, the monster has about a 6% chance of spotting the guy. The dice are rolled... Just once. Yes, but it is the probability that count when setting up the rules. A 5% guy doesn't have much of a chance against a 95% guy, but if the 5% rolls an 01, it's probably his lucky day. The dice are rolled once, but his 01 counts. That's not an unfair edge. That's right. My calculations above don't take the chance of special and critical success. But I'm almost sure that it won't change the results a lot. At any rate, it won't reverse the fact that taking the lowest score as the winner gives an edge (a little but real edge) to the lowest score. Well your wrong again. They change the results quite a bit. With high roll wins, the 20% guy no only looses when the 8-0% guy roills higher, but he will loose when the 80% guy rolls a 16 or less. If I rule that when the two characters get the same result, they roll again, this edge disappear. And if I rule that the highest score wins, the edge goes to the higher skill. This is all what I'm saying. And this is mathematically indisputable. No, you are saying that low roll wins slights the higher skilled character and it doesn't THe higher skilled character always has the edge in winning percentage. THe greater the difference in skill the greater the advantage. Why not? It will clearly show what I'm saying. Just compare the highest score win, the lowest socre win and nobody win (they roll again). Okay, I'll work up the sheet. It will probably be useful anyway for seeing what the odds are anyway. I'll do a low roll wins, high roll wins, and reroll on same SL. That way we can all see the percentages and decide of what looks fairest. The reroll on tied SLs is the "fairest" but obviously the most cumbersome, especially at higher skill levels, as it could lead to a lot of rerolls (a 85 vs 90 contest could take awhile). 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...
Gollum Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) First off, as I've stated repeatedly, but which everybody seems to miss is that you are dealing with a fairly small subset of possible results. So your 60^ difference is nowhere near as significant as you make out. And please, as I wrote it repeatedly, don't exaggerate what I am meaning. Despite of my example, I never said that there was a huge difference. I even explicitly wrote: "As you said it, there is a lot of chance that 20% fails his roll. So, the difference is not huge." I perfectly know that my example is just an example. All what I wanted to prove is that there is a difference. Secondly, you ignore the success levels. Yes. I wrote that explicitly too. Now the 80% guy gets a special success (or better) whenever he rolls 16 or less. That means he is going to win most of the time even if the 20% guy rolls lower. If you go with high roll wins on top of that, you practically give to the 80% guy. He will only lose on a "both succeed" result when he rolls a 17-19, and the 20% guy rolls 18-20. All told the chance of the 20% guy winning, with high roll wins is somewhere around 6% and the 80% guy wins around 94%. Perfectly right. But it still doesn't reverse the fact that there is a difference. Thirdly, and this is a problem with opposed rolls in general with % dice, the 80% guy's chance of success goes over 80% here. The guy's chance of success goes up BECAUSE he is opposed, and that's just wrong. To my mind, it is not a problem. 80% is not trying to succeed against an average task. He is opposing against someone below average. It is exactly like trying to succeed an easy action. When he tries to succeed an easy action, his chance of success goes over 80%. So, why wouldn't they go over 80% when he tries to beat an easy adversary? What "edge"?. The reason why the low guy is winning those rolls is because if he rolled over 20 he'd have lost. You can't judge the odds by one small subset of possibilities. Like I wrote earlier, if the 20% guy rolls an 01, the 80% guy has no chancing of winning. Is that unfair ? Of course not. When the higher roll wins and 20% rolls a 01, 20% gets a critical success. Then the chance that 80% wins are only 4% (a critical success too). It is neither unfair. Now, because we can't judge the odds by one small subset of possibilities, just choose other numbers. 40% vs 60% for instance. And you will see that the difference between higher roll wins and lower roll wins becomes more important. The chance of rolling a critical success are about the same (2% vs 3%) and the one of rolling a special success don't differ a lot (8% vs 12%). With 20% vs. 80% the 70% guy is going to win the majority of the contests (64%+) before we even look at tied success levels. With success levels he's up around 80% even with low roll wins. So what "edge" does the 20% guy have? He has an edge in comparison with the other method. This is just what I'm saying. I'm not disputing that there will be a difference. I'm disputing that roll low gives an unfair edge to the lower skilled character. It doesn't. So, we do agree, then. I'm neither saying that this edge is unfair. I'm just saying that there is one and that the GM must know it before choosing the method he prefers. And, as I also wrote it, I exactly do agree with the fact that this edge is much little than the edge given to the higher skill when the higher roll wins... But I still prefer this method, because it reduces random. Bests win much more often. What happens is that the bulk of the lower skilled character's wins come from the contested regions. The 20% guy has only a 4% chance of winning by success (or better) vs.failure. He deserves a better chance than that. Not in the situation I described. If the monster find the character, the character will probably die. So, if the player did all what he was able to rise his hiding score to 80% (training, camouflage, choosing a very good place to hide himself, etc.), it is fair to minimize the chance that the monster finds him... No, you are saying that low roll wins slights the higher skilled character and it doesn't. I never said that. At least, I never wanted to mean that. All what I wanted to mean is that there is a difference between the two methods. And that there is also a difference between these two methods and the “neutral” one: when the same level of success is scored, reroll. Okay, I'll work up the sheet. It will probably be useful anyway for seeing what the odds are anyway. Yes, and I have to admit that I'm too busy (and probably lazy) to do it myself... Thank you for doing it. The reroll on tied SLs is the "fairest" but obviously the most cumbersome, especially at higher skill levels, as it could lead to a lot of rerolls (a 85 vs 90 contest could take awhile). I perfectly do agree with you here. Edited February 28, 2013 by Gollum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Link6746 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 (edited) Okay, long vacation from these boards, but I'll tell you how I resolve it. 1: Roll both actions normally. 2: If both actions succeed, compare them against each other. whoever has the most room between their skill rating and the die roll wins. 3: Special Successes occur if between 01 and 06 is rolled and the above conditions are met. This means that under most circumstances exact numbers showing just how much someone succeeded are unnecessary- Instead one can simply say that there is more room for success in Roll A than Roll B, meaning that Roll A succeeds and bypasses Roll B. However, after a quick look at the rules, there's actually a method that the combat summary table on page 192 uses that's very simple and effective. Translated to sneaking the results would be: Stealth Active : Defending : Result Success : Success : Defender knows something's up, and investigates Fail : Fail : Defender knows something's up, and investigates Success : Fail : Defender knows nothing. Fail : Success : Defender knows someone is trying to sneak up on him This seems much simpler than coming up with a solution for opposed rolls in a system that wasn't designed to handle them. Edited April 25, 2013 by Link6746 Memory, Haven't hosted my game in two weeks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 This seems much simpler than coming up with a solution for opposed rolls in a system that wasn't designed to handle them. In my humble opinion, it is not really much simpler: the standard resolution described in the big golden book is very easy too. Both players roll against their skill.If one scores a better success, he wins.Otherwise, the highest number on the dice win. Having said that, the important is not having the easiest solution. It is having the one which best fit to what you are exactly looking for. And that is just a matter of preference... Some like adding numbers because they like when rolling higher is better, some others prefer to have a solution as close as possible to ordinary success rolls, some want detailed results (with pins, partial successes or failures), some others prefer knowing who win without any detail about how, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Witigis Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 By radical I mean that it doesn't follow the usual success levels, although it could be modified to do so. It uses the tens digit (with modifiers) as the result/effect/damage/etc. A failed roll is result/effect zero. Specials and critical get a modifier to the effect. It's simple to work out, easy, fast, eliminates some secondary rolls, but is a significant change from standard BRP. I've been working on a variant system that uses this idea/mechanic to handle everything. Hmm, not sure if I understand you right, but that remembers me of the system Harnmaster used, which, as far as I remember, said every percentage roll equal to multiple of 5s was either a critical success (if below skill), or a critical failure (if above skill). That gave a higher skill a much higher possibility to obtain special results and fewer critical failures. But that would not solve the problem with opposed rolls, just change the propabilities?! I personally would still use the opposed skill rolls, but interpret them as necessary, depending on the situation - there have been quite a few good examples for this in this discussion. The situation becomes even more difficult, if the rolls are NOT at the same time. for example, a character camouflages a position and the camouflages effect will be questioned, say hours later, by an enemy patrol. If the character succeeded normally in the camouflage, but the spotter succeeded better, this would de facto be like a failure on the side of the camouflaging character when using opposed rolls. The main problem is that it is IMHO impossible to come up with a set of rules covering each and every situation. It remains in the GMs responsibility in cooperation with the rest of the gamers to find the right solution for any given situation. The system for opposed rolls is just one of them. As well you could handle the case of several spotters (guards) against a stealth attempt with a cooperative skill roll - and, in the case of several stealthy sneakers, let the one with the worst skill roll.... Quote “What part soever you take upon you, play that as well as you can and make the best of it.” ― Thomas More Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atgxtg Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Hmm, not sure if I understand you right, but that remembers me of the system Harnmaster used, which, as far as I remember, said every percentage roll equal to multiple of 5s was either a critical success (if below skill), or a critical failure (if above skill). That gave a higher skill a much higher possibility to obtain special results and fewer critical failures. But that would not solve the problem with opposed rolls, just change the propabilities?! HArnmaster is similar. But this method can handle opposed rolls because you use the 10s digit for comparison. So a 73 would be a 67, as long as both rolls were under the repsective skill scores. Special Success add +5 to the effect and criticals +10. Both figured out a little different than in BRP to eliminate the "high is good, but low is better" way that specials and crticals affect opposed rolls in BRP. It works, but like I said, it's a radical departure from BRP. For instance I use the difference between tens digits as the value for any EFFECT that results from the rolls. So things like damage are based off the difference between the rolls rather than by making another, separate die roll. It also allows you to adjust the difficulty of your rolls. Raising the difficulty makes it harder to succeed but also increases the EFFECT if you succeed, while lowering the difficulty makes it easier to make the roll, but reduces your EFFECT score. That is also how this method handles high skill scores. To really benefit from the higher skill, a character would have to try something more difficult. 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...
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.