Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Killing Time

combat as resisted skill

Recommended Posts

I've had a look at a number of BRP based games but haven't seen any use of combat as a resisted skill. In the game I run, if both attacker and defender roll well, the highest successful roll wins - so if a defence roll of 65 is successful then an attacker has to roll higher than this (but lower than their skill level) to land the blow. This stops the endless 'I hit' 'I parry' sequence that you get with high skilled combatants. You also get a symmetry in that both high and low rolls are good news.

 

One alternative that I haven't tried is using the resistance table to resolve each attack&defence in a single roll- take the difference between attack and defence, add to 50 (if the attack is a higher level of skill than defence) and this is the target number for the attack to succeed. This increases complexity a bit but does remove a dice roll, and also means that you are looking at the difference between contestants rather than absolute skill level. If the skill level of the combatants is the same then attack has a 50% chance of hitting, no matter how skilled they are. This has two implications

  • contests between low skill fighters are resolved more quickly: If both attacker and defender are, say 25% then the target number is 50%. I once ran a melee between a bunch of novices which took ages because of low skill levels on all sides.
  • Equally, if combatants each have skill levels at 100% then the chance of the attack hitting is 50%

Any thoughts???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Legend and RuneQuest 6 compare die rolls if both the attack and parry achieve equivalent levels of success.  One useful side-effect is that the more skilled character has a slight edge, due to having higher values and larger ranges at each level.

 

An alternative, used in some systems I've seen, is to use exchange-based contests rather than attack/parry.  That is, each character rolls his single weapon skill and designates a target.  If his level of success or die roll exceeds his designated target, he hits; otherwise, the target parries.  (Granted, I've seen this only in roll-over systems, but adapting to a roll under system requires the "Price is Right" algorithm of highest without going over.)  Or, one can use the whole HeroQuest major/minor/marginal success/failure framework.

 

I'd rather use opposed rolls than the Resistance Table, simply because the Resistance Table is far too linear for my tastes.  With opposed rolls and tiered success levels the differences between skill levels makes much more than a +/-5% difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well remembered - I've not played either Legend or RQ6 and the inclusion of a 'price is right' feature on combat passed me by.

 

By tiered response do you mean the number of successes scored as per RQ6 or the critical/success/fail/fumble of a standard %ile roll? If the latter then this is not incompatible with the resisted roll mechanic - if your target was 40 or less, a critical would be 01-04. If the player is making all the rolls then an attack which gets a critical result would be resolved as for any critical hit. Not too sure what would happen if there was a critical on a defence roll - perhaps the attacker would have to roll on the fumble table? But this is getting more complex than I originally planned.

Thanks for your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have thought of using the resistance table to resolve combat. Skill versus skill   what i would do is divide skill% by 5 then compare them on the resistance table.  The problem is the end result worth the extra work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Legend and RQ6 only compare die rolls for manoeuvers/special effects. Otherwise, only success level matters.

Latest playtest version of MRQ1 used skill opposition to determine how many damage was soaked by the parrying weapon. If the attacker had the lowest roll, you substracted twice the parrying weapon's ap. Otherwise, you only removed parrying weapon's ap. Dodge reduced damage to minimum possible rolled value, as far as I remember.

I would do something similar : reduce damage by 5 points in case of a succesful parry, +5 for a critical, +5 if your roll was higher (cumulative with the +5 for critical), +X if you're using a big shield or a parrying weapon.

There's any idea I would like to use one day : a failed attack roll does not result in a miss, just a poorly executed attack. Which means that if it's not parried or dodged, it will land but for minimum damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have thought of using the resistance table to resolve combat. Skill versus skill   what i would do is divide skill% by 5 then compare them on the resistance table.  The problem is the end result worth the extra work?

Just use the formula behind resistance table : 50+ attacker's skill - defender's skill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just use the formula behind resistance table : 50+ attacker's skill - defender's skill :)

 

I did this in my last gasp effort to use MRQ

 

Basically (personal preference only) I like players to succeed more oftenn than fail so to boost chances I (effectively) added 50 percentiles to all skills unless facing serious oppostion

 

20% Perception becomes 70% (if opponent has no skill) or 70% minus their skill (if they do)

 

Inspired by Luke and Leia's shootout in the Death Star missile combat mapped quite well to opposed skill rolls as when the character is shooting they are doing two things; engaging the foe and stopping them shooting effectively AND trying to hit them and take them out of the fight

 

It also means that I can let players make all the rolls

 

Fumble - baddy criticals you

Fail - baddy succeeds against you

Exactly equal - stalemate

Success - you succeed against baddy

Critical - you critical baddy

 

Tis quicker and bloodier (as only one roll per exchange and almost every result ends up in someone getting hurt or suffering a  consequence for non combat)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...