10-03-2018, 09:25 PM | #11 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
The way the OP describes is how GURPS handles contests. This is also how I would assume it works in TFT.
From GURPS Lite: Each competitor attempts his success roll. If one succeeds and the other fails, the winner is obvious. If both succeed, the winner is the one with the largest margin of success; if both fail, the winner is the one with the smallest margin of failure. A tie means nobody won (in the examples above, both fighters grabbed the weapon at once, or the knives hit the same distance from the bull’s-eye). |
10-03-2018, 09:38 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: behind you
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Quote:
Another alternative is handle contests with 2d6+stat+skill. Highest total wins. |
|
10-03-2018, 10:27 PM | #13 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
|
10-04-2018, 12:50 PM | #14 | |
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Portland, Maine
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Quote:
EDIT: Oops, that is what GURPS suggested. Sorry about that.
__________________
- Hail Melee Fantasy Chess: A chess game with combat. Don't just take the square, Fight for it! https://www.shadowhex.com Last edited by JohnPaulB; 10-04-2018 at 12:52 PM. Reason: corrected an error |
|
10-04-2018, 01:08 PM | #15 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Again, I think it's really valuable to appreciate the difference in the chances of "upset" results between counting auto-success/failure, or not, and learning to think about the situation represented and what is appropriate.
example: Gambling. Most games of chance retain more or less of a chance element no matter how different the skill levels are. In this case, I would at least allow auto-success failure at the usual thresholds, or likely even increase the odds of pure luck deciding the outcome of a simple game. example: Arm wrestling. This is a pretty direct contest where there is very little that can happen to allow a much weaker person to defeat a much stronger one. Unless it is a very drunk and chaotic contest, ST 9 should not beat ST 18 even 8-9% of the time (as would be the case if you allow auto-success/failure to count). In this case I would not allow auto-success or failure to count, reducing the odds 9 beats 18 to under 1% (probably meaning the 18 was caught by surprise or slipped or something that should not happen often at all). |
10-04-2018, 01:27 PM | #16 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
It's actually not. The GURPS guidelines quoted above is the contestant with the smallest margin of failure wins, i.e., succeeds. Not sure if I agree with that.
|
10-04-2018, 01:53 PM | #17 | |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: behind you
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Quote:
And sometimes a tie is great and need not be resolved immediately. Suppose you had a two guys wrestling over control of a turnstile that controls whether or not a drawbridge get raised. Each time they tie, the bridge stays where it is and might give the invading side time to cross it. |
|
10-04-2018, 03:21 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Quote:
(There are also rules for slow contests versus quick contests, and various scattered optional rules going into more detailed ways to resolve different situations.) |
|
10-04-2018, 03:27 PM | #19 | |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Quote:
It seems to me that while you can figure such things out, you're an experienced GM who thinks carefully about game mechanics, which seems to me a much higher bar than "an autonomous, self-aware being". I've seen some excellent GMs just roll 3 dice and handwave a result without thinking much about how appropriate the odds they're assigning to results for are, which has led to some silly and some excessively lethal situations (especially with Climbing rolls - oh, you failed a climbing roll, guess you fall to your death - AAAAAAAaaaaaaargh SPLAT!) |
|
10-04-2018, 03:46 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: behind you
|
Re: Contests (Opposed Rolls)
Yeah, that climbing example is not what I would call a "self-aware" entity! LOL
In cases such as that, I would try to make sure I have adequately described the dangerousness of the situation to the players. "Are you sure? It's a long way down if you fall..." Or I would probably have them make a check for every 10 feet they have to climb. If they fail one, they slide down 10 feet and take 1 hit. Keep climbing? Ok, resume making checks every 10 feet (or every 20 feet or whatever if it's a really tall structure; no need to get monotonous with it). Last edited by platimus; 10-04-2018 at 03:51 PM. |
|
|