Decisive Quick Contest

Henchman99942 · 01-13-2017, 09:12 PM

It may be that a certain Quick Contests cannot end in a tie. One participant must be declared the victor. I suggest labeling these tests: "Decisive Quick Contests", with victory in the case of ties going the contestant with the greater claim on the default position (aka, to the defender).

Dinadon · 01-14-2017, 06:30 AM

Why must certain quick contests not end in a tie? Can you give a reasonable example to help frame the discussion?

To me, a tie marks an interesting narrative choice, similar to criticals. In the case of a tie that cannot be allowed to stand, a secondary roll against a different skill seems like the most sensible thing to do.

Even if you do something as simple as you suggest and declare someone the winner, what criteria do you use? If two people are competing for the same job, who is the defender? Should it instead go to the one with higher skill level, or higher points in skill?

This also assumes that the quick contest isn't well defined. Often they will mention win or fail results, with the simple implication that a tie results in nothing happening. Combat based quick contests often only work if you win. Most other forms of quick contest can be found in Social Engineering, and these also have well defined results.

01-13-2017, 09:12 PM	#1
Henchman99942 Join Date: Oct 2012	Decisive Quick Contest It may be that a certain Quick Contests cannot end in a tie. One participant must be declared the victor. I suggest labeling these tests: "Decisive Quick Contests", with victory in the case of ties going the contestant with the greater claim on the default position (aka, to the defender).

01-14-2017, 06:30 AM	#2
Dinadon Join Date: Aug 2007	Re: Decisive Quick Contest Why must certain quick contests not end in a tie? Can you give a reasonable example to help frame the discussion? To me, a tie marks an interesting narrative choice, similar to criticals. In the case of a tie that cannot be allowed to stand, a secondary roll against a different skill seems like the most sensible thing to do. Even if you do something as simple as you suggest and declare someone the winner, what criteria do you use? If two people are competing for the same job, who is the defender? Should it instead go to the one with higher skill level, or higher points in skill? This also assumes that the quick contest isn't well defined. Often they will mention win or fail results, with the simple implication that a tie results in nothing happening. Combat based quick contests often only work if you win. Most other forms of quick contest can be found in Social Engineering, and these also have well defined results.