Rule for High Attack and Defense???

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Hrothgar Rannúlfr

I thought that I had read, somewhere, that there was a way to effectively reduce two combatants' skill when both had high attack v defense, but I am having trouble finding it.

You're thinking of Quick Contests, where it's a one-off Contested skill or attribute roll, the highest skill is reduced to 14, the lower one is reduced by the same amount the higher one was reduced.

It's a useful method of determining a contested action when you need a more clear winner and loser and you're not just comparing Margins of Success.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The "reduce skills" thing is usually done for combats.

I think you're missing a 'not' in there.

[zuljita]

Feints are another way to get around defenses that often get overlooked.

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Thanks, everyone.

Everything listed in the replies is helpful, but I think what I read must have been on a forum or blog post, somewhere, then.

What I remember was that it was the same adjustment to both the attacker and defender in order to shorten a fight when both were highly skilled. I think the idea was dividing both by 2 (or even 3 at higher skill levels).

[Tom H.]

Hey, I found it.

(. . . after I was writing a reply to discount it.)

See page 8 of Exploits under Regular Contests.

This may be a new departure from GURPS. For the original solution, see my discussion below under Extra Info.

The idea in both solutions is to bring the high skills back into the dice rolling range that is optimal for the game (3 to 18).

This new DFRPG solution recommends making the translation by dividing or multiplying by a common factor. The original solution was to subtract or add by a common amount.

Now, since the compensation applies to Contests, I would NOT think it would be typically used for combat.

However, it seems to me that a combat attack can be thought of as a Regular Contest of an attack skill vs. an active defense. Does somebody know if this comparison has been made in the forums? Is it valid?

In any event, for combat, I would primarily rely on the option given by DouglasCole above:

Deceptive Attack (Exploits, pg. 38) gives an attacker a way to lower the defender's active defense when the attacker has sufficient skill. If the defender keeps rolling under his skill, you want to reduce it.

(Zuljita's feint suggestion is important too.)

Extra Info:

The GURPS Basic Set has a provision for reducing high competing skills when engaging in a Regular Contest (pg. 349). (This is the option referenced in a preceding post by Evileeyore.)

The idea here revolves around the fact that rolling 3d6 produces values close to 10 in the range of 3 to 18. It is ideal to try to move competing really high skills closer into this range relative to each other.

Arguably, the D&D mechanic is more elegant with competing high skills. The linear d20 roll is always added to the skill and there is no warping of the probability that must be conformed to. The D&D elegance comes from the fact that there is not the need for "rules" to keep things in bounds as in DFRPG/GURPS. Some examples are The Rule of 16 (Exploits, pg. 8) and The Rule of 14 for Fright Checks, not called that in DFRPG but still there on pg. 10 of Exploits.

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Originally Posted by Tom H.

Hey, I found it.

(. . . after I was writing a reply to discount it.)

See page 8 of Exploits under Regular Contests.

This may be a new departure from GURPS. For the original solution, see my discussion below under Extra Info.

The idea in both solutions is to bring the high skills back into the dice rolling range that is optimal for the game (3 to 18).

This new DFRPG solution recommends making the translation by dividing or multiplying by a common factor. The original solution was to subtract or add by a common amount.

Now, since the compensation applies to Contests, I would NOT think it would be typically used for combat.

However, it seems to me that a combat attack can be thought of as a Regular Contest of an attack skill vs. an active defense. Does somebody know if this comparison has been made in the forums? Is it valid?

In any event, for combat, I would primarily rely on the option given by DouglasCole above:

Deceptive Attack (Exploits, pg. 38) gives an attacker a way to lower the defender's active defense when the attacker has sufficient skill. If the defender keeps rolling under his skill, you want to reduce it.

(Zuljita's feint suggestion is important too.)

Extra Info:

The GURPS Basic Set has a provision for reducing high competing skills when engaging in a Regular Contest (pg. 349). (This is the option referenced in a preceding post by Evileeyore.)

The idea here revolves around the fact that rolling 3d6 produces values close to 10 in the range of 3 to 18. It is ideal to try to move competing really high skills closer into this range relative to each other.

Arguably, the D&D mechanic is more elegant with competing high skills. The linear d20 roll is always added to the skill and there is no warping of the probability that must be conformed to. The D&D elegance comes from the fact that there is not the need for "rules" to keep things in bounds as in DFRPG/GURPS. Some examples are The Rule of 16 (Exploits, pg. 8) and The Rule of 14 for Fright Checks, not called that in DFRPG but still there on pg. 10 of Exploits.

Thanks, Tom H. That part about Regular Contests is what I was trying to find.

While I love D&D, especially 3.x and Pathfinder, I am really intrigued by the 3d6 system used by GURPS, along with many other things about GURPS that are built into the system from a foundational level.

[Tom H.]

Originally Posted by Hrothgar Rannúlfr

While I love D&D, especially 3.x and Pathfinder, I am really intrigued by the 3d6 system used by GURPS, along with many other things about GURPS that are built into the system from a foundational level.

I'm not ready to make a final judgement about which dice mechanic is better (D&D vs. DFRPG).

I did want to point out a source of the issue in DFRPG.

I have to say, one silly thing I like about 3d6 is that I "feel" luckier in that I have supporting dice in case one goes all cursed like.

[Stripe]

Perhaps you recall rules from Third Edition? It was something like, "If both combatants have skill 24, reduce both by 10 so they have skill-14." It was like that for ST or something as well, like for reducing an animal's stats in an all-animal campaign (e.g., Bunnies & Boroughs). I can almost picture it in the Basic Set, in a sidebar in the upper-left of the page.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

I think you're missing a 'not' in there.

Quite. I blame Siri.