|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-27-2012, 07:56 PM | #11 | |
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lynn, MA
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
Quote:
I also suppose something good could happen regardless of resistance, "Sure the mind control works despite your crit, but luckily you then slipped off the pier with your last bit of will so your powers weren't used against the innocents" |
|
09-27-2012, 08:24 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
Quote:
__________________
-- MA Lloyd |
|
09-27-2012, 10:19 PM | #13 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
|
09-28-2012, 02:10 AM | #14 | ||
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
09-28-2012, 02:14 AM | #15 | |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
Quote:
|
|
09-28-2012, 03:53 AM | #16 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
@Sir pudding: I think what is meant is that unless your GM tells you your targets exact WILL before you roll, it can get a bit messy with the calculating, or you have to tell the GM both your effective skill and your roll.
In either case, it can get annoying compared to the simple cimparison of margins. Of course there is never actually any penalty, but quick contests behave pretty close to a roll where you get the defenders margin of success as a penalty. @Bruno: That is exactly how I read it too, normally, quick contests and crits don't combine. Edit: about the deceptive attack idea, I think that would be a very bad choice. Will and health are cheap enough to raise, deceptive attacks work the way they do because it is much harder to raise your defence compared to your offence! Anyway, I think I shall go with it as a test and see how it goes, after all, we have a powered priest and a magician in the group, results should show quickly. |
09-28-2012, 10:04 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: alocal
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
You could also set a relative limit, so to say. For example a cap of resisting attribute + 6. Against average people, the effective skill would be 16, as usual. For more remarkable opponents, it would be a little higher (FREX HT 16 would make for a skill cap of 22).
Here's a better example: Mr. Archmage knows Stone to Flesh at 25. First, he tries his spell against Mr. Average who, as one would expect, has HT 10. Since the cap is Attribute+6, Mr. Archmage rolls vs. 16 (Mr. Average's HT of 10, plus six); while Mr. Average rolls against 10 (his HT). If Mr. Archmage tried to affect Mr. Resistant (HT 16), it would work like this: Mr. Archmage would roll against 22 (which corresponds to Mr. Resistant's HT of 16, plus six); and Mr. Resistant would roll against 16 (his HT). This means that skilled opponents will always have better chances of affecting more vulnerable opponents, but not overwhelmingly so. You could always lower the cap to attribute+4, for example. I'm not very good at statistics, so I won't crunch any numbers. But I'm pretty sure there's an acceptable margin there somewhere, just not sure if it's really attribute+6. |
09-28-2012, 10:15 AM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
Quote:
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
09-28-2012, 10:46 AM | #19 | |
Fightin' Round the World
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
The odd thing about resistance rolls vs. spells, to me, is that if you critically succeed with a resisted spell, the victim gets no defense (per Magic p. 13, for example).
Any other success, and they resist normally with a contest mechanic, and must beat your margin of success. They can neither critically succeed or critically fail. You, however, are limited by the Rule of 16. So it's a skill roll vs. a contest mechanic, rather than strictly a Quick Contest. Oddly back in 1e-3e days, you could effectively critically fail your spell resistance rolls - there was an example of a badly blown resistance roll by an orc vs. a Mass Sleep spell. In the 1e GURPS Fantasy, pg. 10: Quote:
But like I said, back in the day. I'm talking 1986 and 1st edition GURPS Fantasy. I do think the current rules are a bit odd, though, and we've long house ruled that a 3-4 always resists a spell and a 17-18 always fails to resist. It doesn't seem to break the game, even if you otherwise retain the Rule of 16, like we do.
__________________
Peter V. Dell'Orto aka Toadkiller_Dog or TKD My Author Page My S&C Blog My Dungeon Fantasy Game Blog "You fall onto five death checks." - Andy Dokachev |
|
09-28-2012, 01:58 PM | #20 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: Houserule Idea - always resist with critical success instead of Rule of 16
|
Tags |
magic, malediction, resisted, rule of 16 |
|
|