Logic behind downgrading success rolls?

[Melkor]

I was just reading through the Runequest Player's Update, and I am still having a hard time understanding the rule listed below. Would someone mind explaining why/how this makes sense?

"The attack and defence rolls are then made simultaneously by the combatants and the results compared according to the opposed test mechanics: as usual a Critical Success always beats a normal success, but if the success levels are equal, the higher Success roll wins and the lower roll is demoted by one level. I.e. if both combatants roll a normal success, then the higher roll remains a success, but the lower roll is downgraded to a failure, or if both roll a critical success the lower roll is downgraded to a normal success. This may seem unfair when both combatants have succeeded, but it is a logical outcome. In such situations the winning opponent has exhibited either greater luck or greater competence, and turned the situation to his advantage."

Does this mean that the only time you get the SAME results on the Dodge and Parry tables is when the exact same dice roll is thrown by both combatants?

 

[DigitalMage]

Does this mean that the only time you get the SAME results on the Dodge and Parry tables is when the exact same dice roll is thrown by both combatants?

And when both character's have achieved the same success level (so even when both characters roll 09, if one has a Weapon Skill of 95% (therefore gaining a critical) and one has a weapon skill of 75% (therefore gaining a success), the same results aren't achieved either.

So basically the Crit/Crit, Success/Success results will occur less than 1% of the time.

I haven't played MRQ in earnest yet, but when I do dropping the downgrading is likely to be my first houserule (and I practically never house rule games nowadays).

PS I will also likely houserule that if you move to engage someone in melee combat they don't get a free attack against you - only if you try to move past. Currently you have to Charge to avoid the free attack!

 

[master of reality]

I was just reading through the Runequest Player's Update, and I am still having a hard time understanding the rule listed below. Would someone mind explaining why/how this makes sense?

"The attack and defence rolls are then made simultaneously by the combatants and the results compared according to the opposed test mechanics: as usual a Critical Success always beats a normal success, but if the success levels are equal, the higher Success roll wins and the lower roll is demoted by one level. I.e. if both combatants roll a normal success, then the higher roll remains a success, but the lower roll is downgraded to a failure, or if both roll a critical success the lower roll is downgraded to a normal success. This may seem unfair when both combatants have succeeded, but it is a logical outcome. In such situations the winning opponent has exhibited either greater luck or greater competence, and turned the situation to his advantage."

Does this mean that the only time you get the SAME results on the Dodge and Parry tables is when the exact same dice roll is thrown by both combatants?

Yes, you are correct.
I just ignore the downgrade rule. If both attacker and defender achieve ordinary success, then I apply the success/success result as stated on the combat chart, and so forth.
Other than that, I pretty much follow the rules as written in the core book and modified in the GM guide or player's update, although the GM guide seems to treat the downgrade rule as optional.

 

[Halfbat]

As they said, though I've played a fair amount of the new RQ with a variety of house rules and no house rules.

It's worth bearing in mind that if you rule it as traditional (no downgrade) you'll lose the more 'heroic' approach taken towards MRQ.

There are a number of options on the MRQ Wiki (see sig for Mr. Qwiki).

 

[kintire]

Would someone mind explaining why/how this makes sense?

It means that a fight between two combatants of high skill will end. As opposed to an endless series of successful defences until someone rolls a critical. Its a big chance factor of course: but "first to roll a crit" is also essentially pure luck, and the downgraade system is over quicker.

 

[Melkor]

I haven't played MRQ in earnest yet, but when I do dropping the downgrading is likely to be my first houserule (and I practically never house rule games nowadays).

I'm like you in that I hardly house rule games these days - but the downgrading rule is something that I will be taking out if and when I play Runequest.

That said, I had a couple more related questions:

• Are there any conflicting rules between the Game Master's Handbook and the Deluxe rulebook?

• If so, which book is the more up-to-date?

Thanks.

 

[zozotroll]

Despite my initial dislike of it, I have come to appreciate the downgrade rule. As mentioned above, high level opponents can spend amny many rounds hacking at each other. With the downgrade, somebody gets hurt fast. Much more interesting to game.

 

[Jed Clayton]

Despite my initial dislike of it, I have come to appreciate the downgrade rule. As mentioned above, high level opponents can spend amny many rounds hacking at each other. With the downgrade, somebody gets hurt fast. Much more interesting to game.

While I've needed some time to really get to appreciate the new MRQ, I agree with you here.

Having an "endless" series of attack - parry - counterattack - parry was a recurring thing in RQ3, as well as in Stormbringer, Elric!, and other iterations of the rules engine. Since my gaming style has changed dramatically in recent years with the scales tipped towards high drama/superheroes/cinematic action/anime, I like rules that make combat faster and shorter, while still allowing for a range of different results.

Having said that, I always point out to new RQ players that the current official RQ rules highly favour the attacker over the defender (unless you have an insanely high Dodge skill or somesuch), and high skill level over lower skill level. I say that to avoid disappointment or misinterpretations.

 

[Mugen]

In one of the latest playtest rules, there was a similar rule, but instead if the parry roll was higher than the attack roll, 2*AP was substracted from the damage, and only 1*AP if parry is lower.

 

[Christopher Graves]

The rules lack some clarity as they stand. If I hadn't been playing RQ for 35 years I might not have gotten the gist. Nevertheless, I made the following house rule for my PBEM 3rd Age Gloranthan Campaign. I happen to be one who still makes house rules fairly often. In my opinion the standard MRQ combat method is fine for high level combats. I chose to mitigate this so the system will work passably well for both high level and beginning combats. This would not work as well for live play.

Here verbatim is what I informed my players.

Opposed Tests- When success levels are equal, the higher success roll only 'wins' if the lower success roll is demoted. The lower success roll is only demoted if the lower roll is, more than 50% of the lower roller's ability at the current test, less than the the winner's current roll. Without a win no damage is rolled.

For example: Marvin has a 60% at shield use. Standish has an 80% ability with a spear. Standish attacks rolling a 65 and Marvin parries rolling a 43 both succeed. Because Marvin's roll of 43 is not more than 30 points (30 being 50% of Marvin's skill of 60% with a shield) less than Standish's roll of 65, Marvin's success level is not demoted and Standish's spear attach is not a win. Without the 'win' no damage is rolled.

This hopefully takes advantage of some nebulous terminology (win) used by the editors of MRQ and mitigates what I can only imagine was an effort to make combat shorter.

 

[DigitalMage]

Here verbatim is what I informed my players.

Opposed Tests- When success levels are equal, the higher success roll only 'wins' if the lower success roll is demoted. The lower success roll is only demoted if the lower roll is, more than 50% of the lower roller's ability at the current test, less than the the winner's current roll. Without a win no damage is rolled.

That seems horrendously complicated (maybe its just the wording) - does it work well for you? It was only your example that helped me understand, and even then I am not completely sure.

For example: Marvin has a 60% at shield use. Standish has an 80% ability with a spear. Standish attacks rolling a 65 and Marvin parries rolling a 43 both succeed. Because Marvin's roll of 43 is not more than 30 points (30 being 50% of Marvin's skill of 60% with a shield) less than Standish's roll of 65, Marvin's success level is not demoted and Standish's spear attach is not a win. Without the 'win' no damage is rolled.

So for Marvin's success level to be demoted, he would have needed to have rolled 35 or less (Standish's Roll of 65 less 30, this being half of Marvin's Skill)? Correct?

 

[Christopher Graves]

Yes, the wording is horrendous, but I am an old time wargamer so I am used to it. Once you comprehend the logic of it, its the calculation that is the time consuming part. Hence, I state that this doesn't work as well for live play. I must say that once you are used to it, making these comparisons is quite easy and almost second nature.

I prefer it over all the intricate game design that went into the whole AP system for weapons. The system as it stands attempt to mitigate itself by reducing the damage taken. I just don't think this feels right. A parry should be a parry etc. Maybe I feel that way cause its what I'm used to.

 

[DigitalMage]

Yes, the wording is horrendous, but I am an old time wargamer so I am used to it. Once you comprehend the logic of it, its the calculation that is the time consuming part. Hence, I state that this doesn't work as well for live play.

Cool, glad you're open to criticism. If it works for you great - go for it, I think most people have house rules MRQ combat in some way, even me who never houserules now in other games