Opposed rolls
- Thread starter Dano_13
- Start date
Jujitsudave
Mongoose
So did I.
Faelan Niall
Banded Mongoose
I don't see anything specific to suggest that they are not opposed rolls. All the levels of success are available in an opposed roll. Both can fail, succeed, or critically succeed or fail. I have used the rules for opposed skills in combat since I got MRQ2. If you did not use them what is the point of getting a skill over 100% in a Combat Style? The master beats the novice, not just because the novice is a beginner, but because the master makes him look even worse than he is. If it were not opposed it takes all the flavor out of it at higher degrees of skill and turns it into a slow monotonous search for critical success or failure. In other words the system breaks down, I don't think that was the intent, and since I have seen nothing to suggest otherwise, I have used and will continue treating it as the best defined opposed skill test in the game.
Obviously everyone is free to play the version of RQ that they want (and I for one am going to uber-mod it) - however, just to be sure I am reading the rules right - doesn't the description of the Trollkin Fight seem to indicate the Attacking and Parrying is task based rather than opposed rolls? I mean the trollkin parries Lilina's attack of 55 with a parry of 12.
Anyway - I am just curious as to what the pros and cons of making attacks and parries opposed rolls. It certainly seems to make the rules more symmetrical (i.e. most rolls seem to be Opposed rolls in the game).
Dan
Anyway - I am just curious as to what the pros and cons of making attacks and parries opposed rolls. It certainly seems to make the rules more symmetrical (i.e. most rolls seem to be Opposed rolls in the game).
Dan
Faelan Niall
Banded Mongoose
Dano_13 said:
That is consistent with Opposed Skills, however it is modified to simply be based on level of success without a tie breaker (read the randomness of the die roll making combat extremely unpredictable). Is either a failure? No. Is either a critical success? No. Is either a success? Yes, both.
On p.86 however this excerpt clarifies what I think you are asking?
MRQ2 Core said:
Hope that helps.
Faellan has quoted what I was going to say. As I understand it the swordmaster with a skill of 190% reduces his skill and those of his opponents by 90% if his opponents skill is 90 or below the opponent has a only a base chance of 5% to succeed and the swordmaster would have to roll a 96-100% to fail. So combat skills over 100% are certainly desirable in most games.
I see 3 ways to use opposed rolls in MRQ2 :
First option :
You can state that parry roll needs to beat the attack roll in order to block any damage (that was more or less MRQ1, revised).
Second option :
You can give an extra Combat Maneuver to the winner of the roll.
If this sounds too deadly for you, you can chose to give the extra CM to the defender only.
That is, you can chose between :
Attacker is 2 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 3 CMs
Attacker is 1 level of succes over the defender : attacker gets 2 CMs
Attacker and defender have the same level of success : Higher roll gets 1 CM
Defender is 1 level of succes over the attacker : defender gets 2 CMs
Defender is 2 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 3 CMs
Or :
Attacker is 2 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 2 CMs
Attacker is 1 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 1 CM
Attacker and defender have the same level of success, Attacker get the highest roll : No-one gets a CM
Attacker and defender have the same level of success, Defender get the highest roll : Defender gets 1 CM
Defender is 1 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 2 CMs
Defender is 2 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 3 CMs
Third option :
Latest MRQ1 playtest rules stated that in case when success level were equal, defender would block APx1 Damage if he got the lowest roll, and 2XAP if he got the highest one.
In MRQ2, this would be equivalent to give one extra size to the parrying weapon.
First option :
You can state that parry roll needs to beat the attack roll in order to block any damage (that was more or less MRQ1, revised).
Second option :
You can give an extra Combat Maneuver to the winner of the roll.
If this sounds too deadly for you, you can chose to give the extra CM to the defender only.
That is, you can chose between :
Attacker is 2 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 3 CMs
Attacker is 1 level of succes over the defender : attacker gets 2 CMs
Attacker and defender have the same level of success : Higher roll gets 1 CM
Defender is 1 level of succes over the attacker : defender gets 2 CMs
Defender is 2 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 3 CMs
Or :
Attacker is 2 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 2 CMs
Attacker is 1 levels of succes over the defender : attacker gets 1 CM
Attacker and defender have the same level of success, Attacker get the highest roll : No-one gets a CM
Attacker and defender have the same level of success, Defender get the highest roll : Defender gets 1 CM
Defender is 1 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 2 CMs
Defender is 2 levels of succes over the attacker : defender gets 3 CMs
Third option :
Latest MRQ1 playtest rules stated that in case when success level were equal, defender would block APx1 Damage if he got the lowest roll, and 2XAP if he got the highest one.
In MRQ2, this would be equivalent to give one extra size to the parrying weapon.
Similar threads
