So why not let your agenda go?

[Taharqa]

This is done using a Resistance Table.

Probably the most unwieldly feature of BRP (though experienced GM:s would use a far swifter mathematic formula: basically setting (defending ability - active ability) x 5 + 50 as difficulty. Some BRP-derived systems have developed easier systems of resolution.

And it should be noted that quite a few games derive from BRP, so I'm not only talking about the actual game Basic Roleplaying, but a family of games with those same mechanics.

Yes it is and from what I understand it cannot be used to make opposed skill rolls, because skills have no ability score. A simpler mechanic would be that the person who rolls the furthest under their score wins - but then of course you would be doing exactly the same thing as D20, but in reverse.

So there you have it - by houseruling penalties to rolls and by adjusting the cumbersome rules to resistance, BRP and D20 can have exactly the same mechanic. The only difference is that BRP is rolled D100 and D20 is rolled D20 (of course). Dunderm seems to think having a score of exactly 63 vs. 65 or 60 is an advantage - I think it just makes the math more complicated.

 

[Mark Dunder]

So there you have it - by houseruling penalties to rolls and by adjusting the cumbersome rules to resistance, BRP and D20 can have exactly the same mechanic. The only difference is that BRP is rolled D100 and D20 is rolled D20 (of course). Dunderm seems to think having a score of exactly 63 vs. 65 or 60 is an advantage - I think it just makes the math more complicated.

I agree with you. In another thread I said I thought d20 made figuring out the DC (I'll use this as a generic term for the score needed for success), much easier and also makes for faster resolution of combat. Having to deal with a 100 point spread as opposed to a 20 point spread, is problematic. I think the 5% difference may not be as impacting as I may have earlier stated. See the next paragraph.

The Resistance Table seems a little strange to me too. It reduces the percentages of the roll basically to a d20 resolution, but in reverse as Taharqa points out. I'll go over it and see how it is set up statistically. There is a formula mentioned on how to figure opposed characteristics (abilities) resolution. I find it strange about the non-opposed skill roll. I don't like that. I would take opposed skill scores and divide by 5 (removes the 5% variance between d20 and d100), and compare them on the Resistance Table. It's been sometime since I've played this game. I will have to go over the rules with a fine-toothed comb and see what's up.

Like OGL, BRP does not restrict games built upon it's rules system to add more structure. RuneQuest added a Class system of development (they didn't call it that, of course), that gave more structure to character creation. Certain skills and abilities could not be chosen unless these classes (called variously names such as guilds, careers, etc.) were selected.

Some OGL games do not have classes and such as I recall other players attested to. Do they all require Levels? I need to get Mutants & Masterminds to find out what that is about, it may help to solve some of my questions.

Still, I believe OGL Conan needs to have more skills. Also, some skills and feats seem to be placed wrongly in either category. Perhaps there is a sound reason for this, I don't see at this point.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Just looking at the RuneQuest thread. Good info there, from actual experienced players. The opinions wrote below, do not necessarily reflect mine. But it does answer the skill vs skill check.

Whilst in d20 you tend to have skill checks and DCs which you have to beat, and the d20 adds to your overall skill modifier, in RQ you have to roll under your d100 (%ge) skill to succeed, plus or minus difficulty modifiers. On top of this there are various levels of success of failure: critical (best possible), special, normal, failure or fumble (an invitation to the GM to have fun). This works really well in adding to each skill check, altering the game froma quick (I'll try an xxxx check...[rolls d20]). For me, it seemed to smooth things out better.

In RQ most skill checks are opposed: if you succeed as a "defender", your skill gets subtracted from the "attackers" chance of succeeding (e.g. Moving Silently vs Listen). Moreover, there is a very simple resistance table which governs most non-skill interactions. Again, the system seems to limit the extreme effect of the d20 in a (for example) STR vs STR opposed check, but that's not to say the dice have a say in the matter!

 

[Mark Dunder]

Just checked out the wiki entry on Mutants & Masterminds. They currently use Power Levels to get Feats and Skills and such. But there seems to be a movement in this game to do completely away with levels. Interesting to see where that goes. I need to put aside funds to buy this game.

 

[Sutek]

A) Skills aren't used during combat in OGL and d20.

At the risk of sounding like a nitpicker, what about Tumble, Bluff, Jump, Ride, Concentration, et al ? Those are used in combat all the time...

- thulsa

They can be used in combat, but they aren't "combat skills".

The aforementioned Harnmaster is d100 and every aspect of the game is a skill use roll, right down to actually swinging a sword. Combat is skill based. In d20, Bluff can sometimes come up in a combat depending on the situation, but that doesn't mean it's a combat skill or a skill used in combat in the strictest sense.

 

[Sutek]

Your argument is flawed because any fudging in d20 never takes place on the die (as it you suggest) but instead is applied to DCs. You've got it backwards. If I set a DC at 35 for a task and my player rolls a 33, well I may just give it to him with slightly edited results befitting a "near miss" - he succeeded, but also just barely made it and the actual resutls will reflect that by my own GM fiat.

The nudge always occurs after the die is rolled. If the DC was 5 and the player rolled 4, you might drop the DC to 4. Does not matter if the die roll was increased by one to meet the 5 or if the DC was decreased by one, the effect is the same. I say the glass is half empty and you say the glass is half full. Who is right? But one level of nudge is 5% because the random roll still has only 1 to 20 in spread, regardless of the DC.

It's not a half empty/half full issue.

A d20 only rolls 1 to 20. Other skills and attributes can modify this infinitely upwards. DC4 never happens in the game because it's rediculously small. DC30 is a very difficult roll, but a 7th level Thief canmanage a DC30 hide check on a max roll with no more modifying the die roll other than his skill rank. However, since 30 is outside the 1-20 range of the die being used, or even DC45 or DC63, the range of the die therefore does not represent a limited range, but merely the starting range of probability. It's more accurate to state that the range is d20+.

Now, in your d100 game, it's a much more limited range because it's limited to values between 1 and 100 on purpose to create a finite envelope. This is create a feeling of reality or realistic correspondance between actors (your character's STR and the weight of an object, for example) but one need not be concerned with rolls or check results lower than 1 or higer than 100, because they don't happen.

As far as the bias being in favor of an attacker: It's like that because that's the way it works. You proved it yourself by having your son attack you (lol). Now, size and damage was a factor in the results, but he was easily able to score hits. This is still a bit moot, however. Combat in d20 represents multiple blows with a single roll. The roll generates combat effectiveness for that round of combat, but encompasses effectively many swings of the sword. When compared against Defense, it's lopsided and continues to go that way as characters level up; DV doesn't increase nearly as well as attacking ability. This is to off-set the HP mechanic and Massive damage rules. Eventually, armor does very little to deflect damage, so the real issue is attack potential versus DV in Conan d20 and pretty much all OGL games.

I'm afraid I don't really even see your first point, but what's your second?

 

[Sutek]

Just looking at the RuneQuest thread. Good info there, from actual experienced players. The opinions wrote below, do not necessarily reflect mine. But it does answer the skill vs skill check.

Whilst in d20 you tend to have skill checks and DCs which you have to beat, and the d20 adds to your overall skill modifier, in RQ you have to roll under your d100 (%ge) skill to succeed, plus or minus difficulty modifiers. On top of this there are various levels of success of failure: critical (best possible), special, normal, failure or fumble (an invitation to the GM to have fun). This works really well in adding to each skill check, altering the game froma quick (I'll try an xxxx check...[rolls d20]). For me, it seemed to smooth things out better.

In RQ most skill checks are opposed: if you succeed as a "defender", your skill gets subtracted from the "attackers" chance of succeeding (e.g. Moving Silently vs Listen). Moreover, there is a very simple resistance table which governs most non-skill interactions. Again, the system seems to limit the extreme effect of the d20 in a (for example) STR vs STR opposed check, but that's not to say the dice have a say in the matter!

Conan has cleaned up a lot of lousey mechanics that D&D still utilizes, just like having one's Move Siliently check (d20+skill) end up being the DC# that others wanting to Spot or Search for the silent character must now beat. If my roll is a 27, people have to roll a 27 on thier search checks to hear me.

The similarity to the d% mechanic is similar, but the d% mechanic is limited to scores between 1 and 100 no matter what occurs. If I'm really spectacular and roll a d20+ to Move Silently is a 42, then I may be able to be heard only by magical means. This is 2 times the max range of the die being use in the system, but it's still a possible result. In d% the best you can ever manage is an 01. Further, unless the change to crit increases in this d% system, 01 becoms just as valuable as 17 or 23 orwhatever the upper limit of success is. In d20, at least, the upper limit is infinite.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Modifiers from Base scores (Base Defense), Feats, Ability Bonus are not dice rolls. Modifiers to skills in BRP are not dice rolls. Skill vs Skill, DC are not dice rolls. They are "beginning values" that you roll dice against.

If the DC you need to equal or beat is 1000, you need at least 980 in Feats, Ability Bonuses, or Skill Ranks, to get at least one chance to equal a DC of 1000. If you don't roll a 20 on the die, you fail. If your score was 990, you would only need to roll 10 or better on d20. If you want infinite try beating a DC of 10,000. Ridiculous? Yes, but I hope it proves my point that having an infinite DC does not mean your Base scores, Feats, Ranks, and other modifiers has anything to do with your 1 to 20 random add from your die.

Same goes for modifiers to BRP. But the random roll is larger. If BRP allowed modifiers to progress the skill level beyond 100, only a 100 roll would spell defeat. Consequently modified scores below 1 would give the player one chance to succeed (if 01 always wins).

The d6 game allows you to roll as many dice as your skill or ability allows. This system is the original Tunnels and Trolls. Each side of a party of players in combat roll all their dice for all their characters and then whomever has the highest points wins. This is a true open ended die roll game. I've had monsters in the game that rolled 40 dice, no kidding. Because of this infinite dice rolling, T&T can get a little tiresome adding up all those dice. I much prefer to have a finite random roll system. But T&T can be a blast!

 

[Oly]

Same goes for modifiers to BRP. But the random roll is larger. If BRP allowed modifiers to progress the skill level beyond 100, only a 100 roll would spell defeat. Consequently modified scores below 1 would give the player one chance to succeed (if 01 always wins).

Not sure if I want to get into this debate or not but I'll just point out that the version of BRP used in the latest Stormbringer game does allow skills to go above 100%. Multiple attacks would use divisions of that skill (if I've got 120% sword skill I could attack twice at 60% or once at 90% and twice at 15% etc.). Getting a critical (20% of your skill) or an impale (5%?) becomes very important in the resolution system.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Thanks Oly, didn't know that (as you guessed). Looks like I need to start upgrading all my old games. Starting to get a little moldy, like me.

 

[Sutek]

Not sure if I want to get into this debate or not but I'll just point out that the version of BRP used in the latest Stormbringer game does allow skills to go above 100%.

Yes, but that's not what I'm saying. The results in a d% game always fall between 1 and 100...so that's the goal. Even if your skill is 123, you still generate a score that satisfies a 1 to 100 result. This is true because you're rolling within the skill level range and so are effectively "trapped". In this case, that's not a bad thing because it make for less super-heroic characters and, usually, that's what d% players (and game creators) are looking for.

In the d20 systems, the goalis being infinitely powerful ad facing ever increasingly powerful foes as well. The inverse mechanic to this is the point at which low level foes start to not count towards accrued XP.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Before I go into how BRP handles rolls above 100 in a skill, I would like to ramble about system mechanics. If theories and speculations bore you, jump a couple paragraphs, I just have to write this first.

I don't feel that the resolution system to resolve actions is particularly important, as long as a clear winner can be determined. But I do feel the method should have a random modifier. Tossing a coin would work. The success value that needs to be met, is not as important as the modifiers both the attacker and defender (or resistance) get to apply. Let's say you have to meet or beat a score of 10 on 1d6. Obviously, you can't do this on the die roll itself, you need modifiers. But let's play favorites, let's say the defender gets to apply the same bonuses as the attacker. The attacker gives himself a +8, because he will at least have to roll a 2, because 1 would always be a miss let's say. So the defender gets to modify this with -8. There is no way, all modifiers being equal, that the attacker will ever succeed unless he rolls a 6. To the reverse, let's say the attacker must roll a -6 or less on a 1d6, he chooses -8 (1 is a miss). You now realize the defender matches this modifier, so the attacker loses unless he rolls a 6. No matter what the random roll, the modifiers and starting score needed for success, matters more.

In the BRP system, you have to roll under the score needed for success. If you roll 100 on the d% you always fail. What do you do about skill scores over 100? Let's say 150. If you do not roll 100% and miss, you get another chance to hit again at 50%. Of course you have to have time to do so. This means you can have infinite possitive modifiers to your score to succeed. +100 to a skill of 200, means you get to roll 3 times for successes as long as you never roll 100. Of course, if the defender has -300, you'll only hit if you roll 1%.

I hope that is somewhat constructive to those of you designing or modifying RPGs.

 

[Oly]

In the BRP system, you have to roll under the score needed for success. If you roll 100 on the d% you always fail. What do you do about skill scores over 100? Let's say 150. If you do not roll 100% and miss, you get another chance to hit again at 50%. Of course you have to have time to do so. This means you can have infinite possitive modifiers to your score to succeed. +100 to a skill of 200, means you get to roll 3 times for successes as long as you never roll 100. Of course, if the defender has -300, you'll only hit if you roll 1%.

I hope that is somewhat constructive to those of you designing or modifying RPGs.

As before I don't want to get drawn into a BRP vs D20 debate but the above simply isn't how BRP works in the Stormbringer (or CoC but that doesn't allow skills of over 100% so is out of the picture anyway), I've no idea about other versions of it though.

In Stormbringer the modifiers used in combat apply to your attack/defend % not your skill and are only in the range of +/- 10 or 20%. So if you have a sword skill of 150% you can choose to attack once at 100% and once at 50%, if you've got a superior position you then get to add say 10% to each attack chance so it works out at 110% and 60%. "Infinite possitive (sic) modifiers" are a technical possibility but not a rule of the game.

Also the only rule governing multiple attacks is that each one must have least 50%. Therefore a very skilled swordsman could, in theory, attack 3 times at 50% with a skill of 150%, it doesn't have to be 100% and then 50%.

Saying "if you roll 100 on the d% you always fail" is technically correct but not the whole story. The fumbles for skills less than 100% are 99 or 00, for skills over 100% it's 00 only.

"Of course, if the defender has -300, you'll only hit if you roll 1%", again not in Stormbringer. You seem to be saying that you subtract the defenders skill from the attackers. What happens is that you both roll (which also happens in CoC) and for your attack to succeeds it must beat the level of success (success, critical or impale) that your opponent gets. Therefore you may not "only hit if you roll 1%". What the attacker wants is to get as high a level of success as possible while his opponent gets a low level or a fumble. There's several ways that a hit can happen.

Really not sure if any of this belongs in a Conan forum but there you go.

 

[ricardo440]

I like the %ile CoC game.

Mainly because in CoC the rules hardly matter. They are simple if completely arbitrary.

Games with fights that arn't "the monster kills you" "the psudopod crushes you to death" "The tentacle plucks you off the ground and slices you in two" "The arm reaches down and puts your squirming body into its giant mouth; you are eaten"
need a better combat system.

D20 is great because you can teach a 5 year old it in 3.7 seconds, it is versatile and your players don't need to read a million books to get all the bits out of the combat system. Skills are intuative, and character advancement is a doddle to learn.

It is flawed for precisely the same reasons.

Every game is a trade off between "realism" TM and "Playability". Games that screw both of them up SUCK. Yeah HP don't always get the feel you want. Yeah people can be happy as larry when they have lost 101 of their 102 hp, lose another and SPLAT. But remembering a million combat modifiers all the time can be a huge pain in the backside. Pro's and cons.

 

[Trodax]

The results in a d% game always fall between 1 and 100...so that's the goal. Even if your skill is 123, you still generate a score that satisfies a 1 to 100 result. This is true because you're rolling within the skill level range and so are effectively "trapped". In this case, that's not a bad thing because it make for less super-heroic characters and, usually, that's what d% players (and game creators) are looking for.

In the d20 systems, the goalis being infinitely powerful ad facing ever increasingly powerful foes as well. The inverse mechanic to this is the point at which low level foes start to not count towards accrued XP.

Sutek, I'm not sure I see what you're saying here. The result from a d% always falls between 1 and 100, likewise the result from a d20 always falls between 1 and 20. Probability wise, systems that use "roll under your score to succeed" or "roll a die, add your score and beat a DC" are the same.
The base mechanic of the d20 system doesn't allow for more heroic/cinematic play in itself.

For example, a character in the d20 system with a +4 modifier has a 50% chance of succeeding at the standard DC 15 test. When the DC goes up, his chance of success will go down until the DC reaches 25 when he will never succeed. Likewise, if his modifier goes up, those DC 15 tests will become easier and easier until he reaches a +14 modifier when he will always succeed at a DC 15 test.

In BRP, you have the same situation. A character with 50% in a skill has a 50% chance of success (well, duh :wink: ). When the task becomes more difficult (you get a negative modifier to your score), his chance of success goes down until you reach -50% tasks when he will never succeed. Likewise, when his skill goes up, standard tests will get easier and easier until he reaches 100%, when he will always succeed (I'm ignoring things such as 100 is always a failure/fumble here).

The systems are basically the same, they just use different numbers and different ways of handling tasks of various difficulty (change of the DC versus giving you a %-modifier to your score)

It would be a very different case if the d20 system used an exploding die (like some other systems do), where, if you rolled a 20, you'd roll again and add to your score. This would allow characters of low skill to always have a chance of succeeding at very difficult tasks.

Basically, I regard the base mechanics of the d20 system and BRP as pretty much the same. Where they really differ is when it comes to how opposed skill checks are handled, as has been said. For this, the d20 system is just so much more elegant.

In the BRP system, you have to roll under the score needed for success. If you roll 100 on the d% you always fail. What do you do about skill scores over 100? Let's say 150. If you do not roll 100% and miss, you get another chance to hit again at 50%.

dunderm, is this a houserule you've come up with or is it a part of some BRP game? It's definitely not in any of the BRP games I own (Stormbringer 5th ed, CoC 6th ed and all the Swedish incarnations of BRP), but I found it an interesting idea.

 

[Mark Dunder]

dunderm, is this a houserule you've come up with or is it a part of some BRP game? It's definitely not in any of the BRP games I own (Stormbringer 5th ed, CoC 6th ed and all the Swedish incarnations of BRP), but I found it an interesting idea.

Also the only rule governing multiple attacks is that each one must have least 50%. Therefore a very skilled swordsman could, in theory, attack 3 times at 50% with a skill of 150%, it doesn't have to be 100% and then 50%.

I am stretching the rules a bit. But using Multiple Actions in Superworld allows you to do another action, but you reduce the roll by 20% each time and the action has to be different. By taking certain superpowers, such as Super Dex and adding Hero Points, it is possible to boost skills like Swim over 100%. And if you take Superswim you are really fast in the water.

So I stand corrected on the percentages (didn't have the Superworld book in front of me, but that's no excuse), but Multiple Actions with Skills can be done. You can do this with skills under 100% also. I like to exagerate sometimes to make it more obvious. But, I guess that may not be such a good idea. Makes for too much confusion.

Also, you can boost a a superpower by 50%. This may push it over 100%. I'm not sure, but the possibility exists. I would have to do more figuring.

The problem with trying to determine if certain things are possible to do with a game, is that you may never in the course of actually playing the game, come up with any of these possibilities. But it is possible.

It would be a very different case if the d20 system used an exploding die (like some other systems do), where, if you rolled a 20, you'd roll again and add to your score. This would allow characters of low skill to always have a chance of succeeding at very difficult tasks.

Yes, I think every RPG can benefit by having an "exploding die" (interesting way of putting it), or "open ended roll" as it is sometimes called. Several RPGs use this method.

Basically, I regard the base mechanics of the d20 system and BRP as pretty much the same. Where they really differ is when it comes to how opposed skill checks are handled, as has been said. For this, the d20 system is just so much more elegant.

I agree. It reduces the number of rolls one has to make. With BRP first one rolls to hit and then the other rolls for that hit to miss. Kind of invalidates the first success roll, I would think. Personally, I would reduce the skill ranks in BRP to a resistance value, by dividing them by 5, and comparing them as you would a Resistance Table roll (except have the attacker only make the roll). This is just a suggestion on how to change the mechanics to give BRP a more elegant system IMO. Having two different resolutions systems in a game, is problematic. Both d20 and BRP have similar problems, IMO.

Ok, this is getting overly long. I just wanted to try answering as well as I could. I probably got lot's of points wrong. But I try.

 

[Oly]

With BRP first one rolls to hit and then the other rolls for that hit to miss. Kind of invalidates the first success roll, I would think. Personally, I would reduce the skill ranks in BRP to a resistance value, by dividing them by 5, and comparing them as you would a Resistance Table roll (except have the attacker only make the roll). This is just a suggestion on how to change the mechanics to give BRP a more elegant system IMO. Having two different resolutions systems in a game, is problematic. Both d20 and BRP have similar problems, IMO.

Again that isn't true in the BRP system used in the latest BRP Stormbringer (yes it is true for CoC IIRC though). A successful parry does not just make the hit miss.

As an example if the attacker gets an impale then the defender is going to need to roll a critical to block it. Alternatively if the attacker just gets a success and the defender parries with a critical then the attackers weapon takes damage.

Yes there are two rolls but both rolls are important, it's not just a hit/miss system as used in CoC.

I think the heavily modified version of the BRP system used in Pendragon does reduce a round of combat down to a single opposed roll with there being no attacker and no defender.

 

[Thoth Aw C'mon]

With BRP first one rolls to hit and then the other rolls for that hit to miss. Kind of invalidates the first success roll, I would think. Personally, I would reduce the skill ranks in BRP to a resistance value, by dividing them by 5, and comparing them as you would a Resistance Table roll (except have the attacker only make the roll). This is just a suggestion on how to change the mechanics to give BRP a more elegant system IMO. Having two different resolutions systems in a game, is problematic. Both d20 and BRP have similar problems, IMO.

Again that isn't true in the BRP system used in the latest BRP Stormbringer (yes it is true for CoC IIRC though). A successful parry does not just make the hit miss.

As an example if the attacker gets an impale then the defender is going to need to roll a critical to block it. Alternatively if the attacker just gets a success and the defender parries with a critical then the attackers weapon takes damage.

Yes there are two rolls but both rolls are important, it's not just a hit/miss system as used in CoC.

I think the heavily modified version of the BRP system used in Pendragon does reduce a round of combat down to a single opposed roll with there being no attacker and no defender.

Its always puzzled me why some people always want to "muddy-up" or "skim over"whats actually happening in combat. Whats the problem with two rolls- one for the attack and one for the parry, or the dodge, or waht have you? It seems to me the time for a game to find out or revealed what EXACTLY is happening is during combat. I dont just want to roll one die and then if you hit, then roll damage. I want to roll to hit, and then the opponent decides if he parries, dodges, or trusts in his shiny armor to deal with it and concentrate on the offense: and then lets the dice determine the results. The time for detail and determing EXACTLY whats happening is during the most exciting part of the game. Why get vague over the good stuff? The exciting battles are whats worth rolling some die over. So many RPGs treat combat as "Yada-yada-yada" which has always puzzled me. Man if my characters' necks are on the line, I wanna know whats going on and if my character needs a desperate parry to save his skin or should he dodge that spear tip coming at his face from that orc? Make some decisions, know whats going on EXACTLY, thats much more exciting to me than some roll over this # and if you do you succeed... Dont just roll one die and then either groan or roll your damage. Its excitiing as hell to save your life with a desperate parry, or to side step a sure hit. I'm a big fan of the Stormbringer combat system from when the boxed set first came out. Its very exciting (and deadly) right from the get-go. It seems to me combat is the heart and soul of an RPG. So man, make it count for something: call the action with all the violent details and bloody bits included, and roll some die!

 

[Mark Dunder]

I agree in principle with Thoth Aw C'mon, and on a gut level it appeals to my own desires to get that last slash or defense in. My pet game does just that, a strike and defense system. And d20 does the same on opposed skill rolls, I found out.

But I have problems with this method, but maybe my reasoning is off. Example:

Attacker has a skill of 70%, Defender has 50%. Attacker rolls a 15, and should hit, but defender rolls a 49 and parries. So even though the Attacker has a better skill value and rolls far better than the Defender, he still misses. Does anyone else see the inequity?

Perhaps if both subtracted their rolls from their skill score and then compared those values it would be equitible.

I may have missed a rule on this, but that's how I see it so far.

 

[Oly]

Attacker has a skill of 70%, Defender has 50%. Attacker rolls a 15, and should hit, but defender rolls a 49 and parries. So even though the Attacker has a better skill value and rolls far better than the Defender, he still misses. Does anyone else see the inequity?

Perhaps if both subtracted their rolls from their skill score and then compared those values it would be equitible.

I may have missed a rule on this, but that's how I see it so far.

Once again this is not how Stormbringer uses the BRP system.

The attacker has a success and so does the defender, it's a "parry". If the attacker does enough damage he can break the defenders weapon. The chance to smash the parrying weapon seems pretty equitable to me, it's not a simple miss.

If the attacker had of rolled just 1% higher he would got a critical and done some damage to the parrying weapon and also had a chance to break it.

I keep bringing up Stormbringer because it's the closest BRP system to Conan that I know of. BRP simply doesn't have to work how you keep quoting that it does.

If you're going to keep comparing Conan D20 to BRP then at least use the closest version of BRP rather than the CoC iteration which is meant to be very rules light.