Two Quick Somewhat Minor Questions

[Innerwall]

Regarding opposed skill tests, if both characters succeed, the one who rolls the highest in their skill test wins (p.20). I would assume this means who ever made their skill roll by more. Joe the barbarian has a stealth of 70 while the guard as a perception of 50. Joe rolls 65 (made by 5) while the guard rolls 15 (made by 35). The guard wins even though his over-all skill-level is lower.

Also, when engaged in combat with large creatures, random hit location rolls may not make sense some times. Joe's fighting a 20 meter giant with a short sword. Kind of hard to hit the giant in the head. In such a case do you just re-roll (as when fighting against a mounted foe)? Or should you just subtract 2 from the hit location roll (thus making a head shot impossible). Just curious how other GMs handle the situation. Seems to me, the less rolls, the better.

www.dropblacksky.com

 

[Halfbat]

1) This has been debated a lot. The answer is no - it's exactly what it says: highest wins. Read through the new Players Guide, too, as it's got some important updates which also show why "highest wins" is important.

2) When fighting really tall creatures I tend to either ask the players to roll 1d8/1d10/1d12 or similar - as you might have to have a reroll on subtraction to avoid hitting the giant in the right leg all the time (e.g. subtracting even 2 gives a 1-5=Right Leg, 6-8=Left Leg, 9-11 Abd, 12-14 Chest, 15-17 RA, 18-20 LA). I also just knock up a hit location chart if need be, or even state one on the fly ("We've just ambushed that 20m giant - he doesn't know we're here!" means that he's probably so out of reach that the only hit locations available are the legs! )[/url]

 

[weasel_fierce]

Its the highest actual dice roll, not how much you pass by.

In your example, Joe is simply too good for the guard to even notice (with the updated rules, the guard would still roll. If he gets a critical, he pulls it off)

 

[Innerwall]

Thanks for the responses. After I hit the post button I realized that the highest successful skill roll, still reflects the percentile range of an individual skill (Joe can roll as high 70 while the guard can only roll as high as 50). I'm new to MRQ and used to lower-is-better.

So I guess you can't crit in a contest of skills (?). Say Joe rolls a 70 but the guard rolls a three?

That's a great idea about changing dice to determine random hit locations, by the way.

 

[weasel_fierce]

You'll want to check out the update here
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/RQPlayersUpdate.pdf

It has a few tweaks and fixes.
Criticals do count in opposed rolls, trumping any non-critical success.

 

[Rurik]

There is no reason you can't simply use the 'makes roll by most' method. It works with the same odds, low is always better, and it scales seamlessly with skills over 100.

The only drawback is the constant subtraction to determine who has the greater margin. It is simpler to just look at two numbers and see which is higher.

If your players are comfortable with it there is no reason not to use it - other posters on this board use the 'makes roll by most' system.

 

[Cowboy]

The new system in the player's guide is a good argument, actually, for just making it whoever wins bythe greatest margin since skills above 100% will effectively work almost the same with this method (effectively adding the value above 100 to the result). I prefer to make all successes equal and say whoever gets the best result (crit>success>failure) is the winner and if both get the same result nobody wins.

 

[Rasta]

I prefer to make all successes equal and say whoever gets the best result (crit>success>failure) is the winner and if both get the same result nobody wins.

Yeah, I like that as well.

 

[Innerwall]

I was thinking about this on the way home from work today (shows you how obsessive I am). The ‘whoever rolls higher’ in a match wins method, really isn’t very intuitive to me. When I read it I thought it might have been typo, hence this thread.

I hate to admit this because it displays a shortcoming on my part, but I really dislike going against the letter of the rule (with game systems). I know it may be sheepish, anal-retentive, obsessive and short-sided, but when something in a game system doesn’t make sense I get a little discouraged. In this case, simply offering the option of using either the ‘making it my more’ or the ‘higher is better’ rule would have been a strength in the text, instead of a weakness.

And while I’m on this soap box, when RQ makes it to its second edition (I’d like to see it surpass d20 on the popularity charts), I really hope Mongoose utilizes Halfbat’s idea for rolling random hit locations on larger creatures. It’s hard to justify Dick the dwarf randomly hitting James the giant in the head with a hammer.

I only get this ridiculously picky when I’m looking at a game system I’d like to marry. Probably the reason why I’m divorced.

 

[weasel_fierce]

Think of it as blackjack

 

[Halfbat]

And while I’m on this soap box, when RQ makes it to its second edition [...]

Though not wanting to sound picky, you may not know that Mongoose RuneQuest (MRQ) is what some people call 4th Edition RQ (though purists say this is not quite accurate as 4th Edition RQ was apparently in the works but didn't quite make it to the open air). Look for threads on the history of RQ if you're interested.

Personally I prefer MRQ.

 

[Innerwall]

That's what I meant-- should have put in M in front of the RQ. I actually have all the editions on my shelf (accept for the first-printing paperback edition, which I tossed because it was falling apart). I’m really happy to see what Mongoose has done with it. A lot of the little things that used to drive me nuts about the game have been fixed, the way I would have fixed them if it had been up to me. The system deserves more notoriety, but I have a feeling that should be coming along shortly.