Yet another combat matrix tinker...

[Drifter]

Heres a thought for the new opposed skill combat matrix that might tidy up a few queries.

If the opposed test favours the attacker, the matrix is used as is.
If it favours the defender, the result is shifted one step in the defenders favour.

I’m still thinking through the ramifications of this, but I thought it might help tidy up –

A shield block (OT to attacker, more passive defence) or parry (OT to defender, more active defence) as a basic simulation of both uses of shield.
Same with weapon parries and dodge, allowing a partially or fully successful defence simulation.

Doesn’t change a whole swath of existing rules, and may work (at least for my campaign).

Any large holes I’m missing?

 

[Sorn]

Seems relatively simple, but what do you mean by shifting one step in the defender's favor? Is this the same as shifting the attacker down (to a crit/success) or (success/fail) or is the defender somehow bumped up?

 

[Drifter]

I suppose what I was aiming at was a 'minimalist fix' which would work for me after reading about the inclusion of opposed skill rolls into the new combat matrix. I was reading through another thread where it was duly noted that the success/success result would only turn up in an exact tie if the opposed rules are used. My thought was simply that the matrix as it stands represents results of using skill rolls.

The opposed result has no effect in the case of any or both combatants rolling a failure, crit or fumble result anyway, so it was only mutual success that I was focusing on.

I thought that, in the case of mutual success, you would consider the opposed roll. If the attacker has the better result, the tables are used as is. If the defender has the better result, treat the table as if the attacker had rolled a fail (as per the current opposed test update, if I'm reading it right).

This way, the matrix as is sees a lot more use of the success/success results, and you have a kind-of-sort-of degree of success tucked into the opposed system.

This in turn allows basic modelling of defensive actions as Blocking (or more-block-than-parry) when the attacker wins the OT, and parrying (or more-parry-than-block) when the defender wins, which was something that came up on another thread here.

Like I said, I'm a minimalist when it comes to rules fiddling, so this change works well for me in terms of a few issues I've read on the boards. Just thought I'd offer it up in case it works for others as well.

 

[weasel_fierce]

What we'll do is use the Sucess/sucess result if the defender manages his parry/dodge roll, but his roll is worse than the attackers, and consider the attack failed if the defense roll is better than the attackers

The defense only fails completely, if the defender blows his roll, or the attacker gets a critical