Thread: Opposed skill rolls

Originally Posted by Baragei

Opposed rolls: whoever rolls highest, but under his skill wins. Barring any trumping by critical and special results.

Yeah, just Googled it.
I think I might use the UNO method instead. Whoever rolls LOWEST and under their skill wins, barring specials or crits.
Suppose this method has a different name.

Originally Posted by tooley1chris

Whoever rolls LOWEST and under their skill wins, barring specials or crits.

This tends to penalize characters with high skill levels. When Character A has a skill level
of 20 % and Character B has a skill level of 80 %, Character B's effort to build up a high
skill level is wasted if the lowest roll wins.

If you skim through rust's link, you'll have food for thought

But just do what you feel works. BRP is very forgiving that way. Unlike this forum on this particular topic...




- just to clarify, i'm joking. This forum is mostly very forgiving and friendly.

Originally Posted by Baragei

But just do what you feel works. BRP is very forgiving that way.

Indeed. As long as the players accept the method and you use it in a
consistent way, there will be no problems.

Originally Posted by rust

This tends to penalize characters with high skill levels. When Character A has a skill level
of 20 % and Character B has a skill level of 80 %, Character B's effort to build up a high
skill level is wasted if the lowest roll wins.

Yes, but the 'luck of the dice' has a charm of its own, and one of the things which makes this system great. An expert has a much better chance of succeeding at an action than a newbie, but the newbie can still pull it off and beat an expert, depending upon the luck of the dice.
Is it realistic? Yes, certainly. Things like this happen, newbies occasionally come in and against all odds succeed better than the experts of the field. I also find it a simple mechanic to GM, the 'roll closest to a critical' wins thingy. But the main thing is its actually a fun mechanic, although it depends on the group playing. I guess, like you say, as long as you're consistent with your troupe then its all okay.

I watched the discussion last time this concept showed up in the forum. I wonder how long the thread will go this year heh heh?

Originally Posted by rust

This tends to penalize characters with high skill levels. When Character A has a skill level
of 20 % and Character B has a skill level of 80 %, Character B's effort to build up a high
skill level is wasted if the lowest roll wins.

Well looks like I didn't think that through very well. Quite right.
Just hate to confuse my players(more than me)
But That's why I asked here. Thanks!

We currently use a deck of cards for opposed skill rolls. Each player draws
one card for each 20% his character has in the skill in question (but always
at least one card) and the highest card wins. This way a character with a
low skill has a chance to be lucky and win, but the higher the skill the bet-
ter the chance to draw a high card.

This is just one example of the many possible methods to deal with opposed
skill rolls in a not too serious way. Having fun while giving all characters some
chance to win is really the most important point.

No it doesn't. I did a thread on that a long time ago. The supposed edge to the guy with the lower skill is illusionary.


For example using your 20% vs. 80% example, the guy with 70% would still have a massive advantage because of all the times the guy with 20% fails his skill roll.

The alleged penalty is a shift of 9%, and after degrees of success barely puts a dent in the 80% guys' 84% win chance. With high roll wins, the 80% guy does better when opposed than when unopposed!

Seems I benefit from this too. I'd have gone with the better success, but it wouldn't have occurred to me to subtract one level of success. Either way, I'd have gone with the spotter. If two people succees, the better score wins.

The rule is extremely simple. If one contestant succeeds and the other fails, no need to explain what happens.

If both succeed, then you must determine which contestant succeeded better, if any. If one of the contestants has a better level of success, he wins, but the other's success "limits" the advantages achieved with a special or critical result. If both contestants have the same level of success, the highest roll wins (lowest if you want to favour chance over skill), but this kind of victory is quite marginal. In some cases, notably combat, there is little or no benefit from the victory and the conflict may continue.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that an opposed roll is not always a "one side must win" affair like a resistance table roll. There are cases where this is true, and cases where it is not. This is why you cannot simply universalize the "blackjack" method.