[frogspawner]

(Regarding opposition to opposed rolls: )

Originally Posted by Lord Twig

I can understand the "keep it moving" mentality, but there is a problem with roll and move on. If a PC makes a stealth roll and sneaks past the guard, no problem. But if an NPC assassin makes a stealth roll and sneaks past the PC they are going to wonder why they didn't get a chance to see the person. Particularly if it results in the death of a PC.

"But I have a Spot of 100%! How could he sneak past me?"

If you only roll the Sneak, a character with 100%+ will almost never (96-100) be spotted no matter how good a lookout you are.

Originally Posted by badcat

You modify the assassin's stealth roll. And/or allow a modified listen roll for the prospective victim. Or do a POW:POW roll or other resistance table roll. Or treat it as an ambush (it's not necessarily going to be fatal, even if the assassin hits...this ain't D&D). Lots of ways or combinations of ways, and they all work without bogging things down with a counter-intuitive resisted roll, and they create tension and fun just the same. Hey, whatever works.

Originally Posted by Trifletraxor

I liked the RQ:AiG version. A successful sneak/hide halved the listen/scan chance of the guard (more if the guard was not expecting anything).

I'd prefer to keep the (Sneak/Spot) rolls entirely separate, and not affect each other at all if possible. Something more like the attack v parry system in combat, perhaps? (without opposed rolls, of course!)

Or maybe somehow use a concept of "layers" of success: Just sneaking by/away is easy (one success required); but sneaking close to someone to pick pockets is harder (two successes); and assasination is even harder (a third success required)?

Currently I use a system where each side makes it's rolls (Sneak/Hide and Listen/Spot respectively) but the success levels just contribute bonus/penalties to a final perception-type Idea Roll by the spotter. Still not really happy with this method though.