I have been using opposed rolls in BRP games ever since I read Pendragon and a light clicked on. Not seen the new BRP rules but my house campaigns collapsed specials and criticals into one (as MRQ does) which meant that I was happier with the range of outcomes. I'm in the camp which tries to read the result off the dice without calculation so I use highest roll wins if the result is a tie. I've never come across any resistance to this among players.
"Made by most" is more aesthetically pleasing but when I tried it (it was the first way I tried to run ORs because it's the most obvious way) there were just enough "hang-ons" that they seemed to interfere with the game and once someone pointed out that I could do highest wins then that ran much more smoothly with my play style. I did occasionally find that having criticals, specials and normals felt congested once opposed rolls started to get used a lot, which is why I collapsed criticals and specials together.
I'm also becoming increasingly converted to opposed rolls in combat. I don't use MRQ's method because it's a mess but with critical/normal/partial results it runs smoothly and all you have to do is look at your dice. It feels about the same level of complexity as RQ3.
Personally I like the deep logic behind opposed rolls. You make a skill test when it's just you against a passive resistance and a skill contest when it's you against someone else. In a skill test there is a fixed modifier affecting your result. In a skill contest there's a variable modifier affecting your result.
|