Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaira
i.) The character that achieves the highest degree of success in an opposed roll wins the contest. Success trumps Failure, Special trumps Success, Critical trumps Special, etc. HOWEVER, if the loser also succeeded their roll, the winner is "bumped down" one level of success for every level of success of the loser. As follows:
If the Loser Succeeds, Winner's Critical becomes Special, Special becomes Success.
If the Loser Specials, Winner's Critical becomes Success.
ii.) If both rolls achieve the same degree of success, the higher roll wins.
Note that there is no mention of Bumping in example (ii). This is clear from the wording, but could definitely be made more explicit - on a casual skim through you *could* misunderstand and assume its all basically one rule instead of two. The example does make it clear what's intended, though.
It looks like Jason has agreed to put a clearer wording in the full release, which clears it up nicely.
It's a neat, elegant rule. I'll be using the first part unchanged; for me, I'll be calculating Success Margins (how much you make your roll by) for the second part, as I anticipate lots of 100%+ characters in time!
|
Quite agree - but there is a flaw in this version: If I special my Sneak against the Guards critical Spot, he only gets a normal success (he won, I got a success two steps better than failure, so I get to bump him down two steps from Criticla success to normal successs).
But if I critical my Sneak, but still lose, against his critical Spot he still gets a critical Spot...
Hence Pete Nash and I saying (in different fashions) that in case ii, the rule should be "higher roll wins, but only achieves a normal success" or, "bumping happens in case ii, but can't reduce a winner's degree of success to worse than a normal success" whichever is deemed clearer. This address the flaw.
Cheers,
Nick Middleton