Quote:
Originally Posted by Trifletraxor
I'm not going to use the opposed rolls, and I'm not going to use the major wound table as it stands. I'm still excited about the book though. When I get mine, I'll organize the wiki in the same manner as the book, and we can all add our houserules.
|
Absolutely! And there's no way I'd resist the temptation to use houserules either. But this issue may make the difference between whether I call what I'm playing "houseruled BRP" or "houseruled RQ"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaira
Here is what it says:
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.
|
Please could you, or anyone, tell us when The Book says we should be using Opposed Rolls (e.g. in combat, or just for sneaking etc.)? And is there an option to
not use them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaira
It's good stuff, guys!  |
Naturally!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMiddleton
But the only way to include the previously published BRP options would to have an entry saying something like "Opposed Skills: gloss over it." or a blank space... Or a few ad hoc specific (and different in each case) examples fro the most common pairs of skills...
|
Well, that's not really true, is it? ORs could have been introduced as an option (like plenty of other rules have), or even as the default with the old ways optional (but I suspect that's not what's happening...).
