Opposed rolls

[Pete Nash]

Originally Posted by badcat

but, but...that's too easy! It doesn't demonstrate how smart I am and how much better I feel when I win an OPPOSED ROLL, the greatest game innovation since, since games were invented!

Badcat's sarcasm aside, I honestly do feel that Opposed Rolls are the best rule innovation since RQ was invented!

Not only do they remove the inherent bias which the standard rules gave to one side or the other by default, but they also fix the associated mathematical problems caused when the contestants reach mastery+ (as demonstrated by Lord Twig above).

No more who is active/passive questions, no more in-game disagreements about consistency of how those decisions were applied, and much less repetitive dice rolling in combat... Simply if there is someone or something which could resist you, then make it an Opposed Roll and get a clear cut result.

Its streamlined the flow of all the games I've played in, or run, since we started using it.

[NickMiddleton]

Originally Posted by Pete Nash

Badcat's sarcasm aside, I honestly do feel that Opposed Rolls are the best rule innovation since RQ was invented!

Also, what he (and others) seem to be confusing is a particular mechanic in the new BRP with a general rule.

RQI/-/III had opposed skill mechanics - they were just implicit and inconsistent: attack vs. parry worked one way, most skills worked another and some (such as move silently vs. listen or Hide vs. Spot) had yet a third method of resolution.

There's a lot of criticism that to me seems to boil down to the fact that people's preferred method of opposed skill resolution hasn't been adopted as the default rule: but since (anecdotally) most of those in favour of more explicit opposed skill mechanics seem to want more (and more consistent) details than the implicit method in RQI/-/III, the new method seems like the best way forward. It's easily ignored by those who don't want to use it, but makes a lot of sense to those who do.

Cheers,

Nick Middleton

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

Also, what he (and others) seem to be confusing is a particular mechanic in the new BRP with a general rule.

RQI/-/III had opposed skill mechanics - they were just implicit and inconsistent: attack vs. parry worked one way, most skills worked another and some (such as move silently vs. listen or Hide vs. Spot) had yet a third method of resolution.

There's a lot of criticism that to me seems to boil down to the fact that people's preferred method of opposed skill resolution hasn't been adopted as the default rule: but since (anecdotally) most of those in favour of more explicit opposed skill mechanics seem to want more (and more consistent) details than the implicit method in RQI/-/III, the new method seems like the best way forward. It's easily ignored by those who don't want to use it, but makes a lot of sense to those who do.

Cheers,

Nick Middleton

I think that is going to be one cross that BRP is going to have to bear. BRP was never really a system before, but more a framework to build on. Since each RPG was built separately, with rules made up to fit new situations as they went along, there is a lot of minor differences between RQ, Stormbringer CoC, World of Wonder, etc. All well and good until you try to combine them under one hat.

By trying to appeal to d100 players as an whole rather than trying to appeal to the fans of one incarnation, guarantees that there will be something in the game that everyone won't like. Just that the "something" will vary from gamer to gamer.


Hopefully the pros will outweigh the cons in everyone's (or most eveyone's) mind and all will be good. But I think there is a real possibility of the combined approach essentially alienating everybody.

[TrippyHippy]

But I think there is a real possibility of the combined approach essentially alienating everybody.

There could equally be the real possibility that it will unite them, depending upon how you view your glass.

To me, the Basic System is useful because it irons some of the quirks out of the Call of Cthulhu rules, that I've always felt were there, whilst also opening up Basic experience to other worlds that aren't intrinsically nihilistic in tone. I mean, I think Lovecraft is great n'all, and the premise is timeless, but it's nice to encounter different times and places with a different underlying perspective, every now and then!

To me the key to whether Basic will be successful or not will not be how tightly compatible the rules are to (mostly long out-of-print) games from the past, but rather the quality and quantity of the worlds that will be provided to support it now, and in the future.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by TrippyHippy

There could equally be the real possibility that it will unite them, depending upon how you view your glass.

It could. But from what I've been seeing I think it won't. Just this thread alone is showing that. Most of us having been running some incarnation of RQ/BRP for over two decades now. BRP has to compete with that. In the end I think a lot of us will buy it, but that most of us will prefer the rule set we are already using and will use BRP as a potential source for adding on stuff.

For instance, I prefer RQ over the simpler/watered down version of the game. I prefer strikes ranks (RQ2 version over RQ3) and hit locations, skill categories and all that. So I'd be more inclined to run RQ with a few mods of BRP than to run BRP.

I think that is going to be the bane of BRP, it will get competition from earlier BRP games.

[Jack Tar]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

I think that is going to be the bane of BRP, it will get competition from earlier BRP games.

Not from me. I'm a Chaosium virgin, having never played any of their RPGs, so know nothing about BRP. I'll be one of the audience who comes to it with a clean slate. Hopefully for Chaosium's financial benefit, that will be a significant number of people. What's attracted me is the recommendation of others who have CoC experience and the use of a d100 system. Way, way back when I cut my teeth on AD&D 1st edition, I lamented the lack of a more common-sense percentile system.

P.S. show the rpg.net masses that BRP is coming and is sexy by casting your 'vote' for it as what you're "excited about for 2008" in this thead;

What are you excited about for 2008? - RPGnet Forums

[NickMiddleton]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

It could. But from what I've been seeing I think it won't. Just this thread alone is showing that. Most of us having been running some incarnation of RQ/BRP for over two decades now. BRP has to compete with that. In the end I think a lot of us will buy it, but that most of us will prefer the rule set we are already using and will use BRP as a potential source for adding on stuff.

For instance, I prefer RQ over the simpler/watered down version of the game. I prefer strikes ranks (RQ2 version over RQ3) and hit locations, skill categories and all that. So I'd be more inclined to run RQ with a few mods of BRP than to run BRP.

But you CAN run BRP with all those features - and someone who prefers their BRP far lighter and less crunchy can run with DEX ordering in combat, only THP / MWL, no skill categories etc. from the same core rule book.

I think that is going to be the bane of BRP, it will get competition from earlier BRP games.

No more than D&D (or Traveller, or Shadowrun, or GURPS...) gets competition from earlier editions. And, given the extent to which the new BRP synthesises prior BRP games in to a single coherent rule book, probably less. The new BRP rule book lets me play an ElfQuest-like game one night, a Cthulhu-esue game the next and a Stormbringer / Hawkmoon style game the next - from one rulebook and without having to lug my treasured copies of any of those old games across town in a ruck sack...

I think one of the positive things that is going to emerge from the new BRP (especially if it is reasonably well supported) is a realisation amongst the wider gaming community and even some of the more blinkered BRP fans as to just how flexible and adaptable BRP can be: it's not just gritty fantasy that it handles well...

Cheers,

Nick Middleton

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

But you CAN run BRP with all those features - and someone who prefers their BRP far lighter and less crunchy can run with DEX ordering in combat, only THP / MWL, no skill categories etc. from the same core rule book.

But why? If you already have a game with those features why switch? That;'s always been the challenge that BRP systems present to each other. For instance many like Call of Cthulhu, I find it a waste of tree pulp. Toss out most of the RQ rules and make a game where the goal is to survive long enough to go permanently insane. It's like Paranoia played seriously.

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

No more than D&D (or Traveller, or Shadowrun, or GURPS...) gets competition from earlier editions. And, given the extent to which the new BRP synthesises prior BRP games in to a single coherent rule book, probably less.

I disagree. What the other games have is a continuing tradition of existence. RQ's been dead for 15 years, Strombringer nearly so. Chaosium hasn't suppoered anything well except for CoC in decades. So all us gamers have gotten used to being on our own.

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

The new BRP rule book lets me play an ElfQuest-like game one night, a Cthulhu-esue game the next and a Stormbringer / Hawkmoon style game the next - from one rulebook and without having to lug my treasured copies of any of those old games across town in a ruck sack...

Bull. You;ll need those other games for all the things that make them work. Setting for one. You'll need to bring stuff along for that. Also, I have strong doubts that groups will really be able to swap out game options from night to night. MOre lijkely that they will pick a set of options and end up running all the other settings with the style of the options picked for Game #1.

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

I think one of the positive things that is going to emerge from the new BRP (especially if it is reasonably well supported) is a realisation amongst the wider gaming community and even some of the more blinkered BRP fans as to just how flexible and adaptable BRP can be: it's not just gritty fantasy that it handles well...

Good luck. That's probably the biggest pipe dream I've heard of about the new BRP. Basically there is nothing in it that hasn't been around in some form or another for the last 20 years. If the general RPG community hasn't got their heads out of the sand at looked at BRP before this isn't going to get them to now.

Nothing against Jason, but he isn't reinventing the wheel here. In fact, more credit to him for not trying. But really, if people didn't stand up and take notice the last ten times the system been put under their noses, what makes you think they will this time?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Pete Nash

Indeed. It is all a matter of semantics and interpretation. However, I personally consider anyone who achieves a 1st dan in an oriental martial art to be at least 90% in their skill, and I apply the same standard to an SCA knight or a Master in the European martial arts. Such titles are usually only applied to those who have shown (at the very least) an extremely high level of prowess, and the ability to consistently overcome their peers in competition.

I also use the same standard for educational awards too, i.e. a PhD for example.

Thus for me, these 'titles' are the vital anchor point to what otherwise is a completely abstract value. How else can you qualify what the skill percentage actually means?

Simple, actually. I consider the skill to define the point where really sharply diminishing returns cut in in improving your skill (since that's the reality of the way advancement mechanic in BRP work). I wouldn't characterize that as applying to just any black belt or SCA knight; most of those still have a considerable ability to improve before they really flatten off.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

There's a lot of criticism that to me seems to boil down to the fact that people's preferred method of opposed skill resolution hasn't been adopted as the default rule...

I'm not bothered what gets adopted as default BRP (being confident it'll be fairly sensible) - I'll be buying BRP stuff anyway. All I want is to find the way that's best...

Originally Posted by Pete Nash

Badcat's sarcasm aside, I honestly do feel that Opposed Rolls are the best rule innovation since RQ was invented!

It is all about feel. You like the Opposed Roll - fine, but some of us don't. And no way is it the best for 30 years! I feel there are quite a few issues about ORs that are not yet resolved: rolling low or high-within-low; extra maths; trivializing potentially exciting contests (e.g. sneaking, bargaining...). For me, the challenge of finding the Perfect Mechanism is still ongoing. Care to join me, or wish me luck?