(APB + (WWR - LAR)) x ECM = AFT
where APB is the number of APs bid in the exchange, WWR is the winner's weapon rank, LAR is the loser's armor rank, ECM is the bid multipler from the Extended Contest Table, and AFT is the quantity of APs actually lost, exchanged, etc.
Here is the example from the book:
"Kallai uses a sword and is armored in chain and shield.
His weapon rank is 3, his armor rank is 5. He faces a
weaponthane using a large axe (rank 4) and armored in
heavy leather and shield (rank 3). Kallai's sword is
matched against the weaponthane's armor (3 - 3 = 0; no
benefit to either side). The weaponthane's axe against
Kallai's armor gives the weaponthane a handicap of -1
(4 - 5 = -1).
Let's say the stake is 5, and Kallai succeeds where the weaponthane
fails. If we plug this into the formula above, we get (5 + (3 - 3)) x 2 =
(5 + 0) x 2 = 10 APs forfeit by the weaponthane. If we reverse the
places, so Kallai fails where the weaponthane succeeds, and use the same
stake, we now get (5 + (4 - 5)) x 2 = (5 - 1) x 2 = 8 APs forfeit by
Kallai. Quite simple, really.
While the above method is a tad more realistic, it is probably easier
(and favors the heroes much more) to total each combatant's offensive and
defensive ranks into one lump score. Using Kallai again, his weapon rank
plus his armor rank is 3 + 5 = 8. The weaponthane's weapon rank plus his
armor rank is 4 + 3 = 7. Kallai would have a +1 Edge every exchange he
won, and the weaponthane would have a -1 Handicap every exchange he won.
Which is official? Probably the former, unless there is a correction in the errata that I've missed along the way. The latter would make an excellent house-rule for those Narrators with a soft heart for their heroes... ;)
Powered by hypermail