>1. Somone in a very early post (sorry I can't find it at the moment)
>pointed out that in a contest between an ability 4W and an ability 4,
>when BOTH succeed the low ability is disproportionally liable to win
>the contest.
>One way to avoid this is to revert to the Pendragon dice result where
>the HIGHEST roll wins. Unlike Pendragon though, 1 remains a critical
>and of course criticals always beat normal successes. The 4 can still
>beat the 4W but must now roll 4 or less but higher than the 4W -
>possible but less likely.
Actually this was one thing that caused us some difficulty, but partially because we sort of did this anyway, by mistake (carried away with our eagerness we didn't check the rules carefully enough...)
Remember that a level of mastery gives you a bump up - so that if both succeed the score of 4w criticals
comparing the possible outcomes of a score of 4w and 19 vs one of 4
19 4w
Complete Victory 1 4
Major Victory 33 75
Minor Victory 273 238
Marginal Victory 3 0
(no of Victories) 310 317
Both Critical (tie) 1 4
Both succeed (tie) 3 0
opp. gets marginal Victory 48 45
Marginal defeat 0 15
Minor defeat 33 18
Major defeat 3 1
Complete defeat 2 0
(no of losses) 86 79
Hope that makes sense!
Anyway it doesn't look to disproportionate to me...
I had thought that "high roll is good" a la Pendragon would make more sense, but on reflection I think "low roll good" makes more sense in the long run (the difference in the above chart would be to move 45 from (opponent gets marginal victory) to (marginal victory) in both cases, and would mean when fighting someone one exactly one mastery higher, you could only win either by you criticaling or them fumbling...
-- +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Ellis EMail tim_at_... | | What is the use of a book without pictures or conversations? | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Powered by hypermail