>
> The rulebook gives explicit instructions on how to calculate
> the outcome. You take the worst roll on each side,
> then adjust it based on the other rolls on that side,
> then compare them on the simple contest outcome chart (IIRC).
Well I beg to differ, but it doesnt (and certainly not what you have said above), so maybe you have a better rule book than the rest of us plebs.
>
> What part of the description of this process in the rulebook
> do you find confusing?
>
>
> Simon Hibbs
The written word is a bugger of a thing, but my reading of that at first resulted in: "How condescending". Re-reading it however I put aside my cynical nature and can see how it might not be... english needs more symbols to convey expression :)
I have been wondering about the problem of masteries in group simple contests myself, so your question is completely valid.
The "explicit instructions" can be implied from the general nature of masteries, ie you get a result and apply masteries. In this case the simplest explanation would be to apply the mastery at the individual level, avoid a fumble/failure, and thus not apply any +3. After masteries have been applied look at the raw dice rolls, use the "best success" (not the best roll), and modify for failures. Thus in Group Simple Contest masteries have a reduced effect, there is no 'bonus' for a critical for eg, but you could adjust this by reversing the mod, giving -3 for each critical. Further there is probably no mastery cancelling between the two sides in a Group Contest, although I am having trouble finding the "explicitly" detailed bit that says that.
HW, the rules book, is NOT user friendly, despite what some on this list may say.
Powered by hypermail