Re: Re: Simple contests

From: Frank Rafaelsen <rafael_at_...>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:45:38 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Charles Corrigan wrote:

> > As I see it no sane hero would want his contests to be resolved as
> > simple contests because of the very remote chance of getting a
> > result better then minor victory.
> In my opinion, it does not matter. If the level of result is
> important to the PC (i.e. is each of the guards now a bloody dead
> heap as a message to their fellows and dead men raise no alarms) then
> use the extended contest rules. If only the result is important
> (i.e. did we get past the guards without raising the alarm) then use
> a simple contest.

Combat was a bad example. Lets say my very experienced liturgist is blessing an army before a skirmish. No matter how experienced he is he'll probably do no better than a minor victory if I use simple contest. Even if he'd easily scored a complete victory using the extended contest rules. In fact his chances of getting a good result improves if he makes the contest harder by extending the blessing (raising the difficulty from 14 to twenty something).

The two higest degrees of victory often depend solely on bad rolling by the resistance (failure or fumble). This is very anoying. Take the rules for breaching the barrier into the otherworld. This rules are completely broken when used in simple contests.

I hate to have to explain my players that they won't do as well on contests that is supposed to be minor problems.

Ha en god dag!
Frank Rafaelsen

Powered by hypermail