Opposed tests vs single test

Cubicle 7 // 2018
Post Reply
Clint
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 2:12 pm

Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:28 am

So, multiple Talents makes it so, that your opponent do not get the chance to Oppose whatever you do to them.

For example:

Fast hands lets you use sleight of hand without the opponent getting to passively test their perception test against you.
Cat-tounged lets your Charm to Lie without the opponent getting to test against you with their Intuition.

My question is: Is this a good thing?
Because in opposed test, the party with the highest number og SL wins. (or the least negative number)
If you only test against your own skill, you might actually be at a disadvantage:

Say you have a Charm of 40% total. The guard you are charming has a Intution of 30% total
If your only testing against your own skill, you have a 40% chance of succeeding, but if its contested, there is a chance that you might fail, but the guard is failing even more, letting you succeed. for example, if you Roll a 65 do Lie, having -2SL, and the guard rolls a 60, having a -3SL, opposed to only you rolling, and failing with -2SL.
You would of course not get the +1SL for having the Talent, as you do not succeed on your roll.

Is this correct or have a misunderstood something?
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:20 am

You've misunderstood something, but only because the talent is poorly worded. Fast hands means Bystanders do not normally get to oppose your roll. the target still gets any opposed roll, meaning you can't pick someone's pocket and be assured they won't happen to back into your hand and catch you. Cat-tounged doesn't even change the roll, it's simply treated as an auto-success, provided the GM says it's believable...

note that the talent Nose for trouble would override both of these talents and allow an opposed roll, as they could both be described as "trouble making". so it's entirely possible for the GM to just always hand that talent out and invalidate both of these talents.
CapnZapp
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:15 am
Location: Norsca

Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:05 am

I do not believe that really gets to the bottom of the OPs question. There certainly are instances of not getting to oppose a Test: Cat-tongued, Rover, and Tunnel Rat are just three examples. And of course, maybe the most frequented of this mechanism is when you're shooting somebody with a ranged weapon.

So your question, then:
My question is: Is this a good thing?
The answer is: it depends.

Against skilled adversaries (with a higher than 50% chance), yes, it is.

Against poor opponents (with a lower than 50% chance), no, it is not.

Anytime you are facing a foe with less than 50% in his actual chance to succeed, mathematics tell you that his attempt to parry or otherwise withstand your action, is actually helping you on average.

That is, you want that 30% Intuition Guard to resist your Charm attempt.

If this bothers you, my only suggestion is to allow characters to choose not to use their Talents if they so desire. Of course, in practical play you are not likely to know the exact scores of NPCs, so my real suggestion is to just not worry about it.
fluminor
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri May 24, 2019 1:30 pm

Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am

I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack. It should be the case that having a shield helps you simply because it offers cover, no matter how unskilled you are. So opposed rolls as in the RAW make little sense, as you can be worse off by using a shield.

1. An option would be that the defender rolls but all negative SL count as zero SL. That is, you can be better off but you can't be worse off by having a shield and trying to use it for cover.

2. Another option would be that against ranged weapons shields count as AP on all locations (1 for medium, 2 for large) so we just drop the opposed test for ranged attacks.

I like 1 more as WS matters, but 2 is simpler. Let me know your thoughts!
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:39 pm

fluminor wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am
I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack.

everyone has felt this so far, and i've seen maybe a dozen different approaches, not including my own ideas. shields are gonna be quite the debate topic for 4th's entire run.
fluminor
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri May 24, 2019 1:30 pm

Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:25 pm

Orin J. wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:39 pm
fluminor wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am
I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack.

everyone has felt this so far, and i've seen maybe a dozen different approaches, not including my own ideas. shields are gonna be quite the debate topic for 4th's entire run.
Let's make this discussion a bit more productive. Tell me, what are the ideas that you have seen that you think are more promising?
CapnZapp
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:15 am
Location: Norsca

Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 am

fluminor wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am
I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack.

Let me know your thoughts!
I would simply allow the character to choose whether to use this property of the shield. If your skill is effectively lower than 50%, simply don't make the Test into an Opposed Test.
CapnZapp
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:15 am
Location: Norsca

Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:46 am

Orin J. wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:39 pm
everyone has felt this so far, and i've seen maybe a dozen different approaches, not including my own ideas. shields are gonna be quite the debate topic for 4th's entire run.
Run shields much as in 2nd edition and you're good :)
- shields (and armor) doesn't negate crits (and doubles doesn't generate crits)
- shields don't absorb damage. They do help you parry, which in 4E amounts to the same thing

Allowing shields to still "parry" incoming missiles (you can see) seems a reasonable idea, so that one can stay. Make it optional if you must.
fluminor
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri May 24, 2019 1:30 pm

Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:03 am

CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 am
fluminor wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am
I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack.

Let me know your thoughts!
I would simply allow the character to choose whether to use this property of the shield. If your skill is effectively lower than 50%, simply don't make the Test into an Opposed Test.
This is a quick fix but not one I find satisfying. Having a shield should help against ranged weapons, not matter how unskilled you are, same as standing behind a wooden fence would. I'll probably rule that the Opposed test is still done, but the defender's SL is at least +1. This way, the shield always help no matter the skill, but higher skill makes the shield more effective.
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:15 am

CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 am
fluminor wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:16 am
I feel we need a better way to rule what happens when someone is using a shield to oppose a ranged attack.

Let me know your thoughts!
I would simply allow the character to choose whether to use this property of the shield. If your skill is effectively lower than 50%, simply don't make the Test into an Opposed Test.
actually the shield property explictly says you may use it against any missiles in range, so as-written it's totally optional to oppose missile attacks with them.

but i'd think it's more a property of the weapon than the shield- i'd let players shield against all throwing, entangling, and sling, no blackpowder, engineering, or explosive weapons, and let the shields against bow or crossbow attacks unless they also posses the damaging trait, citing that the attacks you can't defend with your shield from just punch a hole right through and keep going.
Clint
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 2:12 pm

Sat Jun 15, 2019 12:27 pm

CapnZapp wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:05 am
I do not believe that really gets to the bottom of the OPs question. There certainly are instances of not getting to oppose a Test: Cat-tongued, Rover, and Tunnel Rat are just three examples. And of course, maybe the most frequented of this mechanism is when you're shooting somebody with a ranged weapon.

So your question, then:
My question is: Is this a good thing?
The answer is: it depends.

Against skilled adversaries (with a higher than 50% chance), yes, it is.

Against poor opponents (with a lower than 50% chance), no, it is not.

Anytime you are facing a foe with less than 50% in his actual chance to succeed, mathematics tell you that his attempt to parry or otherwise withstand your action, is actually helping you on average.

That is, you want that 30% Intuition Guard to resist your Charm attempt.

If this bothers you, my only suggestion is to allow characters to choose not to use their Talents if they so desire. Of course, in practical play you are not likely to know the exact scores of NPCs, so my real suggestion is to just not worry about it.
Thats what i thought. Thanks
Post Reply