Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Lance Dillon <riffraff@********.RR.COM>
Subject: opposed tests
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 19:48:40 -0400
i just got my sr3 book today, and was reading through, when i came upon
something that id probably seen before, but it didnt register with me
then...

it concerns the opposed tests (pg 39)...it says that the character with
the most successes wins, but 'In the event of a tie, usually nothing
happens.'

i know the 'usually' is sort of a key word there, but i was wondering on
your opinion of the example, which is 1 guy trying to keep a door shut,
and the other pushing against it to open it...

if there was a tie, who would win?


--
Lance Dillon
Network Administrator
Nielsen Media Research
--
You want a prediction about the weather, you're asking the wrong Phil.
I'll give you a winter prediction:
It's gonna be cold,
It's gonna be grey,
and it's gonna last you for the rest of your life.
Message no. 2
From: Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM>
Subject: Re: opposed tests
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 18:14:25 -0600
At 19:48 9/8/98 -0400, Lance Dillon wrote

>i know the 'usually' is sort of a key word there, but i was wondering on
>your opinion of the example, which is 1 guy trying to keep a door shut,
>and the other pushing against it to open it...
>
>if there was a tie, who would win?

The door goes back and forth a bit, and you roll again? Seems to make the
most sense to me..

-Adam


-
< TSS Productions down temporarily - New URL Soon! / fro@***.ab.ca >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< "Raven loves me! He just bought me a new rubber ducky!" - Lodi >
< TSS : ftp://thor.flashpt.com/pub/srun/ShadowrunSupplemental/pdf >
Message no. 3
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: opposed tests
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 10:18:48 +1000
Lance Dillon writes:
it concerns the opposed tests (pg 39)...it says that the character with
> the most successes wins, but 'In the event of a tie, usually nothing
> happens.'
>
> i know the 'usually' is sort of a key word there, but i was wondering on
> your opinion of the example, which is 1 guy trying to keep a door shut,
> and the other pushing against it to open it...
>
> if there was a tie, who would win?

For this example... the door would stay where it is. Now, that's not the
same as the door stays shut.

Here's the situation: Imagine the door is about half open (not enough for
the person on the other side to come through, of course). If the person
trying to shut it wins, it will get more closed, maybe all the way. If the
person opening it wins, it gets more open. In the event of a tie, the door
stays half open.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 4
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: opposed tests
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 13:58:10 +1000
>>i know the 'usually' is sort of a key word there, but i was wondering on
>>your opinion of the example, which is 1 guy trying to keep a door shut,
>>and the other pushing against it to open it...
>>if there was a tie, who would win?
>
>The door goes back and forth a bit, and you roll again? Seems to make the
>most sense to me..

This is an interesting point, actually... if the guy trying to keep the
door shut is just trying to 'buy time', he's technically won the roll...
Maybe in situations like this it would make sense to roll again, no game
time having elapsed?
Phobic
"He who fears nothing save fear itself. And trolls with clubs."
Message no. 5
From: The Great Cornholio <ChemPhD2Be@***.COM>
Subject: Re: opposed tests
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 00:03:57 EDT
In a message dated 98-09-08 19:53:54 EDT, you write:

<< it concerns the opposed tests (pg 39)...it says that the character with
the most successes wins, but 'In the event of a tie, usually nothing
happens.'

i know the 'usually' is sort of a key word there, but i was wondering on
your opinion of the example, which is 1 guy trying to keep a door shut,
and the other pushing against it to open it...

if there was a tie, who would win? >>

The door. Think of it as "situation remains static". There has been no
change in a situation, so how the situation was at the beginning of the round
would remain constant. In this case, it would appear the guy holding the door
"won", but he was simply lucky enough not to have anything happen to him. At
least until the guy on the other end pulls out the Manhunter and puts 4 APDS
rounds through the door. :-)

TGC
Message no. 6
From: Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM>
Subject: Re: opposed tests
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 08:51:17 -0600
At 13:58 9/9/98 +1000, Dom T-J wrote

>>The door goes back and forth a bit, and you roll again? Seems to make the
>>most sense to me..
>
>This is an interesting point, actually... if the guy trying to keep the
>door shut is just trying to 'buy time', he's technically won the roll...
>Maybe in situations like this it would make sense to roll again, no game
>time having elapsed?

Absolutely not. Game time would have elapsed while the two parties try to
push the door back and forth -- at least 3 seconds if they took up an
entire combat round. Then I would say they could both continue to hold the
door with Free Actions until their next action came around, in which case
they could try opening it again or doing something else entirely different.

If something happens, game time elapses, no ifs and or buts. :)

-Adam
-
< TSS Productions down temporarily - New URL Soon! / fro@***.ab.ca >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< "Raven loves me! He just bought me a new rubber ducky!" - Lodi >
< TSS : ftp://thor.flashpt.com/pub/srun/ShadowrunSupplemental/pdf >

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about opposed tests, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!