Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: dbuehrer@******.carl.org dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: Opposed Tests (Rand, pay attention :)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 11:25:41 -0600
Rand Ratinac wrote:

>Dave, did you consider doing an opposed test, or did
>you just decided immediately on a target number 4 test?

Okay, all of the following is *IMHO* :)

<steps up on his soapbox>

I don't like opposed tests.

1. I don't like the odds.

Let's do a simple arms wrestling competition. Joe has a strength of
3. Bob has a strength of 4. Joe will roll an average of 1.5
successes. Bob will roll an average of 2.64 successes. (I think I did the
math right.) That's quite a difference in odds for a one point difference
in strength. Give them both a target number of 4 and the odds are closer
(1.5 to 2). Bob still has the edge, but he's going to have to work for it.

I like my game to have a bit of an edge to it, and thus prefer the closer
odds when the TN for opposed tests is a flat 4.

2. I don't like revealing the bad guy's stats.

Let's say Chuck the PC is trying to sneak past Stace the NPC. Chuck's
stealth is a 4. Stace's Int is an 8 (he's major NPC and a shaman). If I
tell the player that Chuck's TN is an 8, he's going to know that Stace is
one of the major NPCs, and despite the fact that Chuck's player is a good
roleplayer, it's still going to skew the game.

And let's say that if Stace happens to notice Chuck, his orders are to let
any intruders pass, notify the rest of security, and set up an ambush on
the way out. If Chuck blows the stealth test in such a situation and isn't
noticed, the player is going to get paranoid.

If the TN is a flat 4 odds are that Chuck will make at least a couple
successes. If he sneaks past without incident he will probably assume that
the NPC blew his roll.

Regardless of the situation, I don't like to give away the bad guys stats.

Yes, I could roll dice for the PCs in such situations, but I don't want to
go to the trouble.

3. I like the game to run quickly.

It may not seem like much, but time can be saved if the base TN for opposed
tests is a flat 4. I find that my games are more seamless by using a 4 for
opposed tests. Otherwise I have to ask the player what Chuck's stealth is,
and let him know what Stace's intelligence is, and then we roll dice. My
way, if I tell the player to make a stealth test, he rolls his stealth vs a
4 and I roll Stace's intelligence vs a 4, and I compare successes and tell
Chuck the result.

4. And finally, I like consistent rules.

Melee combat is basically an opposed test, yet FASA uses a flat 4 for the
base TN. For all other opposed tests they use the opponent's stat/skill as
the TN.

I don't like this inconsistency. IMHO it should be one way or the other,
not both.

<steps down off his soapbox>

:)

To Life,
-Graht
http://www.users.uswest.net/~abaker3
--
"All things are at all times, in motion. Take the time to watch the dance."
-John Caeser Leafston
Message no. 2
From: Josh Harrison mataxes@****.net
Subject: Opposed Tests (Rand, pay attention :)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:46:06 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: <dbuehrer@******.carl.org>
> I don't like opposed tests.
>
> 1. I don't like the odds.

[Example snipped]

It's your choice. The way I look at it, when all things are equal in an
opposed test, there is a 50/50 chance of either contestant winning. If one
has a higher rating, things fall into his favor. As an Amber GM once told
me, "If, when all things are equal, you're guaranteed to lose, it's up to
you to make sure things aren't equal." Seems to me like really good advice
for Shadowrun, if you ask me. ;-)

Also, I never felt that the dice scale was linear -- a six isn't really
*twice* as good as a three. This could be my own personal bias showing, but
the advancement scale seems to indicate a more exponential-type curve.

> 2. I don't like revealing the bad guy's stats.
>
> Let's say Chuck the PC is trying to sneak past Stace the NPC. Chuck's
> stealth is a 4. Stace's Int is an 8 (he's major NPC and a shaman). If I
> tell the player that Chuck's TN is an 8, he's going to know that Stace is
> one of the major NPCs, and despite the fact that Chuck's player is a good
> roleplayer, it's still going to skew the game.

Then don't tell Chuck what his TN is. Have him roll as if it were an Open
Test, note the number of successes and chuckle wickedly. Tt's GM dirty trick
#4, IMO. If the player doesn't *need* to know the TN, and the result of the
test won't be instantly obvious, don't tell him the TN.

> And let's say that if Stace happens to notice Chuck, his orders are to let
> any intruders pass, notify the rest of security, and set up an ambush on
> the way out. If Chuck blows the stealth test in such a situation and
isn't
> noticed, the player is going to get paranoid.

You say that like it's a bad thing. ;-) If a player thinks he blew a test
and alarms don't start whooping, perhaps instead of paranoid he'll get
complacent... "Gee, the security here wasn't as tough as I thought..." If he
doensn't know the TN, the only way he'll really know he blew it is if he
Rule o'1's the test -- then it is your god-given right as GM to drop a piano
on him or something equally newsworthy.

> If the TN is a flat 4 odds are that Chuck will make at least a couple
> successes. If he sneaks past without incident he will probably assume
that
> the NPC blew his roll.
>
> Regardless of the situation, I don't like to give away the bad guys stats.

Then don't.

> Yes, I could roll dice for the PCs in such situations, but I don't want to
> go to the trouble.

Let them roll the dice, just note the number of successes yourself. You only
need to remember it for the length of the test.

> 3. I like the game to run quickly.
>
> It may not seem like much, but time can be saved if the base TN for
opposed
> tests is a flat 4. I find that my games are more seamless by using a 4
for
> opposed tests. Otherwise I have to ask the player what Chuck's stealth
is,
> and let him know what Stace's intelligence is, and then we roll dice. My
> way, if I tell the player to make a stealth test, he rolls his stealth vs
a
> 4 and I roll Stace's intelligence vs a 4, and I compare successes and tell
> Chuck the result.

Well I'm not going to tell you how to run your game, but I personally don't
find that sort of thing to be too dragging. Players know their PC's numbers
pretty well. And if you don't have to pass any information back...

*shrug* It's your game. I'll only remind you of what you already
mentioned -- changing TNs like that does mess with the odds. In the end
tthough, I don't see that it really makes a lot of difference -- the higher
score will still win, its just going to be a little bit closer.

-- Josh

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Opposed Tests (Rand, pay attention :), 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.