When I’m under double obstacle penalty for beginner’s luck, you get extra success (double) against me. Why wouldn’t +1ob on me give you extra success?
As to your disarm example, disadvantage doesn’t get inverted like that - the stagger penalty would not apply.
Wait, so the +1ob would disappear? It wouldn’t affect his block at all?
I mean you can’t exceed how many successes you rolled. It’s sort of an edge case, but can happen in Fight when there are lots of penalties.
Had wires crossed, sorry, I meant for cases where Joe would not be testing due to interactions.
Doesn’t this contradict the book?
Or is this case not a proper “disadvantage”?
The opponent does not get any extra successes. The text on p. 440 (and text about versus test in general) is referring only to the math done to calculate the total Ob you are rolling against.
It’s the same as a doubled obstacle penalty. Your opponent doesn’t do twice as well just because your PC is untrained; your PC just has a harder time overcoming him.
But the language on Skilled vs. unskilled doesn’t specifically say add one to your opponents successes like the language on vs. tests in Fight! does. If im at +1 ob and me and my opponent both roll all traitors on a versus test, he should win by a margin of 1, shouldn’t he?
So let me try to understand. Two guys with swords. One is trained in sword, one is not (doing agility beginer’s luck). Guy with the sword skill scripts “Strike,” guy without scripts “block.”
They both roll 3 successes: What happens?
Sword guy has his successes doubled to 6, then has 3 knocked off by the block, so he beats the ob1 strike by 2?
OK, now lets assume it’s sword vs. knife and Sword has advantage (+2ob to knife). Sword scripts Strike and knife scripts Block. They both roll 3 successes, what happens?
As I read it, sword gets +2 successes to make a total of 5, and has 3 knocked off by block, which beats the ob1 strike by 1?
The skilled guy got 3 successes. Since a Strike and a Block are versus tests, the unskilled guy’s obstacle to completely negate the skilled guy’s Strike is 6 (the skilled guy’s 3 successes, doubled to 6). But remember that each success in a Block cancels out one success from a Strike. The unskilled guy got the equivalent of 1 success on his Block (half of 3, rounded down). In the end, the skilled guy achieves a Strike with 2 successes.
Sword guy has his successes doubled to 6, then has 3 knocked off by the block, so he beats the ob1 strike by 2?
As you can see, in this instance, the math is functionally the same. However, it doesn’t always work out that way. For instance, if the skilled guy got 3 successes and the unskilled guy got zero successes, the skilled guy would have a successful Strike of 3 successes, not 6 successes.
OK, now lets assume it’s sword vs. knife and Sword has advantage (+2ob to knife). Sword scripts Strike and knife scripts Block. They both roll 3 successes, what happens?
As I read it, sword gets +2 successes to make a total of 5, and has 3 knocked off by block, which beats the ob1 strike by 1?
Are we assuming that both opponents are skilled here? If so, here’s how I would handle it: The Sword guy gets 3 successes. The Knife guy as gets 3 successes, but his +2 Ob cancels out two of those successes; he is left with 1 effective success. The Knife guy’s 1 successes cancels out one of the Sword guy’s successes. In the end, the Sword guy successfully Strikes with a margin of success of 2.
Huh? Where in the rules does it say to do any of this? Only place I’ve ever seen is the versus rules at the beginning (that were quoted here) and now you are saying those don’t apply in fight?
Modifiers to Ob have no effect on the opponent. E.g., if your PC is at +2Ob for some reason, that has no impact on the opponent. Whatever they roll is what they roll. Your PC is simply at a disadvantage when dealing with him. The math for applying that +2 Ob will simply vary a bit depending on what was scripted.
Thor’s description of the knife vs. sword fight is spot on, and is exactly how things worked in BWR, too. Knife guy’s Block would normally be a base 0 Ob, in essence. The +2 Ob penalty bumps that base to 2 Ob, i.e., he’s got to generate at least 3 or more successes for his Block to have any effect on sword guy.
As Thor implies in the skilled vs. unskilled sword example, it’s often easier to just halve the unskilled opponent’s roll, rounded down, when you’re in a situation where one Action knocks successes off another.
p. 439
FIGHTING SKILL
Unskilled
“In versus test actions, you must generate two successes for each one of your opponent’s successes.”
So don’t even bother doubling the skilled guys sword successes. He got 3. Unskilled guy negates one of those for every 2 successes he gets.
And maybe you’ve had enough examples now but just to make sure everything is crystal clear. In your last example with Advantaged sword versus knife, Thor and Buzz have done the “both are skilled” assumption. If the knife guy is unskilled:
Sword has 3 successes. Unskilled knife has 3. Unskilled knife is at +2 Ob for being Disadvantaged to sword. However, his Block is a Defensive Action and doesn’t suffer from Positioning Disadvantage penalties. So he gets his 3 full successes but it takes two for every one of the sword guys since he’s skilled. So knife guy can only defend against one of the swordsman’s successes. Sword guy succeeds with a Margin of Success of 2.
teh aw3s0m3.
Just make note that I did edit that post for the MoS error I made in the original.
Aargh, and a second correction as I remember that Defensive Actions don’t suffer the Ob penalty for being Disadvantaged. Which would also hold true for Thor and Buzz’s example as well.
Okay, the R&C example, p. 418, now has me confused. The Orc rolls four successes, the Elf three. The Orc is at double obstacle penalty since he is testing Speed vs the Elf’s Tactics.
“The Elf counts as having rolled six successes. He beats the Orc by two.”
By the wording on p. 439, this is wrong. If the Orc needs two successes for every one of the Elf’s, then he’s generated two, which should leave the Elf with one extra success to spend. But I guess since p. 439 is specifically talking about unskilled tests, it could be different than this stat vs. skill example, but that seems weird.
P. 439 is aimed specifically at being Unskilled in Fight, not R&C.
It seems strange one would handle the math differently, though. A versus test is a versus test, isn’t it?
doh! Totally correct.
So…
If you’re comparing two tests to see who got higher, you double the successes of the skilled participant.
If you’re subtracting one participant’s successes from another, you halve the successes of the unskilled participant.
Is that right?