So, at the conclusion of the most recent session of our Burning Persia campaign, my character, Calpurnia, awoke to the sound of her brother getting the shit beat out of him by a thug with a club. In the ensuing Fight, Calpurnia won positioning with her hands, putting the thug at +1 Ob to non-defensive actions. In Action One of Volley One, Calpurnia scripted Throw Person, and the thug scripted Beat. According to the entries for those actions, Throw Person against Beat resolves as two standard tests – against 1/2 Agility for Throw Person, and against 1/2 Skill for Beat. Because they resolve as Standard Tests, the two actions resolve independantly of each other; in this particular instance, both tests were failed, and we moved on to our next actions (Calpurnia dominated the remainder of the Fight with Locks), but what if they had both succeeded? The entry for Beat on page 449 says that “if you meet the obstacle, […] you steal advantage from your opponent”, but the entry for Throw Person (p. 450) says that “if you […] meet your obstacle in a standard test, you throw your opponent off his feet, and he sufferes the appropriate penalties until her rights himself”. Furthermore, page 455 says that “for the purposes of positioning, if you are knocked down, your opponent puts you at his advantage and your disadvantage”. So, who has advantage after a Throw Person against Beat where both parties met their obstacle?
Excellent question. I lean toward giving Throw the advantage since your opponent is knocked down. But I can see it going the other way, too! You’re knocked down, but you’re back at sword point!
It seems wrong that you can win the test and have your results nullified by someone else’s test. Maybe it should be a versus test.
Make it whoever has the most successes over Ob wins advantage.
I would need to re-read the chapter, but I could see it being the guy on the ground has advantage in melee, but disadvantage in positioning.
This was my first instinct as well.