Call of cthulhu D20 or not so D20?

[jdrakeh]

I read the resistance table as designed to compare two characters' ability scores.

Well, yes - that's what it compares, as I previously stated -but you initially said:

Consider, for example, that there is no real way to do an opposed check involving two characters.

Which isn't true. There isn't any specific way to handle an opposed skill check in the core book, but there are rules for resolving "an opposed check involving two characters" that cover things such as feats of strength, agility, endurance, etc. An official ruling for opposed skill checks, however, does appear in the Keeper's Compendium (Volume 1) as part of the Listen skill write-up: whichever player rolls lowest succeeds. Incredibly simple.

The d20 system automatically allows a Keeper to compare both ability scores and skills

Agreed. This is a strength of d20 CoC.

and include more detail when describing the result.

BRP allows for as much description in detail as d20 does (perhaps more, given that BRP measures successes in very specific degrees of quality, whereas d20 measures things in simple terms of pass/fail by default). There are no rules in BRP that limit the amount of detail that a Keeper can use to describe actions.

Plus it has a better system for when the skills being used aren't identical, such as Bluff/Sense Motive or Rope Use/Escape Artist.

That's a purely subjective judgement, of course, but it is one that I agree with.

Plus the chance of automatic success/failure are more likely in BRP

How do you figure? I see abolutely nothing in BRP to support that claim. While it's true that, depending upon a given character's skill or attribute rankings, that a certain outcome can be easily guessed at, automatic success or failure is no more guaranteed in BRP CoC than it is in d20 CoC.

Also, note that, a character's skill ratings aren't rated in increments of exactly 10, nor are their attributes, so I'm puzzled by your reference to 'only a ten point difference in characteristics' - as, depending upon the circumstances, a difference from 1-100 (or more) is possible (and typical, no less).

Again, I bring this up only for players who want a smooth system.

You do know that this is a personal value judgement, right? That is, for some people, BRP is just as smooth (if not smoother) than d20. 'Smooth' is a apurely subjective quality. I think that the assertions you're making (some of them obviously not based on a thorough understanding of the BRP rules) might come off as mildly offensive to fans of that other system.

 

[billd91]

Because if it's a balanced module, monster or sourcebook, it'll be scaled to those classes and power levels? Converting is work the GM doesn't need. I'd think this is pretty obvious.

But considering that conversion is going to be fairly easy to do, both being d20 systems. And with the fact that CoC players are used to dealing with long odds, I don't think this is a very big barrier to using other d20 stuff with d20 CoC.
Minor speed bump, maybe.

 

[Rykion]

Which isn't true. There isn't any specific way to handle an opposed skill check in the core book, but there are rules for resolving "an opposed check involving two characters" that cover things such as feats of strength, agility, endurance, etc. An official ruling for opposed skill checks, however, does appear in the Keeper's Compendium (Volume 1) as part of the Listen skill write-up: whichever player rolls lowest succeeds. Incredibly simple.

I hope there is some modification beyond the player who rolls lowest succeeds. It should be the one that rolled the most under their skill succeeds. So that if one player had a 34% skill and the other had 25% and both rolled 15, the one with the 34% skill succeeds because he beat his skill by 19 compared to the other's 10. If it is simply the one that rolls lowest, there is no difference in opposed skill checks between someone with a world class level of the skill and someone with very little skill at all. :\

Edit: You could also simply subtract the skill % from the roll and have the lowest win. This way there is still a clear winner if they both roll over their skill.

 

[jdrakeh]

It should be the one that rolled the most under their skill succeeds.

The opposed action rules measure the quality of success, with lower (successful) rolls representing a higher quality of success. The edge that being more skilled grants a character is automatically part of the roll (i.e., the character with a higher skill rating is guaranteed a better chance of succeeding, but as in real life, isn't necessarily guaranteed a better quality of success).

Whichever character has the best success (i.e., rolls under their skill rating and rolls lower than the other character) bests his or her opponent*. Note that the difference between a skill rating and number rolled has nothing to do with quality of success in BRP, only with the chance of success (which is presented in the most simple possible manner - as the skill rating itself**). In BRP, there are five specific qualities of success, as follow:

critical is from 01 – 03
special is from 04 – 12
hits are between 13 – 62
misses are from 63 – 98
fumble is between 99 – 00

I can understand where some people would prefer that BRP do things the way that you have suggested, but it doesn't. That said, this doesn't make the approach that it does take flawed anymore flawed than D&D's choice to represent armor as making somebody harder to strike - it's just a design approach than many people agree with, while many others don't. Both rules work and model what they were designed to model - the fact that some people don't like them, doesn't make them flawed

*A bested character doesn't necessarily fail, but is surpassed in quality of action by their opponent.

**A character with a skill rating of 80% actually has exactly an 80% chance of succeeding at an action, while a character with a 46% skill rating actually has exactly a 46% chance of succeeding at an action, and so on.

 

[Rykion]

Whichever character has the best success (i.e., rolls under their skill rating and rolls lower than the other character) bests his or her opponent*.

That is different than your original post which said "whichever player rolls lowest succeeds." The fact they also have to roll under their skill gives the more skilled person an edge. If both players fail to roll under their skill does it then go to the lowest roll, or is it a draw?

 

[Jim Hague]

But considering that conversion is going to be fairly easy to do, both being d20 systems. And with the fact that CoC players are used to dealing with long odds, I don't think this is a very big barrier to using other d20 stuff with d20 CoC.
Minor speed bump, maybe.

There's significant differences in character structure - D20M is, if anything, the least compatible with other D20 products of the variants out there. YMMV.

 

[jdrakeh]

That is different than your original post which said "whichever player rolls lowest succeeds."

Yes, it's a clarification. I assumed that it was well known that all skills in BRP work in a certain manner (i.e, must roll under rating on d% in order to succceed) and so didn't mention it in the earlier post that you responded to.

If both players fail to roll under their skill does it then go to the lowest roll, or is it a draw?

If you fail to roll under your skill rating in BRP you fail, period. So if both players fail to roll under their skill rating, they both fail their action... for example:

Butch Johnson is attempting to sneak past the Museum security guard by quietly skulking through the shadows. He has a Move Quietly skill of 45% and the guard has a Listen skill of 62%. Both roll dice - Butch's player rolls a result of 73% and the Keeper rolls a result of 82%. Butch makes some noise, but luckily the guard fails to notice it.

This is just one example, of course, in a contest that involves covering distance (such as a race) both character's failing may simply indicate that neither gains any time/distance on their opponent. So the answer is - it's always a failure, but how that failure is described depends largely on the specifics of the situation.

Sure, it's not written in stone - but the beauty of that is that implementing rules that make sense for a given situation, is really simple. Which is the problem with rules very specifically defiend and set in stone - sometimes they make no sense at all, but that's what you're stuck with.

 

[Committed Hero]

Butch Johnson is attempting to sneak past the Museum security guard by quietly skulking through the shadows. He has a Move Quietly skill of 45% and the guard has a Listen skill of 62%. Both roll dice - Butch's player rolls a result of 73% and the Keeper rolls a result of 82%. Butch makes some noise, but luckily the guard fails to notice it.

This example is one I will cite in support of d20. Butch could have walked silently, regularly, or banged two pots together while he walked down the hallway, since his attempt has no bearing on the guard's failure.

 

[Committed Hero]

BRP allows for as much description in detail as d20 does (perhaps more, given that BRP measures successes in very specific degrees of quality, whereas d20 measures things in simple terms of pass/fail by default). There are no rules in BRP that limit the amount of detail that a Keeper can use to describe actions.

I agree that BRP allows/doesn't limit description, but it requires a Keeper to come up with the mechanism to do so, whether you use a doubles-critical system or whatever. But I suggest this is built into the d20 system using margin of success.

How do you figure? I see abolutely nothing in BRP to support that claim. While it's true that, depending upon a given character's skill or attribute rankings, that a certain outcome can be easily guessed at, automatic success or failure is no more guaranteed in BRP CoC than it is in d20 CoC.

Also, note that, a character's skill ratings aren't rated in increments of exactly 10, nor are their attributes, so I'm puzzled by your reference to 'only a ten point difference in characteristics' - as, depending upon the circumstances, a difference from 1-100 (or more) is possible (and typical, no less).

The Resistance table shows that a character who's relevant stat beats his opponent by 10 (or 11, whatever) automatically succeeds. The difference between the same d20 characters is 5 (I think); while it's highly unlikely that a STR 7 pantywaist will win an arm-wrestling match with a STR 18 bruiser, if I were controlling the former, I'd still want a roll!

EDIT: Now you are mixing skills and attributes

 

[jdrakeh]

I agree that BRP allows/doesn't limit description, but it requires a Keeper to come up with the mechanism to do so, whether you use a doubles-critical system or whatever.

Err... well, it depends on which version of BRP you're talking about... as mentioned a bit further up the thread, by default there are five different ranges of success and failure specifically defined in BRP the current edition of CoC (said ranges being imported from RuneQuest into the 5th edition of CoC circa 1992).

But I suggest this is built into the d20 system using margin of success.

I wasn't aware that d20 included addressed the entire spectrum of success and failure by default. All of the d20 games that I've seen only deal implicitly with critical successes and otherwise leave determining quality entirely up to GM fiat (that said, I admit that I've only owned and/or played about 9 or so d20 games).

The Resistance table shows that a character who's relevant stat beats his opponent by 10 (or 11, whatever) automatically succeeds. The difference between the same d20 characters is 5 (I think); while it's highly unlikely that a STR 7 pantywaist will win an arm-wrestling match with a STR 18 bruiser, if I were controlling the former, I'd still want a roll!

Ah - gotcha'. Yeah, that's the breaks. You can't please everybody all of the time.

EDIT: Now you are mixing skills and attributes

I'm not 'mixing' anything. I first responded to your incorrect assertion that BRP CoC contained no rules for opposed action by mentioning the Resistance Table and, when you countered that this only covered attributes, I pointed you to the volume (and specific section thereof) in which opposed skill checks are outlined.

Really, you do raise a lot of very good points about BRP CoC's shortcomings, but some of the things that you take issue with haven't existed within the game for five years or more. Starting with 5th edition, a lot of the things that you're complaining about were specifically addressed and corrected. Seriously, you should give the game another look.