Tie goes to the...

[SirEktar]

under Inconspicuous (pg 150):
"... Perception test at double obstacle penalty vs number of Inconspicuous skill sucesses. Ties go to the looker" [emphasis in text]

under Observation (pg156):
"... Perception vs Stealthy or Inconspicuous.... Ties go to the hider." [emphasis in text]

I'm assuming that the tie goes to the looker when it's a double obstacle penalty, otherwise, ties go to the hider. Right?

[luke]

hey that's some good errata.

How should we handle ties? Should ties always go to the hider? That's how we play in our game. But maybe ties should go to the player?

Hrm. We always have ties go to the defender. The "defender" is essentially knocking off successes (or raising obstacle) to the point where the "attacker" can't function.

-L

[Thor]

hey that's some good errata.

How should we handle ties? Should ties always go to the hider? That's how we play in our game. But maybe ties should go to the player?

Hrm. We always have ties go to the defender. The "defender" is essentially knocking off successes (or raising obstacle) to the point where the "attacker" can't function.

-L

Seems like it might be a good time to turn to the DoF. At the brooklyn.nerd.space, we'd probably turn to the Magic 8 Ball. :lol:

[Ulfendar]

Maybe this is overly complicated but I'd say at night ties go to the hider, during the day ties go to the seeker.

-Drew

[Wuxing]

Hehe, I feel crusty and old when I think like this... Choose one way of doing it and be consistent for PCs and NPCs. I'm a huge fan of saying things like, "Sure we can do it that way, but remember it can happen the other way too." We usually end up doing what's best for the game that way, rather than what's best for the player. :D

[foxandwarlock]

While I like the day vs. night thing Ulfendar (thus why people operate at night), I can see it going bad quick. What about a character who has keen vision and can see in the dark? Or what about if you're in a well-lit area at night? Or how about Orcs who have the Lynx eye trait? Anyway, you get the picture and somewhere, somebody's going to feel like they got the shaft in terms of losing the tie.

So my vote's for the good old DOF when it comes to Observation/Stealthy ties. Its that scene in the movie where the guard thinks he saw something and the thief thinks that the guard thought he saw something. So the thief freezes and the guard squints and the camera zooms in close on both of them, sweat trickling down the thief's temple as he strains to keep totally still. And with the DOF it can go either way and the player could choose to drop Artha in order to influence the DOF.

All that being said, I also totally dig the idea that the tie always goes to the hider, as there is always something you can do (as the creeper) to be more sneaky (stop moving, drop, etc.) and wait for the seeker to pass you by. I guess I'm just a little afraid of having that bite me in the ass - stupid creeping goblins :evil:

Of course, the DOF methodology could be implemented when common sense fails. If the thief is creeping into a camp and nobody's really looking, the tie should probably go to the thief. If the thief is creeping into the camp and there's a guard posted, well, then that's probably more of the DOF situation. And if the guard is specifically looking for someone creeping into camp, well then that tie probably belongs to the guard.

[eruditus]

I word it as such in my games, that the attacker always has to meet the defender's successes as an obstacle. Also the stealthy one is making an attempt to sneak by the perceptive-defenses of the on-looker, thus the stealthy one is the attacker and the observer is the defender.

[eruditus]

Thus to clarify, there are no ties. Either the attacker meets tha obstacle or he doesn't. By how much is up to the GM to decide based on the attacker's successes.

[SirEktar]

You'd still run into situations where there is not defined attacker and defender. An example would be two merchants haggling to determine an exchange of trade goods. Actually, this is a bad example since a tie result is perfectly valid in this case - either merchant walks away having neither taking advantage or being taken.

[eruditus]

I suppose its up to the GM who that is. Whom ever is initiating the conflict would be a good estimation of who is attacking. What is the intention of both parties? Think of every scenario as a script and you can probably figure out who scripted "strike" :D

I know that Luke has a scripting mechanism for social interactions. Its not hard to use that model for many other kinds of actions.

[Yagathai]

You're on vacation! Stop posting and get back to the beach and your girlfriend, you bum! :roll:

[spring_violet]

You're on vacation! Stop posting and get back to the beach and your girlfriend, you bum! :roll:

The girlfriend flew back home stupid early this morning and is back at work. So Eru should be at the FL office working - after all, he is on a business trip. :)

Plus I'd hate to think he's sunning himself on a beach without me.

[eruditus]

I moved the side comments to...

http://burningwheel.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=585

:D