No Mo Open Tests, Coming up with alt. rules for open tests Options

[Brazila]

I sent this out to my group, I was wondering what everyone else thinks of open tests?

I don't think open tests fit the rest of the System, few of the players like them, and they don't work right so I want to cut them off at the nut sack.

Here is what I am thinking, there are only a few instances of using open test in SR the main 3 are stealth, the manuever score, and intim/interr rolls.

For stealth I want to just use a stealth(4) vs intelligence(4) (with alertness spec. of stealth as comp dice), the only difference will be the modifiers for lighting, camo, and invis will be added to the TN of the intelligence part of the opposed roll. I am thinking of just using a flat ratio to conver(example: every +4 to the open test would be a +1TN to the intelligence roll) I am interested to see what everyone thinks on this, and what you think the ratio should be 2/1, 3/1,4/1 for the TN increase?

The intim/interr roll would be similar. Intim/Interr (4) roll vs Will(4). The mods, from the tables for the skills would be applied to the will TN after being divided by the ratio we decide on.

For the manuever score , instead of making an open test, you would just roll vehicle skill plus allocated control pool TN of Handling. Multiple successes times Ratio and that is the manuever score.

One of my main problems with the open tests are the rules for rerolling with karma, you have to spend and insane amount to reroll. Example you have stealth of 6 you roll a 10 7 5 6 4 2. Now your 10 is your high score, if you want to reroll the other dice then you have to use (1+2+3+4+5)=15 karma pool, that is nuts, versus the 1 point to reroll failures on a normal roll

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

N/m

[Zeel De Mort]

I don't much like open tests and the rules for them either.

Our GM house ruled the Stealth test quite a long time ago. Now it's just a Stealth (4) test and every success adds +1 to the basic TN 4 to detect you. So say you get 5 successes then whoever is looking for you has TN 9 on a Perception test, assuming no other modifiers. If there are other mods they just get added on as they are. So +1 for camo clothing would make it TN 10, etc.

That works really well as far as I'm concerned, and karma rerolls are sensible now as you just reroll failures as normal and ahhh it's just all so much better.

The other two examples rarely come up with us, so I think we're still using open tests for those.

[Austere Emancipa...]

N/m either...

[Brazila]

what is N/M?

[Jason Farlander]

I go back and forth about open tests. I agree that they don't fit in with the rest of the game well, and generally increase the importance of random chance while downplaying the importance of skill/ability. However. In the most comman usage - stealth/perception - if you go with a standard success test, stealth will end up (almost) always winning. Its just far too easy to pile up visibility mods to raise the perception TN beyond what is reasonable to generate consistently.

One thing I have considered is not providing a base TN for the stealth test, but, rather, keeping a record of the precise die roll and then determining successes on a case-by-case basis using the intelligence of each perciever as the TN to sneak past that perciever. So if you get a result of 6,5,4,4,2,1 on your stealth test, you would have 4 successes against an INT 4 guard, but only a single success against the INT 6 guard. Then the guards roll against a base TN of 4 + vision mods, and must generate at least as many successes on their perception test to notice you (ties going to percieving).

[Brazila]

So you use it more like an opposed test, vs each person you are trying to sneak by.

[Jason Farlander]

Kinda like an area-effect combat spell, actually. One roll applies to all possible percievers, with the number of successes calculated separately for each perciever.

[Edward]

This will make hading easier. With the open tests spotting an invisible target needed 1 lucky roll. Under your system it needs as many lucky roles as your target got average rolls.

Also when dealing with rerolls if you use intelligence as the TN (like aria combat spells) you spend 1 point of karma to reroll failures but which failures,

Edward

[Jason Farlander]

I would handle karma rerolls by allowing the player to roll as many dice over as they liked.

Yes, it does make hiding a easier than it is with an open test, which is the primary complaint I have with the idea. But, by enforcing like giving TN reductions to perception tests for guards being "on alert" and taking into consideration that insanely high visual TN mods do not matter so much if a guard can hear you, I think it balances itself out. I am going to be field testing this approach in the game I just started running, so I will let you know how it works.

[mfb]

there simply needs to be more modifiers for Stealth tests. for instance, you could flip the Terrain modifiers from rigging--open terrain presents a +2 TN to the test, tight provides -1. maybe the ground cover could be a modifier as well; underbrush provides a -2 TN, gravel +4.

[Jason Farlander]

[Fortune]

[JaronK]

I go with an opposed Stealth vs. Intelligence roll, as stated above. Works well enough. For simplified rigging, I just have each person roll their drive skill against their handling, and whoever gets more successes gets to comparatively manuever.

JaronK

[Zeel De Mort]

[mfb]

er, well, i meant in conjunction with the contested roll idea. it's vastly more predictable to have everyone roll against a common TN with modifiers, and compare successes, than it is to simply go for the high roll in an open system. the level of randomness is similar to that in a d20 game, but without even the 'safety net' of result modifiers to even things out.

[Dissonance]

What's the modifier for hiding while wearing a pair of LA Lights? :grinbig:

[hobgoblin]

+infinity most likely...

[Kagetenshi]

I like open tests. They add randomness.

~J

[Bane]

It's true, they do add randomness. It just sucks when you have, say, a Stealth skill of 8, and you fail to roll any sixes. I guess you could use some karma pool and re-roll that... but you have a skill of 8! That kind of randomness is pretty lame, IMO.

[Kagetenshi]

I disagree.

~J

[Jason Farlander]

Umm... the fact that youre rolling dice at all adds randomness. Open tests emphasize randomness as being a more important factor than skill or ability. I don't see why some tests (how many open test situations exist in the game? 4?) arbitrarily need more randomness than others.

[GrinderTheTroll]