IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> House rules for Stealth?, Replacing a Open Test w/ Success Test
The_Dood
post Feb 17 2005, 10:39 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 26-February 02
From: ACT, Australia
Member No.: 1,874



Does anybody know of any house rules that change Stealth to a Success based test rather than an open test?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Feb 17 2005, 10:43 PM
Post #2


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



The only thing I could think to use would be an opposed test. But that would require you to write down all of the dice rolls when you went stealthy.

My problem with stealth isn't that its an open test. my problem is that a single skill covers so much. What's funny is that stealth covers disguises, but by the RAW you can't specialize in disguising yourself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DrJest
post Feb 17 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #3


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,133
Joined: 3-October 04
Member No.: 6,722



Whoa, whoa, stealth covers disguise? ((yanks up his current NSRCG character)) I got Disguise listed separately here...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 17 2005, 10:49 PM
Post #4


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



i believe Disguise is a seperate skill, or at least listed as a specialization, as of SOTA:63,

i prefer the idea of a success contest. set a base TN of 4 for both parties; the perciever rolls his standard Perception die against this TN, plus any modifiers from the Perception Test table. the sneaker would roll his stealth against base TN 4, but would take mods from a currently-non-existant Stealth Test table, with mods like Lots of Cover (-4), Noise-Absorbent Surface (-2), Open Area (+2), etcetera.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DrJest
post Feb 17 2005, 10:58 PM
Post #5


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,133
Joined: 3-October 04
Member No.: 6,722



QUOTE (mfb)
i believe Disguise is a seperate skill, or at least listed as a specialization, as of SOTA:63,

i prefer the idea of a success contest. set a base TN of 4 for both parties; the perciever rolls his standard Perception die against this TN, plus any modifiers from the Perception Test table. the sneaker would roll his stealth against base TN 4, but would take mods from a currently-non-existant Stealth Test table, with mods like Lots of Cover (+4), Noise-Absorbent Surface (+2), Open Area (-2), etcetera.

Thx mfb, though I was going nuts.

And, I've always done stealth tests that way myself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jebu
post Feb 17 2005, 11:03 PM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Finland
Member No.: 2,130



Yes, Disguise is a separate skill introduced in SOTA:63, page 104. And true, the description of Stealth skill in SR3 main book says it covers disguises and camouflage. I've always thought Stealth covers too many things, so I happily adapted the Disguise skill and removed that part from Stealth. I'd also like to see the thieving side of Stealth moved to a separate skill, but no sourcebook this far has done it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Feb 17 2005, 11:03 PM
Post #7


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



Ah. I guess that's what happens when you don't buy all of the supplements. You end up with rules that are correct but odd.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeel De Mort
post Feb 17 2005, 11:58 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 403
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Scotland
Member No.: 3,175



Last time this was covered here.

As I outlined in the above thread, our basic house rule is to roll Stealth against tn 4, and add the number of successes to a base tn of 4 for opponents to Perceive you, applying any relevant modifiers for camo, visibility, obviousness, etc.

I find it works pretty well, and gives more reliable and reasonably consistant results than the open test, which I don't like. There's still room for variation though as you can easily come up with a bad roll even if you are throwing 10 dice at tn 4. Plus it makes an aptitude in Stealth much more meaningful!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RedmondLarry
post Feb 18 2005, 12:01 AM
Post #9


Senior GM
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,406
Joined: 12-April 03
From: Redmond, WA
Member No.: 4,442



Using an open test has a lot more variability in the results than most of the alternate suggestions. Players don't want that variability. They want to know whether they're likely to be successful before they start. They want to design characters that will almost always succeed at something.

The use of Karma Pool for rerolls for Open Tests (1 Karma pool only lets you reroll 1 die) keeps that variability present.

I play it the way the books describe it, because I want to keep that variability of results.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Feb 18 2005, 12:05 AM
Post #10


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (Zeel De Mort)
Last time this was covered here.

As I outlined in the above thread, our basic house rule is to roll Stealth against tn 4, and add the number of successes to a base tn of 4 for opponents to Perceive you, applying any relevant modifiers for camo, visibility, obviousness, etc.

I find it works pretty well, and gives more reliable and reasonably consistant results than the open test, which I don't like.  There's still room for variation though as you can easily come up with a bad roll even if you are throwing 10 dice at tn 4.  Plus it makes an aptitude in Stealth much more meaningful!

Thing I don't like about this variation on the Open Test is that you really don't get penalized for failing to score any successes, the viewer would still need TN=4 + modifiers which seems to make Stealth way more successful than it probably should be IMO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeel De Mort
post Feb 18 2005, 12:09 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 403
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Scotland
Member No.: 3,175



Some variability is good, and it's good if people don't know exactly how well they're going to do before they roll, but I think the open test goes far to far in that direction. It's too much down to chance whether you get one really high result or not. Having a much higher skill helps a great deal, but not enough, and it's still too random for my liking.

I prefer the success test total vs regular perception test thing, it's reasonably accurate, easy, and not prone to wild variation like open tests are.

An opposed test would be okay, but it could get to the point where someone with a not-too-ridiculous Stealth skill would be literally impossible to spot under some circumstances. It's much easier to roll a lot of dice on Stealth than it is on Perception.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeel De Mort
post Feb 18 2005, 12:13 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 403
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Scotland
Member No.: 3,175



Grinder:

That's a fair point. Our characters never really roll SO badly as to get no successes, but if that was an issue, or if you thought it should be balanced more that way, you could make the base tn 2. That way, even after some small modifiers, an Int 3 character should be able to spot you most times you fail the test completely.

Even against tn 4 they usually will, and if there are a lot of modifiers pushing their Perception tn up, well, then there's a chance they wouldn't see you even if you were just strolling past them (e.g. if you're behind some bushes, in smoke, it's noisy, whatever), so I think that's fair enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brazila
post Feb 18 2005, 12:15 AM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 19-March 03
From: Central IL
Member No.: 4,278



Right now my group stilll is using open tests. I came up with an alt. method, but we have not implemented it yet. Just do a stealth(4) test and note successes. Then have the other person roll INT (with the awareness spec of stealth as complem.) Their TN is base of four then take anything that would normally modify perception, lighting, cover, camo etc. total them and add a 1/3 of that to the TN. Then compare the # of successes. We chose to add mods to the oppenents TN instead of lowering sneakers to keep it from being cheesed. We rolled this out under a variety of scenarios and it seemed really good. Just one crazy GMS idea....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Feb 18 2005, 12:16 AM
Post #14


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (Zeel De Mort)
Some variability is good, and it's good if people don't know exactly how well they're going to do before they roll, but I think the open test goes far to far in that direction.  It's too much down to chance whether you get one really high result or not.  Having a much higher skill helps a great deal, but not enough, and it's still too random for my liking.

Too consistant IMO.

OT becomes more effective the more dice you have, while the variant yields auto-success to some degree just for attempting to be Stealthy.

Why train up yor Stealth when all you'd probably need would be a 4 skill-dice+some cover? Considering TN=8 is "blind fire" like conditions, it just seems too easy for my tastes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Feb 18 2005, 12:16 AM
Post #15


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



I've always substituted opposed tests for Stealth (and pretty much everything else that uses Open tests). Open Tests suck!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeel De Mort
post Feb 18 2005, 12:25 AM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 403
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Scotland
Member No.: 3,175



Well, someone with a Stealth skill of 4 is "skilled" at it according to SR3. They're not great, but they're likely to do fine with the skill under normal conditions. I'd say it represents someone who's fairly well trained, maybe some kind of military recon guy. Nothing too hardcore, but someone who knows what they're doing.

If you're skilled at Stealth, and have some modifiers (e.g. it's quite dark or you're camouflaged appropriately and taking cover) I'd imagine you are quite likely to succeed, so long as your opponent isn't actively looking in your direction, doesn't have a suspicion you're there, you're not doing anything obvious, etc.

As long as you apply the modifiers sensibly I think it can work quite well. Or, at least, better than the open test. :D
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 18 2005, 12:29 AM
Post #17


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



grinder, that'd be sloppy GM'ing if those were the modifiers every time. inside a corporate office building, for instance, the most i'd give for cover is -2 TN; the sneaker would also take mods for Indoors (+2, for the echoing and still air), Quiet Area (if after hours, +2), etcetera.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Feb 18 2005, 12:46 AM
Post #18


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



Or here's another. Roll Stealth vs TN 4, with appropriate TN modifiers for open ground (+2), noise-absorbing (-1) or -reflecting surfaces (+1), etc. Basically the opposite of mfb's TN mods, as things that help you be stealthy should reduce the TN and things that hinder you should increase the TN. Each success increases the TN on the Perception Test to spot you by 1. Stealth(Awareness) in this instance would work as a standard Complimentary Skill to your Perception test, giving additional successes but only if you already have at least one success on the Perception roll.

I think that's fair, as even with skill level 3 it increases the TN to spot you by ~+2, which is fairly significant. Stick to the shadows and the TN to spot you will be ~10-12, which is pretty tough, particularly as the Awareness specialization only helps you resolve objects you've already spotted. The problem with an Opposed Test is that it's inconvenient to have to write down every single die roll, particularly if you've got an adept rolling 12 or more dice. It's pretty easy though to just note that the adept has a +4 or +6 to the TN to spot him.

(Edit): And the main problem with having successes on the Stealth test cancel successes on the Perception test is that you're typically going to have adepts throwing 8 or more dice at a stealth test, and security guards throwing only 4-6 at Perception. At that rate it'd be practically impossible for them to hit the necessary 4+ successes to cancel he adept's successes. It's the Force 1 Improved Invisability with 7 successes problem all over again, but even worse because the stealth TN and the perceiver's TN are the same.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 18 2005, 12:58 AM
Post #19


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



personally, i'd just write down the number of successes the sneaker achieves. these successes are subtracted from the perciever's successes on a normal perception test (4 + modifiers). basically, it'd work like a melee roll: if the sneaker wins, he's not detected; if the perciever wins, the degree to which he detects the sneaker is adjudicated according to how many net successes he got (1 succ = ?, 2 succs = !, 3 succs = !!).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Brazila
post Feb 18 2005, 12:59 AM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 19-March 03
From: Central IL
Member No.: 4,278



I think someone with a stealth of 8 should get past most security guards, but I guess that is just my opinion on it. I see 8 as a pretty kick ass skill rating myself!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Feb 18 2005, 01:01 AM
Post #21


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



indeed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Feb 18 2005, 01:05 AM
Post #22


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (mfb)
grinder, that'd be sloppy GM'ing if those were the modifiers every time. inside a corporate office building, for instance, the most i'd give for cover is -2 TN; the sneaker would also take mods for Indoors (+2, for the echoing and still air), Quiet Area (if after hours, +2), etcetera.

Maybe I am thinking of a different types of Test. I was thinking of the Stealth (4), then adding each success scored to TN=4, so the viewer would Oppose the TN generated.

I failed to notice that part of this thread talks about generating successes like Illusions, which I dislike even more than replacing the Open Test.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Feb 18 2005, 01:07 AM
Post #23


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



QUOTE (mfb)
personally, i'd just write down the number of successes the sneaker achieves. these successes are subtracted from the perciever's successes on a normal perception test (4 + modifiers). basically, it'd work like a melee roll: if the sneaker wins, he's not detected; if the perciever wins, the degree to which he detects the sneaker is adjudicated according to how many net successes he got (1 succ = ?, 2 succs = !, 3 succs = !!).

Well, what I'm saying is I don't like the melee rules, so basing yet *another* mechanic on them is wrongheaded. Of course that's just IMO.

And 8 dice would still definately be a kickass skill under my idea. Under good conditions that would add a +6-7 TN mod to the Perception text, almost the difference betwen full light and total darkness. You'll still get the occasional single success though; mfb's (?), if a guard gets really lucky with one of his 3-5 Int dice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Feb 18 2005, 01:11 AM
Post #24


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Feb 17 2005, 08:05 PM)
I failed to notice that part of this thread talks about generating successes like Illusions, which I dislike even more than replacing the Open Test.

Exactly my point. In fact, I also kinda want to change the invis. rules to do something similar. If the spell is not completely resisted, then add the Force of the spell and the number of net successes to the Perception TN to spot the character. (Edit): The Stealth spell works in exactly the same way, but if both spells are active then they layer as per the armor rules (total bonus = higher bonus + half, round down, of lower bonus)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Feb 18 2005, 02:52 AM
Post #25


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



That’s a bitch. I haven’t red SOTA 63 and my GM never told me about the separate disguise skill. Some of my character concepts REQUIER that skill I would have taken it if I had known.

I hate when that happens.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd April 2024 - 07:44 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.