In KAP5, Chapter Five: Game Mechanics, page 92 under opposed rolls it states:

In opposed rolls, a failure is always treated as if the player had rolled 0, regardless of the actual number rolled on the die.

Now, since swords break non-swords, does this mean that if a characters wielding a sword fails, and his non-sword wielding foe fails, the results are considered to both be 0, resulting in a tie and the sword breaking the non-sword?

In KAP5, Chapter Five: Game Mechanics, page 92 under opposed rolls it states:

In opposed rolls, a failure is always treated as if the player had rolled 0, regardless of the actual number rolled on the die.

Now, since swords break non-swords, does this mean that if a characters wielding a sword fails, and his non-sword wielding foe fails, the results are considered to both be 0, resulting in a tie and the sword breaking the non-sword?


No.

In KAP5, Chapter Five: Game Mechanics, page 92 under opposed rolls it states:

In opposed rolls, a failure is always treated as if the player had rolled 0, regardless of the actual number rolled on the die.

Now, since swords break non-swords, does this mean that if a characters wielding a sword fails, and his non-sword wielding foe fails, the results are considered to both be 0, resulting in a tie and the sword breaking the non-sword?


No.



Thanks for the answer, Greg. And thanks for that answer. :)

Another question on Ties.

Where in an opposed roll, both combatants critical, is this treated as a Tie? I was playing 492 when the PC's help Merlin and get drawn into a Melee with Sir Brastias. The PC was using defensive manoeuvre's with a +10 and I Brastias crited his Passion- Loyalty (Uther). So. +20 to him.

So basically, we run this combat for several rounds until the PC's yielded and we had many crit v crit situations.

If its a tie, nothing happens. However, I was thinking of allowing a downgrade of the crit to normal success v partial success for the 'highest' modified roll.

Suggestions?

Thanks

If its a tie, nothing happens. However, I was thinking of allowing a downgrade of the crit to normal success v partial success for the 'highest' modified roll.



That's what I would do. Crit vs Crit just becomes Sucess vs. Partial success.


NT

They count as ties (so swords really come into their own at high levels); in the GPC, Greg Stafford recommends having both fighters take 1d3 points of unblockable damage.

As the god of the doorknob states, if two critical, it is always a tie.

This explicitly remains true if, for instance, someone rolls a 12, and his 30 skill modifies it to 20, and someone else with a skill of 15 rolls 15. Both rolls are treated as 20, and a tie.

In other words, if you fancy your chances against Lancelot using a favoured mace or spear - take lots of spares. :)

Thanks for the replies.

I am not sure I like the sword supremacy. As it stands, there is little incentive to gain much skill in any other weapon, as once you get in crit v crit situations you will lose out. However, in the literature, knights will favour maces and spears at major life and death situations. EG Mordred v Arthur. One deliberatly chooses a spear.

Thanks for the replies.

I am not sure I like the sword supremacy. As it stands, there is little incentive to gain much skill in any other weapon, as once you get in crit v crit situations you will lose out. However, in the literature, knights will favour maces and spears at major life and death situations. EG Mordred v Arthur. One deliberatly chooses a spear.


I'm with you on this. Darren gave me an excellent comparison of why, from a game balance perspective, it made sense, but I do find it slightly comical esp. at the very high levels. I've toyed with the idea of having ties figured purely on the raw roll (irrespective of what they go on to be) or on the modded result when a Crit (eg a 26 vs a 27 is still a tied crit, but not a tie from a weapon breakage point of view) but I still go with the rule as written at present.