If so what do you use as the opposed stat/skill?

WS(Str) vs WS(Str)? or vs Agi?

BS(Agi) vs Co-ord(Agi)? or athletics?

Caster stat vs Disc(Will)?

Or do you do the attack roll opposed by the target's Defence?

Orcs and Wargor have str 5/6 which means players are going to be rocking 3 challenge dice.

Are people missing a lot? I don't want to turn this into 4e dnd (or even worse v1/v2 wfrp) with 50% (or greater) miss rates on all attacks and combat being a whiff-fest

Kaptain O said:

If you feel the success rate is slightly too great, but don't want to see that annoying low percentage chance, then you could check out my house rules. There is something in there to create a (imo) more balaced system. And the house rules are simple too... we don't want them to expand beyond that one page.

http://74.53.20.230/hammerzeit/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&id=2:utilities&download=49:gallows-house-rules-v2&start=20&Itemid=54

I play stat vs stat in combat whenever I can. I don't for the Spells, though, istm, the ones where this is appropriate are already done that way. I use Ag vs Ag and Str vs Str unless there are other circumstances where other stats would seem more appropriate. but we still use Defence as a modifier so don't use a skill with the defending characteristic.

We only have opposed rolls when it's clear that two people are opposing each other, standing up to each other in some way and matching skills. So in a standard melee one against one we would do that, but if a third party turned up and had a bash his diff would be 1. Similarly if someone's shooting arrows at you and you knew they were and where they were, etc, then you'd get to oppose it, but if a hidden sniper got a shot from elsewhere then that wouldn't be opposed.

I don't find there's any whiff about it. It encourages people to gang up, and be more circumspect or sneaky, but that's a feature, I'd say. Also, generally when there are weaker foes, there are more of them, and stronger ones are fewer, so the advantage of numbers helps even things out.

How do you decide which of the 2 people have to roll opposed, say Albert and Boris run up to Christof and start hitting him - do they both roll vs diff 1 and Christof rolls based upon whatever the stat of the guy he is targeting? or does he roll vs diff 1? or do Albert and Christof roll on each other as opposed and Boris gets the diff 1 hits?

Do you still allow Albert and Boris to take the "assist" manoeuvre to give each other a white die?

If Christof sees them coming, I'd have him decide who he squares up to (the most dangerous looking, probably, or random) and that character would roll vs Christof's Str and the other would roll diff 1. And I'd allow them a white die each for any assists. too (although that's not so common in my game coz I charge a manoeuvre just for being in combat). Christof could still use his Reaction Defences to add black dice to either of the incoming attacks, at his discretion.

ok, makes sense - I think I like it.

In my game I do as suggested but I don't oppose rolls (that"s called Competitive rolls in WFRP3), I do opposed check as suggested in rulebook p.56 (if i remember well):

you compare the number of dice between the active characteristic and the defender's passive characteristic to determine the number of challenge dices....

• active > 2x passive = 0 challenge dice
• active > passive = 1 challenge dice
• active = passive = 2 challenge dices
• active < passive = 3 challenge dices
• active x2 < passive = 4 challenge dices
• add 1 misfortune dice per useful trained skill.

So to conclude, I call :

• vs target defense (1d) when the attacked character isn't really "active"
• opposed check (compare characteristics to set the number of challenges dices) when the target is aware and active... I don't use it with foes and unnamed npcs.

Yeah, that's what I meant. 'Opposed Check,' - a single roll. Not opposed rolls.

monkeylite said:

gosh. ok !

I like your point and i do the same