Topic: Stat check

[Skynet]

How do you use stat checks in your games? I'm asking because I have something of a problem with the official answer. Normally, it is a maneuver with 3 times the stat bonus. But it seems awfully low, even for a character with a great strength (let's say 100), this represents only a +30 bonus, giving him a 30% chance to succeed with a medium maneuver. I don't think it's appropriate for a character that is supposed to be THAT strong.

Of course, there is always some skill you could apply, like weight-lifting in a feat of strength, but, hey, this character is supposed to be STRONG. Really strong.

Now I understand the Rolemaster is a skill-based game, that the stats are only there to reflect natural talent in some area and to boost skills. But I would like to be able to ask for a little strength or reasoning test without having to resort to some skill.

Any thoughts? Or suggestions?

[yammahoper]

"I wanna lift that gate."
"Ok, what's your St mod?"
"10."
"Light mnv, add Stx3."
Hobbit perks up, "I wanna lift that chest and drag it under the gate while the fighter holds it up."
"Whats your St mod?"
"-1."
"Extremely Hard mnv, add your Stx3."
"But thats -3!?"
"Yeah, sucks to be a hobbit."

If they have weight lifting as a skill, use it instead.  Additionally, you can actually figure the enc penalty for moving the object using enc rules.  Still, GM fiat is the answer IMO.

lynn

[Skynet]

"I wanna lift that gate."
"Ok, what's your St mod?"
"10."
"Light mnv, add Stx3."

I get your point, yammahoper, but I have difficulties to believe that lifting a gate is a light maneuver. That's hardly a fireplace trap!  And the chest : Extremely hard? That's one hell of a chest.

What I understand by your examples is that you apply maneuver modifiers subjectively. If the hobbit would have tried to lift the gate, his mod would have been higher, is that it? That's totally justified. But I am looking for some way to apply mod objectively. Let's say the gate is a hard maneuver. Then I say it stays that way even if it is a hobbit that wants to lift that gate. But even for the warrior, this maneuver has just a 20% chance to succeed. But he's strong!

Using the encumbrance system is a good idea, but it doesn't tell you what is the maximum weight our tiny hobbit can lift, but what penalties he will suffer if he takes that chest on his poor back and tries to drag it under the gate. Also, I have to guest the weight of everything. Like that gate. How much should it weight. No, I looking for a way to abstract the hard facts and use the maneuver mod to represent the possible weight of an object. Finally, the encumbrance system could always work with strength feats, but what about reasoning or other stats?

I've thought about using, let's say, six time the bonus, but that's not so good with most characters since they probably have 0 bonus in most stats. Another way to get past this problem could be to use the moving maneuver chart and using the result of the roll to generate a final % chance. So our warrior rolls 56, adds his +30 and compares his 86 to the HARD column of the table : 60% Not bad at all. With the same roll, the hobbit would have a 20% chance. Hard. He can still make it, but it'll take a bit of luck to make that roll.

Any thoughts?

By the way, thanks for your input yammahoper!

[Marc R]

You may be defaulting your difficulties a bit high. Don't get caught up on the names of the columns. . .as you see, for a person with a +0 stat mod, a "Medium" Maneuver is actually extremely hard. . . Base the difficulty mods on the odds of sucess for a +0 stat, rather than the prose title headers.

[Skynet]

You may be defaulting your difficulties a bit high. Don't get caught up on the names of the columns. . .as you see, for a person with a +0 stat mod, a "Medium" Maneuver is actually extremely hard. . . Base the difficulty mods on the odds of sucess for a +0 stat, rather than the prose title headers.

Even so, a routine maneuver only give 30% chance to accomplish a task with a +0 stat... Following those guidelines, the maximum chance of accomplishing a stat based task without being supernatural or something is 60%. It cannot, by the book, be easier than this!?! So a solution based on your advice would be to forget completely the mods and give a straight base chance in the form of a bonus to the maneuver, modified by the stat. This way, I could rule that someone normal should have 40% chance to lift the gate of the first example (ie : I give the character a +30 bonus to the maneuver). Then, the warrior would really have a 70%, due to his great strength, and the hobbit would have a 27% chance.

This is not bad. I could go with this. But I prefer to use the tools provided by the system (like the moving maneuver chart) to resolve this issue.

Someone has another idea or experience?

[Marc R]

playing RMC

76 is "partial sucess" on static maneuvers, and routine is +30, so you need a 46 to partially suceed.

A routine MM is 100% sucessful at 41

your 100 ST common man would have a +30 ST bonus.

So, on an "all or nothing" routine difficulty static maneuver, the +0 has a 55% chance of rolling a 46 or better, while the 100 ST common man has an 85% chance.

Perhaps a bit hard there, but not horribly so.

On the MM table, for lifting gates, you can get percentages of sucess. . . so if given enough time you can keep lifting the gate over and over until you make it., and the odds are 5% better than on the SM table.

If you wanted to re-draw it easier, you could double the stat bonus, which would make routine a 115% chance of sucess (don't roll open ended down) for common man STR 100.

40% chance of failing is a bit rough for "Routine", that's akin to "Tripping down the stairs in your own house." . . .of course, that happens, but not 40% of the time.

RMFRP results may be a little different.

[markc]

If I remember right on an ICE article that talks about submiting stuff to ICE it says "Thier are no stat checks in RMSS/FRP, use the relevent skill or approxamatioin".
MDC

[yammahoper]

Well, a routine mnv on the MM table is 100% at 41 or higher.  So without mods, a 10 St will need to roll an 11 or higher for auto success.  If a mnv is going to succeed eventually, then roll each round and add the results until 100% is achieved.  If it is all or nothing, then roll d100 and add the number from the table, with results of 100+ indicating success.  In these circumstances, even partial success can be calculated.  If the result is an 80%, then the object may have been lifted for 8 seconds of the round.  If you have the player roll and add the 80, then any result under 100 can indicate how long, or how far if distance is involved, the object was lifted or moved.

The MM Table is very flexible and can be interpreted in many ways.  If you are in the habit of assigning dificulty mods, then many problems can disapear.  For example, a routine mnv succeeds on 41+.  A +30 mod all but guarantees even low stat mod PC's will succeed, and high stat mod PC's will only be able to fail on a fumble result.

lynn

[Skynet]

I think that the use of the moving maneuver table is pretty much the best solution (for me, at least). As you said, yammahoper, it's flexible and it's a great tool.

Thanks for your input everyone!

[Dax]

To adjust a difficult level or any other boni, I use the mnv table first the other way
- with common sense (Common sense is the solution to any problem  ):


The GM decides about the chance of success:
First the GM thinks of a normal man (stat +0 + racial stat bonus) doing the job and adjust
a chance of success. She thinks of a success-chance of 30 % (50 %, 70 %).
The man should succeed on 71 ( 51, 31);
since he doesn't got a bonus, she adjusts an appropriate bonus.

The PC rolls add his stat (RMSS 3xstat) (add the bonus, if he knows) tells his result.


This principle could be expanded to include the mnv table.
To adjust a difficult level by thinking of a normal person (with average skill boni and stats)
and her chance of success.

[Fenrhyl Wulfson]

I'd use the category bonus for athletic brawn skills if i had to. It is not all about strength but also about being able to endure the strain and to balance your body properly.

Now, i think that if you are strong enough to lift a door you will succeed to do so if you are given enough time. Maybe you'll hurt yourself. As for moving a chest : Either you can move it, and you do so, or you can't and come back with a lever or a rope.

Given enough time, you'll do it.

So i think the MM table is fine for this matter, whatever the bonus.


Now, if you want to lift and iron or heavy wooden door in one round, that's ENTIRELY another matter, and it's not easy. Actually, most people, even brawny ones, would hurt themselves trying to do so.

Now, since i am thinking about it, isn't adrenal strength specially intended for those moments when you need to accomplish great feats of physical prowess ?

[Balhirath]

Adrenal Move Strenght is primary for combat.
Directed Strenght (from Arms Companions) is the skill you're looking for

[Arioch]

Adrenal Move Strenght is primary for combat.
Directed Strenght (from Arms Companions) is the skill you're looking for

In RMFRP Adrenal Strenght can also be used for feats of brute force 

[Balhirath]

Good
Then the PC's dont need to learn yet another skill

[lev_lafayette]

Yes, it is a problem. I usually start with the assumption that if an average person can lift the object, albeit with some strain and difficulty, that's a +50 bonus right up. It still implies that they fail half the time.

You may want to have a look at the article I recently wrote for GC which relates to this issue.

http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2007/aug/chardevskill.html