Re: [HOE] Running from a fight (longish)

["Jeff Shoffner" <shoffner@usit.net>]

After reading the following replies, I'd like to add in some more
opinions.....

First, I was reading from the Deadlands book, WW Player's Guide.  Sorry;
didn't notice the [HOE] tag at the top.

Second, I looked in the HOE Player's Guide, & sure enough, it says just what
you say here.

However, I looked at the copyright of HOE, & see it is published in 1998.
DL guide (at least mine) is copyright 1999.  Now, since these are two
separate games, it shouldn't matter with there being different rules,
however, I think that the general rules were probably supposed to
transcend all DL type games; ie: no matter if it is DL, HOE, or LC, the
general rules stay the same.  So, what probably happened is the HOE rules on
Test of Wills came out, Shane (or someone else) didn't like the fact that a
success didn't give the winner anything, then changed them in the later DL
rulebooks.  Kind of like the whole business of double tapping versus Rate of
Fire.  At any rate, what all this boils down to is what I had in the Joe v.
Jane write up is how I'd do a runaway, regardless what HOE states for
success in Test of Wills.

Cheers


Jeff S

>> > You are off by a raise.  Mere success is bupkus.  One raise causes -4,
>> > and so on.
>> [...]
>> I've always assumed that beating the other roll by 1-4 is a success, 5-9
a
>> raise, etc. I mean if Bob rolls a 9 to dodge and Joe rolls an 8 to hit
>> then Bob successfully dodged. Right?
>
>HOE rulebook, page 68 makes it clear that while you are correct that
>beating an 8 with a 9 in an opposed roll is success, for a test of
>wills winning by 1-4 points has no effect.  It takes 1, 2 or 3 raises
>to cause an effect in a test o' wills.