Contests[edit]

Full Contest Resolution[edit]

However a contest is conceived in story-terms, it plays out the same way mechanically: the protagonist adds up his relevant modifiers, subtracts the antagonist’s relevant modifiers, and adds that to the roll of a single d12. The number that results is compared to the chart below. A total of 7 or greater results in checks beings delivered to the opponent. A total of 6 or less results in checks being delivered to the protagonist.

This means that an actor can, in some sense, hurt himself by acting just as he could hurt his opponent. An action taken in a contest is a gamble: do you win or lose? Move closer to success or failure? This means that the basic roll is not a “to hit” roll, as is more usually seen in RPGs. Rolling low doesn’t mean that you missed. It means that you swung your sword and it was parried and now you’re a little off-balance. Or you hurt your wrist. Or maybe that your execution was perfect, but suddenly your opponent’s man-servant threw himself in front of you. It means something—anything—but always something more interesting than “you missed”.

Contests are goal-oriented, rather than task-oriented and each roll of the die represents an attempt to achieve the actor’s goal. SAMSARA’s system of contest resolution is thus abstract, rather than action-specific. How that goal is furthered or hindered, achieved or not, must be interpreted from the die result. A high result means that the actor has come closer to achieving his goal, while a low result means that his attempt has been hampered. That is all it means, but it does mean that. The specifics of those meanings must be brought out be player and GM to suit the narrative style and needs of the story being told.

Determining the Actor’s Modifier[edit]

1. Add together the two most relevant attributes
2. Add any relevant abilities
3. Add/subtract any relevant motives
4. Subtract temporary checks received in this contest
5. Subtract severe checks in this sphere of action
6. GM applies any relevant situation modifiers

The Contest Roll[edit]

The Contest roll is the result of the protagonist’s modifiers – antagonist’s modifiers + d12

Contest Roll	Checks Delivered	Success Descriptor
-2	-3	Spectacular Failure
-1	-2.66
0	-2.33
1	-2	Full Failure
2	-1.66
3	-1.33
4	-1	Simple Failure
5	-.66
6	-.33
-7	.33	Simple Success
-8	.66
9	1
10	1.33	Full Success
11	1.66
12	2
13	2.33	Spectacular Success
14	2.66
15	3

Don’t worry about the Success Descriptors right now (see Simple Contests for that) or the fractions. Let’s take the first two columns first.

Extrapolating the Contest Roll[edit]

Recall that the Contest Roll is a sum of modifiers and a d12. This means that the result could well be above 15 or below -2, depending upon the stature of the modifiers used in the game. That’s okay since it is fairly easy to extrapolate results: each step increases or decreases by .33. So a Contest Roll of -3 would deliver -3.33 checks, while a roll of 20 would deliver a staggering 4.66 checks.

Variation: Switch the Bones[edit]

By changing the type and number of dice rolled, one can change the probabilities of certain result and thus the “feel” of the game.

One could roll 2d6 instead of 1d12. This would keep the same range of possible outcomes, more-or-less, but due to the shift in probability distribution from flat to bell-curved (well, triangular, actually), the results will tend more toward the middle, with a roll of 7 as the most likely outcome. The effect of this variation would be to favor the more capable actors in a contest as the random factor of the die will be diminished. This would make for a grittier game, with less wild occurrences. On the other hand, that also means that the most likely raw outcome is a success, unless you shift the results table down.

By rolling 2d8, one would also tend to reduce randomness and favor the more capable, but with a greater possible range of outcomes. This would somewhat counter-act the first effect and allow a greater possibility for wild, unexpected occurrences. This variation is then a mix between grittier and wilder. If you use this variation, you might want to shift the results of the contest roll by two places since the average roll will be a 9. So 9 should result in .33 checks, 10 in .66, and so on. If you don’t do this, then everybody will start doing very much better in contests. Which is fine if that’s what you want.

3d6 just increases the variation from above: an even wider range of possible outcomes with a much more pronounced probability curve (a real curve in this case). Again, you might want to shift the results of the contest roll as the most likely result of 3d6 is a 10 or 11.

Tactics and Effect Ratings[edit]

Don’t be frightened of the fractions in the Checks column. They are there to provide a bit of variety in the form of methods and weapons. This is where the abstract nature of contests gets a bit more specific. The manner in which an actor pursues his goals in a contest affects his possible results. The broad term for this is tactics and tactics all have an Effect rating. The Effect rating of the tactic employed is multiplied by the amount in the checks column (always round up the final result). The basic range of Effects and calculated checks is provided in a chart in the back for the math-shy (refer to Appendix B). If you want to ignore this aspect of the game, do so. Every action would map onto the Success Descriptors like so:

Spectacular Failure	-3 Checks
Full Failure	-2 Checks
Simple Failure	-1 Check
Simple Success	1 Check
Full Success	2 Checks
Spectacular Success	3 Checks

A core idea in tactics is strengths and weaknesses. Any tactic has a positive and a negative, represented by greater or lesser potential checks delivered. A standard attempt at something has an Effect rating of 1, which is to say, that you read the results of the checks delivered straight off the chart. But an actor may attempt a more aggressive, powerful, or fool-hearty action and so take a higher Effect rating. If he succeeds in delivering checks to his opponent, the number of checks will be multiplied by the effect rating and so increased. However, if he fails and delivers checks to himself, those will also be increased.

Sample Tactic Descriptor	Effect Rating
Fools Rush In	4
Overbearing	3
Charge	2
Standard	1

Thus, for example, the Mad Berserker goes into a berserk. This means he is attacking with an Effect rating of 4. His least successful contest roll would be a 7 (everybody’s least successful contest roll); the chart says that a 7 means .33 checks delivered. So this foaming-mouthed chap multiplies 4 by .33 and ends up with 2 checks delivered. Even his least successful roll isn’t too shabby. If he had a contest roll of 10, he would multiply 4 by 1.66 and deliver 7 checks. A good roll by the berserker could put an average opponent out in one go.

But consider further. If the Berserker rolls a 1, he would multiply 4 by -2, meaning that he delivered -8 checks, or delivered 8 checks to himself. Odds are he’s out of the fight with one bad round. It’s easy to get into trouble by blindly charging and going full tilt. This, then, is the essence of tactics in SAMSARA. A larger potential to deliver checks top your opponent is always a larger potential to do the same to yourself.

Because physical combat is easy to visualize, the tactics are described in terms appropriate to that sort of contest. But they should not be restricted to combat. The system is designed to make other sorts of contests as interesting and involving as fights and so tactics apply in these spheres too. There is a difference between one actor attempting to persuade the guard to let him pass by speaking reasonably and logically (Effect rating 1) and another yelling and trying to browbeat the poor fellow (Effect rating 3 or 4). One could try to solve “The Puzzle of the Ancients” by sitting and patiently trying to work it (Effect rating 1) or by throwing your whole being into it, neither eating nor sleeping until you solve this enigma (Effect rating 4).

Variation: Weapons[edit]

If you are interested in stressing the different, tactical capabilities of different weapons in the ever-popular fight scenes , then you could use weapons types as tactics. A simple scheme for melee weapons might be thus:

Weapon Type Effect rating

Small weapon (dagger, club) 1
Medium weapon (shortsword, hand axe, mace) 2
Large weapon (longsword, battleaxe, spear) 3
Huge weapon (lance, polearm, great axe, greatsword) 4

This can be extrapolated to contests other than physical fights. For example, a calligrapher might try to create a striking image. If he chooses a blunt-tipped brush, that has an Effect rating of 3: he will likely succeed or fail spectacularly.

One might also consider a method of argumentation or mountain-climbing strategy to be weapons, rather than tactics. You could then use the default system for everything except physical combat, for which you would then use this variation.

Variation: Weapons and Tactics[edit]

If you want to use both weapon types and tactics, you need to decide which to stress as the most important. The secondary choice will then operate as a further +/- 1 Effect rating.

If you stress tactics, then base the Effect rating on the tactic and then -1 for smaller/less deadly weapons and +1 for larger/more deadly weapons. If you stress weapons, then base the Effect rating on the weapon and -1 for a defensive/conservative tactic and +1 for a more aggressive tactic.

Thus, if you focus on tactics and you get the Mad Berserker into a fight with only a dagger, the Effect might be: 4 (from tactics) -1 (small weapon) = 3. If you want to focus on weapons, then the Effect rating would be: 1 (dagger) + 1 (aggressive tactics) = 2. The games’ focus will make a difference.

Please recall that a minimum of 1 check must be delivered to either the protagonist or the antagonist, so Effect ratings below 1 are not possible. See the next section for more on this principle.

Something Always Happens[edit]

This is a principle of design for SAMSARA. Notice that there is no Contest Roll that results in zero checks being delivered. Whenever an actor takes action in a contest, something happens. Good or bad. Minor or major. But something always happens. This might be considered the ultimate tactical choice: action entails risk.

This should probably be true in the narrative sense as well. This issue is ultimately up to the GM and the players, but “whiffing” is usually a very dull result. If an actor is failing in an attempt to do something (i.e. is delivering checks to himself), there should be some reason. Yang the Brute doesn’t just miss—he’s a nasty, bad-ass character, so that when he fails to hurt Essence of Jade, it is because the wily old hermit is leaping and dodging and stuffing eating utensils into his nasal orifice. Essence, the gong fu monk, is super-cool, so when he fails in his attack on Yang, it’s because he is forced to knock out one of Yang’s cronies or his staff breaks on Yang’s hard head. Or something.

Simple Contests[edit]

Despite all of the tension and drama that can result from running a full contest, it can also be a burden. Sometimes, the needs of the story would be better served by quickly determining if an actor succeeds or fails. Maybe you just want to know if your sneaky guy creeps past the guards or if he alerts them. It’s not a given either way, but it would only slow things down to play out the full contest. In that case, you run a simple contest. These contests ignore checks and use the success descriptors from the last column of the Contest Roll chart.

Simple contests involve the same method for computing the contest roll: protagonist’s modifiers - antagonist’s modifiers + d12. The result then is compared to the success descriptor column of the Contest Roll chart. The GM and the player then must, as always, flesh out the meaning of the result, based on the actor’s goal and the narrative needs. The descriptors are guidelines for how to flesh that out.

The most basic description is the success/fail description. A roll of 7 or over is some kind of success and a roll of 6 or under is some kind of failure. That might be all the description needed:

“I want to catch the bomb before it hits the ground.” Success means that you do. Failure means that you don’t. Enough said.

But if the quality of the result matters, the distinction between spectacular, full, and simple, comes into play. If the actor trying to catch the bomb, scores a simple success, he might fumble with it a bit, before fully catching it. A full success means a solid catch. And a spectacular success means that he runs to where it is going to fall, turns a flip in the air, and then catches it. On his head. You get the idea.

A simple failure might be very close to a success and leave the field open to trying again, perhaps. While a spectacular failure means something just plain horrendous has happened. If a character is trying to sneak past some guards and rolls a simple failure, he might have stepped on a twig and alerted the guard nearest him. He’s still got options: he might knife the guard and continue, for example. A spectacular failure, however, means that he snagged a trip-wire or the spot-light just fell full frontal on his sad face. And 20 guys are training their weapons on him now. He’s still got options, but not very good ones.

If your game involves ultra-mundane abilities which a character cannot automatically use, such as magic or psychic powers, using the Simple Contest rules most of the time might be in order. Thus the character might have to roll a Simple Contest against the power level of his spell: success means it works and failure means it doesn’t, with the possibility of extreme successes and failures keeping things interesting. See the suggestions in Appendix A - Ultramundane Abilities.

Ending the Contest[edit]

A contest ends either when one of the actors gives up or when one of the actors can not possibly win. The first is a character decision; the second is mechanical.

A character might decide to quit the contest for a variety of story reasons. Maybe just to save himself from being beaten up at this time. Maybe to run away and try again later with a better plan. Whatever. A good rule of thumb with NPC’s is that they will think about quitting once they take checks equal to half their starting modifier. Thus if a bandit attacks our hero and the bandit has modifiers for the contests of +4, he might think about quitting after he takes 2 checks. This is just a quick and dirty measure and is, of course, open to revision depending upon the personality of the NPC and the needs of the story.

If an actor can not possibly deliver checks to his opponent, no matter how high his roll, then he has lost the contest. In other words, if an actor is functioning with a net modifier of -6, even if he rolls a 12 on the die, he will have a Contest Roll of 6, which means that he delivers checks to himself. He cannot win and has thus lost. The contest is over.

Note that if an actor enters contest with a modifier of 0, it will take only 6 checks to put him out. However, if he enters with a modifier of +10, it will take 16 checks to put him out. It pays to be the best. And to choose the sorts of contests in which one is skilled.

Main Page

1.Fundamentals

2.Contests

3.Modifiers and the Character

4.Attributes

5.Abilities

6.Motives

7.Checks

8.Character Generation

9.Samsara Points

10.Long Term Play

11.Examples of Play