(Relative Success roll vs. a Resistance Check)
I'm assuming that the writer is rolling a persuasion check on his side (relative success means both parties are rolling).
I'm curious, though. I'd have thought that the usual counter to persuasion is will power. Making it resistance is clever, because it means it's not a matter of people fighting against the idea, but of people being resistant to the magic of the change.
There's a separate problem, and that is, how is this resistance check determined? That is, who is rolling against the writer? If everyone gets a roll, that takes forever, and it also means that there will be a lot of successes amidst the failures.
The alternative is to work by averages. Looking at the basic dicing curves on page 419 of the Referee's Rules, we have half the work done for us. The other half the work we would have to do, probably include in a chart in the book. See, if I have a 2@1 persuasion and I roll 20, I've rolled as high as I can. Anyone whose resistance is not greater than 1@10 cannot beat my roll, so they all either failed their check or succeeded but did not beat mine. They've been persuaded. We also know that given standard distribution that's 95% of the population. Resistances tend to be high in some worlds, though, so maybe it's not the case in this world under consideration.
The trick then comes with those who have a 2@1 or better resistance--which presumably includes all those other authors. To avoid being persuaded, these must roll at least equal to my roll but not equal to or greater than their own resistance. That means that they have a 3.33% chance of success if their resistance equals my 2@1 persuasion, and an additional 3.33% chance for every intensity of resistance above that. Thus if we can figure the percentage of people at each level/intensity of resistance, we can determine the percentage of them who make the roll, and no how pervasive my change is.
While that sounds like a devastating change, it should be noted that I gave myself the best possible roll for someone with a 2@1 persuasion. If I had a 2@10 persuasion, I could have rolled 29, and taken out everyone who did not have a 2@10 persuasion (those one in a million people like me) and all but three and a third percent of those who do. But that assumes that I got the best possible roll. If I roll 11 (the lowest possible roll on a difficult check), everyone with at least a 1@2 resistance is going to meet or beat me unless they fail their check, and thus we work by figuring out how many people would have made a successful check.
The math would take some time, but the chart would be worth having for applications where you're trying to persuade "everyone in the entire world", which is something that probably arises periodically.
--M. J. Young