Competing Fright Checks, A House Rule

In a campaign world that I'm putting together, many PCs and NPCs will have versions of the Terror advantage. To avoid craziness, I was thinking of introducing the following house rule:



"You are unaffected by Terror that is equal to or lower than the level of your own Terror advantage. If you are confronted by someone with a higher Terror level than you, you roll the fright check with a bonus equal to your Terror level. Mundane modifiers from GUPRS Campaigns still apply if you are affected. Also, long term exposure to someone of higher Terror level than you makes you immune to their Terror."



For example:

Adam has Terror (2). Normal humans roll fright checks at -1 plus any applicable modifiers when they meet Adam. One day, Adam meets his enemies: Beth, Carla, and Dean who have Terror (1), (2), and (3) respectively. Adam is unaffected by Beth and Carla. But Adam rolls a fright check at -1 plus any applicable modifiers for looking at Dean. Beth also needs to roll a fright check at -1 plus applicable modifiers for being in the presence of Adam. Beth, Carla, and Dean don't have to worry about affecting each other because they spend so much time together, they stopped freaking each other out a long time ago.



Does anyone see any problem with this? There will be some extra calculations at the table, sure. But it is meant to be a part of the campaign. Are there any ramifications I may be overlooking? Also, is there any reason to change the cost of the Terror advantage under these rules considering that some PCs may not have it?



Thanks in advance.

Competing Fright Checks, A House Rule