Damage

[loudriver23]

Hello everybody,
I need a little clarification as it pertains to characters taking damage.
The part that I want to make sure I have correct is, where all damage from a single attack must be subtracted from a single stat. Thus making even the weakest character able to tolerate 3 damage inflicting attacks.

I know this is not a combat/war simulator, but don't you think that if a character is shot with an Energy Rifle for 6d6+effect damage (a potential 42) would't you think that would pretty much kill a human?
I guess I'm just asking firstly, am I understanding the rule correctly, and secondly, do you guys/gals adhere to that or homebrew your damage schema?
Thanks in advance,
Louis

 

[BytePro]

Use the whole paragraph on pg 65 - the part you quoted is just a clarification meant to cover not splitting damage between stats to avoid stats going to 0!

Damage goes first to END. When END goes to 0, then target may choose physcial stat that takes remaining damage...

If that stat goes to 0, then character is unconscious.

If there is still damage left over, it carries over to the remaining stat.

If that stat goes to 0, then character is dead.

 

[loudriver23]

Use the whole paragraph on pg 65 - the part you quoted is just a clarification meant to cover not splitting damage between stats to avoid stats going to 0!

Damage goes first to END. When END goes to 0, then target may choose physcial stat that takes remaining damage...

If that stat goes to 0, then character is unconscious.

If there is still damage left over, it carries over to the remaining stat.

If that stat goes to 0, then character is dead.

Thanks ByetPro,
I just reread it and I totally understand now.

 

[BytePro]

Sure - no problem!

Rule mechanics really need (proofed) examples.

 

[loudriver23]

Sure - no problem!

Rule mechanics really need (proofed) examples.

Exactly. I mean, when I slowed down re-read it again and took the parans into consideration I was finally able to catch the drift of it.
Now i'm wondering about skills, but I'll do a bunch more careful reading before I post again.

 

[BytePro]

With the editing quality, two or three reads are often required to figure out what is actually intended. The statement in parenthesis is literally in direct contradiction to the rest of the paragraph - it wasn't your reading, but the poor quality of editing. Heck, see the first sentence under Damage - 'Each weapon lists the damage it inflicts as a number of d6.' Sure, most will 'know' what the author meant, despite the awkward wording and the technical inaccuracy of the statement. With a little hunting one will find the referenced lists on tables that are not labeled, and are in an entirely different, and later appearing, section...

Anyone familiar with RPGs should know that the rule mechanics for combat are extremely important to the reader. Assuming the reader doesn't know what '3d6+3' means by that point is silly (and means the editing really failed!), and any half way decent editor would have caught and fixed the above quite easily. Ex: Damage is the sum of the Attack Roll Effect and the damage listed for the weapon used, as found on the tables in the Equipment section. [Better wording, labeling tables, and using limited knowledge of word processors for page number references being the 'second draft' fix...]

But, even if the editing was better, examples would immensely help the reader any time new mechanics are introduced. Given the market, I'm less critical of poor editing than the sheer laziness and outright silliness of neglecting to provide good examples...

 

[loudriver23]

But, even if the editing was better, examples would immensely help the reader any time new mechanics are introduced. Given the market, I'm less critical of poor editing than the sheer laziness and outright silliness of neglecting to provide good examples...

I couldn't agree more. Editing woes aside, if the editors/authors provided more specific examples they could have saved everybody some grief.