CT Only: How I understand CT wounding and death.

[Supplement Four]

Assume you had never heard of the first blood rule, or the actual description of combat on page 35 for that matter.

Look at the example on page 36 (not the page 35 stuff). It's the last paragraph of the Wounding and Death section, starting with "For example...." It is very, very clear.

 

[Supplement Four]

The First Blood rule is always described as "the first wound received... Can be sufficient to stin or daze him or her..."

So playing it as you describe above makes perfect sense. The rule is there to "immediately incapacitate" -- not necessarily knock the character unconscious.

Agreed. But, the rule does emphatically state unconsciousness and not incapacitate.

Of course, interpretation is part of the Ref's job.

 

[mike wightman]

A CLEAR EXAMPLE

Page 36 of TTB has a very clear example of how damage was meant to be applied in this game.

Sadly the example stops after the first round and doesn't go on to show how damage would be resolved against character 1 if he/she is hit in round 2

 

[creativehum]

Agreed. But, the rule does emphatically state unconsciousness and not incapacitate.

Of course, interpretation is part of the Ref's job.

Absolutely agree on the importance of the Ref's interpretation.

My only point would be is that the First Blood rule is always something set apart. And the First Blood rule has language much less concerned with unconscious than with incapacitated in whatever form. So a First Blood shot driving a characteristic to zero is more open ended (in my reading at least) than a characteristic driven to zero on a second or later shot -- which definitely would be unconscious.

 

[Supplement Four]

Sadly the example stops after the first round and doesn't go on to show how damage would be resolved against character 1 if he/she is hit in round 2

What's your question about round two?

You don't use the first blood rule if the character is already wounded, even if it is the first hit of a new combat.

First Blood is used only when the character is hit and is completely healed when he is hit.

 

[creativehum]

Sadly the example stops after the first round and doesn't go on to show how damage would be resolved against character 1 if he/she is hit in round 2

True, but it at least does make clear how First Blood works, how points carry over after a stat is driven to zero, and how players distribute dice hits.

I'll be grateful for that.

 

[Supplement Four]

So a First Blood shot driving a characteristic to zero is more open ended (in my reading at least) than a characteristic driven to zero on a second or later shot -- which definitely would be unconscious.

As Ref, my interpretation of two stats at zero--a Serious Wound--isn't necessarily unconsciousness. It's also incapacitate. The character (in my game) could be fully conscious, but lying there holding his leg, trying to keep the blood from pouring out of the big hole made by the bullet.

The effect is still the same: No actions by the character (except maybe to yell out--which cannot be done while unconscious), and immobile.

I might allow a PC a 2D for END or less check to remain conscious.

 

[mike wightman]

Agreed. But, the rule does emphatically state unconsciousness and not incapacitate.

If you are unconscious you are incapacitated temporarily for the duration of the loss of consciousness.

Of course, interpretation is part of the Ref's job.

A lot of the interpretation wouldn't be necessary if the rules had been written more clearly.

This is what it says:

The first wound received by any character, however, can be sufficient to stun or daze him or her

only problem is there is no such thing as a stun or daze result, you are either fully conscious and capable of action or unconscious, as it goes on to say:

As a result, first blood may immediately incapacitate or even kill.

Incapacitate means unconscious and incapable of action.

So are you saying unconscious doesn't mean unconscious, it just means stunned or dazed and incapable of action? Note the combat example clearly states the character 2 is unconscious, not stunned or dazed.

 

[Supplement Four]

The First Blood rule, as we've come to describe it (not described that way in the rules), is a "first wound" rule. It is clearly applied as the first wound a character receives.

In round two, if the character is already wounded, then the First Blood rule does not apply.

In round two, if the character did not get wounded in round one, then the First Blood rule applies.



Let's say that Digger, with stats 777777, gets wounded in a bar fight. The 1D Brawling damage is 1 point, and that is randomly applied to END. So, he ends walks out of the bar fight (the bar tender broke up the fight) with stats 776777.

Now, it's the next day. Digger didn't go see the doctor. He just went home, drank some more, and slept.

When he wakes up, he's still got stats 776777.

He goes back to the bar, and there's Jacks, the same dude he quarreled with yesterday. The fight brakes out again.

Before Digger can do anything, Jacks punches him. Rolling 1D damage, and he gets a 6.

The First Blood rule does not apply here. Digger is already wounded. So, Digger can take that 6 points of damage however he wants. He decides to take it on his DEX. So, now, Digger's stats are 716777.

 

[creativehum]

Not a big deal, but the phrase "first blood" is used in the context of the rule in every edition of the game. It is used synonymously with "first wound" in the paragraph in which it appears.

 

[Supplement Four]

So are you saying unconscious doesn't mean unconscious, it just means stunned or dazed and incapable of action?

I'm saying that the rules clearly indicate that one sat at zero renders the character unconscious for ten minutes.

I'm also saying that I alter that a bit in my games. I can incapacitate or stun or daze--or maybe even render unconscious--the character for 3D minutes.

To decide, I may allow a 2D for END or less check, vs. the wounded END level.

 

[mike wightman]

What's your question about round two?

The side bar on page 47 states that the first wounds from a weapons damage dice i.e. the first damage die rolled, is allocated to a randomly determined characteristic rather than assigned by the player - the critical hit effect of the first wound i.e. the classic first blood rule allocates all weapon damage dice to a random characteristic and then carries over randomly

You don't use the first blood rule if the character is already wounded, even if it is the first hit of a new combat.

That is not being disputed, rather the side bar on page 47 can be interpreted to mean the first damage die of weapon damage in subsequent rounds is determined randomly (only the first die mind you).

First Blood is used only when the character is hit and is completely healed when he is hit.

First blood is completely healed?

 

[Supplement Four]

The side bar on page 47 states that the first wounds from a weapons damage dice i.e. the first damage die rolled, is allocated to a randomly determined characteristic rather than assigned by the player - the critical hit effect of the first wound i.e. the classic first blood rule allocates all weapon damage dice to a random characteristic and then carries over randomly

I don't see the issue with page 47, since we've got a clear example with page 36.

There is little space on page 47. What is written there is for quick reference on those combat charts. It is the bullet points version of what is written in detail on page 35 and page 36.

If all we had were page 47, there would be some interpretation issues. But since page 47 is only meant to summarize the detail given on pages 35-36, there's no issue.

 

[creativehum]

Mike, "incapacitate" means "prevent from functioning in a normal way"... not unconscious.

The First Blood rule clearly stated the words quoted above are a possible result: stun, daze, incapacitate. Whether or not the character is knocked unconscious is moot. He's prevented from functioning in a normal way either from shock (a typical reaction to a gunshot), rolling on the ground in pain, knocked on his ass and staring up at the sky, or whatever.

The phrasing makes all these possibilities clear. How far down the road does a RPG rules set have to hold a Referee's hand before it says, "Here, do something like this"? From encounter rolls to reaction rolls to how to use skill rolls the Basic Traveller rules are constantly teeing up the Referee and saying, "You take it from here."

 

[mike wightman]

The First Blood rule, as we've come to describe it (not described that way in the rules), is a "first wound" rule. It is clearly applied as the first wound a character receives.

The term first blood is used in the text in every edition of CT.

The First Blood rule does not apply here. Digger is already wounded. So, Digger can take that 6 points of damage however he wants. He decides to take it on his DEX. So, now, Digger's stats are 716777.

Here I have to disagree with your interpretation. Since this is a completely new combat then the first blood rule applies, despite Digger having reduced stats.

[I don't know why I am even discussing this since I don't use the first blood rule as written, I use it when a player rolls box cars and call it a critical hit. :devil:]

 

[creativehum]

I'm not saying that I coined the phrase, but I've never heard it called that before. I started calling it that on this board a long, long time ago (and on the TML before that). It seemed to catch on.

I don't think I've ever seen the actual words "First Blood" in any CT rule book.

Maybe others used it before me--it's a natural connection.

I even saw Marc use it some years back.

All I'm saying is that the phrase "first blood" is right there in the books: Book 1 (both editions), and TTB. Like right there, in print, on the page. Whether or not you saw it there is a wholly different issues. But the phrase has been there in the game text since 1977 and each edition after.

(I've always been confused why the Errata refers to the rule as the "so-called first blood rule" as if the phrase was conjured up out of thin air.)

 

[Supplement Four]

All I'm saying is that the phrase "first blood" is right there in the books: Book 1 (both editions), and TTB. Like right there, in print, on the page. Whether or not you saw it there is a wholly different issues. But the phrase has been there in the game text since 1977 and each edition after.

(I've always been confused why the Errata refers to the rule as the "so-called first blood rule" as if the phrase was conjured up out of thin air.)

Actually....I correct myself. It is used in the body of the text. I just read it.

Page 35: "As a result, first blood may incapacitate or even kill."

Silly me. o:

 

[Supplement Four]

Here I have to disagree with your interpretation. Since this is a completely new combat then the first blood rule applies, despite Digger having reduced stats.

Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

Page 35 clearly states..."The first wound received by any character...."

If wounded Digger, who has reduced stats of 776777, is wounded again, is this additional wound the second wound or the first wound received by the character?



The rule doesn't refer to a game round. No mention at all of that. It refers to a character state. The first wound a character receives....

 

[mike wightman]

It's a completely new combat.

According to your interpretation once a character has taken any wound ever he/she is now immune to the first blood rule since there is no mention of healing back to full resetting the rule either.

Sometimes you have to apply common sense, and common sense is that every new combat is a new combat and stuff like the first blood rule can apply again.

 

[Supplement Four]

It's a completely new combat.

Yes, and that has nothing to do whether the character has taken his first wound or not.

According to your interpretation once a character has taken any wound ever he/she is now immune to the first blood rule since there is no mention of healing back to full resetting the rule either.

The rule says, specifically, "The first wound received by a character..."

If the character is not wounded, then apply the First Blood Rule.

If the character is wounded, then any additional would is not the first wound, is it?



Consider the mechanics. Attributes are created using 2D. They average about 1D. And, the range is up to 15.

Thus, if there were no First Blood rule, characters would hardly ever be killed or seriously wounded. The player would take them to Minor Wound/Unconscious first. Average damage is 2D-3D.

Thus, the CT writers needed a rule to put some risk in there. The First Blood rule does that.

AFTER a character is wounded, his attributes are lowered. Thus, the normal pick-and-choose wounding with full dice is more lethal.

Thus, the First Blood rule exists.




If you read the rule carefully, and consider the above, you'll realize that what I'm saying her is true. The First Blood rule only applies to a character who is not wounded, regardless of any new fight or combat round.