Injuries, Wounds and Combat Defense

[Kival]

I've a relatively simple question: Howfar do injuries and wounds reduce combat defense? It's always worded as "for all tests" but Combat Defense is neither a normal test nor a passive test. So far I decided to reduce defense by 1 for each injury and by 3 for each -1D but I'm not sure about it.

[Zorbeltuss]

By RAW, it stays the same.

[Kival]

Is there any explicit line you could quote or do you just deduce it from a missing comment on combat defense?

[Zorbeltuss]

Injuries and wounds impose penalties on tests.

Defense isn't a test, and therefore injuries and wounds would not affect it.

[Kival]

Mali do effect passive test though which are de-facto nearly the same as combat defense, so I'm not sure what's the intended idea is. Anyway my question is also more general: Would you or do you personally impose a penalty on defense too? It seems wrong to be that a prolonged fight becomes less and less dangerous because only attack get reduced.

Also I'm very curious if your opinion changes when it's about the joust and the passive animal handling? Would you impose penalties here? And inhowfar?

[aneirin]

Rules as written, combat defense is not a test, it is a 'derived statistic', as such, wounds and injuries do not reduce them.

The same is true for flaws, a person with agility, awareness and athletics 3 in each would have a combat defence of 9, even if he had a flaw in any of those abilities.

I see what you say with wounds should make a person easier to hit, however, wounds are already pretty crippling in a fight as it is, having it affect combat defense would just make a fight the first to receive a wound. Though it does affect agility and fighting passive tests so it does make it easier to manouvr and knock down your opponent or distract them.

So as to answer your question, wounds and injuries don't affect combat defense for me, however, they do affect passive aimal handling tests in jousts, an inury gives a minus 1 and gives a penalty of 4 (i.e. individual has animal handling 4, so passive test is 4 x 4 = 16. They take a wound, they are at -1 for their stat, so new score is (4-1) x 4 = 12...or 3 x 4 = 12)

[Zorbeltuss]

Wound would probably be -3, since you still roll the die (like a bonus die), but I've yet to find a mechanic for how penalty dices impact passive rolls.

Reducing combat defense due to wounds would probably make them too deadly.

[theharper]

Hi guys!

aneirin:
"The same is true for flaws, a person with agility, awareness and athletics 3 in each would have a combat defence of 9, even if he had a flaw in any of those abilities."
It is not true! Flaws reduces derived statistics (Combat Defense/Intrigue Defense/Health), too!!!

As for the injury/wound vs CD issue. I see your point, that injuries/wounds should do something with CD, but if you take into consideration the fact that they reduce all test rolls - such as Initiative/Attacks/Recovery (later on) - I would say (after a lot of playtesting) that reducing these combat related rolls is more than enough...

best,
theharper

[Zorbeltuss]

It is not true! Flaws reduces derived statistics (Combat Defense/Intrigue Defense/Health), too!!!

Page reference?

[coldwind]

Errata:

Flaw (Addition); SIFRP, Page 90
Add the following sentences to the end of the paragraph.

When calculating your passive test result with this ability, you treat your ability as being 1 point lower. For example, if you have Perception 4 and the Flaw (Perception) drawback, your passive Perception result would by 12 ([4 − 1] x 4). You also reduce any derived characteristics (such as Intrigue Defense) by 1.

[theharper]

Than you coldwind!

Further page references:
Pocket Edition: Page 119
GoT Edition: Page 93

best,
theharper

[rulandor]

Than you coldwind!

Further page references:
Pocket Edition: Page 119
GoT Edition: Page 93

best,
theharper

On a side note, in the Pocket Edition this paragraph contains a double mistake, the GoT Edition only one mistake. There is no ability called Perception; its called Awareness.

But yes, you could probably argue that a wound should afflict Combat Defense, but this would make things somewhat more complicated than necessary. The -1D on active combat abilities is severe enough; making things more difficult wouldn't matter all that much concerning the outcome.

[Kival]

My problem is rather when both have wounds, that they can't kill each other anymore.

[rulandor]

My problem is rather when both have wounds, that they can't kill each other anymore.

Oh, well, this may happen if both are so injured that they can't fight anymore. But this should be a possible, if rare outcome of a fight.

[Kival]

My problem is rather when both have wounds, that they can't kill each other anymore.

Oh, well, this may happen if both are so injured that they can't fight anymore. But this should be a possible, if rare outcome of a fight.

Hm. Envision two good fighters (fighting 4) in full plate (AR 10) with large shields (combat defense . now they both have two wounds, so max. is 12 for an attack. With 12 they do only have one degree of sucess which should not be enough to inflict any injury.

[theharper]

and now...envision the quicker using reckless attack...

[Kival]

I see. Okay, using maneuvers the problem may be not all to big.

[theharper]

yes. They not just makes the system more colorful, but more practical/real.