Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-14-2018, 04:17 AM   #11
ecz
 
ecz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

as I have said I have always house ruled out this possible extensive interpretation from day one.

Probably my understanding of the written English is poor, but I firmly believe that RAW allows any reader to think that any spellcaster is exposed to shock when spends 5 or more ST points

in any case this is a clear example of how rules have been written (and sadly re-written) not in the best possible way.

A simple example of a spellcaster spending 5+ ST points would help but it does not exists in Wizard and/or In The Labirinth.

Also I wonder if a wizard at ST 3 or less, for wounds and fatigue, is subject to the -3 DX.
__________________
VASLeague Tournament Director
www.vasleague.org
ecz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 06:44 AM   #12
TippetsTX
 
TippetsTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Sounds like another good topic for the FAQ that someone proposed in a different thread.
TippetsTX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 08:54 AM   #13
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Gandalf having to take a knee after casting a 10 point Lock spell to hold back the Balrog; Ged passing out after casting and maintaining some sort of funny fog spell we don't have in our TFT spell book; I think this rule is a juicy dramatic opportunity, not a problem.
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 09:53 AM   #14
The Wyzard
 
The Wyzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Yeah, I don't think it's either good or bad, so long as the players know about it beforehand.
The Wyzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 11:47 AM   #15
ecz
 
ecz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wyzard View Post
Yeah, I don't think it's either good or bad, so long as the players know about it beforehand.
Personally I do not care less if the rule (any rule) is good or bad as I can always change it in my table and - BTW - who am I to decide what is good or bad in game like TfT?

My question is pretty basic and regards what the rules are supposed to say.

That it is not so automatic to understand (as everyone sees), despite the 35 years of playtesting and the rewrite.
__________________
VASLeague Tournament Director
www.vasleague.org
ecz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 11:58 AM   #16
ecz
 
ecz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
... Thinking about this again, I thought how funny it would be if spellcasting did give you shock and knock you down...

Counter-tactics could include:

* lying down before you cast powerful spells, to reduce the impact of falling down and to take cover.

* wizard's chairs, which could be wheeled and/or enchanted with various abilities, such as levitation. They're ominous because they suggest the wizard wants to be able to cast a spell for 8+ ST without having to worry about falling down...

* wizards tied into saddles of riding beasts, so they can cast 8+ ST spells without falling off their mounts...
this is very fun, you made me laugh, thanks.

What I decided when a boy in the eighties in five minutes still stands today. Fatigue is NOT injury for DX penalties.

But it seems that the abiguity in the rules, poor written in that point, still makes victims in 2018.

In any case there is no way to decide per RAW if a wizard reduced at ST 3, for wounds and fatigue, suffers the -3DX
__________________
VASLeague Tournament Director
www.vasleague.org
ecz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 02:41 PM   #17
Wayne
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Geelong, Australia
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Casting a long range very detailed illusion spell killed Luke Skywalker.
Wayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 03:05 PM   #18
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

I think this thread demonstrates people can get confused by the wording of that one part which is trying to explain fatigue.

I don't think there's any question that it was originally intended for spell fatigue to cause effects of injury. If you read the original rules, they are pretty deliberate and never mention such an effect from spellcasting - the reactions to injury rules talk about injury and hits, not fatigue or exhaustion. If you read Advanced Melee page 25 on Recovering Lost Strength, it refers to "injury", "hits" and "damage" as one thing, and ST lost from spell casting as "exhaustion". The Effects of "Injury" section seems clearly about injury. With all the redundant rules explanation, if it were intended that wizards needed to worry about collapsing and suffering penalties from casting spells, I'd expect that it would say so someplace.

As a house rule, I think the -2 DX part could be colorful to add, maybe even on top of an injury penalty (if a wizard ever manages to lose 5+ ST from spellcasting and 5 ST from injury on the same turn and still be conscious). I think the falling down part seems extreme to the point of being a bit slapstick, though.

I can see wizards with walkers... and attendants trained to catch them when they keel over...

As for the -3DX at 3 ST or less... I think that yes, it does apply, as that's just an effect of your ST being that low, not a one-time reaction to injury. Compare the wording:

"A figure that takes 5 or more hits in one turn has its DX adjusted -2 for its next action (spell, attack, etc.)."

"A figure that takes 8 or more hits in one turn immediately
falls down."

"Any figure whose ST is reduced to 3 or less has an extra -3 DX for the rest of the combat."

Seems pretty clear to me there where the effects in question are listed. No?
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 03:36 PM   #19
larsdangly
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

I would say the intent is totally ambiguous; you could construct an argument in favor of one approach by quoting various passages, and then turn around and construct the opposite argument by quoting one or two other passages and arguing by omission (i.e., surely if they meant X it would say so). I think until an FAQ addresses the issue directly we should just do what we want.

(And then after an FAQ appears, keep doing what you want.)
larsdangly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 04:06 PM   #20
TippetsTX
 
TippetsTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
Default Re: ST fatigue and "reaction to injury"

Quote:
Originally Posted by larsdangly View Post
(And then after an FAQ appears, keep doing what you want.)
And this is why there will never be an Organized TFT League (thank God)!
;)
TippetsTX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.