What does Unfit apply to?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by corwyn

For that reason, I don't think I'll apply it to extra effort in combat (assuming I ever see a PC with it). I think it's overkill for -5 points, the other penalties easily are worth 5 pts of inconvenience, and when I allow EE it tends to be a big part of the game. I would probably give -5 or -10 for no EE in combat by itself based on my games. Either that or bump Unfit up to -10 or -15 because it would be roughly equivalent to -3 to -5 fatigue.

The possibility of messing up extra effort is virtually the only situation where Unfit is likely to come up as a problem for the player. I mean sure the character will be miserable in a cross country hike and will slow more fit people down, but that's just roleplaying stuff. It doesn't affect your ability to succeed for the most part.



And yeah, it's important to consider how hard it will be to buy/train off a disad. Unfit is one of the advantages that is most likely to be eliminated in the course of a character arc. Or a training montage.

You're the saddest bunch
I ever met
But you can bet
Mister, I'll make a man
Out of you

Boy do I regret cutting Jim!
But Jim had it coming!

[corwyn]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

The possibility of messing up extra effort is virtually the only situation where Unfit is likely to come up as a problem for the player. I mean sure the character will be miserable in a cross country hike and will slow more fit people down, but that's just roleplaying stuff. It doesn't affect your ability to succeed for the most part.

No, the extra fatigue loss is practically an afterthought. It doesn't apply in a lot of games because fatigue is often hand waved and EE in combat isn't part of a lot of games. The main downside is -1 to HT rolls and is easily detrimental enough for -5 points by itself. The inverse of Hard to Kill and Hard to Subdue plus a penalty to a host of rolls - stunning, poisons, disease, spells and other supernatural attacks, etc. It's not uncommon to roll Ht over a dozen times per character. And failing a HT roll is often debilitating.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

I agree that Unfit is fine at -5 - all the stuff it penalizes are either stuff you can choose to avoid (e.g., Extra Effort), or they're things that a lot of Unfit character concepts can avoid (wizards who levitate everywhere, nobles with servants to carry them about, and so on). Too much higher, and it would be more "free points" for the sort of character who would take it. Also, keeping it at -5 makes it much easier to buy off, which is an important thing, I think. The narrative arc of "out-of-shape individual goes on an adventure, gets into much better condition" is, while hardly a defining concept, still a pretty common one. Too much more expensive, and I think you'd just see a lot of characters not take Unfit at all, rather than taking it and buying it off over a couple of sessions.

But for the same [-5] points, you can get to penalize part of the stuff you listed above: get -1 FP and Easy to Kill 1. Now your roll penalty applies to just one type of roll instead of many, and your FP problem is just a single FP smaller pool instead of an effectively halved one.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

At - 10 it is the only disadvantage a regular person might have, and at - 15 it is now solely a disadvantage of more capable characters. Reluctant Killer plus Unfit and two Quirks is already -12 points for your everyman.

Disadvantage limits are an optional rule, so if you don't use that rule it's not a problem.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anders

Disadvantage limits are an optional rule, so if you don't use that rule it's not a problem.

Extra Effort in Combat is an optional rule, so if you don't use that rule it isn't a problem.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Anders

Disadvantage limits are an optional rule, so if you don't use that rule it's not a problem.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Extra Effort in Combat is an optional rule, so if you don't use that rule it isn't a problem.

True. But PK's clarifications weren't really about EE in combat.

[sir_pudding]

If you are out of shape and start exercising consistently, basic cardiovascular fitness is one of the first notable gains, which also suggests that the point cost in terms of Time Use should be relatively low.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

If you are out of shape and start exercising consistently, basic cardiovascular fitness is one of the first notable gains, which also suggests that the point cost in terms of Time Use should be relatively low.

Agreed. One of the principles has to go - either Point Value won't scale with Time Use or with (negative) utility. I would disregard the Time Use rule, but I understand may be inclined to do otherwise.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anders

Agreed. One of the principles has to go - either Point Value won't scale with Time Use or with (negative) utility. I would disregard the Time Use rule, but I understand may be inclined to do otherwise.

That seems less optional than extra effort in combat.

I really don't see the problem, though. If you are taking Unfit at all you either are playing a sedentary character who intends to remain sedentary, in which case you are going to avoid interpersonal violence and unlikely to use Extra Effort in Combat, even if it is an option in your campaign, or you intend to buy it off quickly, in which case the low cost is a feature.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Anders

Agreed. One of the principles has to go - either Point Value won't scale with Time Use or with (negative) utility. I would disregard the Time Use rule, but I understand may be inclined to do otherwise.

Except the time usage rule officially wins over unitedly break down in costs over thing like Combat Reflexes as well.