Review of Play: The Saga of the Westmarch DF Game

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

If someone is still standing, they're still a threat. The guy who is stunned and standing is just as dangerous as the one who is swinging at you.

Then why do you state that you can switch targets freely earlier if you have to roll to do so once you've whacked someone?

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

Torso is fine, but simply cutting off arms is not going to do it.

Just making sure Bloodlust isn't a "automatic hit location penalty" disad.

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

No, I think of it more as "wounded doesn't diminish threat" attitude. Just because you stun someone, doesn't mean that they won't stab you in a back in the second after they recover. They're just as much of an offensive threat as ever - they're just more vulnerable and so should be targeted first.

Sure, but if you have a choice between turning your back on the stunned guy or the unstunned guy, why would you have to roll to not turn your back on the guy that is the immediate threat just because you whacked the stunned guy last round with that reasoning?

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

I'm not penalizing people for resisting disadvantages, so I don't think that starting with the extreme position and letting people roll the dice for control is too much.

That's fair, I just think that the Bloodthirsty person should have some understandable internal logic that drives their behavior. Having a tier of Threat(conscious)>Minor Threat(unconscious)>Not a Threat(Dead) makes sense, but not being able to switch from the stunned guy to the guy who is maneuvering to tickle your kidneys with his shortsword without a roll doesn't jive with that belief system.