In our Felltower game on Sunday, Aldwyn went to more than -1xHP and had to make a "death check." He rolled a 17. As usual - his last one that he rolled was an 18, the previous session.
I ruled he was dead, given the rules discussed here. The player pointed out he had HT 13, and Hard to Kill 2, for a 15. So a 17 is a miss by 2. A miss by 1 or 2 is a Mortal Wound, not instant death, per Basic Set p. 423 and Exploits p. 60. His guy had just died the previous session, so I said okay, he's Mortally Wounded.
In the future, though, I'm ruling differently - and I feel as the rules intend.
Per Basic Set p. 348, and Exploits p. 7, "A roll of 17 is a critical failure if your effective skill is 15 or less; otherwise, it is an ordinary failure." I feel that rule for Mortal Wounds doesn't trump the basic rules of success and failure. A character with HT 16 who rolls a 17 would be mortally wounded, and one who rolls an 18 should be dead even though it's a failure by 1-2.
A critical failure should be bad, even if the rules provide for a failure margin that has a lesser effect. Playing at the top end of the bell curve shouldn't forgive you that except as specifically noted (i.e. 17 becoming an ordinary failure.) Even though specific rules generally trump general rules, I feel this general rule should carry through. Otherwise it's possible to be practically immune to death - death only 1 in 216 times (and with Luck, make it possible to die outright only 1 in 10,077,696 times.)
All of that said, for the future sessions of game I'm making this ruling - the general trumps the specific, here. On an effective total HT+bonuses of 15 or less, 17-18 is a critical failure and death. On an effective total HT+bonuses of 16 or higher, 17 is a normal failure (and thus mortally wounded) and 18 is a critical failure.
I don't think that's different from the rules intend, and I don't feel it's unfair or even unduly harsh. And that's how it'll go.
And does that all mean guys who bought HT 13 + Hard to Kill 2 and then get Fit and increase HT to 14 have effectively no effect from the second level of Hard to Kill? Yes. This is what I meant about over-patching.
I agree with your take on this. Mortally Wounded is clearly a supplementary, not supplanting effect.
ReplyDelete"This is what I meant about over-patching."
Something I've allowed (to encourage a 'spend now' over 'save forever' mentality) is 'trade-ins'. By which I mean if the PC has Hard to Kill and wants to purchase up HT by 1 (or Fit/Very Fit), because the bene from HtK is clearly covered, I allow them to trade it in. See also Striking ST, HP, FP, Basic Move +0.25, etc...
Or do you want the "hoarde the exps" mindset to prevail?
I've mentioned this before in other contexts, including that over-patching post - I don't allow trade-ins. I'd rather have people save than get a mindset of spend-spend-spend knowing it's all an "investment" in a future, larger advantage or attribute.
DeleteThat was my alternative post today - my advice to players about how to build their characters through XP. TLDR version is to save up and buy only what fits your long-term plan for your character's development.
I'd also note that the piecemeal advantages sometimes come with benefits you don't get otherwise, which go away on a trade-in, and that bothers me. HT 13 + HtK1 means on a 14 you're fine but appear dead, which means things trying to kill you move on. HT 14 means on a 14 you're fine and don't appear dead, so things trying to kill you don't move on. Why did that ability go away? Why are you healthier but no harder to kill than before? I find that change jarring.
DeleteDFRPG rewrites HTK so it's much more boring
DeleteKinda my point in calling it out specifically, it brings nothing to the part that HT doesn't bring.
DeleteKinda my point in calling it out specifically, it brings nothing to the part that HT doesn't bring.
DeleteWell, if you don't use the Basic Set rules that seems to be the case. I think that was a space-saver that missed out on a great chance to tie the rules for Playing Dead in with an advantage that gives you an effective automatic success on it.
DeleteFor Ads, Disads, Spells, I've been sticking to the DFRPG rules for consistency. Anything I use not in DFRPG, I have printed out in my house rules. This way the only books we //need/ are the DFRPG books.
DeleteThe other books are certainly available, but I prefer not to draw form them during play.
I'll question if an HT roll has an effective, or any, skill level and suggest that applying the level of success rules to a non-skill roll is dubious.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I follow your argument. Because rolling HT to see if you die is not a skill roll, it doesn't follow the rules for success rolls? How does that follow? Those success rolls apply in non-skill cases, and canonically apply for HT-based rolls in particular, including Knockdown & Stunning, recovery from Mortal Wounds, Duration of Crippling, etc. Why would rolling to not die be different without being specifically called out as different?
DeleteTL/DR: You're right and I was getting too clever with semantics.
DeleteLong form:
The rules under modifiers talk about "These bonuses and penalties affect the number you are rolling against – your “target number”" establishing the phrase for general success rolls, and then defines "Your base skill is your actual level in a skill" with effective skill derived from that. So there is a semantic argument that "effective skill" for skills is different that "target number" for abilities.
Yes, that collapses as soon as I realize that there is no separate rule for success with target number instead of effective skill, so that later must also cover the former.
I do find a critical failure on top of dying to be odd and I'm still not sure what a critical success looks like.
The usual joke on a 3-4 on a death check is, "I'm immortal!"
DeleteMore accurately, you're alive and we'll often find some minor perk to go with it - maybe you don't need to roll for consciousness if that's coming right up, or if you have multiple checks we'll declare them all successful, etc. A critical failure just means death, so that's sufficient.
I figure there are plenty of examples where a critical success does something good but a critical failure doesn't, and vice versa, so I'm not bothered by the lack of symmetry.
I like your ruling and have done the same in my games. Also, your hypothetical guy with a superfluous level of HtK might still profit if he gets attacked with a HT-draining Affliction!
ReplyDelete-Joel Sammallahti
Oh, good point, I'd forgotten that.
DeleteOr if he faces a Death Check with a penalty... which I've never seen, but I can imagine some sort of truly nefarious 'save or die' poison or spell.
DeleteNew Spell:
DeleteClose to Death
Regular, 1 min, 10 FP, no resist
Temporarily thins the barriers between life and death. Death aspected mana increases a level but the subject is also at -5 on death checks.