Concerning Wounds

[cuthalion]

For the sake of rules consistency and to eliminate vagueness, I'm simply asking if the Consequences of Failure table for Hazards concerning the Wounded line (#6) is an oversight?

Hmmm ... I've gone back and forth about this. But I think the sentiment is that you're reading a little too literally. Just as you say it wouldn't make any logical sense for the wound to be treated over night, the retort is that it might make narrative sense (see Dunkelbrink). Or, it might not--that's your call as a LM I guess.

We have this on wounds from the rules (p. 129):

A Wounded character has received a life-threatening blow: an open wound or other critical injury. While losing fundamental characteristics and recovering Endurance is an everyday occurrence for an adventurer, being Wounded is a more serious predicament, which is going to affect a character for much longer. Characters are Wounded most often in combat.

Together with the rules for healing wounds--that it takes at least 24h to notice that a wound hasn't been treated successfully etc.--this would seem to suggest that wounds are supposed to be significant, you're right.

Maybe, since the table is kind of short-hand, the phrase 'or suffer a Wound on an {eye}' doesn't preclude that wound also being accompanied by an endurance loss. I don't think many would argue strongly with your interpretation. And I'm not sure a re-wording is necessary, or makes this that much clearer.

See 209, under a different context albeit, but still applicable here I think:

A partial Loremaster can easily ruin a game, as an unfair call when applying a rule brings the rules themselves to the players’ attention and their immersion in the game is interrupted.

This seems like an easy one to solve according to the narrative needs of the adventure, and while keeping the level of immersion that suits you and your players.

Shouldn't the EYE result be worse? It's an EYE, after all.

And yes--the effects are potentially worse. Say you're character gets wounded by a hazard. Even if they were to recover in one night, if they get into combat they can be knocked unconscious or even killed outright. And of course, any endurance they do lose will be recovered slower while wounded. Those are the more 'serious' effects of being wounded given by the rules.

Again though--I think it could be played either way, depending on the needs of the story/state of characters: say for example you've a character on 4 endurance, and you roll a 5 on a success die for endurance loss and wound them. You've now just killed a character following a hazard episode (albeit with 24hr chance for recovery). Bit harsh? Maybe in this case you might just go with the wound?

[Dunkelbrink]

No swords drawn here Elfcrusher, just a normal discussion...

So, is the EYE result normally worse than an Endurance loss? The answer is "yes". A Wound is dangerous, if you have one since earlier or if you're low at Endurance. A wound means potential death.

Is the EYE result always worse than Endurance loss? The answer is "no". If you're at full or almost full health (like 28 out of 30) the Wound will heal overnight. As will a Endurance roll of 1-2, while a higher number takes a few more nights to heal.

Is this hazard rule, where an Eye result in a few cases is less dangerous than an endurance loss (like in Beckett's Scout example), an oversight in the RAW? The answer is imho "no".

It's of course possible to change the "or" to an "and"; that would be a nasty Eye result indeed.

[Majestic]

While throughout the discussion I found myself 'siding' more with beckett's point of view (his POV does make sense), I can also see the POV that if that Scout character (in the example) was already wounded when that happened, that EYE result could have been lethal.

Didn't Francisco used to jump on here and answer rules questions like this one?

[Francesco]

Hi everyone,

thank you for the considerate musings, you all pose some interesting points. As the rules stand in the revised text, it is indeed possible that an EYE result ends up being a less punishing outcome than a regular failure, should the hero be at full Endurance. The severity of a wound in TOR can be considered to be directly connected to the Endurance status of an injured character, so much that a full End character who receives a wound might be seen as someone who received a brutal blow, but absorbed it without more grievous consequences.

Now, this does not diminish the fact that an EYE result might indeed at times be more desirable than a regular failure, and this annoys me (and others) a little. On the other hand, substituting the OR for an AND would make for an excessively cruel consequence, especially on someone already below his full End score as someone already suggested. Last but not least, an errata would mar our wonderful revised text...

Jokes aside, for the moment I would stand behind the current rule and let the RAW apply as is in its slight imperfection. If someone (myself included) will end up suggesting something much more reasonable, we might reconsider.

Thank you very much!

Francesco

[Glorelendil]

And on the seventh day He rested.

[beckett]

Thank you, Francesco. I haven't found substituting the OR for an AND excessively cruel at my table yet but the revised rules are still very new for us, so I will certainly keep an EYE out for it.

[Stormcrow]

The solution is very simple.

Any player who gloats when they get an Eye automatically gains 1 Shadow point.

[zedturtle]

The solution is very simple.

Any player who gloats when they get an Eye automatically gains 1 Shadow point.

That's not a bad idea... a Shadow point for a failure to avoid the Wound; it doesn't compound the problem with Endurance and healing Wounds, but makes spending Hope more difficult... I like it.