forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Angelalex242 wrote:From the OP, this is not explicitly an Axe of Az question. However, I used Axe of Az to extrapolate that if you are wearied by a blow, the protection test is made wearied. Of course this applies to enemies too, and PCs like that rule a whole lot better when it applies to the bad guys.

Unless we're doing the double standard thing where heroes get to make it unwearied and villains have to make it wearied. I prefer a more even board though.

See, I don't agree that the axe makes you wearied for the protection test. Everything happens "immediately", so you determine what the effects of the hit are, and then all those effects are applied at once rather than one at a time.

The axe specifically makes an opponent Wearied as soon as the Gandalf rune is rolled on the Feat Die. That's before any damage or the protection test is rolled with regard to the attack; due in part to the condition not being applied to Adversaries based on Endurance loss. I agree with you that standard protection tests, and being Wearied in the same attack through damage, don't get the Wearied status applied on the test associated with the attack but the Axe of Az is an exception based mechanic and the Wearied status is specifically stated as applying when the Gandalf is rolled on the Feat Die. The Protection test takes place after such a result/roll. I remember asking Francesco about it years ago as one of my players has a Dwarf character.

Rich H wrote:The axe specifically makes an opponent Wearied as soon as the Gandalf rune is rolled on the Feat Die.

Yeah, I don't think that is any more immediate than all the other things that happen immediately on making the roll. I'd there some source on it happening first, or is that just an assumption?

doctheweasel wrote:Yeah, I don't think that is any more immediate than all the other things that happen immediately on making the roll. I'd there some source on it happening first, or is that just an assumption?

As stated above, I asked Francesco about it.

Rich H wrote: As stated above, I asked Francesco about it.

Ah, that's what I get for being only barely literate (i.e. American).

doctheweasel wrote:

Rich H wrote: As stated above, I asked Francesco about it.

Ah, that's what I get for being only barely literate (i.e. American).

... Don't be too hard on yourself, I'm always missing stuff and I'm a Yorkshireman (ie, supposedly perfect).

You can interpret the rules either way, but I would simply use real world logic. In actuality, everything is happening at once. If you are armored, unweary, and uninjured, and you are struck with a sword or spear, regardless of the result, you are absorbing that entire blow as an armored, unweary, and uninjured person. If you become weary as a result of that attack, does it happen at some point between when the spear penetrates your flesh but before it hits any organs? Its just silly to think of it like that. I say resolve the entire attack, then apply the results. But to each their own.

It seems I stand corrected. The Ax of Az is a unique case.

Angelalex242 wrote:It seems I stand corrected. The Ax of Az is a unique case.

As long as you've been consistent in other cases I don't think it matters too much - I mean it does only impact PCs, so makes combat a little more dangerous when someone is Wearied in the same attack that also could wound but such don't happen all the time and are likely pretty uncommon.

Matty1Love wrote:You can interpret the rules either way, but I would simply use real world logic.

That way lies madness. That's generally true, and especially so in this case: The number of dice you roll is based on your armour, not a skill, so by "real world logic" Weary shouldn't affect the roll at all. (Maybe Weary affecting the Feat die when rolling Protection could be justified, but that's not on the table.)

Since the mechanic has no connection to real world logic, the solution should be whatever results in the best gameplay.