New Hold Back Called Shot and various Adversaries

[Kullervo]

Hey guys - we just had a session where this Called Shot came up as a potential option, but we ended up being of different minds about how it actually worked. To avoid spoilers, we effectively had to capture a minion of the Shadow, who we finally caught up to after a long chase. My Beorning was quite angry at the above-mentioned minion due to circumstances, so I offered oocly to knock it out. The concern was that I may accidentally kill it, so I said we could use the Hold Back called shot. One of the other players then said that that'd still kill it because it doesnt have Great Size.

This, then, is our issue. The Loremaster is so far siding with that player, but we havent had a decent discussion about it as it was late - in my eyes, the text of the Called Shot is pretty clear about its intended effect; if it only worked on Adverseries of Great Size, that make it extremely narrow in utility, as there are very few Adversaries with Great Size who you would even want to knock out. Sure, there might be some differing opinions there, maybe you totally want to KO that troll, tie him up and cart him into town to face justice but... Well, it seems unlikely.

In my eyes, its a way to capture prisoners when you fight things that can speak and reason with you. Curious what everyone else thought! The Called shot is on page 110 of the Adventurer's Companion book.

[Deadmanwalking]

Per official rules, going down to Endurance loss for adversaries without Great Size results in them being unconscious and dying, but not instantly dead (unlike Wounds, which kill instantly). Therefore, you can absolutely do this, though you'll need to make a Healing check (at TN 14, I believe) to keep him alive once he's down.

For those with Great Size, I suppose it's sort of an LM call, but I don't think it's possible by a strict reading of the rules.

[Glorelendil]

Huh. I tend to play much more leniently than that. If the player states he (or she) is trying to subdue and not kill, I allow it. A Pierce/Wound would become a knock-out blow, and while I haven't actually been in a game where a player wanted to use a Called Shot to do just that, I'd allow it in a heartbeat. Regardless of how RAW parses.

I could see how in a particularly dramatic situation it could be narratively compelling to have the players accidentally kill the adversary who had, for example, had the information they needed. But to rule that, as a general thing, whether you can successfully subdue without killing is up to the dice seems...pointlessly arbitrary?

[Deadmanwalking]

I might easily do the same, I was just stating how the rules, speaking strictly, worked by default.

[Falenthal]

Exhaustion
When a character’s Endurance score drops to 0, he is
exhausted and drops unconscious (see Unconscious
opposite). Players whose characters are made unconscious
due to loss of Endurance should be careful to check the
characters’ Weary box, too (if he wasn’t Weary already).

P.128/9

Unconscious
A character who receives a second Wound or who isn’t
Wounded but is reduced to 0 Endurance passes out and
drops unconscious.

p.129

And, regarding Adversaries specifically:

Endurance
This value represents the Endurance rating of the creature.
Unless a special ability prevents it, a creature is knocked
out of combat at the end of a round if it is reduced to
zero Endurance, or is killed outright when it is wounded
once.

p.231

By the RAW, reducing someone's Endurance to 0 makes him/it unconscious, but not dying or dead.

[Rich H]

I seem to remember Francesco (or maybe some other) stating that the RAW wasn't his direct intention and that adversaries at zero Endurance were dying so that there was no need for PCs to go around skewering orcs etc after the battle to make sure they were dead (and therefore also avoiding getting into discussions about whether such an action should incur Shadow point gains).

With that in mind, I'd therefore say that Holding Back causes subdual damage. It still comes off of Endurance but when reaching zero an Adversary is explicitly unconscious and not dying.

Also, I think a house rule that a Wounding attack would knock out the opponent instead is also an interesting option.

[Deadmanwalking]

I seem to remember Francesco (or maybe some other) stating that the RAW wasn't his direct intention and that adversaries at zero Endurance were dying so that there was no need for PCs to go around skewering orcs etc after the battle to make sure they were dead (and therefore also avoiding getting into discussions about whether such an action should incur Shadow point gains).

Yup. This statement can be found here, and was partially the basis for my earlier statement.

[Kullervo]

Per official rules, going down to Endurance loss for adversaries without Great Size results in them being unconscious and dying, but not instantly dead (unlike Wounds, which kill instantly). Therefore, you can absolutely do this, though you'll need to make a Healing check (at TN 14, I believe) to keep him alive once he's down.

For those with Great Size, I suppose it's sort of an LM call, but I don't think it's possible by a strict reading of the rules.

Man, I dunno how I forgot this part... Just been rolling with Endurance damage being lethal to anything without Great Size for as long as I can remember. Thank you all for bringing up your points!

[bluejay]

The intent of the rule is that not only are you attempting to subdue your opponent, you are obviously doing so and onlookers would be aware. Very useful in situations where using lethal force would be unwise.

Once reduced to zero endurance they are considered unconscious rather than dying.