Thick skull and stuntys?

[Greyhound]

Hi,

i think the rules are clear. You get KOed on a 7 and stunned on a 8. The real strange thing is, that you roll a 7, have MB left, you won't use it, to make it a stun but a KO . It doesn't make much sense though.

Perhaps a clarification would be:
Thick Skull (strength)
A player with Thick Skull may use the skill, if the injury roll results in a KO. The skill allows the player to substract 1 from the injury roll result in this situation. If after the modification the result still is KO, then the player is put in the KO box, otherwise the player is placed stunned instead. The skill may only be used once per action.

Greets,
gan

All that's been said above and on top of it this change in the rules would change the satistics of Thick skull since 7 happen more often than 8.

[charlesanakin]

Perhaps a clarification would be:

The rule works fine as is ... we knew this was there and its a game rule ... and it was a known one ... so its all good and doesn't require rules clarification for an interaction that is so rare as to virtually never occur. (rules should not be changed for 1 in a 1000000000 things).

If you want to go after NOT using Mighty Blow to defeat a Stunty player's Thick Skull than you also have to:

A) Go after the fact that I might choose NOT to use Dirty Player so that Sneaky Git works

B) Go after the fact that I might choose NOT to use Strong Arm or Accurate so that Safe Throw works

Sometimes in the rules there are spots where NOT using a +1 modifier skill is the better answer ... and that's okay.

Galak

But shouldn't the rules be written to cover 1 in a 10000000000 things if they can? It certainly wouldn't be over diffcult to have avoided this inconsistency. Did the RC know about this when they initially created the rules? If so why not just write the rule to cover it?
What about the rare occurance when this might happen and the attacking player doesn't have MB and they roll an 8 and end up with a stunned player instead of a KO that they would have had on a 7?
I am not trying to pick a fight Galak but if you did know it was there from the beggining why write it this way. The skill description of Stunty could easily have been written to avoid this inconsistency in the first place.

Charlesanakin

[GalakStarscraper]

I am not trying to pick a fight Galak but if you did know it was there from the beggining why write it this way. The skill description of Stunty could easily have been written to avoid this inconsistency in the first place.

Charlesanakin

I very much disagree. I have no issue with the rule interaction and honestly don't see why anything needs re-written. The BBRC was fully aware that this is how the rules worked on this issue and it was deemed fine.

Just like I'm fine with allowing someone to NOT use Dirty Player so their player with Sneaky Git does not get ejected ... or do you think we needed to re-write the rules to force someone to always use Dirty Player as well? And then should we have rewritten Accurate so that you never choose not to use it so that Safe Throw works instead?

I'm fine with writing rules for a 1 in a 1M item if it is actually a real problem. This is not a real problem.

Tom

[Xeterog]

But shouldn't the rules be written to cover 1 in a 10000000000 things if they can?

uh, do you want the rules to look like Star Fleet Battles or Squad Leader?

[charlesanakin]

But shouldn't the rules be written to cover 1 in a 10000000000 things if they can?

uh, do you want the rules to look like Star Fleet Battles or Squad Leader?

My point is not to have a trillion rules that cover everything but simply that the skill description could have been written using the same rule (skill description), same amount of ink and elimianted a situation where coaches are penalizied for a higher injury roll.
This would solve the inconsistency:
Thick Skull-
This player may on an injury roll of 7-8, after any modifiers have been applied, subtract one from the final result. This skill may be used even if the player is Prone or Stunned.

That way a 7 after modifiers becomes a 6 against a Stunty/Thick Skull player and an 8 beomces a 7 KOing the Stunty (as the rules dictate every other case).
Against an Ogre/Thick Skull it still works. 8 Becomes 7 only stunning and 7 becomes a 6 affecting no change.
This preserves the pattern and the percentages.

Charlesanakin

[charlesanakin]

I am not trying to pick a fight Galak but if you did know it was there from the beggining why write it this way. The skill description of Stunty could easily have been written to avoid this inconsistency in the first place.

Charlesanakin

I very much disagree. I have no issue with the rule interaction and honestly don't see why anything needs re-written. The BBRC was fully aware that this is how the rules worked on this issue and it was deemed fine.

Just like I'm fine with allowing someone to NOT use Dirty Player so their player with Sneaky Git does not get ejected ... or do you think we needed to re-write the rules to force someone to always use Dirty Player as well? And then should we have rewritten Accurate so that you never choose not to use it so that Safe Throw works instead?

I'm fine with writing rules for a 1 in a 1M item if it is actually a real problem. This is not a real problem.

Tom

Does every player who rolls a 7 or an 8 against a Stunty player have MB? Some (most) players who roll a 7 are stuck with a 7 and when they roll 8 they are stuck with an 8 and have no option to select or not select the use of a skill. In the case of a MB you are correct, but for everyone else the higher roll is penalized. Tom you are right, it's not a real problem. It's hard to imagine a Stunty ever having Thick Skull (except for the Fanatic in which case this rule doesn't matter).

Charlesanakin