From: Roderick Robertson, SC1-5, x52936 (ROBERTSON@delphi.intel.com)
Date: Mon 23 Aug 1993 - 20:56:00 EEST
On the Pain debate:
>Re the question about effects of damage on skills (sorry I seem to have
>deleted the reference!), I've always thought of using something simple
>like -5% to all skills for each point of damage taken. Of course,
>this assumes that 2 x 1 points wounds are as debilitating as 1 x 2 point
>wound, but its a simple method. I'm assuming that this applies continually
>until the wound/s are healed. I seem to remember an odd rule from GURPS,
>where a wound subtracts from your next chance to hit (only!), which seems
>very strange.
'Way back when, I was thinking of this, then decided to ask some
one who would know (a Doctor). She advised that in combat situations
(or any time adrenalin is flooding your system), you won't notice the
pain. Once the moment is over, you're going to feel it of course...
So, I decided to leave it alone.
But, now that it's come up...
I'd assess the -5% per damage point if the character is not engaged
in hand to hand combat. So if Joe Orlanthi gets hit by a crossbow
bolt, he'll be at -Damx5% until healed. First Aid will relieve *some*
of the pain, but not all, unless it was a scratch. This will stop the
xD&D idea of running around with gaping wounds ("Well, I'm down 6 hp,
but I can still function. Let me at that lock). This also means that
wounds will "hurt" outside of combat.
The Gurps idea of only assessing a penalty to the next attack seems
more to re-create the idea of being staggered by a hit. I could see
assessing a Strike Rank penalty for being hit. You can still defend
normally, but you can only attack after SR+x Strike ranks (What x is
I'm not sure, 1/2 damage taken maybe?).
Of course, both of these suggestions lend complicatiopn to the
combat...
Roderick Robertson
Robertson@delphi.intel.com
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:28:55 EEST