Re: (TFT) Experimental Injury and Healing rules - comments appreciated.

["Charles Gadda" <cgadda@earthlink.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ErolB1@aol.com>
To: <tft@brainiac.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: (TFT) Experimental Injury and Healing rules - comments
appreciated.


> OK, here's a long usenet thread (from google) that goes into it:
>
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.frp.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/e507cd723a9815ec?hl=en
>
This is an OUTSTANDING thread. I strongly urge anyone that has any interest
in this discussion to read it from beginning to end. All of the posts are
good but in particular pay attention to those by Brian Gleichman and Greg
Benage. Thanks for posting the link, Erol.

That said, though, while alot of thought provoking material is presented, it
does not really disprove the "death sprial" vis a vis *impairment*, which is
the whole point here. Rather, virtually all of it talks to whether or not
someone is _incapacitated_, which is not the same thing. Even the main
proponent of eliminating the death spiral (Brian G.) was forced to concede
that he had no direct evidence that there wasn't impairment, and there are
sound reasons for thinking that at least some impairment occurs.

A further flaw is that all of the extant studies invariably focus on
firearms injuries, which are a different beast than a sword or axe wound.
Worse, any speculation on impairment invariably only talks to firing a gun,
which is utterly different from swinging a sword effectively. While both are
demanding skills, firing a gun simply requires that you remain stationary -
sword use is far and away more dynamic, and involves _moving_ the whole
body. What probably will not affect you in being a stable firing platform
for a gun might well hinder you in using a sword or other melee weapon.
Also, I would bet serious money that all of the gunfights studied probably
took place at very close range, where any sort of impairment might go
unnoticed (i.e. so the injured gunner shot his opponent in his lower right
abdomen rather than in the heart - but a hit is a hit so it is difficult or
even impossible to realize that the shooter was in fact far less accurate
than he intended to be. Very hard to measure objectively, to put it mildly).

That said, Erol's suggestion has significant merit, even if I don't really
agree with it. Here is what I've preliminarily concluded:

1. I agree with Erol that there is no basis for the "8 damage = knockdown
rule" Either a wound incapacitates or it doesn't, and knockdown is not a
factor. Even when hit by a 20mm cannon round, the body has equal odds of
falling forward or backward. If you are not incapacitated you are also
likely not noticing pain or reacting to it, so there is just no basis for a
knockdown rule.

2. I disagree that getting rid of the DX- for wounds is more realistic. Even
though I agree that pain should not be an issue (until perhaps afterwards)
there is more to impairment than just pain. Even torso injuries will affect
use of melee weapons, IMNSHO, at least I fail to see any reason why it
shouldn't (yes, some interesting anecdotal evidence can be set against this,
but it is limited in nature, so I am disinclined at present to accept it at
face value). Exsanguination is another point - I don't care how much of a
Mr. Toughguy you are but less blood = less oxygen to your brain and you are
just not going to function as well, period.

I do suggest that the rules on these DX penalties be revamped and rewritten.
I will do this in my rewrite to this optional rules proposal, but I need to
consult some back issues of Interplay before I do to consult an article or
two that might be pertinent to this.

Great discussion, folks!
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"