[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (TFT) TFT: Attack Order

On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Dave Seagraves wrote:

> Dan writes . . .
> >If you read the example of play in the back of the Wizard
> >rules booklet, it seems clear to me that fST was intended
> >to count towards killing people.  Not counting fST toward
> >death seems to bias the game even more in favor of wizards.
> >Have you noticed any negative effect on playability due to
> >this rule?
>    Of course you mean /play balance/ here, not playability 
> (two slightly different things). 

Yes, thats what I meant - sorry for any confusion.

>    From my campaign's ground rules . . .
> Wounds and Fatigue
>    Wounds and fatigue are now assessed separately against
> a figure's ST and are not added together.  (Normally these
> two are added together when determining a figure's status.)
> So a ST 12 figure now has 12 "hit points" and 12 "fatigue
> points."  A ST 12 wizard with 4 hits of damage on him can
> still have up to 12 fatigue points left to cast spells, not
> just 8.  This simplifies bookkeeping for players and GM
> alike, and is actually more realistic as well.

I don't know about this.  Specifically, I'm thinking of the
extreme case where a figure with a base ST of 12 has taken
10 points of damage, but still has 12 fatigue points left.
This seems unreasonable.  What about this: each two points
of damage causes a loss of 1 fST as well.  Bleeding takes
an awful lot out of you.

(Note that the converse is not true ... every 2 fST lost 
would NOT mean a loss of 1 "hit point.")

Dan Tulloh

Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"