Fantasy Craft Second Printing Q&A Thread

[Mister Andersen]

In the combat section it says a character who doesn't possess the unarmed proficiency deals 1d3 subdual damage, and a character who is proficient deals 1d4 lethal.  Can a character who is proficient choose to deal subdual damage?  How much do they deal?

Damage Conversion: An attacker may choose to convert the damage from lethal to subdual or vice versa. This decision must be made before the attack roll is made, as a –4 penalty is applied to the check. The resulting damage is converted to the chosen type and reduced to 1/2 normal (rounded up).

Personally, I'd ignore the half-damage bit because the idea that a trained individual is less capable of just knocking someone out than some noob is just doesn't work for me.

[Krensky]

In the combat section it says a character who doesn't possess the unarmed proficiency deals 1d3 subdual damage, and a character who is proficient deals 1d4 lethal.  Can a character who is proficient choose to deal subdual damage?  How much do they deal?

Damage Conversion: An attacker may choose to convert the damage from lethal to subdual or vice versa. This decision must be made before the attack roll is made, as a –4 penalty is applied to the check. The resulting damage is converted to the chosen type and reduced to 1/2 normal (rounded up).

Personally, I'd ignore the half-damage bit because the idea that a trained individual is less capable of just knocking someone out than some noob is just doesn't work for me.

I'd probably call that the sole exception to the conversion rules. Especially since half of a d4 is slightly worse then a d3.

EDIT: What I mean is I'd allow you to choose to do 1d3 subdual or 1d4 lethal.

[Sletchman]

In the combat section it says a character who doesn't possess the unarmed proficiency deals 1d3 subdual damage, and a character who is proficient deals 1d4 lethal.  Can a character who is proficient choose to deal subdual damage?  How much do they deal?

Damage Conversion: An attacker may choose to convert the damage from lethal to subdual or vice versa. This decision must be made before the attack roll is made, as a –4 penalty is applied to the check. The resulting damage is converted to the chosen type and reduced to 1/2 normal (rounded up).

Personally, I'd ignore the half-damage bit because the idea that a trained individual is less capable of just knocking someone out than some noob is just doesn't work for me.

Personally, I ignore the -4 too.  I was just wondering if there was a bit in the book I missed about picking either type of damage, because the damage conversion rules are a bit silly in this instance.  I should have put something to that effect in my OP.

[aegis]

I agree. It wouldn't be silly if there wasn't the backhand ability of the Martial Artist. This one specifically implies that without it, damage is lethal. It does kind of suck. So yeah, I've always considered unarmed fighting dealing either lethal or subdual damage, at no penalty. And forget about backhand.

[Psion]

No book here at the moment, but I thought beatdown was subdual and backhand was stress.

But yeah. At worst, i'd assume you don't get a penalty for doing subdual, but no bonus (for martial arts, etc.), but beatdown lets you use all your bonuses.

[Crafty_Pat]

The conversion rules include those restrictions because subdual damage gets ugly very, very quickly as the damage escalates. At this level - with an absolute damage cap of 4 + STR mod, it's probably fine though. YMMV, of course.

[Gentry]

Of course, if your martial artist wants to deal subdual, there's always the Pummel, which always does subdual damage. At my table this last weekend the martial artist laid down 34 points of subdual damage in a single whack. He thought it was the coolest thing he'd ever seen.

[aegis]

No book here at the moment, but I thought beatdown was subdual and backhand was stress.

My mistake! Thanks Psion. The big difference between the two here is that stress damage ignores damage reduction. This makes it a powerful tool against DR-heavy critters which you would like to subdue but not kill, like say ... city guards. Otherwise, as Gentry said, there is the powerful Pummel action which always deal subdual damage.

[Psion]

Is the club (the first listing in the blunt weapons table) really supposed to be 2 handed? That's gotta be wrong.

[pawsplay]

Hmm, if I use the monkey grip stance from spear basics to wield a normally two handed weapon in one hand, does it count as a one handed melee weapon for the purposes of the two weapon fighting feat?

prototype00

Sure!

Since the wording there, and on p. 215, so precisely avoids saying a 2-handed weapon becomes 1-handed, I assumed that would not be the case. Does that mean a pike wielded in one hand via Monkey Stance gains Reach +1?  I see four possible scenarios.

1. The wording in Two Weapon Fighting is overly picky and it should just say two melee weapons.
2. The pike does gain +1 Reach, becoming Reach 4.
3. You have reconsidered your answer, and you may not use the pike in conjunction with TWF, and the pike gains bleed regardless of how it is held.
4. Handedness is determined by weapon, not by how it is wielded, except that references to handling, holding or wielding refer literally to the hands used. So TWF would allow the pike, but the pike gains bleed (not Reach +1) and you still cannot wield a pike two-handed in Monkey Stance to gain +2 Strength for damage purposes.

[Deral]

Hmm, if I use the monkey grip stance from spear basics to wield a normally two handed weapon in one hand, does it count as a one handed melee weapon for the purposes of the two weapon fighting feat?

prototype00

Sure!

Since the wording there, and on p. 215, so precisely avoids saying a 2-handed weapon becomes 1-handed, I assumed that would not be the case. Does that mean a pike wielded in one hand via Monkey Stance gains Reach +1?  I see four possible scenarios.

1. The wording in Two Weapon Fighting is overly picky and it should just say two melee weapons.
2. The pike does gain +1 Reach, becoming Reach 4.
3. You have reconsidered your answer, and you may not use the pike in conjunction with TWF, and the pike gains bleed regardless of how it is held.
4. Handedness is determined by weapon, not by how it is wielded, except that references to handling, holding or wielding refer literally to the hands used. So TWF would allow the pike, but the pike gains bleed (not Reach +1) and you still cannot wield a pike two-handed in Monkey Stance to gain +2 Strength for damage purposes.

This post just made me realize that by RAW a Many-Armed Rootwalker couldn't use the Two-Weapon feats with a pair of two-handed weapons.

[Morgenstern]

This post just made me realize that by RAW a Many-Armed Rootwalker couldn't use the Two-Weapon feats with a pair of two-handed weapons.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Generally speaking, having more hands or more weapons gives you more options, not more attacks/damage. Ramping up damage is pretty tightly controled.

[Deral]

This post just made me realize that by RAW a Many-Armed Rootwalker couldn't use the Two-Weapon feats with a pair of two-handed weapons.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Generally speaking, having more hands or more weapons gives you more options, not more attacks/damage. Ramping up damage is pretty tightly controled.

But an ogre wielding one two-handed weapon does the same damage and can get just as many attacks with Darting/Flashing as Two-Weapon would give.

[Sletchman]

This post just made me realize that by RAW a Many-Armed Rootwalker couldn't use the Two-Weapon feats with a pair of two-handed weapons.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Generally speaking, having more hands or more weapons gives you more options, not more attacks/damage. Ramping up damage is pretty tightly controled.

But an ogre wielding one two-handed weapon does the same damage and can get just as many attacks with Darting/Flashing as Two-Weapon would give.

Which is why I, for one, would let a player who wanted to do it, do it.  FWIW I chose "4" on pawsplay's question too.

[Crafty_Alex]

Hmm, if I use the monkey grip stance from spear basics to wield a normally two handed weapon in one hand, does it count as a one handed melee weapon for the purposes of the two weapon fighting feat?

prototype00

Sure!

Since the wording there, and on p. 215, so precisely avoids saying a 2-handed weapon becomes 1-handed, I assumed that would not be the case. Does that mean a pike wielded in one hand via Monkey Stance gains Reach +1?  I see four possible scenarios.

1. The wording in Two Weapon Fighting is overly picky and it should just say two melee weapons.
2. The pike does gain +1 Reach, becoming Reach 4.
3. You have reconsidered your answer, and you may not use the pike in conjunction with TWF, and the pike gains bleed regardless of how it is held.
4. Handedness is determined by weapon, not by how it is wielded, except that references to handling, holding or wielding refer literally to the hands used. So TWF would allow the pike, but the pike gains bleed (not Reach +1) and you still cannot wield a pike two-handed in Monkey Stance to gain +2 Strength for damage purposes.

4. The weapon's statistics do not change - just how you use it. Using Monkey's Grip to gain access to the 2-handed weilding rules and +1 Reach was never the intent of the stance.

As a pointer, if you are confronted with a complex order of operations quandry like this in the future, apply Occam's Razor - the simplest answer is both the best and the most likely one. That is how our exceptions are - they are intended to change as little as possible (typically, only what is specifically addressed). If a "correct" interpretation of the rules would require the rescripting of one or more feats, totally ignoring clauses of particular rules or radically changing how a chain of rules would work, you're probably going too far.