Fantasy Craft Second Printing Q&A Thread

[Crafty_Pat]

Not really a question, but I'm wondering if the following two sentences contain a typo:

p. 253, Angel entry
"Though their individual appearance varies wildly and can change between visitations, they’re naturally winged humanoids, often with perfect features and a welcoming aura. Depending on their native pantheon, they sometimes have an extra pair of wings, a wreath of flames, or a welcoming aura."

No it's not going to matter, but there's no Errata thread.

Technically, yes. Definitely only worth an actual revision should we be dealing with other more important stuff, though.

[Crafty_Pat]

How does one handle:
   Grappling a blinded opponent?
   Grappling in the dark?
The action is an Melee Attack Action but does not use BAB. Do you apply the attack adjustment to the attackers Athletics skill check, does the defender suffer any penalty to thier athletics check?. Read the text for blinded then for grapple, its not clear how or even if being blinded afffects grapple.
I'd mostly like to hear interpretations of RAW rather than house rules of any one table.

I'd say that's definitely conditional and up to GM interpretation. Should he or she rule that those modifiers apply, there's no reason they can't apply to Athletics instead.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Definitely only worth an actual revision should we be dealing with other more important stuff, though.

Hey, take your time.  I tried to acknowledge in my question post it wasn't that important.

[Klokwurk]

Can Master's Touch I be used to apply specific weapon attack tricks (for instance, hammer attack tricks) to unarmed attacks, or do they have to be generic melee attack tricks?

Cheers!

[Sletchman]

Can Master's Touch I be used to apply specific weapon attack tricks (for instance, hammer attack tricks) to unarmed attacks, or do they have to be generic melee attack tricks?

Cheers!

I believe not.  Primarily because that seems to be more the domain of Master's Touch II (which allows Hammer tricks to be applied to Swords and so on).  I'd probably allow it at my table though.

[Fastidious Monk]

How would you bypass a magic trap like Glyph of Protection?  Counter Magic seems to be only usable after the spell has been triggered.

Thanks

[Krensky]

If there is a password, Sense Motive.

Detect Magic to see the Glyph, Knowledge (Spellcasting) to determine what it is, and Counter Magic to break it.

[cjs65]

Quick question about Medicine Skill: Mend. The rules state:
"With success (DC 15), the character heals 1 stable target of 2d6 damage (if the target’s a special character, this is split evenly between subdual, vitality, and wound points and the patient distributes any uneven excess)."

Does this mean the result is always split between subdual/vitality/wounds even if the target has (for instance) only taken vitality damage? So, for example, if the target has taken 6 vitality damage and the Mend result is '6', is all 6 vitality healed or is 2 vitality healed and the 2 subdual and 2 wound healing lost?

It sounds like this should be a stupid question, but I've read it many times now and can easily apply either interpretation. 

[Jake]

Quick question about Medicine Skill: Mend. The rules state:
"With success (DC 15), the character heals 1 stable target of 2d6 damage (if the target’s a special character, this is split evenly between subdual, vitality, and wound points and the patient distributes any uneven excess)."

Does this mean the result is always split between subdual/vitality/wounds even if the target has (for instance) only taken vitality damage? So, for example, if the target has taken 6 vitality damage and the Mend result is '6', is all 6 vitality healed or is 2 vitality healed and the 2 subdual and 2 wound healing lost?

No it all goes to vitality. If the character doesn't have non-vitality damage there is nothing else to heal.

It sounds like this should be a stupid question, but I've read it many times now and can easily apply either interpretation. 

Don't worry about it, I ask plenty of stupid questions myself 

[Bill Whitmore]

Quick question about Medicine Skill: Mend. The rules state:
"With success (DC 15), the character heals 1 stable target of 2d6 damage (if the target’s a special character, this is split evenly between subdual, vitality, and wound points and the patient distributes any uneven excess)."

Does this mean the result is always split between subdual/vitality/wounds even if the target has (for instance) only taken vitality damage? So, for example, if the target has taken 6 vitality damage and the Mend result is '6', is all 6 vitality healed or is 2 vitality healed and the 2 subdual and 2 wound healing lost?

No it all goes to vitality. If the character doesn't have non-vitality damage there is nothing else to heal.

It sounds like this should be a stupid question, but I've read it many times now and can easily apply either interpretation. 

Don't worry about it, I ask plenty of stupid questions myself 

Now, I have always played it the other way.  If you get healed for more than your damage, the excess is just lost, not unlike casting Cure Wounds II on a guy who is down 10 vitality.  After you heal 10 vitality, the remaining 10 doesn't get converted over to wounds just because he is now full.

[Krensky]

The question was if they only had vitality loss.

[Bill Whitmore]

Yea, I know.  And the rule says it is split evenly between Vitality, Wounds and Subdual.  It does not say it is "split evenly between Vitality, Wounds and Subdual unless you don't have one or more of those damage types in which case it is only split between the types of damage you have taken".

If you Mend for 6, the target heals 2 Vitality, 2 Wounds and 2 Subdual.  By the RAW, if you get healing that exceeds the amount of damage you have taken, it gets lost.  Nothing in Mend says otherwise and nothing in Mend says you can convert it to one of the other damage types.

There are a couple of reasons why I have played it this way, other than that being the RAW, but the main one is this:

After a fight, a guy has taken 20 vitality, 6 wounds and 6 subdual.  If he was to be Mended, he would have to split his healing 3 ways.  Fatigue levels come back faster than Wounds so he decides to bang his head on the wall until he fails his subdual save.  Now he has a level of fatigue and no subdual damage.  Should Mend really be giving him back more wounds now than if he still had subdual damage left over?

[ludomastro]

I got the impression that the wording was intentionally left vague so that the GM could make that decision for the style of play desired.

My take, for whatever it is worth, follows:

The Healer rolls a 9.
The Patient is down 11 Vitality, 3 Subdual, and 1 Wound.
Evenly dividing between the three would grant:
     1 Vitality, 1 Subdual, and 1 Wound
     This would use 3 points.  The other 6 of excess could be used as the player saw fit.

Keep in mind I do this to make non-magical healing more attractive for my group.  As always, YMMV.

[Krensky]

After a fight, a guy has taken 20 vitality, 6 wounds and 6 subdual.  If he was to be Mended, he would have to split his healing 3 ways.  Fatigue levels come back faster than Wounds so he decides to bang his head on the wall until he fails his subdual save.  Now he has a level of fatigue and no subdual damage.  Should Mend really be giving him back more wounds now than if he still had subdual damage left over?

No, because that would be ludicrous. Any player attemping it is metagaming the rules to the point where they would be warned, the ejected from my table. Do you seriously game with people that twist the obvious intention of the game beyond credibility just because the rules as written allow it?

Your interpertation of the rules basically make the mend check worthless unless it's the only form of healing in the game.

[Bill Whitmore]

After a fight, a guy has taken 20 vitality, 6 wounds and 6 No, because that would be ludicrous. Any player attemping it is metagaming the rules to the point where they would be warned, the ejected from my table. Do you seriously game with people that twist the obvious intention of the game beyond credibility just because the rules as written allow it?

Obvious intention?  The "obvious intention", if you actually read the words, sir, is that the healing from Mend is split 3 ways.  Just because you may not like it is no reason to attack me, my game or especially my players.

I am done discussing this.  I bid you adieux, Krensky.