Harsh Beating and Grueling Combatant Question

[Korik1]

Quick question that is imminently important: Does Harsh Beating (+4 to fort save DC from inflicted Subdual damage) apply to the Grueling Combatant trait (opponents that miss the PC take 2 subdual damage)?

Tonight's GM is saying no, the player who is introducing the new PC says yes. What does the forum say?

[Big_Jim]

By RAW, yes. And by intent, I would say yes also.  Grueling Combatant represent the character cuffing and elbowing the opponent when they miss clumsily.  Harsh Beating means the character does that REALLY HARD.

[Gentry]

I concur with Jim. The language seems pretty clear.

[Krensky]

Why wouldn't it?

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Why wouldn't it?

Someone might assume that Grueling Combatant represents an opponent who makes the attacker work so hard that they hurt themselves by over-exertion.

[Jake]

Why wouldn't it?

Someone might assume that Grueling Combatant represents an opponent who makes the attacker work so hard that they hurt themselves by over-exertion.

That was my assumption. Remember in AD&D the attack round was 1 minute long and characters made multiple attacks in that time but only one that really matter, which you rolled on. I have always assumed that Grueling Combatant work like that. The character makes a flurry of attacks that don't land but his opponent must put out an exhausting effort to block them.

[Crafty_Alex]

By RAW, yes. And by intent, I would say yes also.  Grueling Combatant represent the character cuffing and elbowing the opponent when they miss clumsily.  Harsh Beating means the character does that REALLY HARD.

Jim has the right of it. Watch out!

[Gentry]

Remember in AD&D the attack round was 1 minute long and characters made multiple attacks in that time but only one that really matter, which you rolled on.

As an aside, there's no real reason a 6-second combat round can't be viewed the same way. Cinematic swordfights pack a huge number of blows into six seconds. There's every reason to believe that in a typical combat round the participants are mixing it up pretty good, and the attack check represents being able to actually gain advantage from the exchange.

[Korik1]

The idea for why  Harsh Beating and Grueling Combatant don't stack is because Harsh Beating says that when the PC "inflicts subdual damage" the DC is increased by 4, whereas with Grueling Combatant the opponent that missed "suffers 2 points of subdual damage." The person was arguing that GC's subdual wasn't inflicted, that it would be like HB applying to numbing poison.

[Blankbeard]

I'm not sure I can make the claim that Fantasy Craft never splits a hair that close but let me say that it very seldom needs to.  What the GM decides is final. of course but in general I'd say that A inflicts B is the same situation as B suffers because of A.  That's just the easiest reading.