Odd 2x Stun rule

[lemming]

Knockback does 2x stun if the initial blow that caused the knockback knocks the person out?

 

Hmm, I wouldn't of thought so since the target's Forcefield etc would still be on until the end of the segment. Of course, maybe I'm wrong with that as well.

[Constantine]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

Yeah, this ruling is kinda nasty. Of course, I don't like the idea of down people taking x2 damage to begin with. Why wouldn't everyone, always hit someone who is down, just to make sure they don't get up? Icky. My group doesn't use this rule, so the ruling won't effect us...

[Fox1]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I too seem to recall that one's Forcefield remains up until after knockback damage is resolved. If that's the case, I see no reason to take x2 stun

 

In fact, I consider this very important in play because otherwise I'd end up with everyone buying persistent on their forcefield to keep form taking significant body damage on knockout blows (perhaps with a limit- persistent only for 1 segment), an event which just isn't genre

 

So I consider this ruling... odd.

 

I won't be using it in my games.

[Blue]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

FF up or down, I don't see why you'd take 2x. You can say you're unable to properly defend yourself, but with knockback it's not like a directed attack; nobody's exploiting your condition. In fact, going limp in some cases might help in collisions.

 

There are lots of stories of car crashes where the drunk driver survives and the sober others don't.

 

And it's just mean.

[lemming]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

Yeah' date=' this ruling is kinda nasty. Of course, I don't like the idea of down people taking x2 damage to begin with. Why wouldn't everyone, always hit someone who is down, just to make sure they don't get up? Icky. My group doesn't use this rule, so the ruling won't effect us...[/quote']

Yea. I was already ignoring the 2x stun anyway. Generally if the villian gets knocked out, I let them lie there. I just thought it an odd enough ruling to point it out.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

Powers remain up until the end of the phase, I think, so the FF would still be there, but you would take double stun from the attack (I think it is double the stun that gets through defences, rather than double and then apply, but I could be wrong).

 

As to double stunning the helpless, I can't see a problem here: it is basically a coup-de-grace, and if you have the time in a battle to waste a phase doing it, good luck to you. Most hits in combat against an aware target are going to involve an element of rolling with the punch, even if you are not using the manoeuvre, which is why attacks never, in practice, do anything like their full damage potential (well, except killing attacks, of course....). I just see the 'double damage' thing as being, in effect, the ability to inflict a far higher proportion of your potential damage on an unresisting target.

 

Mind you, what do I know?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

This is something I hadn't considered before. The rules do kinda spell it out though.

 

When a character is reduced to 0 or less STUN:

 

He is instantly at 0 DCV

All of his Constant or Continuous Power remain active until the end of the Segment, then shut off.

Damage does x2 STUN past DEF.

 

I guess the only thing this ruling/clarification does is spell out that KB damage isn't considered part of the the attack that caused it.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

This is the way I've always played it. I suppose if you have problems with "heroes" kicking helpless enemies in the head, you can eliminate the 2xSTUN rule for unconscious characters, but then again, as Sean pointed out, if they have time to do that, then more power to them.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

When we play with knockback rules, we've always used the X2 Stun rule like this if the KB'ed character is KO'ed. It seems to make sence, in my mind... while I've never *really* sufered Champs style KB in real life... I have taken (in game terms) significant Knockdown while Stunned and hitting the ground in uncontrolled freefall with absolutely no ability to try and cushion for the impact is very jarring. like *tweet*tweet*tweet*, stars around the head, can't move, somewhere at the -1 to -10 stun (aware but incapable of action) state. This, if anyone is interested, came from a sheild bash to my unarmored face. Including Body damage (The broken nose took several weeks to heal). and in spite of the explosive sensation in my face, the impact with the ground is really what put me down.

[Mike W]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I don't use the 2x STUN rule at all for KO'ed characters. If you knock someone out and need a "one more to make sure" hit, like you would need for bricks and other opponents who take a HECK of a beating or who have huge REC stats/recgen, you would be putting people in comas all the time. And that isn't very heroic.

[lemming]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I have taken (in game terms) significant Knockdown while Stunned and hitting the ground in uncontrolled freefall with absolutely no ability to try and cushion for the impact is very jarring. like *tweet*tweet*tweet*' date=' stars around the head, can't move, somewhere at the -1 to -10 stun (aware but incapable of action) state.[/quote']

Just as a counter point, see my post in the hurt yourself thread. Quick version: Ski accident, I was knocked out by a blow to my head, I skidded a long distance downslope and went thru a barrier. Became consious at the end of it. Major concussion, broken bone, but nothing more or less because I was unconcious.

 

However, real events aren't going to map very well over.

 

To me, this was a pointless ruling. I've switched over to all 2x stun effects happening after defenses and will be ignoring this ruling anyway.

[lemming]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I don't use the 2x STUN rule at all for KO'ed characters. If you knock someone out and need a "one more to make sure" hit' date=' like you would need for bricks and other opponents who take a HECK of a beating or who have huge REC stats/recgen, you would be putting people in comas all the time. And that isn't very heroic.[/quote']

A good point. As a GM, if the PC hits the villain with a good smack and the villian is out, the villian is just going to stay out.

Unless you're going to stage the DNPC diving in front of a eye laser when the villian will shoot the hero in the back later of course. But that gets old after awhile.

[CBikle]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

Don't like it.

 

The PCs will like it, except when it applies to them.

[OddHat]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I don't plan to use it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

Some people seem to not like the 2xSTUN rule and some people don't like it applying to KN from a KO blow. For the former, really whether it matters is up to the GM: if you have unconscious characters getting up and re-joining the fray, then players are going to want to give them that extra smack after lights-out.

 

Cross referencing pages 411 and 380 of 5ER you double the stun before applying defences, which is rather nasty. I mean KB bites maybe 3/4 of the time, and rarely does enough damage to get through defences, but applying the rule as is, virtually anything over 4 or 5 inches KB is going to cause quite substantial additional damage likely to put you beyond -10 STUN and therefore completely out of the fight.

 

Asiding somewhat....but for the latter group (don't mind 2xSTUN but not for the KB on a KO blow)

 

I wouldn't mind seeing a new combat manoeuvre allowing you to resist KB with casual strength/flight. The rules (5ER p 421 & 373) are a bit scant. Basically you can declare you are resisting KB (I let players do this as part of their normal attack action) and you halve your DCV. I'd propose something similar but allowing you to resist with casual strength for a -1 or -2 penalty on DCV, but otherwise the same - full KB if you get hit from an unexpected direction.

 

One other solution is to encourage the purchase of KB resistance, possibly with the limitations 'non-persistent' (-1/4), 'only from one direction' (-3/4). Works out pretty cheap to effectivevly nullify KB from the opponent you are engaging. You could have RSR as well, but that tends to slow down combat as it is a roll you'll be making a lot.

[zornwil]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I don't use it, never really thought about it. I guess it's another update to the house ruels page, if I get around to it...

[Dust Raven]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

It would really say something about a campaign when the villains don't "make sure" with the extra shot but the 'heroes' do.

[zornwil]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

It would really say something about a campaign when the villains don't "make sure" with the extra shot but the 'heroes' do.

Well, it could just say the GM is inattentive and the players are playing to a trope peculiar to RPGing.

[Fox1]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

It would really say something about a campaign when the villains don't "make sure" with the extra shot but the 'heroes' do.

 

Best reason to drop the rule.

 

Typically I count out the bad guys whenever they drop below zero. It's rarely genre (for the genres I game anyway) except for the 'master villian escape clause' (which is handled in other ways) in any case.

 

So that deals with that as far as I'm concerned.

 

And I want my villians to go up and whack the under zero hero to make sure. Taking x2 stun on knockback would reduce cases of that.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

I've just found it to be rather anti-genre in just about all cases (except for some of the grittier ones) for any character to "make sure". Even when it's done, it's typically done while attacking and using overwhelming force... rapidfiring an extra shot or using Autofire or something similar. Otherwise whoever wins walks over to the losing side and checks to see if they are dead, then makes sure. If the winning side doesn't want to kill the losers, they just leave, or stand around and gloat, wait for the cops to show up or whatever it is a winners would do. Should a loser wake up during this, that's just the fight not being over, or a chance for the winner to sit on someone's chest and flick them in the head once or twice. But even that's done after they've woken up and is never done to make sure (except for those over kill times when the character just keeps on bashing away or shooting because he hasn't yet realized his target isn't resisting anymore).

[zornwil]

Re: Odd 2x Stun rule

 

On a serious note, while I don't find stunning the guy who's down to be superhero comic book genre, it does seem to fit action movie genre and, within reason, is "realistic" to me. But I don't encourage it beyond saying such as, "he looks like he could get up" or "he looks like he's not too far out," if the subject in question is being examined for signs of consciousness. And at that point I have zero trouble with a non-BODY shot at the subject. I'll give a major villain recoveries as per rules; minor villains I'll give their recoveries to in the 0 to -10 range if the combat is raging. Minor villains less than -10 (typically, in an even battle that is going to go on and both sides are going down below -10 and back up I'll be more rules-attentive because it's more dramatic) or below 0 at the tail end of a foregone conclusion combat I don't worry about, I leave them down.