Platelet Factories, Do they reduce Stun damage? Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Switch to: Outline Standard Switch to: Linear+

[Andinel]

Platelet Factories: Platelet factories increase the body’s ability
to handle Physical damage by accelerating the production of platelets
within bone marrow, thus lessening the trauma from large wounds and
quickly stopping bleeding. Any time the user suffers 2 or more points
of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point.

Can platelet factories reduce Stun damage as well? It seems from the actual rules text (the last sentence) that they reduce all damage, but from the first sentence they would only reduce Physical damage. How about Physical damage converted to Stun because of armor?

[Rusted Scrap Met...]

"handle physical damage..."

Physical damage is not stun damage.

It's talking about when the user suffers physical damage, not stun damage.

[Lurker 0]

Platelet Factories

Name says it all, really. Platelets are the little protein structures floatin' 'round you blood stream that make any bleedin' holes in you clot up so you don't bleed to death. Natrually, if you're bleeding, you've taken physical damage and extra platelets will help with that. If you're not bleeding, it's stun and all the platelets in the sixth world won't stop it.

[DuctShuiTengu]

Name says it all, really. Platelets are the little protein structures floatin' 'round you blood stream that make any bleedin' holes in you clot up so you don't bleed to death. Natrually, if you're bleeding, you've taken physical damage and extra platelets will help with that. If you're not bleeding, it's stun and all the platelets in the sixth world won't stop it.

So, when I was 8 and [Name removed to protect the guilty] punched me in the nose, it bled because he was secretly an adept who could cause physical damage with unarmed attacks? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

More seriously though, the mechanics of the platelet factory are fairly clear in that it's just physical damage - and likely for the reason that you stated (Even if it doesn't always like up with real-world examples)

[toturi]

Can platelet factories reduce Stun damage as well? It seems from the actual rules text (the last sentence) that they reduce all damage, but from the first sentence they would only reduce Physical damage. How about Physical damage converted to Stun because of armor?

From your quote, strict literal RAW, all damage. The first sentence tells you how it helps to reduce Physical, it does not state that it only reduces Physical, although the implication is there.

[darthmord]

I want to say that in earlier editions the Platelet factory reduced all damage but also had the drawback of uncontrollable clotting (which could kill you) if you didn't take the right drugs.

[Chibu]

I want to say that in earlier editions the Platelet factory reduced all damage but also had the drawback of uncontrollable clotting (which could kill you) if you didn't take the right drugs.

In Shadowrun 2 (Shadowtech p.14) Platelet Factory reduces only Physical damage. And yes, if you didn't take an anticoagulant daily, you'd get all clotty and die.

The trick was to combine this with Trauma Damper. The Trauma Damper shifts one box from physical to mental when you take physical, or reduces mental damage by 1 box.

[Muspellsheimr]

"handle physical damage..."

Physical damage is not stun damage.

It's talking about when the user suffers physical damage, not stun damage.

Incorrect. The fluff says Physical damage. The mechanics say damage.

Platelet Factories apply to all damage taken.

Name says it all, really.

Name has no relevance on how it works rules-wise.

More seriously though, the mechanics of the platelet factory are fairly clear in that it's just physical damage - and likely for the reason that you stated (Even if it doesn't always like up with real-world examples)

Again, the fluff description claims Physical damage. The actual mechanics are non-specific, & apply to all damage.

[Rusted Scrap Met...]

Incorrect. The fluff says Physical damage. The mechanics say damage.

Platelet Factories apply to all damage taken.

What we have here is a case of "semi-crunch" to use the term correctly. It's also called "fluff mechanics" and it is done when you add a little bit of fluff (which contains absolutely ZERO mechanics or mention of mechanics, but mentions or showcases the item in question) to the mechanics of the piece. You are using the fact that it is semi-crunch to make your argument about how it works, up to and including the old thing of ignoring logic and common sense in order to have it fit your description.

It says, quite simply, that it handles "Physical" in the fluff text.

Now, you don't use capitals on a word unless the word is a mechanic, which makes it a proper noun meaning, once again, that this is semi-crunch.

It doesn't matter if the description is in the fluff, if it applies to the game, as, once again, it is semi-crunch/fluff mechanics right there.

It's arguments like this that made me hate writing crunch.

[Muspellsheimr]

Load of bullshit used to support an incorrect interpretation & poor writing techniques.

Any time the user suffers 2 or more points
of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point.

The mechanical aspect makes no distinction between damage types, & thus applies normally to all damage. Any mention of physical damage is limited to the fluff aspect of the description, & has no effect whatsoever on the actual mechanics.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Any mention of physical damage is limited to the fluff aspect of the description, & has no effect whatsoever on the actual mechanics.

Wrong.

It's capitalized, and thus, a game term, exactly as used in the Combat section (Physical damage). Given the context, it can restrict the following, unspecific mechanics to a specific kind of damage.
A strict separation of fluff and rules isn't given in the whole section, either.

[deek]

Looks like a need for errata. RAW is inconsistent and can be interpreted either Physical damage or all damage.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Actually, this is an errata already:
From SR4 to SR4A, the word 'Physical' was added to 'damage'.

In the light of that change, while there might be some wiggling room over RAW, there isn't much over RAI:

Platelet Factories help against Physical damage only.

[deek]

Actually, this is an errata already:
From SR4 to SR4A, the word 'Physical' was added to 'damage'.

In the light of that change, while there might be some wiggling room over RAW, there isn't much over RAI.

That seals the deal for me...it only affect Physical damage.

[Muspellsheimr]

Wrong.

It's capitalized, and thus, a game term, exactly as used in the Combat section (Physical damage). Given the context, it can restrict the following, unspecific mechanics to a specific kind of damage.
A strict separation of fluff and rules isn't given in the whole section, either.

Yes, it is a game term. No, it is not included in the mechanics. No, it is not limited to only Physical damage.

Once again, trying to use 'semi-crunch' bullshit to defend an incorrect interpretation & poor writing.

Actually, this is an errata already:
From SR4 to SR4A, the word 'Physical' was added to 'damage'.

In the light of that change, while there might be some wiggling room over RAW, there isn't much over RAI:

Platelet Factories help against Physical damage only.

Bullshit.

Platelet Factories: Platelet factories increase the body's ability
to handle Physical damage by accelerating the production of platelets
within bone marrow, thus lessening the trauma from large wounds and
quickly stopping bleeding. Any time the user suffers 2 or more points
of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point.

Might I also add this is the exact quote in the OP?

Edit: Yes, 'Physical' is new to SR4A, but it is irrelevant because it is not included in the mechanics.

[Rusted Scrap Met...]

Once again, trying to use 'semi-crunch' bullshit to defend an incorrect interpretation & poor writing.

Dude, seriously...

You're wrong. Face it. It's OK to be wrong. Yes, they should have put "Physical" before the damage second appearance, but more than likely the authors thought they wouldn't have to, because they had explained what type of damage it affected and how. It's obvious just reading it that it applies to physical damage only.

You're claiming that the beginning of the text is pure fluff, when it isn't. It states what type of damage it affects and why it only affects that type of damage. Sounds like not only a rule, but a rule clarification to me. The meaning and the wording is obvious if you just read it.

The bullshit is watching someone do the best they can to twist the words to mean whatever they want, despite logic, common sense, or what is written.

Platelet Factories: Platelet factories increase the body's ability
to handle Physical damage by accelerating the production of platelets
within bone marrow, thus lessening the trauma from large wounds and
quickly stopping bleeding. Any time the user suffers 2 or more points
of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point.

Looks pretty cut and dried.

I'd like your explanation on how it is supposed to handle stun damage. Let us say... from fatigue.

How would a platelet factory drop a box off of fatigue incurred damage? How would it relieve drug induced stun damage?

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Yes, it is a game term. No, it is not included in the mechanics.

That's glorious doublethink there.

Once again, trying to use 'semi-crunch' bullshit to defend an incorrect interpretation & poor writing.

Yes, that would be your point - trying to claim that game terms have no impact on game mechanic.

Yes, 'Physical' is new to SR4A, but it is irrelevant because it is not included in the mechanics.

You keep repeating that to yourself - even if the distinction you want to see simply isn't there.

I'll leave it up to the readers to get to the conclusion what it means if the revised edition of SR4, called SR4A adds a game term that refers to a specific kind of damage.

[Rusted Scrap Met...]

It's crap like this that led Wizards of the Coast to define exactly what are doors and windows in D&D Dungeon Master's Guide. It's what made text go from:

"Used on a sword blade, when the caster touches the weapon, it causes the blade to glow a faint red and flicker with faint runes. The weapon this is cast upon does an extra 1d6 points of fire damage."

to:

"This spell can only be cast on swords, as defined in the Book III, Page 25, Subsection II, and the caster may only cast it on one sword, by touching the sword with his fingertips directly and immediately after successfully casting the spell. When this spell is cast upon the blade of the sword, the blade of the sword glows a faint red (that adds a -2 circumstance penalty to people attempting to spot the wielder or the sword blade) as well as having non-magical non-sensical runes that have no effect upon the game flicker within the faint red light. Finally, the blade of the sword that this spell is cast upon does an extra 1d6 points of magical fire damage upon a successful hit upon a target susceptible to that damage type. Those struck by the blade of the sword that has had this spell cast upon it are not permitted spell resistance or a saving throw, although damage resistance applies only to the damage done by the sword blade itself, not damage done by the spell, which may be resisted by an immunity or resistance to magical fire."

And finally to:

"I'll kill you if you bug me about this spell.--Hugs and Kisses: The Writer"

[DireRadiant]

Edit: Yes, 'Physical' is new to SR4A, but it is irrelevant because it is not included in the mechanics.

Can you explain to me which part is the mechanics and which part is the fluff you are ignoring?

Are the entries in the bioware gear section split into Bioware Name - Fluff - Mechanics sub sections?

Is the first or last sentence of some special significance defined somewhere? I don't see anything in the gear section declaring a special "mechanic" section.

The only thing I notice is the convention of using the captilized "P" in "Physical damage" which usually a special defined term is being used. Like the Physical damage track has a meaning that differs from a physical damage track.

[Andinel]

The biggest problem is that the section where the actual mechanics are covered - the last sentence - says "damage" and not "Physical damage." Taking the first sentence alone, "Platelet factories increase the body's ability to handle Physical damage by accelerating the production of platelets within bone marrow, thus lessening the trauma from large wounds and quickly stopping bleeding," has no actual game mechanics. Taking the second sentence alone, "Any time the user suffers 2 or more points of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point," does. The question is whether the first sentence (fluff), which is useless without the second sentence (mechanics), should be taken as modifying the second sentence for one word: damage. In my interpretation of this, I think it would reduce both. But it could be taken as reducing only Physical damage, depending on how you read it.

[deek]

Let me ask...why did the writers add Physical to this description? If they left it alone, the description is consistent and I think everyone would agree that it reduced both physical and stun damage. But they didn't leave it...they corrected it to what they meant it to say. Unfortunately, they didn't change the second sentence as well, so now we have two valid interpretations.

Yes, both interpretations are valid in the current state.

My logic tells me, that because the added the word Physical, they wanted to be clear that it only reduced physical damage.

So, what's the argument on the other side? If they wanted it to reduce both damage tracks, why would they add the word Physical? Did some writer need a few pennies? Did one of them think, "Ha, if I add this word here, all hell will break loose on DSF"?

[Chibu]

Really?

In every other edition (Shadowtech p.14, Man & Machine p.68) it applied to only physical damage.

Platelet Factories have always, and will always, only apply to Physical Damage. They make your blood clot faster. So, it only works with Physical Damage. I understand that they left the word out the second time. The writers thought "Hey, we don't need to write it twice, people will understand since it already says that once." Why is this being argued about? If you want to run that it works on all damage in your game, go right ahead. If you want to use it as intended, it only applies to physical.

There doesn't need to be anymore bickering about it.

[Daishi]

Andinel's argument is entirely reasonable and how I read it. Frankly, the description as written is clumsy. The first sentence is clearly fluff (other than one single word there is nothing mechanically relevant) and the second is clearly the game rules (people don't bleed in points). Rules trump fluff. To stick a game keyword in the fluff that's not echoed in the specific mechanics is just sloppy writing because it leads to this exact discussion. I had just assumed that "Physical" was an editing gaffe they forgot to clean up because it sits disconnected from the rules.

[Mongoose]

There doesn't need to be, but I'm sure there will be.

Even with it only affecting physical damage, this is an excellent piece of bioware. Its like having 2 extra body points for resisting (physical) damage, right? Much better than the trauma damper, which (at least under the old rules) I tended to avoid because it typically lead to you facing larger injury penalties due to having minor damage on both tracks.
Technically it also shouldn't help against most toxins, diseases, and other "non-violent" sources of damage; GM call, as usual.

For what its worth, Shadowrun has a long tradition of mixing fluff and rules together. It was only in the SR3 books that they started to firmly separate them. The Platelet Factory is from SR2, and it looks like they may have just done a cut-n-paste on the text. It would not have occurred to most people who started with SR1 or SR2 (which means most authors an editors) that it was confusing.

[DireRadiant]

Someone is still going to have to explain to my satisfaction why sentence 1 is fluff top be ignored, and sentence 2 is not. What happens in gear with 3 sentences? What happens in gear described where more then the last sentence has a mechanic description? While most descriptions are consistent in the last sentence containing an explicit mechanic, this convention does not make something mentioned in other sentences any less meaningful if it does reference a mechanical term. There are plenty of examples where gear has mechanics described in other then thr final sentence.