Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Damage modifiers
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Smokeskin
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I believe the correct way is
0-2 wounds: 0 modifier
3-5 wounds: -1
6-8 wounds: -2

The rules aren't exactly crystal clear on it, but they clearly state for every 3 boxes you get a -1, as opposed to "for every 3 boxes or fraction thereof". Unfortunately the examples in the wound modifiers section only use 3 and 6 wounds as examples.

However, the following examples should clear it up:

SR4 pg 78
QUOTE
A character who
possesses this quality can ignore one box of damage per rating
point when calculating wound modifi ers (see Wound Modifiers, p.
153). So a character with this quality at Rating 2 can take 4 boxes
of damage without suff ering a wound modifier.

4 boxes, 2 points of HPT, that's 2 boxes effective, giving no modifier.


SR4 pg 231:
QUOTE
It gets 1 hit,
enough to reduce the damage to 5 boxes.
The IC has 10 boxes on its Matrix Condition
Monitor, so its halfway to being fi nished, and
now suffers from a 1 Wound modifier.

Here 5 boxes of damage gives a -1 wound modifier.


SR4 pg 188
QUOTE
Subtract your level of Pain Resistance from your current damage before
determining your wound modifiers. So, an adept with 3 levels of
Pain Resistance does not suffer any modifiers for sustaining up
to 3 boxes of damage and suffers a reduced penalty with more
significant injuries.

This description however is at best ambigous, at worst goes opposite the other examples.

Opinions on this?
Bull
As far as I know, you don;t get any penalties until you acquire that 3rd box of damage.

Bull
Serbitar
QUOTE (Smokeskin)
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I dont think thats what most people think.
Demerzel
My first thought was 1-3 = -1 etc. This was probably a hold over from thinging SR3- style. I find many of my misconceptions of the rules stem from remembering the former versions. I think that previous experience is a powerful bias in my reading of the rules, and often I'll read a bit of fluff consistant with old rules, then miss the intent of the new rule.
Demerzel
I should clarify I don't think that anymore, I'm curretnly of the opinion that 0-2 = 0, 3-5 = -1, etc...
Bull
QUOTE (Serbitar)
QUOTE (Smokeskin @ Aug 3 2006, 10:25 AM)
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I dont think thats what most people think.

There are a few. I make it a point to note the change when I do SR4 demo's, because people are just very used to the idea of getting a modifier for one box of damage (ala a L wound in SR1-3).

I don't know about most though wink.gif I only know a couple hundred people who play SR4 though, and most of them were either playtesters, or I taught to play. ork.gif For all I know, the other thousands who bought SR4 think that cyber.gif

Bull
Brahm
QUOTE (Serbitar @ Aug 3 2006, 10:29 AM)
QUOTE (Smokeskin @ Aug 3 2006, 10:25 AM)
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I dont think thats what most people think.

I've seen a few people express that view. But not many. I suspect mostly because it is wrong. wink.gif

EDIT *shakes an angry fist at Bull* You have struck back after me beating you the first couple of times. nyahnyah.gif
James McMurray
Nobody in my group ever thought that way. I'm curious where the figures for the "most" calculation came from. smile.gif
Bull
QUOTE (Brahm)
EDIT *shakes an angry fist at Bull* You have struck back after me beating you the first couple of times. nyahnyah.gif

You have way more free time than me, I think. wink.gif
Smokeskin
The "most" part came from the Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0 thread, where the issue came up and everyone seemed to settle on the "-1 for 1 box of damage". But I guess I assumed wrongly, and on a rather thin basis.
Dread Polack
QUOTE (Smokeskin)
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I also thought this. When I looked at the condition monitor, I assumed the -1 applied to the entire row of boxes, and so on. After reading the parts you quoted, and having read some messages here, I was set straight.

I think maybe a good way to do it, if making your own condition monitor is to label your modifier in each box.

Dread Polack
GrinderTheTroll
QUOTE (Smokeskin)
The "most" part came from the Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0 thread, where the issue came up and everyone seemed to settle on the "-1 for 1 box of damage". But I guess I assumed wrongly, and on a rather thin basis.

If you played SR1-SR3 this was the norm.

It's hard to fight the temptation of applying pre-SR4 ideas and rules to a new version. It's probably the hardest part of learning the new rules IMO.

As a side note, the higher threshold-before-modifiers makes Pain Tolerence and other abilities/augments even more effective.
Moon-Hawk
Initially, I just took it for granted that the -1 applied on the first box. It wasn't until I saw arguments that I actually examined it closely enough to realize what it really said.
Teux
I think any new players who take a look at wound modifiers will figure it out pretty simply. Even the damage boxes on the character sheet make it fairly plain.

Any misconception probably only comes from older players who remember the '1 damage box = -1 modifier' rule. It's easy to miss in all the small differences between SR3 and SR4...

Poison
QUOTE (Dread Polack)
QUOTE (Smokeskin @ Aug 3 2006, 10:25 AM)
It seems that most people think that wound modifiers goes like
1-3 wounds: -1
4-6 wounds: -2
etc.

I also thought this. When I looked at the condition monitor, I assumed the -1 applied to the entire row of boxes, and so on. After reading the parts you quoted, and having read some messages here, I was set straight.

I think maybe a good way to do it, if making your own condition monitor is to label your modifier in each box.

Dread Polack

So what are the exact rules then? I still seem to miss it.
James McMurray
0-2 wounds: 0 modifier
3-5 wounds: -1
6-8 wounds: -2
9-11 wounds: -3

etc.
Moon-Hawk
Right. -1 per FULL three damage boxes.
NOT: -1 per three (or part thereof) damage boxes.
Now granted, what they say in the BBB is clear, and the correct interpretation is in there, but they probably should've been overly explicit for the sake of us stubborn old-timers. biggrin.gif
Shrike30
QUOTE (Smokeskin)
I believe the correct way is
0-2 wounds: 0 modifier
3-5 wounds: -1
6-8 wounds: -2

You are correct, sir.
knasser

Bloody Hell. Count another one in for thinking it applied to the entire row. I bet there are a lot of older players who assumed this.

Thanks Smokeskin!
booklord
If I were to have written a top ten list of changes I really liked about SR4. The no damage modifiers until you take at least 3 boxes of damage would have made the list.

I knew.
AngelWuff
heh. didn't notice that. but I won't remind my players.... I'd think even 1 box is usually enough to not make you happy and start hurting like crazy. but I suppose I'll have to go over it with my players
Charon
"I'm okay guys, it's just a flesh wound!"

I like the new 2 box period of grace.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012