Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Platelet Factories
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Andinel
QUOTE ("SR4A p.346")
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 Metal
"handle physical damage..."

Physical damage is not stun damage.

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

Lurker 0
QUOTE
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
QUOTE (Lurker 0 @ May 19 2009, 10:27 AM) *
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? 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
QUOTE (Andinel @ May 19 2009, 03:06 PM) *
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
QUOTE (darthmord @ May 19 2009, 07:46 AM) *
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
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 19 2009, 12:08 AM) *
"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.

QUOTE (Lurker 0 @ May 19 2009, 01:27 AM) *
Name says it all, really.

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

QUOTE (DuctShuiTengu @ May 19 2009, 01:42 AM) *
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 Metal
QUOTE
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.

QUOTE
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 Dainig
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 09:40 PM) *
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 Dainig
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
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 19 2009, 05:00 PM) *
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
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 19 2009, 01:52 PM) *
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.



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 19 2009, 02:00 PM) *
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.

QUOTE (SR4A p.346)
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 Metal
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 02:07 PM) *
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.

QUOTE
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 Dainig
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 10:07 PM) *
Yes, it is a game term. No, it is not included in the mechanics.

That's glorious doublethink there.
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 10:07 PM) *
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.
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 10:07 PM) *
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 Metal
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
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 04:07 PM) *
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.
Daishi
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ May 19 2009, 10:15 PM) *
Someone is still going to have to explain to my satisfaction why sentence 1 is fluff top be ignored, and sentence 2 is not.

It's a simple matter of interpreting genres. Sentence 1 is a real world based description that uses language removed from the vocabulary of the game rules. By contrast, Sentence 2 is only comprehensible by applying knowledge of game mechanics.

Do you rule that platelet factories are at reduced functionality if bone marrow is substantially reduced (i.e. cyberlimb replacement)? Do you rule that platelet factories assist in stabilization as they stop blood loss? Do you rule that platelet factories are only applicable when blood loss is a significant component of damage? Off the top of my head, this would exclude: Acid, fire, or other self-cauterizing wounds, black hammer or other direct neural damage, mana damage, toxins, disease, or any blunt force trauma not affecting the body core. If you don't treat platelet factories this way then you have also interpreted sentence 1 (exempting one word) as fluff and are disregarding it mechanically.
Muspellsheimr
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ May 19 2009, 09:15 PM) *
Someone is still going to have to explain to my satisfaction why sentence 1 is fluff top be ignored, and sentence 2 is not.

Sentence 1 describes what the augmentation does. Sentence 2 describes how it works within the rules.
Sentence 1 is fluff. Sentence 2 is mechanics.

I can insert rules terms all fucking day in fluff descriptions of anything in the books. Would this change how the mechanics work & are applied? No. It would simply be shitty writing.



In the case of Platelet Factories, the fluff says it applies to Physical damage. The rules say it applies to damage. And guess what - when determining the mechanics of something, you use the rules.
BullZeye
Yep, first sentence says what kind of damage it reduces: Physical. It means in my reading it reduces damage from physical sources, like punches & bullets. Is magic physical... guess it depends on spell. Stunbolt it would not help, but powerbolt it would. Now it doesn't say what kind of game mechanic damage it works with, Physical or Stun specifically but just states it reduces 1 if 2 or more is taken. So it applies to both as long as the damage was meant to injure physically.

But I can understand those that read the capital P in damage and just say it works against damage that will be marked on physical boxes... Yet the last sentence doesn't specify...

Argue on!
deek
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 20 2009, 01:46 AM) *
In the case of Platelet Factories, the fluff says it applies to Physical damage. The rules say it applies to damage. And guess what - when determining the mechanics of something, you use the rules.

Why would the writers add a word to the fluff in SR4A? I don't see a reason other than they wanted to clarify what damage was affected. I mean, let's say the writer added "Physical" to the second sentence. Wouldn't we still be arguing because the first sentence didn't specify what sort of damage?

Again, I don't see how any one of us (i.e. those that did not write the book) can say it works one way or another by what is written in the current SR4A core. We can assume one way or another...we can go back to earlier editions and say that it NEVER reduced stun, but we can't get a clear cut ruling just from the text.

Its just not possible without official clarification.
DireRadiant
I have randomly chosen another Bioware description.

"This small, muscular sac is implanted in the
lower abdominal cavity and connected to each of the two supradrenal
glands. When dormant, the pump serves as a reservoir for adrenaline
and noradrenaline. When activated, the sac contracts, sending a surge
of concentrates into the bloodstream. Stress and other emotional states
such as anger, fear, or lust might also activate the pump; the gamemaster
can call for a Composure Test (p. 138) in such cases to determine
if the pump activates or not.

When the adrenaline pump is triggered, the user ignores injury
modifiers from Stun damage, and she will not fall unconscious when
Stun damage reaches its maximum
. The adrenaline pump’s rating is
also added to Strength, Agility, Reaction, and Willpower attributes
(up to the user’s augmented maximum)
. The pump works for Rating x
1D6 turns; this duration cannot be ended prematurely
. When the duration
ends, the user crashes, immediately taking one box of unresisted
Stun damage for every turn the pump was active[/b]. After the effects end,
the attribute values return to normal and the user can no longer ignore
the injury modifiers of the Stun damage taken
. While an adrenaline
pump is in effect, the character is unable to rest
.
After the effects have worn off, the pump requires 10 minutes to
regenerate its supply—during that that time it cannot be activated.
"

What is fluff? What is mechanics? How do you tell which to make fluff?

How about this one?

"In a long and painful process,
the molecular matrix of the subject’s bones is altered for density and
strength. The procedure also strengthens ligaments, but as a side effect
increases the character’s weight. Increase the recipient’s Body by the
bone density rating for damage resistance tests
. Characters with bone
density augmentation deal Physical damage in unarmed combat.
Bone
Density Augmentation is incompatible with the Bone Lacing implant
"

On to the next...

"Vat-grown replacement eyes with a structure that amplifies
light and enhances the user’s night vision, providing her with
natural low-light vision
. Cat’s eyes are slit and reflective. This bioware
is not compatible with cyberware eye enhancements
."

Oops, a mechanics reference in the first sentence. And fluff in the second...

Why for Platelet factories is "Physical damage" suddenly fluff because it's in the first sentence? Because you choose to read it that way. Not because it's inherent in the layout or definition of the descriptions for gear.

Using swear words for emphasis does not enhance your arguments.
Rusted Scrap Metal
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 19 2009, 11:46 PM) *
I can insert rules terms all fucking day in fluff descriptions of anything in the books. Would this change how the mechanics work & are applied? No. It would simply be shitty writing.

Or it would be a mixture of mechanics and fluff. You know, engaging and descriptive writing that combines the bone dry game mechanics with some descriptive text to bring some life to the text.

I think the next time I write something, thinking that "sure, the players will understand it" I'll reread this thread so it will remind me how every little fragging thing has to be explained in minute detail.
Zurai
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ May 20 2009, 09:46 AM) *
Why for Platelet factories is "Physical damage" suddenly fluff because it's in the first sentence?


No one has said that it's fluff "because it's in the first sentence". Not in this thread, certainly. I have no clue where you got that from. What HAS been said is that a particular sentence is fluff if it does nothing but provide background on WHY something works, rather than tell you specifically WHAT IT DOES in game rules. "Reduces Physical damage" is a kind of borderline case, because it tells you what, but does not give specifics. You're not told, in that sentence, how much damage it reduces or in what situations and with what limitations. There's no way to use that sentence to arrive at the actual game effect of Platelet Factories. On the other hand, the second sentence DOES provide a very specific and thorough explanation for exactly what they do.
Zurai
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 09:52 AM) *
I think the next time I write something, thinking that "sure, the players will understand it" I'll reread this thread so it will remind me how every little fragging thing has to be explained in minute detail.


There's a very large difference between "writing in clear language" and "explaining every little fragging thing in minute detail". I would suggest that if you don't know the difference, you have no business whatsoever in instructional writing.
DireRadiant
QUOTE (Zurai @ May 20 2009, 08:54 AM) *
No one has said that it's fluff "because it's in the first sentence". Not in this thread, certainly. I have no clue where you got that from. What HAS been said is that a particular sentence is fluff if it does nothing but provide background on WHY something works, rather than tell you specifically WHAT IT DOES in game rules. "Reduces Physical damage" is a kind of borderline case, because it tells you what, but does not give specifics. You're not told, in that sentence, how much damage it reduces or in what situations and with what limitations. There's no way to use that sentence to arrive at the actual game effect of Platelet Factories. On the other hand, the second sentence DOES provide a very specific and thorough explanation for exactly what they do.


What if the mechanic can't be explained in a single complete sentence? What if it takes several sentences? Are you now claiming if it isn't a complete description of the entire mechanics in one sentence that it isn't any good and you can determine it is fluff and you can ignore it? Who decides if it is complete enough for you?
Rusted Scrap Metal
QUOTE (Zurai @ May 20 2009, 06:56 AM) *
There's a very large difference between "writing in clear language" and "explaining every little fragging thing in minute detail". I would suggest that if you don't know the difference, you have no business whatsoever in instructional writing.

That first sentence looks pretty clear to me. It looks like the rest of the entry has to do with Physical damage. But because of one missed word, now all of a sudden it's bad writing?

Could they have put Physical Damage instead of just damage? Sure. The writers might have actually thought that they didn't need to. They might have thought it was pretty clear.

Nope. Apparently they had to explain that it is Physical damage in both sections.

QUOTE
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.

Becomes...

QUOTE
Platelet Factories: Platelet factories are bioware that increases the body’s ability
to handle Physical damage done to a body implanted with Platelet Factories 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 Physical damage caused by a single wound of Physical damage, the Physical damage is instantly reduced by one point.
Multiple implantation of Platelet Factories do not stack.


That's without getting into what type of damage types are affected by the Platelet Factories. Like someone else brought up: Does it reduce damage from acid and fire? What about chemical inhalation? What about energy weapons?
DireRadiant
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 08:52 AM) *
Or it would be a mixture of mechanics and fluff. You know, engaging and descriptive writing that combines the bone dry game mechanics with some descriptive text to bring some life to the text.

I think the next time I write something, thinking that "sure, the players will understand it" I'll reread this thread so it will remind me how every little fragging thing has to be explained in minute detail.


Don't worry about it too much. I'd rather read engaging writing any day.
Zurai
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ May 20 2009, 10:03 AM) *
What if the mechanic can't be explained in a single complete sentence? What if it takes several sentences?


Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, get off your high horse and calm the hell down. Also, stop putting words in peoples' mouths. I never said it had to be contained in only a single sentence. I never implied that it had to be contained in a single sentence. I was pointing out that you were going total batshit insane over a stupid "rule" that you invented out of whole cloth to make the "other side" look bad.

QUOTE ('Rusted Scrap Metal')
That first sentence looks pretty clear to me. It looks like the rest of the entry has to do with Physical damage. But because of one missed word, now all of a sudden it's bad writing?


Yes. If omitting words causes the instructional writing to become unclear, it is bad writing. You don't even have to change the word count to solve this: just move "Physical" from the first sentence to the second. Voila, instantly solved with no innocent words killed or kidnapped. This is no different than a rule that leaves out some other vital term, such as "Damage from magical drain can be healed by magical means" with a missing "NOT".

QUOTE ('DireRadiant')
Don't worry about it too much. I'd rather read engaging writing any day.


You say that as if they were mutually exclusive. They aren't.
Rusted Scrap Metal
Let's do this the easy way...

QUOTE
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.


Now, let's pull the non-mechanics out...

QUOTE
Platelet Factories: Platelet factories handle Physical damage.
Any time the user suffers 2 or more points
of damage, the damage is instantly reduced by one point.

Uh-oh.

Looks like it works only on Physical damage.
Muspellsheimr
QUOTE (deek @ May 20 2009, 06:31 AM) *
Why would the writers add a word to the fluff in SR4A? I don't see a reason other than they wanted to clarify what damage was affected. I mean, let's say the writer added "Physical" to the second sentence. Wouldn't we still be arguing because the first sentence didn't specify what sort of damage?

No, we wouldn't. It would be clear that it reduces Physical damage taken by 1, whenever you would take 2 or more. There would be no need to argue.
QUOTE (deek @ May 20 2009, 06:31 AM) *
Again, I don't see how any one of us (i.e. those that did not write the book) can say it works one way or another by what is written in the current SR4A core. We can assume one way or another...we can go back to earlier editions and say that it NEVER reduced stun, but we can't get a clear cut ruling just from the text.

Its just not possible without official clarification.

Yes, it is. They inserted a game term into a fluff description. That does not change the fact it is a fluff description - I could do this all day with any section of the book; doing so has no impact on the actual mechanics. All it does is create a poorly written piece.

QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 07:57 AM) *
Now, let's pull the non-mechanics out...


Uh-oh.

Looks like it works only on Physical damage.

No, it looks like it works on damage.

All you have done with that is clairify that it 'handles Physical damage', but reduces damage.

Yet again, the Physical is not included in the description of what it actually does in game terms, & thus becomes fluff and poor writing.
Muspellsheimr
QUOTE (Zurai @ May 20 2009, 06:56 AM) *
There's a very large difference between "writing in clear language" and "explaining every little fragging thing in minute detail". I would suggest that if you don't know the difference, you have no business whatsoever in instructional writing.

Well said.
Rusted Scrap Metal
QUOTE
All you have done with that is clairify that it 'handles Physical damage', but reduces damage.

Only if the second sentence is taken out of context with the first.

QUOTE
Yet again, the Physical is not included in the description of what it actually does in game terms, & thus becomes fluff and poor writing.

Actually, when it says "It handles Physical damage" that section is not fluff. That's actually saying what the device handles.
deek
Hmmm...maybe I have a bad printing or PDF, because I don't see any difference in font, size or color in the text between fluff text and rules text...
Muspellsheimr
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 10:20 AM) *
Actually, when it says "It handles Physical damage" that section is not fluff. That's actually saying what the device handles.

No. What it does is describe what the augmentation does - it 'handles Physical damage'.

Then you look at how it works - it 'reduces damage'.

The description, despite using a mechanical term, contradicts the actual mechanics of the augmentation. It is not part of the mechanics, & is fluff. Because it is using mechanical terms in a fluff description, it is also shitty writing.


Edit: If you want to write rules text, learn how to do so. Do not include anything intended to be rules in a description - include them in the mechanics.

"Platelet Factories handle Physical damage. Whenever you would take damage, reduce it by 1 to a minimum of 1."
- Description: Handles physical damage.
- Mechanics: Reduces damage.

"Platelet Factories handle damage. Whenever you would take Physical damage, reduce it by 1 to a minimum of 1."
- Description: Handles damage.
- Mechanics: Reduces Physical damage.

Do you see the difference between the two? Are you even capable? Going by your arguments in the thread so far, I would guess not. If you want to write rules, learn about this difference first. It is what makes Rules as Written match the Rules as Intended. And guess what - generally speaking, only those on these boards have a clear distinction between the two, and only when there is developer input. The vast majority of players have no basis for determining if there even is a difference in any given instance, & thus the Rules as Written are law, the Rules as Intended are theoretical discussion.
Rusted Scrap Metal
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ May 20 2009, 10:34 AM) *
No. What it does is describe what the augmentation does - it 'handles Physical damage'.

Right.

QUOTE
Then you look at how it works - it 'reduces damage'.

Right.

QUOTE
The description, despite using a mechanical term, contradicts the actual mechanics of the augmentation.

How does it contradict it? Does it go from handling physical damage to making small dragonflies appear when a rifle goes off?
QUOTE
It is not part of the mechanics, & is fluff. Because it is using mechanical terms in a fluff description, it is also shitty writing.

You know what...

This is just going to go round and round.

Plain and simple...

"Handles physical damage. When damage is taken..."
If it handled stun, it would have said, handles stun.

You're taking the second sentence out of context with the first in order to support your view. Taken in context, it is obvious it refers to Physical damage ONLY. It's not shitty writing, it's shitty reading comprehension.

Real simple, if something says:

"This blender handles food objects by using sharp blades to chop them up. Objects put inside are reduced to a slurry." do you honest think that it means you can drop a 5 lb block of vanadium/titanium alloy into it and get a slurry?

Are you seriously claiming that you can't see the context between the first and second sentence? Or understand that the first sentence puts into context what type of the damage the second sentence is referring to?
Heath Robinson
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 06:38 PM) *
"This blender handles food objects by using sharp blades to chop them up. Objects put inside are reduced to a slurry." do you honest think that it means you can drop a 5 lb block of vanadium/titanium alloy into it and get a slurry?

Are you seriously claiming that you can't see the context between the first and second sentence? Or understand that the first sentence puts into context what type of the damage the second sentence is referring to?


Your example is invalid.
Andinel
The biggest problem I see is that there is a difference between damage and Physical damage - one is generic, one is specific. Although it can be interpreted as handling only Physical damage, the way the description of the bioware is written is vague, so it's unclear whether Rules As Written would have it handle both Physical and Stun damage or only Physical. Like Muspellsheimr said, moving the word Physical one sentence over makes it just that much clearer.
Chibu
The biggest problem I see, is that you're all still arguing. Stop it. It really doesn't matter. If your GM wants to make that piece of 'ware handle stun as well, it is irrelevant to how anyone else plays. There's really no point in bickering, seriously. Obviously, no one is going to change their opinion on this topic simply becuase you insinuate that their level of intelligence is similar to that of a cheeseburger. Let it go, take a deep breath and play the game however you want. Maybe someone official will eventually state which is correct, but probably not. So, until that time, and even after that, use it however you want. no one (unless you're not the GM) can stop you.
deek
I may be inclined to change my opinion if my intelligence was compared to that of a cheeseburger...but only once.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Rusted Scrap Metal @ May 20 2009, 08:57 AM) *
Looks like it works only on Physical damage.



Just to throw a monkey wrench into the argument....

Stun damage is still Physical damage... it is just damage that is applied to the Stun track rather than the physical track... ALL Damage is PHYSICAL (it has a physical effect on the metahuman body) rather than Spiritual or Mental... Semantics maybe, but true all the same...

Bruising damage is STILL PHYSICAL, though you apply it to the Stun Track for damage pruposes...
ALL Damage causes a physical reaction to the body regardless of the track it is applied too...

My Two Cents
Professeur
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 20 2009, 09:55 PM) *
Just to throw a monkey wrench into the argument....

Stun damage is still Physical damage... it is just damage that is applied to the Stun track rather than the physical track... ALL Damage is PHYSICAL (it has a physical effect on the metahuman body) rather than Spiritual or Mental... Semantics maybe, but true all the same...

Bruising damage is STILL PHYSICAL, though you apply it to the Stun Track for damage pruposes...
ALL Damage causes a physical reaction to the body regardless of the track it is applied too...

My Two Cents


No. Just no.

Physical damage is physical. Stun damage is stun. I don't know what you're trying to do, but you're actually mixing things up.
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