Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stun, Battered, and Minor and Major Injury Conditions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stun, Battered, and Minor and Major Injury Conditions

    Reading the Stun Weapons tag I encountered the terminology "Minor Injury Condition" and "Major Injury Condition." Clarification on exactly what these are?

    Reading the Stun Weapons tag it says it can only cause a series of bruised injury conditions (another issue) or stunned injury condition, but fails to clarify what in Scion a "stunned" character actually is.

    Twice now I have encountered the Battered Injury condition terminology as if it has specific significance. What is this?

  • #2
    I had questions about these as well, particularly the Battered Injury Condition. It's mentioned at least three times in Origin, in the Combat Tags section--once in Bashing ("The tag allows for the Broken and Battered Injury Conditions"), once in Lethal ("A weapon with this tag cannot inflict the Bruised or Battered Injury Conditions"), and once in Stun ("When inflicting an Injury, this weapon can only be used to inflict the Minor Injury Conditions Bruised, Staggered, or Stunned, or the Major Injury Condition Battered).

    If I had to guess, maybe Injury Conditions are considered Minor at the Bruised level(s), and Major at the Injured, Maimed, and/or Taken Out levels?

    In terms of what the Battered condition entails, I at first assumed that it was just one of those things that the Storyguide/player decide for themselves--but the fact that it's specifically called out several times (and has restrictions on what can and can't trigger it) makes me wonder if maybe it was spelled out in an earlier version of the text, and later got cut for one reason or another.









    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sheeted Kid View Post
      I had questions about these as well, particularly the Battered Injury Condition. It's mentioned at least three times in Origin, in the Combat Tags section--once in Bashing ("The tag allows for the Broken and Battered Injury Conditions"), once in Lethal ("A weapon with this tag cannot inflict the Bruised or Battered Injury Conditions"), and once in Stun ("When inflicting an Injury, this weapon can only be used to inflict the Minor Injury Conditions Bruised, Staggered, or Stunned, or the Major Injury Condition Battered).

      If I had to guess, maybe Injury Conditions are considered Minor at the Bruised level(s), and Major at the Injured, Maimed, and/or Taken Out levels?

      In terms of what the Battered condition entails, I at first assumed that it was just one of those things that the Storyguide/player decide for themselves--but the fact that it's specifically called out several times (and has restrictions on what can and can't trigger it) makes me wonder if maybe it was spelled out in an earlier version of the text, and later got cut for one reason or another.
      The names of the individual Injury Conditions aren't really ironclad. They're more examples.

      Minor being Bruised level and Major being Injured, Maimed, or Taken Out is probably the best way to think of it.

      So, here's something that may be on your mind that I'll pre-emptively elaborate. No, the Lethal Tag doesn't bypass the -1 Injury Level, despite them being called Bruised Levels. It could be a bit clearer, and honestly I wish they had just stuck with the numbers because those are clearer.

      The Damage Tags influence what KIND of Injuries can be created. Bashing will deal Bruises, Bashed, or Battered. Lethal will inflict Cut, Dramatic Scar, or Hamstrung. Aggravated will inflict Burned Flesh or Arm Blown Off.

      These are names for the most part, and Aggravated Injury Conditions take magical efforts to heal, as per the Weapon Tag. But the Bashing-inflicted Injury of "Heck of a Shiner" at -1, the Lethal-inflicted Injury of "Dramatic Head Scratch" at -1, and the Stun-inflicted "Numb Arm" at -1 are all Injuries that inflict their penalty to the relevant actions.

      As for "What do these do"... Well, that comes down to one question. "What would this injury inhibit?" For instance, 'Shot in the knee' will probably effect any rolls involving running or climbing, but it probably won't impact if they're sitting and have to do something with their hands. And as I mentioned, the sample Conditions are just that: Samples. You can make up the kinds of injuries on the fly when you inflict them.


      Disclaimer: I'll huff, grump, and defend my position, but if you're having fun I'll never say you're doing it wrong.

      Comment


      • #4
        Please note that Kyman actually didn’t answer what stun does in Scion 2nd because, as with the entirety of this system apparently, there isn’t really a system attached. Stun gets its own weapon tag but all it is is generic bashing damage X. There’s no actual rule except to state that a weapon that can stun can’t do lethal, and then no rules about what stun actually does.

        Comment


        • #5
          I will not quote Scion because it’s really weird... so here goes Trinity Stun Tag

          A weapon with the Stun tag does not inflict dam- age when purchasing the Inflict Damage Stunt Instead, it inflicts the Stunned Status Condition with a level 2 Complication instead.
          Additionally you need the condition stunned.

          The character is slowed, and finds it hard to take actions or move. She suffers a Rank 2 Complication that inflicts −2 to all rolls until she overcomes it.
          Resolution: The Stunned Condition wears off naturally after a number of rounds based on the damage source. A character can overcome the Complication associated with the damage source (see “Indirect Damage,” below) to end the Condition early.
          Better? The differences are there, not many, but still I think Trinity is better written and more structured...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mateus Luz View Post
            I will not quote Scion because it’s really weird... so here goes Trinity Stun Tag



            Additionally you need the condition stunned.



            Better? The differences are there, not many, but still I think Trinity is better written and more structured...
            So since you have been consistently the only one with anything remotely resembling a coherent reply to any of my questions and every time it’s a reference to Trinity my take away is: I should have just bought Trinity and not wasted money thinking I was getting a complete game with Scion?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by JohanDracys View Post
              Please note that Kyman actually didn’t answer what stun does in Scion 2nd because, as with the entirety of this system apparently, there isn’t really a system attached. Stun gets its own weapon tag but all it is is generic bashing damage X. There’s no actual rule except to state that a weapon that can stun can’t do lethal, and then no rules about what stun actually does.
              Stun as a Tag exists to define what a weapon cannot do, specifically, as noted in the text of the book it lets you Take People Out without killing them, useful if you want to have a mook left after to interrogate.

              As for what the Stun Condition does... penalizes attempts to take movement actions is a good place to start. I'm not certain why you keep coming back with the same 'complaint' that the game expects you to design most of the exact effects of Injury Conditions yourself... this fact has been pointed out to you multiple times and is unlikely to change, and this is made clear in the actual book. You are expected to define your own Paths, Conditions, Boons, Birthrights and Marvels with the examples and guidelines provided. Hell, Injury Conditions are easier than most because the actual effect is already given t you... a fixed penalty to certain actions... all you need to do is determine which actions it applies to as seems logical to the narrative to you.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Samudra View Post

                Stun as a Tag exists to define what a weapon cannot do, specifically, as noted in the text of the book it lets you Take People Out without killing them, useful if you want to have a mook left after to interrogate.

                As for what the Stun Condition does... penalizes attempts to take movement actions is a good place to start. I'm not certain why you keep coming back with the same 'complaint' that the game expects you to design most of the exact effects of Injury Conditions yourself... this fact has been pointed out to you multiple times and is unlikely to change, and this is made clear in the actual book. You are expected to define your own Paths, Conditions, Boons, Birthrights and Marvels with the examples and guidelines provided. Hell, Injury Conditions are easier than most because the actual effect is already given t you... a fixed penalty to certain actions... all you need to do is determine which actions it applies to as seems logical to the narrative to you.


                This game has nearly 0 lethality. There isn't a 'dead' health level. The game designers even point out that it's on purpose. If a fight is too hard, the players can take 3 momentum and cut scene out. There is no actual consequences or chance of death. So I fail to see how "non lethal" damage is even a consideration. In fact, players, regardless of Stun effects, get to decide on if they killed or merely incapacitated their foes all for the 'benefit of the story.'

                The only time something dies is when a PC wants it to die and explicitly says "I kill it." No other time.

                Even under the "Taken Out" Injury Condition in Combat which only applies to PCs it explicitly lists that PCs can only be killed by something of equal or greater tier and even then it's not a sure thing.

                Thank you for further clarifying an expansion on the minimal lethality of the game.

                I'm sure it's very easy for you to understand an incomplete game riddled with contradictions and misleading terms. But since I'm hardwired differently then an NT, I will have to continue to ask my stupid questions.

                I asked about the STUN injury condition. Which the Stun weapon tag says it inflicts. Since every game has a different systematic for how STUN is inflicted and resolved based around it's own unique system, I didn't know how to deal with this. But yet again, I knew that this forum would be the welcoming place for help. It took me 5 days to actually decide to try and ask my question, because I knew the responses I would get. I'm glad to see I wasn't disappointed.

                Comment


                • #9
                  PCs aren't the only people who exist..... Sometimes you might want to take out an enemy without the risk of killing them.

                  "The only time something dies is when a PC wants it to die and explicitly says "I kill it." No other time." is 100% invented by you. Not the book. In the book, the SG is the one who decides based on circumstances and tone if a character is killed when they get the Taken Out condition.

                  "Even under the "Taken Out" Injury Condition in Combat which only applies to PCs it explicitly lists that PCs can only be killed by something of equal or greater tier and even then it's not a sure thing. "
                  Nope, antagonist rules say they get Taken Out when they lose all their Health.

                  Just because you dislike the answers your given, doesn't mean people aren't giving you answers.
                  Last edited by milo v3; 06-09-2019, 07:31 AM.


                  Genius templates (for Demon: the Descent)

                  Rakshasa: the Kingdom (Featuring the Extinction Chronicle) [WIP]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JohanDracys View Post
                    There is no actual consequences or chance of death.
                    The low lethality of the game doesn't mean there's no actual consequences. In fact that's sort of the point. The consequences are all about what happens around the fight. If a Titanspawn is running away with an artifact of doom, what's important is if you keep the artifact of doom out of the hands of the Titans' servants, not if you kill the one carrying it right now. Scions especially need to be careful about how their Deeds translate into Legends, since a militaristic Scion isn't going to want to become the god of cowards by voluntarily opting to get Taken Out whenever there's a tough fight.

                    In fact, players, regardless of Stun effects, get to decide on if they killed or merely incapacitated their foes all for the 'benefit of the story.'
                    The SG decides the fates of NPCs, not the players. So while it's not useful to NPCs (since the SG can always opt to not kill a PC even for NPC that are capable of doing so), it's useful for PCs because it ensures enemies they attack don't get ruled as dead by the SG:

                    Page 122 - "It’s up to the Storyguide to judge the tone of the campaign and determine whether or not a character has been permanently slain."

                    Note that this does not say that enemies can only die if the PCs declare it.

                    But since I'm hardwired differently then an NT,...
                    1) You're not that only person around here with a diagnosis, including plenty of the people you've been arguing with.

                    2) Your neurology isn't a fucking weapon, and it's insulting to the rest of us for you to use it like this. If your brain is messing with you so much you can't stop being an ass about things here? You have bigger problems than figuring out how Scion works.

                    ...I didn't know how to deal with this.
                    The problem is that you continue to refuse to engage with the fact that Injury Conditions are meant to be improvised based on the guidelines. You might not like it. It might not work for you. But that's how the game is designed and if you're not going to get anywhere if you can't get past this direct point: The effects of an Injury Condition are determined by the SG when the Injury is inflicted based on what the SG feels makes sense.

                    Just stop railing about how incomplete or contradictory this stuff is. It's not. Something not being how you'd like it doesn't mean it's broken.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by milo v3 View Post
                      PCs aren't the only people who exist..... Sometimes you might want to take out an enemy without the risk of killing them.

                      "The only time something dies is when a PC wants it to die and explicitly says "I kill it." No other time." is 100% invented by you. Not the book. In the book, the SG is the one who decides based on circumstances and tone if a character is killed when they get the Taken Out condition.

                      "Even under the "Taken Out" Injury Condition in Combat which only applies to PCs it explicitly lists that PCs can only be killed by something of equal or greater tier and even then it's not a sure thing. "
                      Nope, antagonist rules say they get Taken Out when they lose all their Health.

                      Just because you dislike the answers your given, doesn't mean people aren't giving you answers.
                      Actually as was painfully detailed on another thread, antagonists take “appropriate complications to the damage the PCs inflict” therefor the PCs determine their lethality. They decide in the description of every strike and can even “stunt” their strikes to make certain they incap.

                      I did actually read the book. As incomprehensible as it, I do know how to read and apply the relevant mechanics. So no, it doesn’t matter if the weapon has “stun” because the overriding mechanic to the entire game is “players win” and “narrative first” and all that is required is a player to “appropriately describe their attack” to incapacitate regardless. Since after all, a fist doesn’t have stun and you can incap with that can’t you?

                      But of course it does go along with the whole “stun weapons only do bashing damage” except not all bashing weapons cause stun since you can only have 3 tags and well you can kill people with a hammer.

                      But please tell me more about how I’m wrong by explicitly quoting where I talk about the rules inconsistencies that make certain your point has absolutely no merit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JohanDracys View Post

                        So since you have been consistently the only one with anything remotely resembling a coherent reply to any of my questions and every time it’s a reference to Trinity my take away is: I should have just bought Trinity and not wasted money thinking I was getting a complete game with Scion?
                        No, that’s not true. Trinity is not designed with the same propose than Scion, it’s intended for a mortal level development, so it uses other opinion to handle things that have a large impact but short time recovering.

                        By standard it takes a few days to recover from injuries, if not weeks, If the characters are hit by an stun gun and get stunned for a week, you (as a player) are not going to feel the difference between it and a shot. In Scion, it’s easy to find some fast healing (at least for the PCs), so it doesn't matter if it was a punch, a stab or a stun gun, as long you don’t die, it’s not going to last too long.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Kyman201 View Post
                          The names of the individual Injury Conditions aren't really ironclad. They're more examples.

                          Minor being Bruised level and Major being Injured, Maimed, or Taken Out is probably the best way to think of it.

                          So, here's something that may be on your mind that I'll pre-emptively elaborate. No, the Lethal Tag doesn't bypass the -1 Injury Level, despite them being called Bruised Levels. It could be a bit clearer, and honestly I wish they had just stuck with the numbers because those are clearer.

                          The Damage Tags influence what KIND of Injuries can be created. Bashing will deal Bruises, Bashed, or Battered. Lethal will inflict Cut, Dramatic Scar, or Hamstrung. Aggravated will inflict Burned Flesh or Arm Blown Off.

                          These are names for the most part, and Aggravated Injury Conditions take magical efforts to heal, as per the Weapon Tag. But the Bashing-inflicted Injury of "Heck of a Shiner" at -1, the Lethal-inflicted Injury of "Dramatic Head Scratch" at -1, and the Stun-inflicted "Numb Arm" at -1 are all Injuries that inflict their penalty to the relevant actions.

                          As for "What do these do"... Well, that comes down to one question. "What would this injury inhibit?" For instance, 'Shot in the knee' will probably effect any rolls involving running or climbing, but it probably won't impact if they're sitting and have to do something with their hands. And as I mentioned, the sample Conditions are just that: Samples. You can make up the kinds of injuries on the fly when you inflict them.
                          Thanks! That helps.

                          That being the case (and this question goes out to everyone, not just Kyman), do you have any thoughts on what a Condition like Battered would entail? My own sense is that being battered involves either:
                          --Getting struck by a number of relatively minor blows; this would likely result in being disoriented, possibly to the point where it could conceivably affect any action one attempts.
                          --Getting coated in a mixture of flour, milk, water, and possibly other ingredients; this would likely result in being more delicious if one subsequently gets cooked. (Probably not relevant in this context, unless one has been captured by hungry giants or somesuch.)

                          Or do you suppose the intent is that you don't get a general Battered Condition, so much as you get a "Battered Arm" or "Battered Ribcage" (so that the penalty would, in fact, only apply to your Defense, certain actions, etc.)?

                          While I'm at it, the rules (on page 121 of Origin) say that when a character takes damage, the player chooses to take a Bruised, Injured, or Maimed Condition, if available. So if my character gets walloped by a haymaker from a random street thug, I could opt to take the damage at the Injured (or even Maimed) level even if I have a Bruised level free, right? Are there any circumstances where it would be advantageous to do so? And does that mean I tell the Storyguide which injury level I'm taking, and then he/she decides what the corresponding Injury Condition will be?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by JohanDracys View Post

                            Actually as was painfully detailed on another thread, antagonists take “appropriate complications to the damage the PCs inflict” therefor the PCs determine their lethality. They decide in the description of every strike and can even “stunt” their strikes to make certain they incap.
                            Not how the game works. If you take out an enemy with a gun, you can very easily kill them if that's the sort of game being run. From the section on Taking Out "It’s up to the Storyguide to judge the tone of the campaign and determine whether or not a character has been permanently slain". I am also unclear what Stunt your referring to, since none seem to have any way of incapacitating enemies outside of the ones that inflict damage.

                            I did actually read the book. As incomprehensible as it, I do know how to read and apply the relevant mechanics. So no, it doesn’t matter if the weapon has “stun” because the overriding mechanic to the entire game is “players win” and “narrative first” and all that is required is a player to “appropriately describe their attack” to incapacitate regardless. Since after all, a fist doesn’t have stun and you can incap with that can’t you?
                            Except the player doesn't have control over the universe. Just their character. "the overriding mechanic to the entire game is “players win” and “narrative first”" isn't a thing. If you're using a shotgun and shoot a person with it at point-blank range causing them to be taken out.... then your SG has a pretty good justification for the dude just outright dying.... Now the player could try to say they try to shoot the dude in the legs, which is fine because he can state what his intent is. But that's all that is. Intent. They might intend to shoot someone in the legs, but maybe they aren't accurate enough for that and get the person in the gut, or maybe the person was already severely injured by previous attacks, and they bleed out shortly after you shoot them in the legs.

                            And yes, you can incapacitate people with things without stun. It's that it Will always incapacitate rather than kill, but sometimes things will happen where you hit someone on the back of the head and they crack their heads into the pavement and die. The tag is a narrative certainty that "When a character is Taken Out by a weapon with the Stun tag, they are knocked unconscious".

                            But of course it does go along with the whole “stun weapons only do bashing damage” except not all bashing weapons cause stun since you can only have 3 tags and well you can kill people with a hammer.
                            Technically you can have more than 3 tags through the birthrights system.

                            But please tell me more about how I’m wrong by explicitly quoting where I talk about the rules inconsistencies that make certain your point has absolutely no merit.
                            Dude, tone down the constant hostility. It's ridiculous.

                            Originally posted by Sheeted Kid View Post

                            Thanks! That helps.

                            That being the case (and this question goes out to everyone, not just Kyman), do you have any thoughts on what a Condition like Battered would entail? My own sense is that being battered involves either:
                            --Getting struck by a number of relatively minor blows; this would likely result in being disoriented, possibly to the point where it could conceivably affect any action one attempts.
                            --Getting coated in a mixture of flour, milk, water, and possibly other ingredients; this would likely result in being more delicious if one subsequently gets cooked. (Probably not relevant in this context, unless one has been captured by hungry giants or somesuch.)

                            Or do you suppose the intent is that you don't get a general Battered Condition, so much as you get a "Battered Arm" or "Battered Ribcage" (so that the penalty would, in fact, only apply to your Defense, certain actions, etc.)?

                            While I'm at it, the rules (on page 121 of Origin) say that when a character takes damage, the player chooses to take a Bruised, Injured, or Maimed Condition, if available. So if my character gets walloped by a haymaker from a random street thug, I could opt to take the damage at the Injured (or even Maimed) level even if I have a Bruised level free, right? Are there any circumstances where it would be advantageous to do so? And does that mean I tell the Storyguide which injury level I'm taking, and then he/she decides what the corresponding Injury Condition will be?
                            I'd say all three would work, though the first would probably be more mechanically limited than the next action they commit. Could make it harder for them to dodge because of them needing a second to get their bearing with that one?

                            And yes, you get to choose what severity of damage condition you take s you could choose a more severe injury condition than the lowest one you have available. As for benefits, a bigger injury might have more broad instances that are penalized by it, thus giving you a higher opportunity for momentum. Finally, I would say yes you should tell the SG who should quickly tell you what sorta condition you get.


                            Genius templates (for Demon: the Descent)

                            Rakshasa: the Kingdom (Featuring the Extinction Chronicle) [WIP]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Johan, the game's just not going to stop requiring fill-in-the-blank consequences and player/GM fiat. You have things you want it to do, and those are different from what the creators want it to do. You can keep trying to prove that a cupcake isn't a ricecake, but it's not going to change that.

                              Also, who's the audience for these threads? You're not going to convince the people who're playing the game successfully that they're not. And your questions have been answered according to the intent of the books, you just don't like that intent.


                              Cavaliers of Mars Creator

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X