CT Only: The First Blood Rule - New Evidence Found! Extra-Extra! Read All About It!

[rhialto]

Right now, all I see is the rules saying that the First Blood rule is applied as a character's first wound. I don't see anything that implies that the First Blood rule is supposed to be applied as the first wound in each and every individual combat scenario.

But, like I said, if contradicting evidence is found, I'll change my stance.

If you count "apply your Ref's sense to the rule's intent" as evidence, then I see it as a clear attempt to model the first wound taken in any given combat. If you only rely on the text as literally written then I just refer you to "Dogs must be carried on the escalator"...

 

[Supplement Four]

If you count "apply your Ref's sense to the rule's intent" as evidence, then I see it as a clear attempt to model the first wound taken in any given combat. If you only rely on the text as literally written then I just refer you to "Dogs must be carried on the escalator"...

I'll admit that I've played it for years the way you and Mike are saying--that First Blood is meant to be the first wound of the encounter.

Looking at the rule coldly, taking away any prejudice, it just doesn't back up what you say.

It makes no sense that the First Blood would be applied to the very first hit of a combat situation and no other.

It does makes sense if you're talking about the first time a character is wounded, regardless of time.

For example...





Round 1.

Digger is 777777.

He takes damage using FB so that he is 177777.



Round 2.

He takes damage again, an applies normally.







Day 1.

Digger is 777777.

He takes damage using FB so that he is 177777.



Day 2.

He takes damage again, an applies normally.





The above makes sense. They're the same.

Day 2 shouldn't be more damage to the character. That makes no sense at all. After some rest, a character should be more resilient, not less so.



The First Blood rule exists so that combat poses a threat to characters with very high stats. Without it, characters with high stats would be tanks and feel impervious to combat.

 

[Brandon C]

The First Blood rule exists so that combat poses a threat to characters with very high stats. Without it, characters with high stats would be tanks and feel impervious to combat.

I'm more worried about average characters being knocked out after one average shot.

The first blood rule only serves to make all characters useless in combat.

 

[rhialto]

I'm more worried about average characters being knocked out after one average shot.

The first blood rule only serves to make all characters useless in combat.

Since I just ran my CT campaign again this past weekend I see this as a feature, not a worry: this exact thing happened in my game, where the first person to open an airlock got shot by a robot and knocked unconscious in one average 4D wounds roll. While it was too bad for that PC, it made the whole party warier from that point on. If I worried about it I'd think about the MgT/CE option of two stats at 0 being unconscious, not one. Or ditch the whole thing, as you have stated you have.

 

[rhialto]

Looking at the rule coldly, taking away any prejudice, it just doesn't back up what you say.

It makes no sense that the First Blood would be applied to the very first hit of a combat situation and no other.

The First Blood rule exists so that combat poses a threat to characters with very high stats. Without it, characters with high stats would be tanks and feel impervious to combat.

I disagree with how you are interpreting it, and what you see as authorial intent I see as clearly ambiguous (pun intended). The two examples you cite are simply not the same. IF one thinks that FB is meant to model the shock of the "first blood" drawn in each combat, then my interpretation makes perfect sense. IF one thinks it is meant to be "the first time being wounded in combat, ever" then I'd think any of the LBB1 prior careers could simply ignore this rule, being the (minimum) 4-year veterans that they are. And frankly that latter interpretation just doesn't jive with my CT Ref-sense.

 

[Supplement Four]

Since I just ran my CT campaign again this past weekend I see this as a feature, not a worry: this exact thing happened in my game, where the first person to open an airlock got shot by a robot and knocked unconscious in one average 4D wounds roll. While it was too bad for that PC, it made the whole party warier from that point on.

Yes. And, the average end result isn't that bad--unconsciousness. Incapacitate. Being taken out of the fight.

It's a like a time out. A slap on the hand. Go sit in the penalty box and miss all the fun, but you're character isn't dead. Respect combat and be smarter about your actions in the future.

 

[sabredog]

As always I'm confused as to why the chunking of the wounds is needed to be so fiddly. What is the point if it all ends up with the same results?

Player 1 gets hit in the first round for 12 total damage with the 777 stats for physical characteristics. Random roll by me says the first blood hit comes off DEX and then the players distributes the balance among the other two for a result of 504777 and the PC is out.

Now if the strict rule is applied then you have say a roll of 4.4.4. on the three dice. First blood takes the 12 off DEX first, then you have a balance of 1.4. STR becomes 6 DEX 0, and END 3. Not enough of a difference to make any difference so it seems more like a "tomAAto - tomahto" thing to me.

Is it worth the effort versus keeping combat actions moving?

And yes, I second the notion that a handful of dice clattering across the table is pretty nice. FGMP's and RAM grenades have made their appearances in my campaigns - rarely in the hands of players, but they do sometimes get used. It's a Chekov's Rifle thing.

If I had to roll each die and apply it manually from a RAM grenade HE autoburst I'd go insane. Or even in a player shot off a ten round burst from his gauss rifle and hit (because who would miss?) three times for 12 dice total.

 

[Supplement Four]

I disagree with how you are interpreting it, and what you see.

The reason I see it the way I do is that it is only used for the first wound. It's not possible to roll a Critical Hit (First Blood is called a "Critical Hit") after the first wound.

Why only have it as the first hit? That doesn't make sense, and it doesn't seem realistic at all. Which is why I think that it is meant to keep combat deadly for characters with high stats.

IF one thinks it is meant to be "the first time being wounded in combat, ever"...

Just a clarification. Not "ever". I'm saying FB is only applied to characters who are not wounded as their first wound.

A character could suffer from FB. Get Medical help and recover fully. Then he's eligible for FB again.

 

[robject]

First - how does Starter Traveller explain it? It is best-of-breed, with fixes that TTB lacks. If I recall aright.

Second - first blood is clearly for each character for each encounter, as a way to speed up combat while also driving home how serious combat is. I also get that is helps make super-stat characters vulnerable.

In my conceited opinion.

 

[Supplement Four]

UH-OH...

I think Mike was on to something in the other thread.


Reading the rules carefully, especially page 47, I think wounds are supposed to be handled like this...



1. Critical Hit

(The so called "First Blood" rule is more properly called the Critical Hit rule, in TTB.)

1. Critical Hits are the first wound a character receives.

2. If damage is 6, 5, 3. Take 14 points from a physical randomly.

3. Any left over damage reduces the total of the next die in order.

4. Remaining damage is taken in full dice, where each full die is rolled randomly and separately, applied to the physical stats.




2. Normal Damage

1. The first die of damage rolled is applied randomly to a physical stat.

2. Any left over damage reduces the total of the next die, in order.

3. Remaing damage is taken in full dice, where each full die is applied to the physical stats at the preference of the player.





If you read the damage section closely, and compare that to the "bullet points" version on page 47, this is what the rules are saying.

 

[ffilz]

First - how does Starter Traveller explain it? It is best-of-breed, with fixes that TTB lacks. If I recall aright.

Second - first blood is clearly for each character for each encounter, as a way to speed up combat while also driving home how serious combat is. I also get that is helps make super-stat characters vulnerable.

In my conceited opinion.

Other than the actual different rules systems, I haven't seen any different text in ST vs TTB, but I also haven't read everything carefully.

If there are actually differences, I want to hear about them so I can update my Section by Section comparison.

Frank

 

[Supplement Four]

First - how does Starter Traveller explain it? It is best-of-breed, with fixes that TTB lacks. If I recall aright.

It is explained exactly, word for word, as that in TTB.

The way I say it in post #30.

Second - first blood is clearly for each character for each encounter, as a way to speed up combat while also driving home how serious combat is.

How is it "clearly" that? Nothing in the rules say that. I seem to be the only one saying that it is the first wound a character receives, but what I've been saying is what is written.

The rule say "first wound". They don't say "first wound of a combat encounter".

 

[Brandon C]

How is it "clearly" that? Nothing in the rules say that. I seem to be the only one saying that it is the first wound a character receives, but what I've been saying is what is written.

The rule say "first wound". They don't say "first wound of a combat encounter".

No, that's how you are interpreting it. There are three ways (at least) it can be taken: first wound ever in the character's life, first wound when healthy, first wound in a combat. Nothing written suggests one more than the other, so most of us are going with what makes the most sense.

 

[Supplement Four]

First Wound

FIRST WOUND

I have since discovered that "first wound" isn't speaking to the Critical Hit rule at all (the First Blood rule).

It's not speaking to the first time a character is injured.

It's not speaking to the first time a character is injured in a combat round, either.

What is is speaking to is the first die rolled in a throw of damage dice.

It's talking about the first die of EVERY damage applied to the character.





The actual paragraph says...

The first wound received by any character, however, can be sufficient to stun or daze him or her, and is handled differently. This first wound is applied to one of the three physical characteristics (strength, dexterity, or endurance) determined randomly. If that characteristic is reduced to zero,then any remaining hits are then distributed to the other physical characteristics on a random basis. As a result, first blood may immediately incapacitate or even kill.

What that is saying, it this...

Jarm has stats 478A56

He is hit with damage of 3D: 6, 5, 4.

The first die rolled is applied randomly to the character's physicals.

Randomly roll STR. Jarm becomes 078.

But, there are still 2 points of damage from that first die to apply randomly. Roll END next, and Jarm becomes 076.

Now, the 5 and 4 dice are left. The player can take that damage however he sees fit as long as he applies the damage in whole dice.





WHERE IS THE PROOF THAT WHAT I AM SAYING HERE IS TRUE?

Look at page 47, where it says, under Wounding And Death:

Bold is my emphasis.

Wounds are applied to the physical characteristics, temporarily reducing them for the duration of combat.

Each die rolled for wounds is treated as a group of hits that should not be divided; for example a 1D result of 5 should be treated as 5 hits to be applied as one group to one of the physical characteristics. Select the first physical characteristic to receive wounds randomly; the wounded player character may select all subsequent physical characteristics to receive wounds.

So, it is clear that all normal damage, except Critical Hits, are applied like this:

1. First die of damage is applied randomly.

2. If any points of that die are left over after zeroing a random stat, then apply just the left over part to the other two attributes randomly.

3. The player may pick and choose where to apply any remaining damage dice as long as he applies the damage in whole dice.







WHAT ABOUT CRITICAL HITS?

Page 47 also describes Critical Hits (First Blood).

For a critical hit, the entire amount of damaged is totaled into one sum, and that is applied to one of the physical stats randomly.

If any damage is left over, the points are used to reduce the damage dice left, and each die is applied randomly.

Like this...

Jarm has stats 478A56.

He takes damage of 3D: 6, 5, 4.

The total amount of 15 points is applied randomly to one of the physical attributes.

We roll for STR. Which is zeroed. 078A56.

Remaining damage is 3, 4 (5 was reduced to 3 due to the extra 2 points).

Then, these dice are applied randomly to the remaining two stats.

3 points is rolled for randomly.

4 points is rolled for separately, and randomly.

This is a slightly different procedure than for regular, non-Critical Wounds, described above.

The proof for this is in the page 36 example, clearly written.





There is random application of damage every time a character is damaged. With normal hits, the first die of damage is applied randomly. With Critical Hits, the total damage is applied randomly first (instead of just the first die), and then the remaining dice are also applied randomly (instead of allowing the player to choose).

 

[casquilho]

My head is starting to hurt.

 

[Brandon C]

My head is starting to hurt.

I just failed my SAN roll. I'm out.

 

[Axe]

Other than the actual different rules systems, I haven't seen any different text in ST vs TTB, but I also haven't read everything carefully.

If there are actually differences, I want to hear about them so I can update my Section by Section comparison.

Frank

Hi,

Where is the latest version found?

Thanks

 

[infojunky]

I just failed my SAN roll. I'm out.

Shrug.... Too complex for play mostly... Mostly I use a END roll with each wound...

 

[rhialto]

The reason I see it the way I do is that it is only used for the first wound. It's not possible to roll a Critical Hit (First Blood is called a "Critical Hit") after the first wound.

Why only have it as the first hit? That doesn't make sense, and it doesn't seem realistic at all. Which is why I think that it is meant to keep combat deadly for characters with high stats.

Just a clarification. Not "ever". I'm saying FB is only applied to characters who are not wounded as their first wound.

A character could suffer from FB. Get Medical help and recover fully. Then he's eligible for FB again.

I think we've talked in circles here...I've stated why it "makes sense", just as I can clearly state in what context "Dogs must be carried on the escalator" makes sense: not that "one must carry a dog to get on the escalator", but that "if one gets on the escalator with a dog, one must carry the dog".

 

[rhialto]

My last words on First Blood

FIRST WOUND
I have since discovered that "first wound" isn't speaking to the Critical Hit rule at all (the First Blood rule).

It's not speaking to the first time a character is injured.

It's not speaking to the first time a character is injured in a combat round, either.

The proof for this is in the page 36 example, clearly written.[/B]

So I went back to the example on p.36 of TTB, and the example states:

"Because this is One's first wounding in the combat...", "Again, because this is Two's first wounding of the combat..."

Sure seems clear that the First Blood rule applies to the "first wounding in the combat", no?

I also went back to LBB1 as well, and there's a subtle difference between it and TTB:

LBB1 ('77, p. 30): "This first wound received is applied entirely to one of the three physical characteristics (strength, dexterity or endurance), determined randomly." (emphasis mine)

LBB1 ('81, p.34) and TTB (p.35): "This first wound is applied to one of the three physical characteristics (strength, dexterity, or endurance) determined randomly."

Note the missing "entirely" from LBB1('81) and TTB, although the example on p.36 of TTB makes it clear the "first wound" really means "first wound taken in a combat", not "first die of any wound taken in a combat". "Entirely" can only mean "sum of all dice", since there is the earlier statement that each die is to be applied as a whole:

"Each die rolled (for example, each of the two dice rolled in a result of 2D) is taken as a single wound or group of hits, and must be applied to a single characteristic." (common across LBB1 ('77 and '81) and TTB)

Finally, while I think it would be an interesting variant to randomly apply the first die of any subsequent wounds, it does seem too fiddly. It also contradicts the statement:

TTB, p.35: "The wounded player may decide which physical characteristic receives specific wound points in order to avoid or delay unconsciousness for as long as possible."

I've enjoyed the discussion, and hope you don't take offense. If some of us want to walk around with one sandal in our hand, we should be allowed to. :coffeesip: