One thing I find is that the book is rather lacking in examples of tests. The few it has are good, but there are so many permutations that it may be helpful to have a discussion of them. What kinds of tests do you call for? Whether they are simple combat tests or fear tests. It may be helpful to show some social tests too. Personally I find they can be the least used.

These were a couple of examples that I used recently. DanteRotterdam had some good examples too.

• Joe is standing in the street when a group of three zombies round a corner and make for him. He pulls his pistol and starts firing. He's got a pistol, is a crack shot, and is aiming, so we will say he has 4 positive dice and a Dex stat of 3. The zombies are shambling, but are unrelenting and horrifying, so they give 2 negative dice. Total roll on positive dice is 5, 2, 2, 1. Total roll on negative dice is 4, 2. The 5 is over the stat so is eliminated. Two 2s from the positive and negative dice cancel each other out. But he does hit for 5 damage (2 successes + 3 pistol damage). But 1 negative die roll (4) is uncancelled. This could be applied as mental stress being that the zombies are still at range and thus described as Joe beginning to freak out as the get closer to him.
• Next round, Joe (Dex 3) starts running for the door of the mall. Looking back, as he runs, he tries to continue shooting. Not able to aim, Joe is down to three positive dice (1 base, 1 pistol, 1 crack shot). The zombies are still coming (unrelenting) but he is running which will throw off his aim (1 negative die) for a total of 2 negative dice. Rolling he gets a 4 and two 3s on the positive dice and a pair of 4s on the negative dice. The 4s cancel each other out leaving a positive pair of 3s and one negative 4. As to the positive dice, I could run this as a normal hit (5 damage again) or (if using the head shot feature) have him take out a zombie with a head shot. As to the one negative die, it could be described as stumbling over debris while running inflicting a point of physical stress or more mental stress as the other zombies keep coming. Personally I'd go with the former as I think taking out a zombie would reduce the horror of the situation somewhat, but either works.

It may be helpful to people to see when negative dice are used or not used. Whether a test can inflict stress. When and if to use features both positive and negative. Feel free to discuss them. I don't think there is any absolute right or wrong way and it may be helpful to others to see alternate viewpoints.

I think this is a great idea, however whilst I personally believe that stress can (in some situations) cross categories, it's not RAW, so should probably be pointed out in your example above.

Why on earth would the zombies having the unrelenting quality add a negative die to someone shooting at them? It just means they won't let up if they are not killed outright. The same could be said about horrifying.... And, as VF says, the cross categorial adminstration of stress. This is not how the game works.

I think what you are doing now mouthy merc is taking your houserules from a different topic where there was a discussion about them and are now just putting them forward as examples of the RAW which isn't a fair representation of the rules or at least you should make a disclaimer that you are using houserules here. Other than that I think it is a good idea to put forward some examples... I will work out a few tomorrow (slow day at the office).

I never said they were RAW. And people are free to post whatever they want. Including their disagreement. Feel free to discuss them, as I said.

I could see "unrelenting" giving a negative die or Mental Stress on a second or subsequent shot. "Why, won't you die?" At least in the early days. If I put three in the chest of some maniac and he keeps coming at me I'm going to be pretty shaken.

Of course for most of us just shooting at a human being, or what looks like a human being, is going to be psychologically very tough. Yes, I know, we are all hardened gamer-boys and will shoot down zombies like there is no tomorrow. Really? How many hunt? How many have actually pulled the trigger with intent to kill on a real living thing? How many have no inhibitions beyond the law says "no" about throwing punches?

That said, once the zombies start looking less human and more obviously zombies, unhealed wounds, lots of blood stains, ragged rotting clothing, shriveled rotting flesh, it will get easier to shoot them. I think it will be a very sharp stair step from "OMG! I can't shoot Mrs Wilkins she's such a nice old lady" to "Blast the Zed!" probably a matter of days if not hours. Those who cannot adapt quickly will be taken out by the zombies in short order.

But this does not mean it is RAW that "unrelenting" gives a negative die for shooting at zombies.

Also as mentioned in many other topics there really aren't any rules for unrelenting or horrifying features. I love the game but the npc features given are very vague and essentially not explained A few examples of what tests they should be used with would have been nice.

Also as mentioned in many other topics there really aren't any rules for unrelenting or horrifying features. I love the game but the npc features given are very vague and essentially not explained A few examples of what tests they should be used with would have been nice.

There are rules, as they are standard features in my opinion. I believe they're purposely unexplained to allow the GM greater freedom in their use.

In that case saying you can't use a negative dice for the "unrelenting" feature because it's against the rules isn't a true statement. The feature is there to be interpretted as the Gm sees fit.

In that case saying you can't use a negative dice for the "unrelenting" feature because it's against the rules isn't a true statement. The feature is there to be interpretted as the Gm sees fit.

That is the way I understand it too. From my reading you can use the features to add negative or positive dice as the case may be whenever the GM thinks they should apply. I would be inclined to use NPC features as much as possible- since the rules for NPCs are so barebones anyway. Thats just my interpretation, I've read and reread the the book but I might be missing something. If anyone can cite specific pages or sections for further clarification go ahead by all means.

Well, if I go over the rules it is pretty clear that features add positive and/or negative rolls to the roll of the one having such features and not to those opposing them. However, having said that I would be hard pressed how " horrifying" would work then...

Well, if I go over the rules it is pretty clear that features add positive and/or negative rolls to the roll of the one having such features and not to those opposing them. However, having said that I would be hard pressed how " horrifying" would work then...

Maybe in a situation where the zombie's presence is like an attack that could cause (mental?) stress.

"The zombies sees the PCs and lets out a loud roar as bloody spittle flies from it's mouth". The GM roll for the zombie adding in one positive die for the zombie's +Horrifying feature. Any stress could be applied to the PC's mental stress track.

That's just one example I can think of.

Well, if I go over the rules it is pretty clear that features add positive and/or negative rolls to the roll of the one having such features and not to those opposing them. However, having said that I would be hard pressed how " horrifying" would work then...

Horrifying should definitely work for 'mental attacks', similar to fear / sanity checks in other systems.

Whilst I agree that it's not explicit that someones/somethings features can work for those opposing them, I think it's implied on page 44:

Positive dice are added to a test's dice pool to represent any circumstances that could be helpful to the character making the test

and

Negative dice are added to a test's dice pool to represent any circumstances making the task more difficult or dangerous for the character to perform

Do an opponents features not indicate circumstances that can be used?

Do an opponents features not indicate circumstances that can be used?

I don't think that features from an opponent are there to influence your dice roll. That just seems off for some reason... I don't have the book on me now but I am going to dive into it once I get home tonight.

Once you have added all the negative dice appropriate to the character's features and traumas, you should add any dice indicated by the difficulty of the task. Difficulty can be affected by environmental conditions or hazards, or it may simply reflect a task's inherent challenge.

If a group of character comes across two gang members and one has the feature +kung fu master , is that one not going to be more of a challenge than the other?

Actually that quote puts me in the right more then it does you.

If features from a target (social, combat or other) would be of influence you would think they'd make an effort to name them in such a rule, right? They specifically name them from the active side but they speak only of " environmental conditions", "hazards" and "inherent difficulty" from the passive side, so I guess they do not come into play RAW .

Also, in all RPG's I've played the to hit roll does not take the fighting ability of the opponent into account. Neither D&D, nor EotE, nor CoC. I am having a hard time believing a simple rules-light system such as this one would do so.

If I would take your example to heart for instance:

I attack a gang member. I have 1 positive die and that's it. My oponent has a "Kungfu master" feature and it adds 1 negative.

I roll a 4 on the positive and a 6 on the negative die. My dex is 3 so I miss and I get stress from the negative die? On my turn when throwing a punch... And then we go to the opponents turn. So he gets to hurt me not only on his turn but also on mine?

In that case wouldn't hitting him be more dangerous then just standing there? So if I wanted to keep him engaged for multiple rounds I only need to walk up to him and stand there... In that way I would get hurt once per round instead of the two times your example woul bring about...

I have to agree that it seems that features would only impact the the amount of dice for the person possessing those features. For the zombie the "horrifying" and "unrelenting" features would add positive dice to the zombie's actions. The same way if a PC had a "body builder" feature wouldn't add negative dice to the zombies attack.

"Relentless Pursuit" and "Unyielding" are zombie features. I have been unable to find either "Relentless" or "Unrelenting" in my copy of the game. Which zombies have "Unrelenting" as a quality?

I actually wonder about the quality "+Hard to Kill" if opponents' possitive qualities never add negative dice to a player's pool. What test would you add possitive dice to a zombie's pool for having the "Hard to Kill" quality?

I would add a negative die to any physical attack pool against an opponent with "Hard to Kill" to reflect the difficulty of scoring a significantly damaging hit. Likely because the enemy shrugs off most damage as inconsequential, not because it is actually harder to physically hit.

As for adding negative dice for the enemy's qualities, look at the last two entries on Table 7, page 37. Negative dice are added for "enemy is beyond reason" and "enemy hates you". These are conditions that I would express in teh game mechanics as qualities assigned to the enemy.

I think the End of the World is taking a very Old School approach to game design and providing a very bare bones RPG resolution framework, the details of how that framework is implemented in play are left up the individual GM. This is not a d20 style design where every rule and every situation is spelled out in great detail and if the rules do not explicitly say you can do it then you cannot. Quite the opposite. This is a game where if the rules do not explicitly say you cannot do it then you can. Or at least you can build a dice pool and try.

Also, in all RPG's I've played the to hit roll does not take the fighting ability of the opponent into account. Neither D&D, nor EotE, nor CoC. I am having a hard time believing a simple rules-light system such as this one would do so.

But this isn't like other RPGs, the Kung Fu Master in other games would have a high AC, etc. In this, is it not all rolled up into one feature ?

Yeah, I totally understand where you are coming from... Everyone that is.

"Relentless Pursuit" and "Unyielding" are zombie features. I have been unable to find either "Relentless" or "Unrelenting" in my copy of the game. Which zombies have "Unrelenting" as a quality?

I actually wonder about the quality "+Hard to Kill" if opponents' possitive qualities never add negative dice to a player's pool. What test would you add possitive dice to a zombie's pool for having the "Hard to Kill" quality?

I would add a negative die to any physical attack pool against an opponent with "Hard to Kill" to reflect the difficulty of scoring a significantly damaging hit. Likely because the enemy shrugs off most damage as inconsequential, not because it is actually harder to physically hit.

Regarding the "+hard to kill" I would like to note that it is not "+hard to wound" also whether or not there is a negative die there only means that you might get stress and it doesn't make the target a lot harder to kill (of course dice might cancel out.)

I think that it is more a way to add an extra positive on the death saving throw then anything else...

As for adding negative dice for the enemy's qualities, look at the last two entries on Table 7, page 37. Negative dice are added for "enemy is beyond reason" and "enemy hates you". These are conditions that I would express in teh game mechanics as qualities assigned to the enemy.

This is all reasonable and I advocate adding those dice, but these are however not Features.

I think the End of the World is taking a very Old School approach to game design and providing a very bare bones RPG resolution framework, the details of how that framework is implemented in play are left up the individual GM. This is not a d20 style design where every rule and every situation is spelled out in great detail and if the rules do not explicitly say you can do it then you cannot. Quite the opposite. This is a game where if the rules do not explicitly say you cannot do it then you can. Or at least you can build a dice pool and try.

I agree. But I have found that this game works best when using KISS (keep it simple stupid)...

Also, in all RPG's I've played the to hit roll does not take the fighting ability of the opponent into account. Neither D&D, nor EotE, nor CoC. I am having a hard time believing a simple rules-light system such as this one would do so.

But this isn't like other RPGs, the Kung Fu Master in other games would have a high AC, etc. In this, is it not all rolled up into one feature ?

Why would a Kung Fu Master have a higher AC in another system?

Also, isn't there armor in this system? How does that work? (I don't have the book on me now.)

Also, in all RPG's I've played the to hit roll does not take the fighting ability of the opponent into account. Neither D&D, nor EotE, nor CoC. I am having a hard time believing a simple rules-light system such as this one would do so.

But this isn't like other RPGs, the Kung Fu Master in other games would have a high AC, etc. In this, is it not all rolled up into one feature ?

Why would a Kung Fu Master have a higher AC in another system?

Also, isn't there armor in this system? How does that work? (I don't have the book on me now.)

Possibly a poor choice of rules, as I'm not overly familiar with your quoted systems, however in most games I'm sure a Kung Fu Master would be hard to hit?

Yes, there is armour rules, but that wasn't where I was trying to go.

For another example the EDEN Exec has -paranoid, surely you sure be able to work that into a social encounter and gain a positive dice from it?

Yeah, I totally understand where you are coming from... Everyone that is.

"Relentless Pursuit" and "Unyielding" are zombie features. I have been unable to find either "Relentless" or "Unrelenting" in my copy of the game. Which zombies have "Unrelenting" as a quality?

I actually wonder about the quality "+Hard to Kill" if opponents' possitive qualities never add negative dice to a player's pool. What test would you add possitive dice to a zombie's pool for having the "Hard to Kill" quality?

I would add a negative die to any physical attack pool against an opponent with "Hard to Kill" to reflect the difficulty of scoring a significantly damaging hit. Likely because the enemy shrugs off most damage as inconsequential, not because it is actually harder to physically hit.

Regarding the "+hard to kill" I would like to note that it is not "+hard to wound" also whether or not there is a negative die there only means that you might get stress and it doesn't make the target a lot harder to kill (of course dice might cancel out.)

I think that it is more a way to add an extra positive on the death saving throw then anything else...

But page 46, NPCs and Trauma suggests having minor NPCs, such as most zombies, just dies without a cling to life roll. Perhaps those with "hard to kill" would get the roll and those without would not?

This is not the first game I have played with possitive and negative dice in a dice pool. I have found that the cancelation of positive dice by negative dice can make tasks significantly harder to accomplish, but does so in a different way than a flat increase to teh difficulty target. Negative dice should not be thought of just for their potential to add stress.

I have a feeling though that my GMing style and how I run my games is very different to yours.

I have to agree that it seems that features would only impact the the amount of dice for the person possessing those features. For the zombie the "horrifying" and "unrelenting" features would add positive dice to the zombie's actions. The same way if a PC had a "body builder" feature wouldn't add negative dice to the zombies attack.

Actually if the zombie were grappling with a PC with "bodybuilder" I would be inclined to give the zombie a negative die for that. The extra strength would make it easier for the PC to hold the zombie at bay, thus making it harder for the zombie to make a successful attack.

Bodybuilder would not help if the PC were the target of a rifle or pistol shot though.

Also, in all RPG's I've played the to hit roll does not take the fighting ability of the opponent into account. Neither D&D, nor EotE, nor CoC. I am having a hard time believing a simple rules-light system such as this one would do so.

But this isn't like other RPGs, the Kung Fu Master in other games would have a high AC, etc. In this, is it not all rolled up into one feature ?

Why would a Kung Fu Master have a higher AC in another system?

Also, isn't there armor in this system? How does that work? (I don't have the book on me now.)

Possibly a poor choice of rules, as I'm not overly familiar with your quoted systems, however in most games I'm sure a Kung Fu Master would be hard to hit?

No, not really...

Yes, there is armour rules, but that wasn't where I was trying to go.

I know. I was just wondering out loud what they were... Do they add negative dice as well?