23 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

It was more an attempt at levity than anything else. I didn’t really expect font size 8 would hide anything from anyone.

As for the topic at hand, this is the beta for a new edition. Saying you have issues with parts of it doesn’t automatically change those parts to something you like better. Maybe things will be closer to your preferences in the final product, but for now saying they should not be the way they are is not really an argument. Katana in this beta are razor-edged. That makes them an inefficient choice against heavy armor, and not something to be tested by trying to slice through rocks.

I have not just said I have an issues with part of it and left it at that.

I have made my points clear in many other post on this thread.

Feel free to look them up.

This was only a comment about the size 8 post not about the rule.

45 minutes ago, Sephyr79 said:

General question for those that have tested the beta more than me:

How big a deal is a weapon being only 2-handed? This is not D&D, in which you are sort of expected to carry a shield in your off-hand. Other than dual-wielding Dragon bushi, what are you losing by picking a 2handed weapon?

Having 1-handers get a perk when wielded with an extra grip is really neat, I'll say.

Having an injured arm, wanting to carry something in your off-hand or needing it to hold on to something, using a kata that only allows a one-handed weapon, being restricted to a low range band (like while in a grapple). All circumstances where a one-handed weapon is more convenient. There’s also some undefined areas like combat on horseback - should it make a difference if you have a hand free to help control your horse? All in all not a big deal, but it can make a difference.

That aside, I think that in most situations (other than maybe a duel) where you’re bringing a two-hander you will usually carry your daishō - or at least a wakizashi - and possibly a knife as well. You play a samurai, most schools likely to train you in the use of a two-handed weapon have one or more one-handed weapons in their starting outfit.

Honestly, I feel weapons like a tetsubo, naginata and no-dachi are fine doing more damage than a katana. The weapons described as wargear are weapons of warfare.

I'm not ok with the flimsy armor samurai wear breaking katanas though. It's a rule I would likely ignore in its current state.

That being said, I find it perfectly reasonable for shadowlands creatures and other mythic beings to have hides tough enough to break katanas.

The current rules do a pretty decent job of representing the katana as an elegant weapon which requires skill to use.

The samurai didn't pick the most effective weapon to carry, they picked the most elegant and the one requiring a great deal of skill and mastery.

1 minute ago, SideshowLucifer said:

The samurai didn't pick the most effective weapon to carry, they picked the most elegant and the one requiring a great deal of skill and mastery.

For warfare, they preferred bow and spear. Those were the go-to choices. The katana was, in mass combat, largely a sidearm.

Whether that’s the intent for L5R in this edition as well is up for debate, but I seem to see more mention of weapons other than the daisho in the starting outfits than in previous editions and things like razor-edged and ceremonial appear to incentivize using wargear (that term alone is indicative too) for war and the katana for other situations.

1 hour ago, Sephyr79 said:

General question for those that have tested the beta more than me:

How big a deal is a weapon being only 2-handed? This is not D&D, in which you are sort of expected to carry a shield in your off-hand. Other than dual-wielding Dragon bushi, what are you losing by picking a 2handed weapon?

Having 1-handers get a perk when wielded with an extra grip is really neat, I'll say.

Given the lack of things to do with the extra hand... not that big a deal. Except for certain techniques.

1 hour ago, nameless ronin said:

For warfare, they preferred bow and spear. Those were the go-to choices. The katana was, in mass combat, largely a sidearm.

Whether that’s the intent for L5R in this edition as well is up for debate, but I seem to see more mention of weapons other than the daisho in the starting outfits than in previous editions and things like razor-edged and ceremonial appear to incentivize using wargear (that term alone is indicative too) for war and the katana for other situations.

I just did a google search for L5R artwork.

Wanna guess which weapon is shown being held and used prominently, both in war and in other less extreme settings, about 80% of the time? First two don't count.

Man, those legendary champions are all doing it wrong. Who knew.

History is great and fun for inspiration, but I'll take rule of cool every time when developing a system that has a strong identity.

2 hours ago, Sephyr79 said:

I just did a google search for L5R artwork.

Wanna guess which weapon is shown being held and used prominently, both in war and in other less extreme settings, about 80% of the time? First two don't count.

Man, those legendary champions are all doing it wrong. Who knew.

History is great and fun for inspiration, but I'll take rule of cool every time when developing a system that has a strong identity.

Again, that’s cool and all but in the end FFG does what FFG wants to do. I kinda hope a few things get tweaked a bit, but this beta just means we get to say our piece and then FFG gets to decide whether they like what we say or not.

In the end, if you want katana to be the go-to weapon for samurai all you have to do is set your adventures for the larger part in situations where war gear is not acceptable. If a Crab bushi arrives in court anywhere outside Crab lands and presents himself for mingling among the other guests in full armour and carrying a tetsubo, it shouldn’t go well for him - period. It’s not even a matter of honour or manners, such a thing can not ever be allowed by the local lord and his guards. Enter a city or large enough village in armour in peace time and people will go out of their way to avoid you: expect minimal interaction and little or no co-operation. Keep provoking fights with boorish behaviour and settling matters of honour with weapons other than your daishō and you’ll find you’re no longer welcome in civilised company: good luck travelling anywhere without calling in favours. And that’s assuming nobody decides to deal with you in some other way.

The daishō’s biggest advantage is getting to carry it on your person in situations where any other real weapon (disregarding tanto here) is going to get you into trouble.

19 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

Again, that’s cool and all but in the end FFG does what FFG wants to do. I kinda hope a few things get tweaked a bit, but this beta just means we get to say our piece and then FFG gets to decide whether they like what we say or not.

In the end, if you want katana to be the go-to weapon for samurai all you have to do is set your adventures for the larger part in situations where war gear is not acceptable. If a Crab bushi arrives in court anywhere outside Crab lands and presents himself for mingling among the other guests in full armour and carrying a tetsubo, it shouldn’t go well for him - period. It’s not even a matter of honour or manners, such a thing can not ever be allowed by the local lord and his guards. Enter a city or large enough village in armour in peace time and people will go out of their way to avoid you: expect minimal interaction and little or no co-operation. Keep provoking fights with boorish behaviour and settling matters of honour with weapons other than your daishō and you’ll find you’re no longer welcome in civilised company: good luck travelling anywhere without calling in favours. And that’s assuming nobody decides to deal with you in some other way.

The daishō’s biggest advantage is getting to carry it on your person in situations where any other real weapon (disregarding tanto here) is going to get you into trouble.

I understand,and if if that's the way they want to go in the end, I'll shrug and accept it.

I just don't think "It's ok that the daisho is lame mechanically, because it's -rude- to actually bring real weapons" is a good reason to keep it as is. And if, say, one of the court's musicians turns out to be a horrible Shadowlands impersonator that once exposed by the party grows a hide of obsidian scales that gives it armor 4, having the PCs scurry around for a vulgar club to be able to hit it because their katanas (folded 200 times, slaked in the blood of enemies, honed to perfection) will be slightly more effective than pillows.

I've rolled dice for this game a grand total of 2 times. When I made this post, I was fully expecting (hoping, even!) to have someone reply "You are forgetting that by doing -this- or using this move you can easily get more damage-per-success out of your sword and be a deadly badass in 70% of situations". It even happened in my gaming whatsapp when I mentioned that strife builds up -way- faster than both me and the DM imagined without easy ways to bleed it off, one guy pointed out that you recover your water ring's worth every scene, and that was that.

We briefly went over how armor values being generally high make the low damage even smaller, and no one really had an asnwer (I was called irrational and random, but no actual points).

I even posted a skirmish example, fully expecting someone to say "Pfft, if you'd just done this , you'd have dealt with that brigand easily", and no one said anything regarding why a club is better in-game than a two-cent club.

Here's another: Crane bushi does a Horizontal Iai strike at a training dummy with traveler's clothes (AV 2). Two successes. Boosts his damage to 5, reduced by two, for a final Three Damage.

Toge the town drunk strikes at the dummy with his dog-beating club. Two successes. Extra success increases damage by one, to 7. AV brings that down to 5.

An an elite duelist using a 'deadly' kata and a specialized weapon achieving about half the damage of a simpleton with a club for the same successes just blows my mind.

I deliberately left stances out because with Fire stance toge would likely overshadow the iai strike event worse.

I think we've all said all we are likely to say on this point, so I'll leave the thread here for the devs to use as they wish.

My final opinion from what I've read/played/heard:

- Katana Damage is too low, and its high deadliness does not compensate when piled damage will always be more effective and easier to achieve than gambling on crit techniques/toying with TNs.

- General armor levels are too high given the current damage range. Regular fabric should be 0, Heavy winter clothing should be 1, concealed armor and ashigaru 2, Lacquered 3, and Heavy 4.

- Blunt weapons currently have inflated damage, likely because devs thought their low Deadliness stat needed to be compensated for. Tone them down a bit and give them limited armor/bypassing abilities to keep them useful as anti-shadowlands gear.

-Katanas breaking should be dramatic, not a common ocurrence whenever something of a certain AV pops up. Perhaps even allow for voluntarily damaging your sword in order to cut through enemy armor instead of having it snap harmlessly.

-Having one class of weapons be more effective at what they do (combat) is not and should not be compensated by "well, it's a faux pas to lug one around."

Thanks everyone, for the input.

Again, a club is an improvised weapon. I do think staves shouldn’t do more than 5 damage, but a dog-beating club - by the rules! - is a damage 2 weapon . Two, not six.

As for musicians turning out to be Oni: first, that’s the lord’s responsibility - bringing your weapons of war is not done, aside from security reasons, because it implies your host can’t guarantee your safety. Which, second, means that if you do find yourself in such a situation it shouldn’t be easy to just fight your way out of. I’m sure we can list two dozen situations easily in which your characters may lament not having their trusted tetsubo or even a serviceable yari with them, but that’s the thing: they’re not supposed to always have it easy. That’s the challenge and thus the fun: finding yourself in adverse circumstances and still coming out on top. Or even, I don’t know, suffering the occasional setback. Imagine that.

I'm not fond of the reduce the critical severity mechanic.

Typical Bushi run 8-12 resilience. Assuming unarmored, and average hit by 1 over TN..., so 6 damage. About a 30 % chance of a crit. And if it is one, it's likely to be either a 3. The next hit is only likely in the 10-12 range, and may be 2 in that range, but given the ease of knocking it down by 1, the odds are bloody good that it won't actually be a 12..

So at least 2, probably 3 strikes to kill an unarmored man. And only 4-6 to do it to an armored one.

1st hit may or may not generate a crit. Second should on the damage, and maybe another. The crit will be a

This, for a weapon that historically was measured in "How many corpses can it cut through in one swing" and was noted for cleanly chopping a living man in twain on a good day, and typically, taking a man's head clean of his shoulders in one swing should one grab his hair...

(Note, any good quality broadsword can do the same when sharpened well; the average european one wasn't, as they were expected to hack through armor. See also the various executions by sword in Europe.)

I don’t really mind that there’s a way to mitigate crits, although it’s yet another roll in the process. The whole resolution of an entire turn is convoluted enough without it already. I think crits should be stronger though. Maybe do some regular damage on top of their current effects.

5 hours ago, Sephyr79 said:

I'll take rule of cool every time when developing a system that has a strong identity.

This is fair.

5 minutes ago, AK_Aramis said:

I'm not fond of the reduce the critical severity mechanic.

I think the reduction is fine, but either the attacker needs a way to boost the crit before reduction or the base values need to be at least a few points higher. Getting lucky with a soak roll to avoid losing a limb is fine, but the high water mark for effect on crits is a little low and too strongly linked to remaining resilience - I feel like that should be a factor, not the only way to cause real harm. I'm reluctant to give numbers without a bit more testing the results, but I think pushing the basic crits up one severity level across the board would make the damage/deadliness trade feel a little bit closer to a fair exchange.

As part of this readjustment I think reducing the bonus to crits from incapacitation and unconsciousness would be in order, especially since it's largely moot once one side is defeated.

I'm going to play around with some ideas, I think the basic concept is fine but the relationship mechanically needs to change to satisfy the folk in this thread. Not sure it's going to be possible to please us all at once, but a few different ways to tweak to taste might go down well.

That, or rescaling the crit table perhaps? Depends what you want the fight results to look like as much as anything.

2 hours ago, GaGrin said:

I think the reduction is fine, but either the attacker needs a way to boost the crit before reduction or the base values need to be at least a few points higher. Getting lucky with a soak roll to avoid losing a limb is fine, but the high water mark for effect on crits is a little low and too strongly linked to remaining resilience - I feel like that should be a factor, not the only way to cause real harm. I'm reluctant to give numbers without a bit more testing the results, but I think pushing the basic crits up one severity level across the board would make the damage/deadliness trade feel a little bit closer to a fair exchange.

As part of this readjustment I think reducing the bonus to crits from incapacitation and unconsciousness would be in order, especially since it's largely moot once one side is defeated.

I don't mind the reduction, per se, but it's just too hard to raise the bar.

Summing the crit ratings of all crits during a single turn (not round) would go a long way...

14 hours ago, nameless ronin said:

Having an injured arm, wanting to carry something in your off-hand or needing it to hold on to something, using a kata that only allows a one-handed weapon, being restricted to a low range band (like while in a grapple). All circumstances where a one-handed weapon is more convenient. There’s also some undefined areas like combat on horseback - should it make a difference if you have a hand free to help control your horse? All in all not a big deal, but it can make a difference.

That aside, I think that in most situations (other than maybe a duel) where you’re bringing a two-hander you will usually carry your daishō - or at least a wakizashi - and possibly a knife as well. You play a samurai, most schools likely to train you in the use of a two-handed weapon have one or more one-handed weapons in their starting outfit.

Indeed.

• Survival checks for horsemanship - obviously you can ride a horse 'bare handed', but I suspect having a hand on the reins or not is a good enough reason for the GM to consider altering the TN of the check because it does matter to the difficulty.
• We've had someone trying to have a sword fight whilst climbing.
• Because drawing and sheathing a weapon now takes an action, having a free hand might be useful. You can carry a bow one-handed, even if you can't fire it (yes, all right, you could just drop it. But it's your bow, it's important and valuable, and I suspect dropping it in the mud to get dirty and damaged is probably not your preferred course of action)
• Some techniques (the basic Iaijutsu is the only one so far, but others might come in subsequent sourcebooks) specify single-handed grips.
• It gives you an excuse to trigger your ambidextrous distinction*

*

"You don't seem concerned."

"That's because I know something you do not."

"What's that?"

"I...am not left-handed." [swaps grip]

16 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

..()

• It gives you an excuse to trigger your ambidextrous distinction*

*

"You don't seem concerned."

"That's because I know something you do not."

"What's that?"

"I...am not left-handed." [swaps grip]

I asked my DM after our last session if I could wield my Chokuto in exclusively my left hand and get ambidextrous bonus on every attack because i'm using my offhand. His bewildered silence leads me to believe that's not the case.

Regardless, I for one am kind of glad that the Katana isn't the end all be all greatest weapon. Your sword in war-times is supposed to be a sidearm to a better weapon, like a polearm or zanbatou if you're feeling particularly shonen. Staves doing gratuitous amounts of damage aside, It was always my assumption that the trade off was if you walk into a town with a Katana on your waist no one bats an eye but if you walk into a (non-crab) town with a otsuchi slung over your shoulder or armor strapped to your chest that you were going to be assumed a hostile invader and met accordingly. Why would you wear war gear into town if you weren't going to war with them, after all. Swords are good for what they're meant for, the ceremonial duel, they are a ceremonial weapon, more symbolic than practical on a battlefield. Not to say you can't be the cult-of-swords guy who charges at the army with just his grandfathers blade, but you better be a supremely skilled swordsman, because being poked to death by a naginata or bashed away by a tetsubo is much more likely an end result, and for good reason.

16 minutes ago, KillingGoblinBabiesIsDishonorable said:

I asked my DM after our last session if I could wield my Chokuto in exclusively my left hand and get ambidextrous bonus on every attack because i'm using my offhand. His bewildered silence leads me to believe that's not the case.

If you're using one hand exclusively...that's not really taking advantage of being ambidextrous as described, I guess. The description talks about a check where your equal skill with both hands matters, so whilst swapping hands (with mandatory Rathbone-esque ' haha!' ) or dual-wielding qualifies, I'd be hesitant to say using it in a single hand matters. After all, that hand is no better than the other hand - that's the point of being ambidextrous.

If your opponent finds out to their surprise that you're ambidextrous mid-fight, then you've got a temporary advantage to capitalise on.

Many excellent points here on all sides, but something I haven't seen accounted for, unless someone brought it up much earlier, is that in most combat in the new system PCs will be fighting minions, something that didnt exist in l5r til now.

Considering that criting on minions before passing damage does fatigue equal to lethality and minions only have to have a severity of 7 before they die i feel that allows both razor-edged and heavy weapon camps the abilty to dish out on more even ground.

Now while that doesnt extend to adversaries i like a little meat on their bones. They die too quickly and what was the point?

And pc vs pc doesnt arise too often in my games but thats what duels are for right?

32 minutes ago, Shiba Rana said:

Many excellent points here on all sides, but something I haven't seen accounted for, unless someone brought it up much earlier, is that in most combat in the new system PCs will be fighting minions, something that didnt exist in l5r til now.

Considering that criting on minions before passing damage does fatigue equal to lethality and minions only have to have a severity of 7 before they die i feel that allows both razor-edged and heavy weapon camps the abilty to dish out on more even ground.

Now while that doesnt extend to adversaries i like a little meat on their bones. They die too quickly and what was the point?

And pc vs pc doesnt arise too often in my games but thats what duels are for right?

That’s ok in theory, but in practice it seems like a lot of the time the PCs are cutting through minions they’ll be in a situation that warrants full gear anyway. For me it always comes back to the ceremonial quality a daishō has in this edition: a katana is used when circumstances dictate it. Formal duels, assisting with seppuku, training the perfect strike because training for perfection is what you do, and so on.

2 hours ago, nameless ronin said:

That’s ok in theory, but in practice it seems like a lot of the time the PCs are cutting through minions they’ll be in a situation that warrants full gear anyway. For me it always comes back to the ceremonial quality a daishō has in this edition: a katana is used when circumstances dictate it. Formal duels, assisting with seppuku, training the perfect strike because training for perfection is what you do, and so on.

Or even 'set upon by ruffians in the night-time streets'. If you're at court in Toshi Ranbo and are walking through the outer districts of the city for some reason, no-one would look askance at you having your Daisho on you. Carrying a double-handed naginata and wearing plate is a different matter entirely.

Compare today - Even in places where openly carrying a weapon is legal, there'd be a difference in the reaction you'd get from other people - and especially from guards and law enforcement - between carrying a discreet revolver or automatic sidearm and carrying a heavy machinegun.

7 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

• Survival checks for horsemanship - obviously you can ride a horse 'bare handed', but I suspect having a hand on the reins or not is a good enough reason for the GM to consider altering the TN of the check because it does matter to the difficulty.

Keep in mind - the horses are trained for horse archery; they're directed almost entirely by the archer's feet, not the reins.

1 hour ago, AK_Aramis said:

Keep in mind - the horses are trained for horse archery; they're directed almost entirely by the archer's feet, not the reins.

That works for mounted archers, who stay out of the fray itself. They don’t need to turn on a dime, never mind have the horse fight with them. It’s still ok for warriors who can keep charging through enemy infantry at speed. But if you’re fighting on horseback and can’t move relatively unhindered, when you’re turning all the time, when you’re guiding your mount to rear up or kick with its hind legs, having that hand free makes a big difference - not even just for the reins, but also for maintaining balance.

So, I thought having some actual numbers for comparison might be helpful for the discussion in general. Here's the situation as of update 1:

Deadliness plus modifiers sets the high-water mark for injury. This is reduced by a resistance roll, so the chance of actually hitting these values is low and gets lower the stronger your opponent is.

Weapon Severity versus Fighting/Incapacitated/Unconscious opponent

Typical blade (e.g. Katana one-handed, Scimitar, Dao): 5 Crushing / 10 Maiming / 15 Swift Death

Heavy blade (Naginata or Nodachi): 6 Crushing / 11 Maiming / 16 Instant Death

Katana in two-handed grip : 7 Crushing / 12 Agonizing Death / 17 Instant Death

Yumi, Yari and Tetsubo (and almost all non-blades): 3 Staggering / 8 Devestating / 13 Agonizing Death

Unarmed, Staff & Improvised Blunt: 2 Staggering / 7 Crushing / 12 Agonizing Death

What's worth noting is that incapacitated characters in this game are not out of the fight and can use their turns to recover if they get the opportunity. Thus, damage inflicted as fatigue is only buying you a temporary advantage unless you can force them unconscious. Also remember the incapacitated state does not increase the severity of the free critical strike(s) you get when you cause the incapacitation, only future hits.

Outside of duels or clashes, the only way to inflict a fatal injury against a conscious opponent is with the Katana in a two-handed grip.

A few Kata and the Way of the Crane school ability change this fairly substantially, but in most cases will amount to reducing the deduction from the victim's soak result rather than providing a notable increase unless the striking character already has an advantage.

For reference, the Severity Categories in ascending order of nastiness are:

Close Call (0) inflicts causes Damaged condition to armour; Staggering (1-4) inflicts temporary effects like Dazed or Disoriented ; Crushing (5-7) inflicts a disadvantage for the fight but is relatively simple to remove; Devestating (8-9) inflicts semi-permanent disadvantage and Bleeding; Maiming (10-11) inflicts life-long effects, Bleeding and Unconscious ; Agonizing Death (12-13) kills in 3 rounds; Swift Death (14-15) kills in 1 round; Instant Death (16+) ...do I need to explain this one?

There's actually alot to unpack here in terms of the design intent.

52 minutes ago, GaGrin said:

What's worth noting is that incapacitated characters in this game are not out of the fight and can use their turns to recover if they get the opportunity. Thus, damage inflicted as fatigue is only buying you a temporary advantage unless you can force them unconscious. Also remember the incapacitated state does not increase the severity of the free critical strike(s) you get when you cause the incapacitation, only future hits.

The only two ways for a character to self recover from Incapacitated currently are a Kata that costs a Void Point and to spend actions on Calming Breaths (which recover 1 fatigue for each action). A PCs and Adversaries can only recover at the most 2 fatigue per turn (while in water stance) through Calming Breaths.

38 minutes ago, GaGrin said:

Outside of duels or clashes, the only way to inflict a fatal injury against a conscious opponent is with the Katana in a two-handed grip.

Maiming (and to an extent Devastating) blows are arguably fatal injuries as well not just Agonizing Death and higher. The Bleeding condition should kill most unless they receive outside aid.

13 minutes ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

A PCs and Adversaries can only recover at the most 2 fatigue per turn (while in water stance) through Calming Breaths.

While this is true, you can still gain the passive protection from stances so your opponent's being able to down you before you regain the few points you need to fight back is not guaranteed. You can also escape from a fight while incapacitated to buy yourself more time. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying that incapactitation is not the same as the fight being over, unlike in many other games.

13 minutes ago, Ultimatecalibur said:

The Bleeding condition should kill most unless they receive outside aid.

I need to re-read the bleeding condition, but my impression was that it was both trivial to stop and only actually bled you if you were taking actions (i.e. earning strife). If that is true, then unconscious characters are immune to bleeding.

Edit: I was mostly right, but I missed an important detail. Any strife gain at all causes the damage tick and crit for bleeding characters... which has interesting implications for strife-inducing effects.

Just now, GaGrin said:

While this is true, you can still gain the passive protection from stances so your opponent's being able to down you before you regain the few points you need to fight back is not guaranteed.

And being at 0 hp has been the same way in D&D, though most forget that. A character taking more fatigue than their resilience is pretty much removed from the fight and most personal attempts to recover and return to the fight will only lead to a longer or more permanent removal.

While Air stance does increase TNs of attacks targeting you you end up being removed from participating for twice as long as using Water stance.

35 minutes ago, GaGrin said:

You can also escape from a fight while incapacitated to buy yourself more time. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying that incapactitation is not the same as the fight being over, unlike in many other games.

Escaping from a fight is pretty much declaring that the fight is over and the scene ending for those attempting to escape.

You can survive being Incapacitated but that doesn't mean that you can continue to effectively participate in the current fight once Incapacitated without the use of a once per scene VP kata or outside assistance.

1 minute ago, GaGrin said:

I need to re-read the bleeding condition, but my impression was that it was both trivial to stop and only actually bled you if you were taking actions (i.e. earning strife). If that is true, then unconscious characters are immune to bleeding.

A TN 2 Medicine (Earth) check is only trivial if you have the ranks in the skill (and one that not every character can reasonably be expected to have) and all Strife taken triggers the bleed damage. General Fire Opportunity use by others, Anxieties and other Strife inflicters will start inflicting equal amounts of fatigue to bleeding characters.