This came up on Saturday. The only negative to an extremely fun session.

The group was fleeing from the prison they purposely were captured in to obtain schematics for Gel Malcrofs operations on Airboonie ( different take on the first scenario of chronicles of the gatekeeper)

they stole malcrofs yt-1300 and were being purses by 2 security fighters. During the course of battle I hit their ship twice for criticals.

The way I always played it was that critical attacks untreated stack. Their shield overload (106) on ship crit chart (2 separate crits)

they begin to argue that crits do its do not stack and that you roll a new d100 for each crit and then add 10,20,30 to that roll but each crit is its own roll.

This doesn’t make sense to me.

1. You have to get a total of 6 crits before you have a 9 percent chance of dying

2. i have never seen 6 crits activates to then dame person before their wound threshold gave.

We checked the books and I checked reddit and both were somewhat confusing.

Does anyone have the official clarifiTion. Do crits stack if they are untreated?

thanks.

Reddit seems to support my PC arguments.

Making it it a lot harder to die in game unless an NPC has the vicious quality. Even so. They need a very high vicious quality.

So.....a pc suffers two crits first one at 45 and the second at 50....they have a total crit score of

60 (50 plus 10) and not 105 (45 plus 50 plus 10)?

I don't have the books in front of me, but we have always played that the first crit is rolled normally. The second crit gets a new roll with a +10 to the roll. This may result in a lesser effect than the first crit. The 3rd crit is another roll with a +20 to the roll.

So if the first roll is 95 the crit is a 95.

2nd roll is a 42, the crit is a 52.

3rd roll is a 87, the crit is a 107.

After those 3 rolls, they are suffering from a 52, a 95, and a 107 for 3 separate effects.

3 minutes ago, Edgookin said:

I don't have the books in front of me, but we have always played that the first crit is rolled normally. The second crit gets a new roll with a +10 to the roll. This may result in a lesser effect than the first crit. The 3rd crit is another roll with a +20 to the roll.

So if the first roll is 95 the crit is a 95.

2nd roll is a 42, the crit is a 52.

3rd roll is a 87, the crit is a 107.

After those 3 rolls, they are suffering from a 52, a 95, and a 107 for 3 separate effects.

Okay. Next question, does the medic/doctor have to heal all three crits to stabilize the PC?

6 minutes ago, Sincereagape said:

Okay. Next question, does the medic/doctor have to heal all three crits to stabilize the PC?

As soon as a character's wounds are decreased below his threshold, they're considered stabilized and conscious. Exceptions are Bleeding Out (they may be conscious, but can't really be considered stabilized until that's been dealt with) and The End is Nigh (for obvious reasons).

That being said, the critical injuries persist until they've been healed, and add an offset to further critical injury rolls (as Edgookin said), so not treating them increases the risk of death.

4 minutes ago, EpicTed said:

As soon as a character's wounds are decreased below his threshold, they're considered stabilized and conscious. Exceptions are Bleeding Out (they may be conscious, but can't really be considered stabilized until that's been dealt with) and The End is Nigh (for obvious reasons).

That being said, the critical injuries persist until they've been healed, and add an offset to further critical injury rolls (as Edgookin said), so not treating them increases the risk of death.

Okay. ANd I think you can attempt to healer a critical only once a week unless you have a bacta tank and if that crit is not healed on the roll than you have to wait anothe week to attempt.

5 minutes ago, Sincereagape said:

Okay. ANd I think you can attempt to healer a critical only once a week unless you have a bacta tank and if that crit is not healed on the roll than you have to wait anothe week to attempt.

Correct.

That being said, RAW specifically says "A character may attempt one Medicine check per week per Critical Injury." So theoretically, you could have multiple people give it a go until one of them succeeds. Do this at your own risk (I know some GMs who'd treat failures as "you've made things worse").

2 minutes ago, EpicTed said:

Correct.

That being said, RAW specifically says "A character may attempt one Medicine check per week per Critical Injury." So theoretically, you could have multiple people give it a go until one of them succeeds. Do this at your own risk (I know some GMs who'd treat failures as "you've made things worse").

I’d probably do that if they rolled a despair of disadvantages.

Your PCs are correct.

The Vicious weapon quality increases the crit roll by 10, as do some reasonably common talents in combat trees.

The system is designed to encourage PCs to push the envelope without inordinate fear of death.

Aye. The system makes it hard to actually kill someone. However crits can easily stack up over the course of even a single battle. Remember if a PC drops below their wound threshold they suffer a new crit, and each new hit while they are out is also a crit.

toss in a weapon with the vicious quality(disrupters, any vibro weapon, enemy with lethal blows, etc...) and it can stack up.

Just remembering to use bad guys advantage to toss out a crit when you can also will give them something to work on. Many crit results do only minor one round/encounter effects, but still give that +10 on the crit chart till healed. And unless someone rolls amazingly on multiple medicine checks a pc will often walk around with several crits for a session or two.

Let me follow up: how often do PC deaths occur in your campaigns. Either PC or GMs can answer.

I’m not a “Kill Bill” GM as one of my PCs will say. Without death there are no stakes in the game

Over the past ten years I’ve been gming semi-regularly the games include shadowrun 4th, L5R 1st, VTM 2nd, AoR, and deadlands noir....maybe over that time in between all of the games...half a dozen PC deaths? None in AoR

It depends on what system I'm running. I rarely have a Paranoia session where I can't get at least one of the PC's through a six-pack. Shadowrun's a dark environment, too, so I've had I think 4 dead PCs, though I don't run it all that often, so I can't give you a good count.

I've never had someone die in FFG Star Wars. Had once close call where I laid out all the warning signs. It was the introduction of the BBEG for a campaign, who was intended to be the reason the PCs were out there trying to gain abilities in order to beat her. Approaching Imperial force 10 times the size of the party, cloaked NPC commanding the group, riding on a speeder, before whipping out a lightsaber and telling her troops to hang back so she can handle the PCs personally. Made them roll a fear check. They were on the edge of a light forest, had speeders, and their ship was in a clearing only about a minute behind them. And then one of the PCs goes Hawkbat on her. I ask something along the lines of, "You really want to leap into melee range? There's 50 of them, you're all on speeders, you've got some tree cover from their blasters, and a fantastic shot at getting away?" only to be told "Yes."

The other PCs called the ship in, so it worked out OK after the PC spent a session in bacta.

1 hour ago, Sincereagape said:

Let me follow up: how often do PC deaths occur in your campaigns. Either PC or GMs can answer.

I’m not a “Kill Bill” GM as one of my PCs will say. Without death there are no stakes in the game

Over the past ten years I’ve been gming semi-regularly the games include shadowrun 4th, L5R 1st, VTM 2nd, AoR, and deadlands noir....maybe over that time in between all of the games...half a dozen PC deaths? None in AoR

This system makes it very hard for a PC to die. I have never had one die in any game I have played in or run. A PC would have to do something very stupid IE jump out an air lock or have to be very unlucky while currently having alot of crits to even have a chance of dying. That being said arms and legs seem to get lost all the time....

We’ve had 3 campaigns, no deaths so far. But we’ve had our share of mutilations.

This system really is not intended for death to be ever present. It’s a interesting dynamic. PCs are usually fairly squishy, and must beware even the most mundane of enemies, however death is very rare.

If your players want more danger, have better enemies face them(more likely to crit), give their enemies vicious weapons, etc...

On 2/25/2019 at 5:59 PM, EpicTed said:

Correct.

That being said, RAW specifically says "A character may attempt one Medicine check per week per Critical Injury." So theoretically, you could have multiple people give it a go until one of them succeeds. Do this at your own risk (I know some GMs who'd treat failures as "you've made things worse").

Not really, it means the injured character get's one attempt per Injury per week total. So no you can't just line up a bunch of Doctors and have them keep rolling until you heal, you get one roll per Critical so best to choose someone good at it.

3 hours ago, FuriousGreg said:

Not really, it means the injured character get's one attempt per Injury per week total. So no you can't just line up a bunch of Doctors and have them keep rolling until you heal, you get one roll per Critical so best to choose someone good at it. 

That's a valid (and reasonable) way to interpret things, but it's not what it says in the books.

13 hours ago, FuriousGreg said:

Not really, it means the injured character get's one attempt per Injury per week total. So no you can't just line up a bunch of Doctors and have them keep rolling until you heal, you get one roll per Critical so best to choose someone good at it.

That's certainly how I'd run it, I wouldn't allow a conga line of surgeons in my game.

On 2/26/2019 at 9:56 PM, Sincereagape said:

I’m not a “Kill Bill” GM as one of my PCs will say. Without death there are no stakes in the game

This is something I fundamentally disagree with, though I suspect that it will depend on the group. Some groups only care about their own characters, or their own character and the other PCs. For them, the idea that without death there are no stakes would be valid. However, I wouldn't want to play with, or GM for, that kind of group. Unless the PCs are all sociopaths, there are things out there that they care about. You can get all the stakes you need putting those in jeopardy. Which hurts more - losing a character, however treasured, when you can immediately put together a new one and get right back into the game? Or having your character see that village they promised to protect in flames, knowing that it's retribution for their own actions, that every death is because of their own failure?

Kick your players in the feels, not the character sheet.

17 hours ago, EpicTed said:

That's a valid (and reasonable) way to interpret things, but it's not what it says in the books.

It's not an interpretation it's just understanding English grammar but we don't have to argue about it, just send in a question and post the answer get here.

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/