@Signofthepresent

Holy/psychic/daemonic damage isn't that common. If anything, it is about as common as felling(x). Really the stat block is just fine as it is, and its the job of the GM to understand what that means.

Or should they just not print out the effective value, as felling makes Unnatural Toughness "conditional" as well?

it appears you edited after I quoted, as I am certain the quotes have not been messed with. but no matter.

you suggest that because specific attacks with for example the trait "sanctified" ignore some of his toughness bonus his toughness bonus should say something like 12/8.

basically as kommissar k said, I could say that if you are gonna do that then specific attacks with for example the trait "felling" ignore some of his toughness bonus his TB should say 12/8/4. and the toughness bonus of everything in the game should be changed accordingly.

basically i think the game designers credit players with enough intelligence to know when a specific ability ignores some of a monsters toughness bonus. which is a reasonable assumption imho

Well it's an issue of clarity. I don't know what every single talent, trait, piece of gear, power, etc etc means. I'm reading the rules and I haven't played the game so that information isn't committed to memory. Assuming that someone reading the rulebook is going to have some form of eidetic memory is a tall order. Most people will read the book, get the gist of the rules, play the game, make a few mistakes, learn and get better. There's a lot to take in and the majority of rules are circumstantial. So when I come across an incongruity like this it takes me out of running the game while i say 'hang on, his TB isn't permanently 12'. That's also important when you consider using TB for other things, such as the effects of damage or whatnot, because Daemonic is again circumstantial. Now I'm sure once you know that it's not a big deal, same with most things. It's when you don't know that it's a problem.

Also the Fatigue rule needs clarification because the wording is unclear. He regains a level of fatigue - from what? There's no indication that he heals fatigue by virtue of falling unconscious. However the example states that when the guy comes round he heals all but one level of Fatigue. Now in the RT rulebook the guy in the example for the same rule comes around and his Fatigue levels are set to match his TB. Perhaps the rule is meant to be slightly different for Space Marines, that's fair enough, but the entry is still unclear.

The stat line TB of the Daemon Prince wouldn't be an issue if the 'Daemonic' trait was clearly defined in the rulebook & errata. I think listing the DP's TB in the stat line as 12/8 would be a useful reminder for GMs that the Daemonic bonus is conditional. In the heat of all the dice rolling for combat it would be easy for a GM to overlook when the daemonic bonus is negated. Holy/Felling weapons might be rare but what about psychic attacks? Many, if not most, kill-teams will probably have a librarian in their ranks, their powers & force weapon will both negate the daemonic bonus.

If they had left it at 8, and you quickly had to read it the stat block (say in the case of one being summoned by a Librarian messing up) in all likelyhood most people would miss "Daemonic" and so just work with a TB of 8, which is incorrect 90% of the time (though of course it will be TB 8 against the force sword). TB is mostly used for damage reduction (especially with NPCs) and so that damage reduction is the main thing you have to worry about. I think they have done the most sensible approach possible with that particular aspect of the stat box.

Truthfully I wouldn't recommend using a Daemon Prince (or anything that complicated) without fore-thought and planning though, to allow you the time to clarify what all its little bits do.

You're right, the fatigue rules are a bit unclear. They always have been (looking at Dark Heresy there is little clarification at what happens to fatigue when you fall unconscious), but my guess is that you "remove" all fatigue when falling unconscious and that "regain" means you then receive another level of fatigue when you wake up... basically meaning you still have the -10 penalty for fatigue but are as far away as possible to falling unconscious again otherwise (and yes, like the speed you regain fatigue this seems to be a special one for space marines). Truthfully I wouldn't worry too much about that though. I have only seen fatigue build up close to knocking a marine out once, and have yet to see it quite tip over the edge, and for the length of time someone remains out cold most fights are over before anyone comes round again, and the speed of recovery means you can easily just say "You're all better now" when it would next matter.

borithan said:

I don't care to second guess rules, simply because it's not always clear (at least until you play) how rules work and assuming incorrectly may have undesirable consequences. That's the art of writing rules.

The rule doesn't say that Fatigue clears if the target is rendered unconscious, though it might make sense for that to happen. Furthermore, as I said, the Fatigue rule in RT says that (according to the example) the character only removes enough levels, upon regaining consciousness, to put his Fatigue equal to his TB. That isn't the case in DW and I don't know if that's intentional (though if it is that strikes me as ill advised).

The rule (in DW) says that the target regains one level of Fatigue, which is where it's unclear and i could find no errata entry for this. So either Fatigue does what the example (in DW) says, or what it says in RT, or the target regains consciousness and loses only one level of Fatigue, which could potentially put him straight back under again. So it's really not clear at all.

borithan said:

signoftheserpent said:

The fact this is very different from Dark Heresy (where this little matter is unresolved entirely) and RT where they do wake up on the brink of unconsciousness is almost certainly deliberate. 1) Space Marines are meant to be uber-tough and 'eroic types, and so could understandably have a boost in this area, and 2) it looks very much like FFG wanted fatigue to be much less of an issue in this game than in DH and RT. In those fatigue is the non-lethal, non-maiming ways characters are taken out of a fight. It is a real hindrance, not only because of the -10 penalty, but because it hangs around so long and you can fairly easily be put under, and if you go under it is easy to put you under again. In DW your characters are not really meant to pass out from over-stretching themselves, and even if it comes to that unlikely event you are meant to be able to press on with the mission shortly after. Fatigue in DW is more about the nuisance factor of having your actions penalised during a particular event (gaining it in a fight and having it dog you for that whole fight, or doing some activity that penalising what you are doing there in then). It is not meant to be an ongoing problem (explaining the quick recovery period). This is similar to many of the "minor niggles" that bother characters in the other games being removed or severely limited in the system. For example, the fact that the players are presumed to have unlimited ammunition, barring a GM fiat in certain scenarios.

Basically I would say the balance of evidence certainly suggests to me that the much more forgiving rules as implied by the example in DW is the one to go for.

Little things like this are surely the easiest things to clarify but this isn't even mentioned in the errata.

Also presumably the fatigue rules aren't just for the players, they apply to NPC's and enemies. Thus it's easier on a Rogue Trader to get punched by a Space Marine using DW rules than it is to get punched by an Ork in Rogue Trader in this respect.

signoftheserpent said:

The errata is a low priority job because it doesn't earn FFG any money. Their main effort right now probably goes into BC.

Alex

signoftheserpent said:

Well... technically the rules apply to the NPCs as well. Well maybe.... Long term fatigueis not going to be much of an issue for an NPC. Usually all that will matter is 1) if they are fatigued at all and so suffer the -10% and 2) if they receive enough to be knocked out. I can't think of that many situations where the exact timing of how quickly an NPC recovers fatigue will matter (not that there are no situations like that. Just that I imagine them to be extremely rare). So I am not sure whether they meant to apply to NPCs or whether it is just they never thought it an issue and so separate rules were unnecessary.

I would probably use the rules from RT for more mundane enemies (humans and the like) and the Space Marine ones (ie the DW ones) for beings with similar stamina and ability to absorb minor punishment.