In which checks will universal effects(Two boons heals you of stress or fatigue or two banes inflict stress or fatigue) are available?For example:Fear checks,Initiative checks?Also,if the action that I performed has an entry with two banes and I rolled them can I choose to execute the universal effect instead of the effect of my card?

Thanks for your support!

The universal effects are on all rolls. Even fear/terror and initiative checks (not likely on initiative as there are no "bad" dice in the pool).

The GM allways chooses which bad effects will apply to you. So if you roll two banes as in your example, the GM can give you a stress/fatigue or trigger the effect on your card. If you roll 4 banes the GM can trigger both the card effect and the universal effect. Important to note is that boon/bane effects can only be triggered once per check.

So if you roll 4 boons you cannot trigger heal one stress/fatigue twice.

Oh, and just so you know: you as a player choose which "good" effects to trigger. THe GM chooses which "bad" effects to trigger.

This is where I have most problems with WFRPv3 and I suggest you but a limit on this or house rule it a bit.

I have been in a session where player was in +3 aggressive stance fighting a some gobbos, it was an easy fight and they winning fast.

Then stuff started happening around them, nothing dangerous just some thing that called for a two observeation rolls, and a nature roll in the same turn.

This caused the player to fall unconscious cause he rolled stress on his red dice in every roll and he got 1 set of bane giving him a total of 4 stress.

There was no danger at the time and this made a fun session for us, but it also made me re-examin the rules on fatigue and stress. Now I limit stress and fatigue on all involuntary die rolls unless the situation specificly call for it (like fear rolls).

The hardbacks suggest other outcomes for boon/bane/comet/chaos star that you can use a times or freeform as universals from "take a misfortune die on next action" to "your weapon damaged" to "unexpected aid" etc. etc. This makes play more interesting generally and avoids inflicing fatigue/stress when it doesn't make sense.

LoveSkylark said:

1) It would be strange (and unusual) to be still be in combat, and then in one turn have to also make two observation rolls as well as a nature roll, in addition to whatever combat rolls.

2) If the player went unconscious at 4 stress, that means their WP is only 2. I would never recommend anyone taking a 2 WP or 2 To ... EVER . That means they are extremely weak and vulnerable in that area. Stress and Fatigue aren't really that tough to gain, as besides the universal bane effect, a lot of enemies have abilities that cause those too. If a PC has a 2 WP or 2 To, then they really shouldn't be using the Reckless stance, let alone risking 3 steps into it. The player made the choice to be that deep into Reckless, knowing their weakness, so it honestly is their own fault. If you have a character planning to go deep into Reckless, you need to be prepared to suffer significant amounts of both Fatigue *and* Stress, and so should have a reasonable To as well as WP. Or else, deal with the risk and the consequences.

3) The GM could have used the 2x banes to trigger a different effect than stress. He thought it was good for the story to apply the stress and cause the PC to go unconscious. That is not the game's fault.

1) Observ roll because he was close enough to spot the trap (was not in danger himslef), Nature roll to realize the that it was not normal leaves but a trap. Then He had to make another Observ roll to see that his friend was heading straight for the trap. (but all that does not matter there are plenty of involuntary roll player constantly roll in fight so the GM can give the player further info that he may or may not know)

2) Never said he was at 0 stress at the time, the fight was almost over and he had accumulate a few stress tokens.

The point is he spoted a trap that his friend was running into and he fainted!, I am a GM and of course I can adjust to the situation but when you are learning a new system you stick to the rules until you have figured things out for your self. That why I told k7e9 to be careful.

If a player is in aggressive mode he can easly drop down from stress Just because the GM is making him roll for information.

LoveSkylark said:

In this case I'd probably call for one observation or nature lore (player's choise and award a fortune die to the player if the he/she had both skills) as 3 rolls have the following drawbacks as I see it:
1. Risk the player's sanity and consiousness.
2. Take to much time away from the "real" action, as assembeling dice pools, rolling, narrating the result etc. It's not worth the time/effort when it's really just about one trap (again, my opinion, feel free to disagree)

In this case I'd probably make the one roll, and if the player rolled many successes, boons and/or Sigmars comet(s) on the roll I'd give him/her the extra info about the leaves and/or the friend heading straight for the trap. Keeps the game running and keeps the rolls fewer.

LoveSkylark said:

The player should have used assess the situation to get rid of some stress then, his/her character probably visualized his friend falling to his death into the trap and fainted from the sheer exhaustion of battle, adrenaline and she stress of knowing that your friend might die. Maybe it was just too much for the character.

It is much up to the players to manage their stress and fatigue, assess the situation is a very important action for the players to use, if they don't that's their problem. And also since it's also the player's choise how far into reckless they go, they can in a way controll the risk they are willing to take on, the stance dice (especially the reckless ones) are about risking more for greater potential reward.

LoveSkylark said:

I generally let my players choose if they have to roll. A character far into reckless probably would not even be looking for, and might not even care about a trap, he/she is too uncareful and uncaring. A conservative character though might very well spot the trap, and take care to avoid it and make sure that everyone knows it's there. I often let my players choose if they want to roll the passive rolls or not, if they provide a (plausable) explanation as to why their character would not care about it and then I might use it against them later on. For example, if I call for a roll of Folk Lore in a library (to recognize a famous book for example) and one player says "I don't care about books, I don't want to roll" (to avoid getting stress) I won't force the player. But if the party is ever searching for some books later on I might impose penalties, like misfortune dice, on the character who doesn't care about books.

How can you argue with me and prove my point at the same time?

LoveSkylark said:

I can because that's how I roll.
I don't really see how I prove your point though, so if you could clarify that.

If I understand you correctly you have house rules in regard to stress and fatigue, while I (as far as I know) play with the rules are written in regard to stress/fatigue, dealing them out every time I get the oppurtunity to do so and leave it all up to the players to manage their stress/fatigue levels.

I must agree with k7e9. I would have only required a single roll for the Trap, allowing the PC to use whichever they wanted. Of course, the information provided would be different depending on which skill was used.

The PC fainted because they are mentally strained/exhausted by trying to fight off an opponent, while also keeping track of their allies, as well as trying to spot the trap, etc. It is too much effort for them to assimilate, and they pass out briefly.

Everything is covered under the rules, and it was essentially the player's fault (plus some bad dice rolls). The player took the risk of going deep into Reckless stance. Notice that it is described as "high-risk / High reward". One of the risks is Fatigue/Stress. If the PC already had increasing dangerous stress, then they should have found a way (such as Assess the Situation) to reduce their Stress. They could also have reduced their depth into Reckless as they gained stress.

It is also a possibilility, as k7e9 suggested, to let the player decide for their PC to not even roll to spot a trap if they don't want to, most especially if they are actively involved with something else (like combat). In that situation, I would probably have the PC who would be affected by the trap roll, and only if they fail would I offer to the other group members if they wished to attempt to make the test.

Ultimately, it really rests on the player to manage their own risk and fatigue/stress. The closer they are to their break-point of going unconscious, the more risk they run should they have a moment of bad luck (or have an enemy able to inflict fatigue/stress damage). It was their decision to run the risk and not manage it, by either reducing what causes the risk (reducing reckless stance) or reducing the fatigue/stress they current have.

As a GM, stress and a fatigue are a great way to threaten "min-max" combat PCs. You know, the Ironbreaker with 5 To that can never take more than 1 wound from any hit and has maxed out wounds. It can sometimes be much easier to cause their stress or fatigue to go up to dangerous levels, rather than trying to force them unconscious by inflicting wounds one at a time (8 or 10 stress/fatigue might sometimes be easier to inflict than 18-20 wounds)