If I do more damage, then the opponents Tougness Bonus, then he get's a Fatigue Point.

So to KO an opponent with 4 TB, I would have to do 20 Dmg, which probably kills him, unless he is a marine.

Either it's nonsense or I just don't get it...

pretty sweet would be:

I roll dmg and if that roll is more then the targets toughnessbonus he gets a point of fatigue

You likely won't be capable of KO-ing an enemy while he still has wounds left, but remember that certain low-crit results produce additional fatigue, which add up with those you already inflicted.

vogue69 said:

Yes, you would have to do at least 20 points of damage with a minimum of 4 hits (at least 5 points of damage for each hit). You are missing the fact that 16 of that damage would be soaked by the TB leaving the opponent down 4 wounds with 4 levels of fatigue.

I can't remember if fatigue needs to equal or exceed TB for you to go unconscious.

Of course, the real reason to sock someone in the jaw is to give them one level of fatigue. Then they get to enjoy a -10 to everything, making the rest of the fight a bit easier for you!

ItsUncertainWho said:

@It'sUncertainWho

IMO, the rule reads as if you had to actually deduct as many wounds as the enemy has toughness in order to inflict fatigue.

Cifer said:

me too. but if you play throgh en example with 2 subnormal guys (STR 30, TG 30) It would be impossible for them to inflic even 1 point of fatigue. Even if they fight wearing speedos.

It always made me wonder: why can I take a power sword to the gut and (assuming I survive the damage and don't suffer any adverse critical effect) still fight at peak performance, but I take a punch and suddenly I'm all dizzy and fatigued?

I've always assumed in pretty much every RPG i've played that things like wounds are more representative of things like luck, energy etc. Basically I think when you get hit by a power sword, and take 10 wounds, its not that the power sword stabbed you in the shoulder, its that it cut through your armour and scored a light hit against you.

Thats why I think toughness bonus is not reduced by penetration (well, the melta gun cut through my armour like butter, but my glorious abs protected me from harm) but more an increased ability to shrug off small hits to your body.

As for unarmed damage, I guess I think of it more like a boxing match. It's possible to knock someone out with one hit, but the rest of their body stays fine. Yeah, I know this is terrible justification, but eh, just rolling with the rules sometimes

Nimas said:

So... everyone instinctively rolls with the blows to minimize actual harm when being smashed by a 20kg hammer wreathed in destructive energy, but when it's a bare fist, all they can do is stand there and take it? Truly is pugilism the most powerful of destructive arts.

Sorry for the sarcasm, by the way. I mean no disrespect, just couldn't help myself, and I don't think I can phrase it any clearer without it.

The problem essentially comes from the degree of abstraction. You don't want several dozen kinds of damage, as that just overloads the game. However, just one kind of damage is odd as well - beating someone unconscious should be possible without killing them. Thus, unarmed versus armed damage is one of the more common kinds of distinction in games.

Personally, I prefer the WoD system, with bashing damage (=blunt force trauma) having the same debilitating results as lethal damage (= blades and bullets), but being less difficult to soak and heal.

Think of it like a classic action movie. Moves, like punching someone in the face instead of shooting them with your gun makes sense in movies, because it looks cool. The rules are there to give players incentive to mix things up.

Morangias said:

RAWR I take much offense at your sar... wait no, I really don't. Yeah, it does seem odd, but Cifer and Jackal said, it more to allow some variance in combat, and maybe give you an option if you wish to capture someone for ransom as opposed to punch their head off (which is actually doable, and seems really weird)

I'm not sure it's that bad. I always assumed you needed to exceed the toughness bonus, so you'd need to exceed it by 1. I like the idea of having a way to render an opponent unconcious. The opponent has to take at least 4 such hits (assuming his toughness is 40), which is multiple rounds, unless multiple people are beating on the same target. I think there's lots of weapons that can take out opponents much quicker but they are lethal. At the same time I don't think it's too difficult or cumbersome either.

As far as justifying the fatigue, I think it's fairly difficult to knock someone out without actually killing them or risking long term damage, so you're forced to choke them out and/or wear them down. Once again, that's just my justification...

Lightning Attack while unarmed, perhaps?

I guess by the RAW you need to have a melee weapon equipped, but hey Knuckle-duster?

Darth Smeg said: