Zealous hatred not stacking clarification

By PnPgamer, in Black Crusade Rules Questions

It says that the critical injuries don't stack… but what does it mean? Cannot it stack onto the same spot on a target? not to the same person at all? how about the levels of critical? if you crit to a body, but with greater effect than before, is it ignored or is the more severe version applied?

If you get character to 0 wounds and then hit him again (let's say for 2 wounds), he gets -2 critical. Then if you damage him for another 2 wounds, he gets -4 critical and so on. However critical hits from zealous hatred doesn't stack that way. Each one is 1d5 critical no matter how injured the target is.

Think of it this way. Zealous Hatred doesn't actually deal damage, it just applies effects from the critical effects chart. And it only applies the effects of the first 5 options, keeping Zealous Hatred from killing a target. Though the effects of the ZH rolls do stack. For example, if you roll a stun twice, then the length of the two stuns are added together.

so for example, an enemy gets 2 zealous hatreds, that other one gives a 1 round stun, and other one 1 fatigue, and thus they stack. So basicly he could have criticals 1-5 on all body parts… at the same time?

That's not impossible no, just highly improbable (considering the amount of dice and attacks you'd need).

If you roll two 10's with a 2d10 weapon you get to apply two different ZH results (asuming you roll two different ones). Kinda funny stuff.

PnPgamer said:

so for example, an enemy gets 2 zealous hatreds, that other one gives a 1 round stun, and other one 1 fatigue, and thus they stack. So basicly he could have criticals 1-5 on all body parts… at the same time?

Not all. Remember what I said, ZH doesn't actually deal any damage, it just applies status effects that you find the critical hit tables. In addition to that, it only applies the critical effects of the location that gets hit. From your example above, the enemy hit would have, lets say ten wounds, 1 turn of being stunned, 1 fatigue, and no critical damage. No matter what, ZH cannot deal any critical damage, it only applies the effects you would get from critical damage, even if the target is at zero total wounds.

To put it another way [again], ZH does not stack critical damage, ever.

Yeah I got it when the first time you wrote about it. I was just stating you could have effects of 1,2,3,4,5 criticals on all body locations. Don't worry you're not the first one to misunderstand me, when I've given my 2 cents around the internet.

You could have those effects stacked at the same time, though that would be rare. Most targets would die from the sheer number of hits before ZH had any real effect.

BrotharTearer said:

If you roll two 10's with a 2d10 weapon you get to apply two different ZH results (asuming you roll two different ones). Kinda funny stuff.

This is not right. If any dice rolled in the attack comes up as a natural 10, then the attack may cause a spectacular hit.

Just as in previous games where 10s might cause additional damage, multiple dice simply increase your chances of scoring a "bonus", but they do not score multiple bonuses. In DH/RT etc, you got to roll one single additional d10, regardless of how many 10s you rolled on your attack. In BC, you get one single critical effect, regardless of how many 10s you rolled.

Now, if you rolled multiple hits with a auto-burst or swift attack, however …

Darth Smeg said:

BrotharTearer said:

If you roll two 10's with a 2d10 weapon you get to apply two different ZH results (asuming you roll two different ones). Kinda funny stuff.

This is not right. If any dice rolled in the attack comes up as a natural 10, then the attack may cause a spectacular hit.

Just as in previous games where 10s might cause additional damage, multiple dice simply increase your chances of scoring a "bonus", but they do not score multiple bonuses. In DH/RT etc, you got to roll one single additional d10, regardless of how many 10s you rolled on your attack. In BC, you get one single critical effect, regardless of how many 10s you rolled.

Now, if you rolled multiple hits with a auto-burst or swift attack, however …

I checked it out, and by the wording of attack includes swift, lightining, semi-auto and full-auto. Thus it wouldn't make much difference between single or bursts of hits, if rolled same amount of dice.

PnPgamer said:

I checked it out, and by the wording of attack includes swift, lightining, semi-auto and full-auto. Thus it wouldn't make much difference between single or bursts of hits, if rolled same amount of dice.

The difference is that, for example, with lascannon you roll 5d10 but can score only one ZH no matter how many natural 10 you roll, but with 5 hits from full auto you can potentialy score 5 ZH. Makes double-wielding chainswords with lightning-atack and flesh render very fun to use as opponent has so many status effects after 1 round that he can barely stand happy.gif

maybe I wasn't clear enough, not the first time though

Lightning attack and full auto are both attacks as a whole, thus making the zealous hatred trigger only once from a single full auto or lightning attack set. Dual wielding is an exception to this though as you are making more than one Attack(usually 2 or more with multiple arms trait).

It seems I've been doing it wrong all the time..

Good catch, PnPGamer. I agree with your arguments, and shall implement this change immediately.

This will mildly annoy my suspiciously-dice-lucky friend, but I think one crit pr burst is quite enough ;)

okay this goes a bit sidetracked from the main topic but I've been wondering about corruption and its effects

I think it was so that the failure corruption that triggers the gifting check is the only one that limits away the ability to affect the gift roll, or is there another effect that I've missed about the failure corruption? Also in many places it says that failure enrages the patron god, but the effects of this is nowhere to be seen?(or I just miss it) How does this come to in effect? does it at all?

(copied from another of my question threads as nobody seemed too interested in it…)