When Blood Loss occurs there is a 10% chance cumulative each round that the sufferer dies. Does that mean a roll is taken IMMEDIATELY when Blood Loss occurs or is the first (10%) roll taken one round AFTER Blood Loss is suffered?

Thanks!

Where did you see that the 10% is cumulative?? The book says nothing like that, I think, and I don't rule it that way.

In my game, the chance of dying from blood loss its always 10% and a character has a chance to die at the end of his own turn. So if the blood loss was caused during an enemy turn (what usually happens), the PC won't check for "blood loss death" until the end of his turn, having a chance to stop the bleeding by himself before dying.

Oops! Looks like I misread the text. Yep, there is no mention of cumulative effect.

And thanks for your interpretation of the rule. Makes sense.

it would make sense for it to be cumulative though, you loose more and more blood as time progresses and get weaker and weaker. maybe not increase by 10% but a slight increase would help show this.

Even with a flat 10% chance per round, your cumulative chance of dying keeps increasing. And does so rather quickly, as a round is very short.

So when you find yourself lying helpless in a rpaidly expanding pool of your own blood, every second counts. No need to make this situation even more harsh.

And how about when you get a Blood Loss result more than once? (in different wounds and critical effects). This happened in our last session a couple of times and we decided that, in that specific case, it made sense to have cumulative 10% for every time you get a BLoss result during combat.

whoseyes said:

That's logical enough, and i'd go further and say that every subsequent attack that hits you (even if it does no damage) adds a further +10% chance of blood loss as it jostles you around and opens the wounds more.

Honestly though i've rarely had blood loss come up in a 40k RP game, it was only really deathwatch and in that you can pretty much ignore blood loss anyway!

Kasatka said:

We have played 5 sessions and Blood Loss has happened twice to the PCs and lots of times to ork enemies. One of my players is always putting his character into big dangers (no fate points left, medallion crimson, in our last session he managed to climb a tree with a broken arm on a sling [crit 7] and ambush a couple of orks with his flamethrower from there!).

With orks, we don't rule that they die when they lose all their wounds, we record also their Critical Status (that makes fighting orks more tense).

Kasatka said:

Oh man, in our games, 4/5 of the player characters die because of Blood Loss … The remaining 1/5 were Orks with Die-Hard. Over here, we learned to fear Blood Loss, because it either comes with Stunning (so you can't treat it immedaetly) or Fatigue (-10 to the Medicae Test). Not to mention the case when the character is untrained in Medicae (ouch!).

whoseyes said:

This interpretation makes sense and I'll probably use it but "by the book" separate occurrances of Blood Loss does NOT stack, right?

Eradico Pravus said:

The book says nothing about that. It's something that came up in one of our games and I thought that it would be reasonable to do.