Why do armours have separate value headings for Arms and Legs while the Wound Effect Tables read simply as "Limb"? This makes no sense to me, especially considering the incongruous difference in Arms and Legs Armour values for Mesh when all other armours have equal values on those Locations.

Then, Table7-4, result 25-26: "...exploding shards of burning bone into his shoulder..." What if the "Limb" hit was Location 7-8 (Leg)?

Or why does a target specifically suffer Ballistic Skill Decay for suffering a Wound Effect from Impact weapons when hit...in the Leg? Rending Wounds to Limbs "...used to make attacks..." suffer Weapon Skill Decay, but any Limb suffices when suffering BS Decay? Again, this does not make sense to me.

Table 7-10, Wound Effect 19: "The blow severs one of the target's digits..." I just lost one toe (read the grammar correctly), so I suffer WS and BS Decay? Why? Or Wound effects 26-29: Why do I suffer a permanent reduction to my WS because I lost a Leg? Shouldn't the effect be linked with my mobility? Don't give me irl discussions about proper footing, because if I survive I can get a bionic Leg, but my skill with a melee weapon is permanently impaired? Meanwhile a Rending Wound Effect of 26-27 (Table 7-12) relieves me of both eyes, but I might suffer a mere -1 permanent reduction to Perception, but no reductions at all to BS?

These tables have poor internal consistency. They are, simply put, terribly written.

Either A) rewrite the Tables, make them consistent, and get rid of the ridiculous notion of Arms and Legs as "Limbs" and include Wound Effect Tables for Arms (there are already nine Tables, how can three more make or break all the difference in the game's utility?)...

or B) rewrite the Tables, make them consistent (ie Table 7-10, Wound Effect 19: If the Limb is used to make attacks blah blah blah, and if the Limb is used for mobility blah blah blah), and make all Armour values on "Limbs" the same (I'm looking specifically at Mesh), ie Head: value X, Torso: value X, Limbs : value X.

Most people seem to think we'd be better off without the wound tables entirely, but FFG will never remove them at this point.

While I can see the problems with the tables, I am unsure why there is anything wrong with having different armour values for legs and arms?

Most people seem to think we'd be better off without the wound tables entirely, but FFG will never remove them at this point.

"Most people" is a very big statement to make. The consensus from the forums (although assuming a consensus with so many varying opinions is a bit of a dumb prospect) seems to be that the individual details of the wound tables need some reworking, and that the way wounds are applied have some slight anomalies.

I haven't seen many people saying the entire concept is irredeemable. Except maybe you.

Most people seem to think we'd be better off without the wound tables entirely, but FFG will never remove them at this point.

Was there a poll done somewhere on FFG forum that I don't know about? No? I would avoid big words like "Most people" then. It certainly needs tweaking but I found the idea cool.

As to separate armour on legs and hands, I don't find it in contradiction with the wounds table. What if you want to mix armour?

The 'fix' for Limb results penalizing BS even though the 'limb' in question as a leg rather than an arm (or other goofy effects) would be to add a qualifier to the wound effect description: "If applied to an Arm location, the effect also does ___".

I suspect we'll end up simplifying it down to each location causing 10 points of Toughness damage & 10 points off of one or two other Characteristics. What's there now is not really narrative friendly, and not really sim friendly either. But it is rather more elaborate than it needs to be.