I'm pretty much in agreement with mouthymerc.

Since Sam's answer does indicate the character has the option to use the talent or not, the player decides before the dice are rolled when the critical injury modifier is being rolled. Once those dice hit the table, the player has to accept the result.

Not what I would have expected as far as whether using the talent or not is a choice on the player's part, especially as it's a Passive talent.

If you really want to institute a house-rule that Durable can't be used after the crit roll, you're free to do so. Just keep in mind that it's a house-rule, one that other GMs won't necessarily share.

That was cheeky, I just couldn't resist, sorry. To actually address your view, I feel you aren't reading the e-mail correctly.

Me:

If I have 3 ranks of Durable, and am critted with a result of 90, what happens?

B: Durable is an option and I may suffer the crit result of a roll of 90 or 60.

Sam:

However, when you choose to use Durable, you must reduce the Critical effect by 10 plus all ranks of Durable purchased. In other words, your option B is correct.

Seems pretty clear cut to me. I don't know how you get another interpretation out of that?

Actually, Sam's answer indicates that the character chooses whether to suffer a 90 or 60 on the roll. So the choice happens after the critical injury roll (in other words, when the character suffers a critical injury).

Actually my point was that I have no interest in gaming the game. It ruins the narrative if I need to start giving options slowing down the game just because one result may be better than the other. If you want the option to use it or not, tell me before I roll. After that we go with the result.

AndreKeller,

Actually, that was you making an attempt at being snide after your cheese-laden metagaming suggestions of how Durable should work got shot down by one of the lead designers.

Maybe you missed the point that mouthymerc and that i agreed with that was how we'd run it in our games, with the implied caveat that it's us opting to exercise GM fiat for the sake of not letting the narrative of the game get bogged down as the player tried to decide which critical injury result they'd rather deal with.

As I said I my first post, if you are going to resort to ad hominem attacks or straw man arguments, your input is no longer welcome in this thread. My goal in this thread was to present multiple interpretations of the rules for Durable, get a read for what people thought, and ultimately, the lead dev answered the way the game works RAW. You can keep your value judgements to yourself sir. I can enjoy this game however I want, and you can do the same at your table. Why be a jerk?

As to your second point, your first post in this thread was authoritatively laying out how Durable works, incorrectly. Your second post was incorrectly reading Sam's e-mail, or at least ignoring the part of his e-mail you didn't agree with. Your third post was slamming me, against the request I made in the opening post of the thread, for having the one of three interpretations I thought was most compelling being incorrect, while ignoring that the interpretation you supported was also proven to be incorrect, and then moving on to say that your second post was clearly talking about how you were house-ruling the game, when none of the previous posts had any context to suggest this. It is your game, you can choose to house-rule it as much as you want, just don't present your opinion as fact. The lead developer has laid down what is RAW, and everyone is free to do with that as they wish, all I ask is that you show respect to me, and anyone else who has a different opinion than you.

I very much like the content you provide for this community, so it is doubly disappointing to see you behave in this way. Many people here respect you for the service you give to this community, so please treat everyone else with respect as well.

Easy people. As with all thing, do whatever works best for your game. Talk to your players, get their feedback.

When the cover vs armor setback die stacking question was answered by Sam in the Order 66 podcast, Our group talked it over and unanimously (sp?) agreed to ignore the "official" ruling. We let them stack and everryone is happy with it. Sure our dice pools are marginally larger, but it's no big deal for us

What I believe Andre and away are getting at is that Sam's answer indicated a player could choose to suffer either the 90 or the 60, but was forced to modify the result by all 3 ranks of the talent, implying that the players choice would be made after an initial result was generated. However I wouldn't look to far into it. Sam's a game developer, not a diety. take his advice or don't.

Sam's a game developer, not a diety.

*Unobtrusively dismantles recently-built altar*

What I believe Andre and away are getting at is that Sam's answer indicated a player could choose to suffer either the 90 or the 60, but was forced to modify the result by all 3 ranks of the talent, implying that the players choice would be made after an initial result was generated. However I wouldn't look to far into it. Sam's a game developer, not a diety. take his advice or don't.

My issue with the modifier being applied after the roll that is that it involves the player using blatantly out-of-character knowledge to game the system, and could slow combat down as the player tries to decide which critical injury result they want to deal with. It's also much cleaner and simpler to have the PC decide if they are going to use Durable or not when the GM is calculating the check modifier (bonuses for existing critical injuries, Lethal Blows talent ranks, Vicious ranks, and additional crit activations if the attacker scored lots of Advantage) for the critical injury roll.

Sorry, but allowing the player to say "hold on, let me look up the critical injury chart to see what would happen if I opted to use my Durable talent" just doesn't sit well with me, particularly since it holds up combat, which otherwise is a very quick and smooth aspect of the game (a welcome contrast to how laborious D&D combat could get in 3rd & 4th edition).

Maybe it just needs a follow-up question to ask when the use of the talent can be declared as this isn't stated in Sam's answer and is pure conjecture from anyone else.

There isn't any point in arguing if someone else sees something from a different point of view, without evidence to suggest that their view is actually incorrect, at the moment either view could be correct. So at this point it's like shroedingers talent.

(Please excuse the probably incorrect spelling of the scientist with a cat!)

Maybe it just needs a follow-up question to ask when the use of the talent can be declared as this isn't stated in Sam's answer and is pure conjecture from anyone else.

There isn't any point in arguing if someone else sees something from a different point of view, without evidence to suggest that their view is actually incorrect, at the moment either view could be correct. So at this point it's like shroedingers talent.

Sam's answer does state explicitly that you can use it after the roll comes up. I put forth 3 possibilities, all of which were after the crit result has been tabulated. The one that he explicitly says is right, B, says that people who have 3 ranks of Durable, if crit for 90, can choose to sustain a crit of 60 or 90.

If people don't like that answer, they can house-rule it, that is the glory of rpgs. I was just after raw clarification, and will probably ask my dm to allow for my C interpretation of Durable, where each rank can be used individually, since I feel it better gets across the flavor of Durable. I just like knowing what is raw so I know where to work from. That is the great thing about role-playing, different people can look at a rule, have completely opposite reactions to it, and go different ways. As long as they are in different game groups, it works fine. Cheers.

To be specific, Sam does not state explicitly anywhere in what you have provided us with that you can choose before or after the roll (it is not mentioned, what is mentioned is if its a choice and whether you have to use all ranks of the talents or can choose to pick only some), neither are your examples posed to him explicitly saying when the choice can be made. Just saying there's an ambiguity in the questions you posed to him, regardless of intention and the meaning you put into it.

I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. My entire question to him was prefaced on the assumption that the question of Durable being optional would revolve around it being used post crit roll. Frankly, the whole notion that some people have been putting forth that they would allow Durable to be an option, but only pre roll, seems pretty pointless. You are asking your player to be clairvoyant, and guess whether or not using Durable would cause them to receive a more favorable crit? It isn't a meaningful decision, so I never really entertained it. If Durable can't be chosen to used after the crit roll, there is no reason not to use it everytime, as lower crits TEND to be less severe than higher ones. It is a false choice, which most games try to avoid since they don't add to impactful or compelling gameplay. The idea of letting Durable be chosen to be used or not after the crit roll gives your player a meaningful, thought provoking choice, so it is really the only one I ever considered.

I disagree with your comment regarding Sam not telling us whether it can be used after the roll. My option B says B: Durable is an option and I may suffer the crit result of a roll of 90 or 60. This is the one Sam said was correct. If he thought that Durable could only be chosen to be used before the crit roll, why say an option which specifically cites two numbers, 90 and 60, as the two options available to the player, since the crit wouldn't have been rolled yet? I believe he correctly ascertained that the Durable choice was post crit roll, since all the language I used in my question made that claim. Also, as a game developer, I also assume he would dismiss the idea of allowing Durable to be optional, but only before the roll, out of hand, since it doesn't create any actual gameplay. It is entirely possible that he misread my question, but he seems like a smart guy, and I think he correctly read my question. If someone else asks him a followup question and he contradicts the statement he gave me, then that is fine, please post it in this thread so I can know. For now though, I'm going to give Sam the benefit of the doubt that he fully understood my question and answered it correctly.

Also, just want to thank the majority of the thread for being very respectful in their discussion. While not everyone agrees, I like hearing people's differing views, and having my own views challenged. Thanks a lot.

I think the issue with Sam's answer is that the options didn't specifically call out that they are all for after the crit roll has been made, it is implied but could be interpreted differently, much like the use of the talent in the original question.

The question was focused on how ranks of durable work,did you have to choose to invoke the talent and did you have to use all the ranks when you use the talent? And not when the talent needed to be activated.

(Personally I would allow the talent to be used after the crit roll as I don't like the potential of a character being worse off for using a character option they have invested xp in, unless there is some sort of trade off as part of its use).

Yeah I don't consider this choice as being metagamging. If lower was always better then there would be no reason to make a choice, but that is not the case. Someone with this talent is more durable than someone without, so from a roleplaying perspective not giving them the choice after the roll could result in the opposite result

I think the issue with Sam's answer is that the options didn't specifically call out that they are all for after the crit roll has been made, it is implied but could be interpreted differently, much like the use of the talent in the original question.

The question was focused on how ranks of durable work,did you have to choose to invoke the talent and did you have to use all the ranks when you use the talent? And not when the talent needed to be activated.

I understand what you are saying but disagree. My entire question to him was prefaced on the concept of it being used or not after the crit roll, since as I admitted, I never really even considered it being a choice, that only using it before the roll, to be an idea anyone would put forth. Every single option in my question contained hard numbers, all derived from the application of a certain number of ranks of Durable, to one rolled crit number, 90. Sam selected the option which allowed for someone who got a 90 rolled against them to suffer a crit of 90 or 60, their choice. This means the choice is after the crit is rolled. I understand that he doesn't explicitly say "durable is a choice after the crit roll", but he doesn't have to, the overwhelming context of every aspect of my question operates under that pretense, and he didn't need to hammer the point home. It would be like me asking you if you want to hang out 2 days from now, and when you called me 2 days later, acting surprised, saying I meant two Jupiter days, not Earth days. In this scenario, I'm being entirely unreasonable, because we are both denizens of Earth, and any mention of passage of day defaults to discussing Earth days between all people on this planet, because that is the context we live in. I'm sorry if this is coming off as condescending, I don't mean it to at all, it is just driving me batty that there is a question to the veracity of his statement. He read the question and answered it, can't we give him the benefit of the doubt of reading comprehension and understanding of context? I just don't see any possible other way to interpret his answer. By selecting an option dealing with hard numbers, he therefore approved of Durable dealing with crits post rolls. If he didn't think this way, he would have offered up a fourth option that dealt with variable numbers, such as X vs X-30 (X being the crit roll) instead, in order to get across the idea that the talent could only be chosen to be used before the crit roll. Cheers!

Then why didn't you supply us with the preface of choosing before or after the roll in addition to Sam's answers? The way it stands, on the previous page, it's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, what is written there (what you have supplied us with of information of that exchange) is ambiguous and open to interpretation both ways. You see that don't you?

Got an answer from Sam Stewart, gotta love the responsiveness of these guys!

My e-mail:

"How do multiple ranks of the talent Durable work? I notice the talent says may, so I assume you can use it as a choice, and choose not to use it. If I have 3 ranks of Durable, and am critted with a result of 90, what happens?

A: Durable isn't an option and I suffer the crit result of a roll of 60.

B: Durable is an option and I may suffer the crit result of a roll of 90 or 60.

C: Durable is an option, and each rank may be activated or not discreetly, and I may suffer a crit result of 90, 80, 70, or 60.

Thank you very much for your time. I've been enjoying playing this game you have worked so hard to create."

His response:

"Interesting question. Durable is a optional talent, although in most cases, activating it is going to be a good idea! However, when you choose to use Durable, you must reduce the Critical effect by 10 plus all ranks of Durable purchased. In other words, your option B is correct.

I hope this helps!

Sam"

There you have it. Not the answer I was personally rooting for, but that is Word O' God, so that is how I'm playing it going forward.

Jegergryte, this is my post earlier in the thread, posting the e-mail I sent to him and his response. As I've said, I did not explicitly say at the beginning of this e-mail "This question is about Durable being optional to use after the crit roll", because the thought of Durable being optional to use, but before the crit roll, never even occurred to me since it doesn't create compelling gameplay and expects your players to be psychic.

As a hypothetical, lets say you have 100 dollars. I tell you that I'm going to roll a d100, and if the result is even, I'm taking X dollars from you (X being the roll), and if the result is odd, I'm giving you X dollars. As a bonus, I'm letting you choose for the result you get to either be X or X-3, but you have to choose before I roll. What have you gained by being given the option? I am layering a random choice on top of a random choice. The four possible results are 1) you take a straight roll and get an even result (sucks, but hey, random), 2) you take a straight roll and get an odd result (yay, but hey, random), 3) you take X-3 and turn an even option odd (yay, but hey, just a random choice put on a random result), or 4) you take X-4 and turn an odd option even (sucks, but hey, just a random choice put on a random result). No where in this hypothetical has there been any compelling gameplay. I don't understand entertaining it as an option.

Your comment that Sam's response is ambiguous confuses the heck out of me. You are saying that his choosing of an option that says when someone is crit for 90, and they have three ranks of Durable, they can choose to be crit for 60 or 90, can be interpreted to mean that he believes that Durable can be optional, but either before or after the roll? How do you get support for Durable being only before the roll from that statement? He is citing hard numbers? If he said that you could be crit for X or X-30, THAT would be an ambiguous answer, since that could be interpreted to mean either before or after the roll, though I would lean towards before. If Durable is an option after the roll, referencing a hard number is the correct tact. This is what Sam did. If Durable is an option before the roll, referencing a variable number is the correct tact. He didn't do this.

I don't understand how someone can read the e-mail that I sent and come to any conclusion other than I asked the question in the context that Durable is chosen to be used or not after the crit roll. I chose 1 number, 90, as the crit roll, referenced every subsequent number at 90, and the selected correct option said that when an individual is crit for 90, which mean the crit dice have been rolled and 90 came up, the player with three ranks of Durable can choose to be crit for 90 or 60, which means the player looks at the already roller number of 90, and chooses whether to accept it or apply negative 30 to it.

I'm really trying to wrap my head around how this can be seen any other way, and I am failing. I don't see how it is mathematically or lingually possible?

Actually, you never specified whether it is applied before or after the roll. Nor is it specified in the talent. I take all modifiers before I roll, figure out the total modifier, then roll. Others may do it after, in which case you can choose to apply Durable or not. Either way works, just in my case the choice really isn't one.

But then you could end up with someone who has the Durable trait being less durable than someone without it. Yes, unfortunately, the only way to "successfully" use this talent to match the roleplaying intent of it (Character A is more durable than Character B) is to allow the player to choose the result from the critical hit table that has less of an impact on his character. If they had written the table in such a way that a higher number was always worse, then I could see with applying it all the time and before the roll, but that's not how the table is laid out.

mouthymerc, did you read what I wrote? This is incredibly frustrating. I'm really trying to understand what you guys are saying, but it doesn't make any sense to me. If I told you I got a brand new pet, and he was loving chasing tennis balls, going for walks, barking at neighbors, peeing on fire hydrants, and sleeping in his house I built for him outside, would you show up with a gift of catnip for me and then tell me I never explicitly told you if I got a cat or dog?

Stop your examples, please, they're pointless.

Nowhere in that e-mail, regardless of what you meant or had not conceived of before sending it, explicitly states anywhere that the questions are concerning choosing before or after a crit is rolled. Nowhere. Of course it is implicit for you, but not necessarily for us nor Sam. This is a simple interpretative gesture anyone with some interest in texts, communication and the problem of text communication should be able to gather - it should not be confusing. Whatever you intended to say, it is not necessarily what is understood, registered or answered, since your question is not explicitly what you say it is, it is not precisely saying what you think it says. It's as simple as that.

Of course you cannot understand why anyone can come to a different conclusion, that is because you are biased (naturally, we all are) and a part of the whole exchange of text symbols also includes - in your mind - a lot of other significant symbols of meaning, that is not explicitly, but implicitly, included in the meaning and conclusion you derive from the exchange. This is natural, and I am of course biased since I can also read a different meaning and conclusion in it, because the questions and answers are not precise, by which I mean nowhere is it explicitly stated in writing (significant meaning conveying symbols) whether the choice happens before or after.

Now, why I can interpret and come to a different conclusion to his answer is partly due to the above, since most questions are imprecisely posed and usually this means they are interpreted outside a specific context, the answer can be of a general nature, thus meaning that when the choice has been made, regardless of before or after, the option B is the correct alternative. That is to say, if you choose not to use it, well you can and you get the rolled result. If you choose to use it, you have to modify the result of the critical roll by all available ranks in the talent. Of course, it could also mean what you say, but this other conclusion is as valid as yours, since nowhere in the written question is it explicitly stated anything about the timing of the choice. That is only implicit in you interpretation and intention of the question, whether Sam understood it like that or not we can merely speculate in. His answer does not however state explicitly one way or the other. He states that you can only choose to use all or nothing - not anything about when.

Your interpretation is as reasonable as any other.

I have specifically asked Sam to give his opinion on whether you use the talent before or after the roll, as this seems to be getting a little nasty.

"If I have 3 ranks of Durable, and am critted with a result of 90, what happens?"

There is a timeline in this question. My character exists and has 3 ranks of Durable. Then my character is attacked and crit, and the roll of that crit is 90.

"...your option B is correct."

This is what Sam says.

"B: Durable is an option and I may suffer the crit result of a roll of 90 or 60."

We are now in another, later part of the the timeline. In this timeline, Durable is an optional talent, and the player, who has been hit and crit, and had a 90 rolled against them, can suffer a crit of either 90 or 60.

There is no ambiguity in my question or his response to my question. If Durable was an option, but only before the roll of the crit, Sam would have clarified, putting forth an option D, saying Durable is an option, but only before the roll, so if crit, you choose whether to use all or none of your ranks of Durable, and after the crit is rolled you will suffer a crit of X or X-30. It is possible that he misread my question, misread the options I laid out for him, and accidently selected the wrong option to be correct. This would be a mistake, not ambiguity. I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt of reading comprehension. You are free to do as you please.