http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/woundtolerances.pdf

It appears that Luke thought these important enough to print out and include them, as a seperate sheet, with my copy of The Burning Wheel.

Why is this? Could someone point me to appropriate threads somewhere? What's wrong with the wound penalties as printed? The standard rules seemed simple enough to me, and the change seems very small.

Although I couldn't find a specific post over on BW.org and RPG.net, I have read many ... um, "complaints" that the original wound system was a "statistical oddity" and such since it was better to have -1D than a +1 or a +2. There was much math and statistical analyses tossed around and eventually those that complained got their message through to Abzu. In his greatness, he delivered forth the new version of the wounding system. Although this system has been playtested for some time now, it is still not official. There is still some flux in the healing times and treatment effects.

In that case, what is the math on that? It isn't exactly intuitive.

I failed algebra in highschool and really haven't paid attention to math since. I am sorry, but I cannot help you there. Also, I find those sort of posts highly painful to read.

heh heh, this old saw again? Glad to know you got the game, Kirt!

Let me explain:
the wound penalties in the book work just fine, if you don't mind having the Superficial and Light wounds count more than Midi or Severe. Personally, I don't mind at all, but jesus some folks howled on about this.

Anyway, raising the DN to 5 or 6 for a roll is statistically more detrimental than subtracting a die or, in most cases, from raising the obstacle. So I created an alternate version to attempt to satisfy both sides of the camp. Use either one, it doesn't really matter. All that matters is that a lost die causes a Steel test, wounds subtract dice (for incapacitation) and that characters have a Mortal Wound tolerance. Everything else is really just gravy.

From my own experience, I've found the revised wound penalties easier for new players to swallow.

-L

Ah, I should've also noted that part of the rules adjustment comes from a philosophy of not wanting to change the DN at all. Having one number to rule them all makes for a real slick system, I think. It was fairly easy to do with the Wound system, but it's proving a little more prickly with the Armor system. Ideally, BW will be a game without any changing DNs - unless you epiphany, that is!

I have a hard time with math but my players screamed bloody murder at the old rules (litterally).

It worked like this:
My mage player'd take a scratch or a deep cut and his difficulty number would increase to 5 or 6. Drasticly increasing his risk of not making a forte test, something which is really, really bad if magic is your thing. (moans and grumbles from my player and threats of self-inflicting wounds to get to the +3 DN stage where one looses a die.)
Start using the new rules and he'd take that steel test instead of having to take a forte test against a higher DN when lightly wounded. He throw his forte dice with one less die, but he'd only need 4s, not 5s or 6s. Pervertedly this makes it safer for him to cast his spells.

He still whines when hit but at least he wont be cutting himself before he casts his next spell.

An example that should illustrate the general nature:

Roll five dice against DN6, there's a 60% chance of getting ONE success. Rolling four dice against DN 4, there's a 93% chance of getting one success, and about a 68% chance of getting two. In fact:

5 dice against DN4: 97% chance of one success
5 dice against DN5: 86% chance of one success
5 dice against DN6: 60% chance of one success
4 dice against DN4: 93.75% of getting one success
...

And so on. In other words, even DN+1 is in many ways a higher penalty than -1D, even if ostensibly you have a chance of getting MORE successes than is possible with a smaller die.

I just futzed this off the top of my head right now, so if there are any errors, I apologize. But the change is drastic.

You can also see the odds for yourself by checking out my Probability Tables that I did in Excel, and Luke posted in the Downloads section of the Burning Wheel's website.

But your odds tables don't show the odds of DN 5 or 6, which is what's being compared right now, no?

Oh, that's right; Luke turned my spreadsheet into a .pdf. The spreadsheet, I think, made it pretty easy to see the odds for any DN. If you would like a copy of the .xls, just send me an email.

I should point out that a +1 Ob penalty for Superficial also does weird things to the numbers - it's slightly better for large #s of dice to get a +1 Ob, but small numbers of dice suffer horribly. And -1D is still often better than +1 or +2 Ob.

I don't know if there's a "right/better" answer, but I think I'm going to stick with the +DN system for now, since it's at least more consistent across the board.

(Thanks for the files, Durgil!)

i still maintain, and it is a philosophy of the system, that the little things hurt more. The big wounds are more adrenalized and endorphin-softened. The fractured nose, bleeding eye, or ripped figure nail tend to resonate in ways quite different than the deep gash that you don't feel until later.

-L

abzu wrote: i still maintain, and it is a philosophy of the system, that the little things hurt more. The big wounds are more adrenalized and endorphin-softened. The fractured nose, bleeding eye, or ripped figure nail tend to resonate in ways quite different than the deep gash that you don't feel until later.

because then they turn into a "big thing" and endorphins and adrenaline really kick in.

that's the idea behind the little things drag you down until the fight or flight response kicks in.

the big things seemingly don't interfere as much, but they drag you down must faster than the little things. And they force Steel tests.

-L

In other words... sometimes it DOES make sense to cut yourself?

::sigh::

come on, we're not seriously going to have this discussion are we?

No. It was late and I was punchy. Sorry about that. Honestly, I understand the philosophy that little things turn into big thing.

But something's been gnawing at me, and I think I finally figured out what it's supposed to be...

...doesn't your philosophy imply that once you get a big thing, then the little things don't count anymore? Say, for instance, you've got a guy with a black eye (Superficial, +1DN). He then gets a knife to the gut (Midi, -1D).

At that point, the adrenaline and endorphins and the whole fight-and-flight stuff has kicked in, so would it be unthinkable for the +1DN penalty to go away? (And, at least until THAT fight is over, no more DN penalties should apply, but further dice penalties should).

Just thinking aloud here.

You know, that's a perfectly fine way of doing it. I think EABA does something like that as well -- only the biggest wound counts.

what happens there, though, is you make it a little harder to wear someone down and incapacitate them. this is a feature of the system I like very much.

However, we have been playtesting a middle ground. I've been allowing players to shrug off Superficial Wounds with a Health test (not artha). The Shrug counts the same as the Artha shrug (only lasts until the end of the scenario/encounter). It's fun, because it gets players more involved in keeping their characters on their feet.

-L

My vestigial proposal, such as it was, would be:

* Once you get a die-penalty, ignore DN penalties (except for the purposes of adding three together to get another die penalty). So it wouldn't be JUST the biggest wound counting, but once the adrenalin kicks in, the DN penalties go away.

This still makes it a LITTLE harder to wear someone down than before, but not nearly as hard as "only biggest counts." Three superficials, two lights, or one light and one superficial, will still give another die penalty - their DN penalties are just ignored because of adrenaline and endorpins.

But maybe that's too complex.

nah, that's cool.

Trolls are allowed to do something like this with their Numb trait.

I see absolutely no problem with this, if it fits within your style of play. The wound modifiers really aren't that big a deal.

-L

edit: though considering you haven't actually played the game, i highly recommend (to you and everyone else reading this post) that you try BW, as is. I think you'll be surprised how well it plays and how much sense it makes. Look at what the system encourages and discourages -- follow its lead and you'll be pleasantly pleased, i think.

Oh, apart from changes appropriate to the setting, as we've discussed in the other thread, I'm fully committed to using the rules as stated. But my mind tinkers regardless.

abzu wrote:
However, we have been playtesting a middle ground. I've been allowing players to shrug off Superficial Wounds with a Health test (not artha). The Shrug counts the same as the Artha shrug (only lasts until the end of the scenario/encounter). It's fun, because it gets players more involved in keeping their characters on their feet.

try this:
Ob 2 Health test to Shrug +1 Ob/+1 DN. Takes two actions. (See Jet Li in Fist of Legend).

Ob 4 Health tes to Shrug -1D. Takes four actions. (See..., the one, um, with the broken arm... damn it, can't remember reference).

Shrugging removes wound penalties temporarily. After the scenario/encounter all wound penalties are restored. If this knocks the character out, so be it.

Also, if you're using the new wound penalties, allow Immediate Attention to (immediately) restore 1D of wound penalty. The remaining dice heal as normal.

-L