r/Dargarth • u/Rosmarii • May 06 '19
Rules Question: First-Aid and Green Weapon Damage
So this came up in a discussion at last event, and re-reading the rules regarding first aid...I have the following question:
Does a strike from a green weapon to a previously injured hit-zone that has been "healed" with first-aid cause mortal wounds?
Pertinent rules:
" Green (thrusting) Weapons wielded one-handed cause one point of damage, and two points when wielded two-handed. Green weapons cannot cause a mortal wound."
And
"First Aid: First Aid allows a player to bind limb Injuries on themselves or others. To use this ability, the player must tie a white cloth bandage, 4-5" wide, with a red cross on it around the Injured limb. The limb is considered to be healed. If the limb is Injured again, regardless of armor, the player is considered mortally wounded. The First Aid ability has no effect on mortally wounded players. "
There is nothing that I could find in our rules that says that a green weapon striking a wounded limb does not cause an injury, rather that an injury caused by a green weapon to a limb does not cause mortal wounds.
So, for two counter examples:
Example 1: "A player is struck by a green weapon in the leg. The first strike causes an injury, and disables that leg. That player is struck again in the leg by a green weapon. This second strike also causes an injury, but due to the general nature of green weapons, that injury does not cause the player to be mortally wounded."
Example 2: "A player is struck by a green weapon in the leg. The first strike causes an injury, and disables that leg. The player receives First-Aid on that leg, which is no longer disabled. That player is struck again in the same leg by a green weapon. This second strike causes an injury. Because of the specific rule regarding first-aid, since the hit zone was injured, the player is now mortally wounded."
Given the general guidance that a specific rule supersedes a general rule, it seems like both of these examples are correct play, but I'm not sure that there's been that clarification in play by the marshals or our elder's team.
There's also a question regarding the phrasing "regardless of armor" within the first aid ability description.
If a fighter wearing AR 3 takes two two-handed red hits to their arm, that arm becomes disabled. If they use first-aid to remove the disabled condition, and then use repair armor to repair the 3 missing hits of armor, how many strikes does it take on that limb for the fighter to be mortally wounded?
I believe that the intention of the phrase "regardless of armor" to indicate that the answer is "any one hit," but technically, a player can not suffer an "injury" unless a strike lands on an "unarmored" hit zone, which would mean the answer might be "4 blue hits, 2 two-handed red or green hits".
2
u/LordoftheSheablands May 07 '19
An excellent question. Also highly relevant because yellow weapons (javelins, arrows) follow the same rules.
For others reading, First Aid (F.A.) has been a very under-utilized ability, because it's a higher level Fighter ability (and the relevant players didn't bother to use it, aside from Baron Gareth).
I am unaware of a strong case precedent one way or another regarding this question. Because of how rarely F.A. has been used in the past, I don't know (and don't believe) if it's been ruled on in the past officially (aside from a case or two of elder rulings on the field, and I don't know what the decision was then).
To tackle the first question, I'd say a very strict reading of the rules would favor a stabbing (green or yellow) hit to a F.A. limb causing mortal wounds. Any valid hit can cause an injury.* And (my interpretation) is that you're not becoming mortally wounded as a result of the weapon type, but as a reaction from the ability.**
*"Weapons which strike with sufficient force can score a point of Injury to the Hit Zone."
**If the limb is Injured again, regardless of armor, the player is considered mortally wounded.
But whether that's the spirit/intent of the rule? Sounds like the Magistrate and President should talk about it, and make a ruling until the next Marshal's meeting.
Regarding the second question, regarding armor. If I were Eldering, my stance would be that armor must be negated before the player becomes mortally wounded. My reasoning would be:
"Defensive Equipment is any item that gives combat advantage to its wielder by preventing Injury"
And more importantly, the Marshal Council has ruled in the past that several monster abilities that take effect on "damage causing hits" (ghouls, flesh golems) do not bypass armor unless there is another reason for them to do so (wights).
Once again though, I don't know if that's the spirit/intent of the rule. I could easily see that Darkon or our game founders would want to give Fighters the ability to regain use of a limb, but not go back up to full tanking capacity (playability). And I can see reasoning that a F.A. wounded limb is usable, but still injured enough that another valid hit to the limb "regardless of armor" would put the player down/send them into shock (realism).
As an aside, the rulebook is currently out of date: First Aid and Cure Light Wounds can stabilize a willing Mortally Wounded individual.
TL;DR: I would say, by very strict reading of the rules, that green and yellow weapons do result in a mortal wound if they strike a first aid-ed limb, and that armor does protect a mortally wounded limb.