Strike to stun

The enemy lurks in shadows
Post Reply
Mathias4
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 18, 2021 5:53 am

Could someone share their point of view on these questions, please:
Do you inflict damage if you succeed to hit, but fail the opposed strength/endurance test during strike to stun?
Does advantage also apply to the opposed strength/endurance test when striking to stun?
Would you let someone use a shield or sword as an improvised weapon, if they chose to?

Thank you
Ayantis
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:31 pm

1. RAW, the hit is resolved first as normal.
Then you attempt the Opposed Str/Endurance from the Pummel quality.
2. It’s not that clear in the RAW, but since it is an opposed Test, you will lose all Advantage when losing it. I would rule either use Advantage and lose Advantage, or do not apply Advantage and there is no chance to lose the Advantage after losing the test.
3. If they have the Strike to Stun talent, sure, that’s what the talent pretty much enables if you rule you could attempt Strike to Stun by hitting with the hilt of your Sword.
As per „ Further, you count all improvised weapons as having the Pummel Quality. „
Mathias4
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 18, 2021 5:53 am

Thank you for the reply. I hope you are willing to further share your views and clarify if I'm wrong :
1. You use your strike to stun talent, gaining SL bonus to the opposed melee test. You will then stand a better chance to hit having the s2s talent due to the SL bonus. The hit is resolved as normal WITH the SL bonus. You attempt the opposed strength/endurance test from the pummel quality.
2. From RAW p. 164, I guess Strength/Endurance is an "appropriate" combat test.
3 You can use all Melee weapons listed on p 294 as improvised weapon and thus to attempt s2s if you have the talent.
Jack Ketch
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:05 am

Anyone else read the topic and think of a certain Server Goddess?
Ayantis
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:31 pm

1. Yes. The talent bonus is good to have to get extra SL in the opposed Test and thus for more damage, but won’t give you bonus to the Opposed Str/Endurance.
And it is Characteristic vs Skill test, typically Skill is much higher than the Characteristic, so the defender can have the upper hand and if they win the attacker loses all Advantage.

2.
To be an appropiate combat test it should be used to „attack, defend or resist the influence”. The Pummel quality test itself doesn’t do damage or prevent it, and it is not a Psychology test, so I would say it’s not clear and up to the GM.
For the same reason a Pray test is not an appropiate combat test, unless the Miracle/Blessing will deal Damage.

3. If you have access to a good weapon with the Pummel quality then the talent is very good.
Otherwise an improvised weapon doesn’t dish so much damage (low Damage, Undamaging flaw) in comparison to a hand weapon.

In the core rules there is no hand weapon with that Quality, in the Archives there is a Dwarf Hammer, but then I would say Dwarfs won’t be so willing selling it to the other races.

The best one would be a Quarterstaff, IMO.
Cavalry Hammer is 2h, and nothing special otherwise and the Warhammer is Slow, which is a bad flaw.
User avatar
Hyarion
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 11:56 am

Jack Ketch wrote:
Thu May 27, 2021 6:58 pm
Anyone else read the topic and think of a certain Server Goddess?
Glad to know I wasn't the only one. :salute:
I hold the glaive of Law against the Earth.
Zisse
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:14 pm

Hyarion wrote:
Fri May 28, 2021 7:23 am
Jack Ketch wrote:
Thu May 27, 2021 6:58 pm
Anyone else read the topic and think of a certain Server Goddess?
Glad to know I wasn't the only one. :salute:
Greetings to lovely Austria!
Mathias4
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 18, 2021 5:53 am

Ayantis wrote:
Fri May 28, 2021 3:26 am
1. Yes. The talent bonus is good to have to get extra SL in the opposed Test and thus for more damage, but won’t give you bonus to the Opposed Str/Endurance.
And it is Characteristic vs Skill test, typically Skill is much higher than the Characteristic, so the defender can have the upper hand and if they win the attacker loses all Advantage.

2.
To be an appropiate combat test it should be used to „attack, defend or resist the influence”. The Pummel quality test itself doesn’t do damage or prevent it, and it is not a Psychology test, so I would say it’s not clear and up to the GM.
For the same reason a Pray test is not an appropiate combat test, unless the Miracle/Blessing will deal Damage.

3. If you have access to a good weapon with the Pummel quality then the talent is very good.
Otherwise an improvised weapon doesn’t dish so much damage (low Damage, Undamaging flaw) in comparison to a hand weapon.

In the core rules there is no hand weapon with that Quality, in the Archives there is a Dwarf Hammer, but then I would say Dwarfs won’t be so willing selling it to the other races.

The best one would be a Quarterstaff, IMO.
Cavalry Hammer is 2h, and nothing special otherwise and the Warhammer is Slow, which is a bad flaw.

I really appreciate your input here. Thanks. I don't say I disagree with you. I can't help wondering though, regarding 2), what is an appropriate combat test. There are lots of actions not involving damage. Talents such as Feints, Disarm, Distract. You have any comments on these talents and advantage?
Mathias4
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 18, 2021 5:53 am

Another test is of course trap blade. Opposed strength
User avatar
Wyrmslayer
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:44 pm

To add to the topic, a couple of chin tappers to "hmm" over.

Does anything contribute to the strength vs endurance test?
As mentioned above, the stunee already has a bit of an advantage in that endurance being a skill there's a chance that along with the toughness stat it's based on has been advanced, whereas the stunner only has their strength stat involved. There are careers in which there's no chance to increase strength for a considerable time after the talent has been gathering dust in their talent section.
Do any of you add the damage modifier of the weapon involved to the strength roll?
Anyone go with learning the talent a second/third applies a modifier to the strength roll rather than the initial WS test?
Would you factor advantage into the strength vs endurance roll, in addition to the Ws test, or instead of it?

Slings. Their ammo comes with the pummelling quality.
Would you deem it that using one, anyone can try attempt to stun. Or that if a character that had one and also had the strike to stun talent could use that for it's negation of the -20 to hit modifier to the head location?
Ayantis
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:31 pm

Size Rules should apply since it says „OpposedStrength tests or similar”.
Other than that I also allow the Strong Back talent to give SL to the test.
The Strike to Stun is already strong enough (no penalty to Called Head hits AND +1SL / level to successful Melee when striking to stun) . No need to boost it more beyond what it is with related Careers.

And no „shoot to stun”in my gaming group with sling and strike to stun combination.
cancadia
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:20 am

In normal cases you get to your Strength/Endurance Test your advantage bonus. But as you says, attribut vs skill is a bit difficulty to win a test. and if you win it, the opponent gets another Test at end of turn to reduce the Stun-Condition. Ok, that turns into a fatique-condition. But in normal cases you try to Knockout an opponent.

Strike to Stun in the 4th edition, is a bit of sensless in my opinion. First, if you do a strike to stun, the opponent gets only one stun-conition per hit. And i don't know, why you made normal dmg, if you try to knock out. You are faster to "knock out" if use the optional rule, that you dont want to do physical dmg on normal attacks with your weapon.

Strike to stun should be changed to:"Make an attack as normal with extra SL for each rank in strike to stun" and compare the result with the SL of opponents Endurance-Test. If you win, opponent gets X stun-conditions for each netto SL. If your opponent has more than toughness-bonus stun-conditions, he is knocked out... or something else. Maybe armor could have a role for this, to reduce the number of condions he gets on a strike or it increased the toughnesbonus for "Knockout-check"... it's only a quick example :)

But normal rules are not optimal. Attribute vs Skill (maybe + Talent (iron jar)), you can't win :/
FasterThanJesus
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2019 4:30 pm
Location: UK

cancadia wrote:
Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:13 am
Strike to stun should be changed to:"Make an attack as normal with extra SL for each rank in strike to stun" and compare the result with the SL of opponents Endurance-Test. If you win, opponent gets X stun-conditions for each netto SL. If your opponent has more than toughness-bonus stun-conditions, he is knocked out... or something else. Maybe armor could have a role for this, to reduce the number of condions he gets on a strike or it increased the toughnesbonus for "Knockout-check"... it's only a quick example :)

But normal rules are not optimal. Attribute vs Skill (maybe + Talent (iron jar)), you can't win :/
I like that, it's more simple and probably fairer.
adambeyoncelowe
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:54 pm

If you're going that route, I would just simplify it even further.

So, instead of doing damage, you can declare any attack is an attempt to stun and thereafter, any damage it would inflict after soak is instead applied as an equal number of Stunned Conditions.

That way, you're factoring in their Toughness anyway (TB via soak), and only need to make one Opposed Melee Test, without the extra Endurance roll.

It's nerfed a bit, in that you no longer do any damage, but the result is that you'll probably inflict more Stunned Conditions this way than the original Talent.

If you wanted to allow the Talent to do some damage, you could say it's like pulling your punches: you must state before you attack what the max damage you'll inflict is. You resolve that damage first. Any damage left over is converted to Stunned Conditions. If you don't do enough damage to exceed your maximum, you just do the damage and no Stunned Conditions.
FitFitNitMin
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2021 8:49 am

Would Strong Back talent assist with the Str v Endurance test to see if the recipient of the blow to the head is stunned? Adds SL to an opposed STR test
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

FitFitNitMin wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 4:46 pm
Would Strong Back talent assist with the Str v Endurance test to see if the recipient of the blow to the head is stunned? Adds SL to an opposed STR test
Strictly speaking, no. Reading the pummel quality the test is a strength/endurance contest, with the person getting bonked using their endurance against the attacker's strength. since Strong Back only improves Strength in opposed rolls and you're stuck using endurance, it's not of any help here. reasonable question though, the wording on this is pretty rough.
adambeyoncelowe
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:54 pm

Orin J. wrote:
Sat Jul 24, 2021 10:46 am
FitFitNitMin wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 4:46 pm
Would Strong Back talent assist with the Str v Endurance test to see if the recipient of the blow to the head is stunned? Adds SL to an opposed STR test
Strictly speaking, no. Reading the pummel quality the test is a strength/endurance contest, with the person getting bonked using their endurance against the attacker's strength. since Strong Back only improves Strength in opposed rolls and you're stuck using endurance, it's not of any help here. reasonable question though, the wording on this is pretty rough.
I assumed the question was can the attacker use Strong Back to boost the SLs on their own Strength roll (versus the target's Endurance)?
FitFitNitMin
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2021 8:49 am

Yes. Could Strong Back improve chance to stun someone.
User avatar
Orin J.
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 10:39 pm

strictly speaking, yes. the trait called out opposed STR tests so you can objectively say it should apply to yours and not be out of line. the exact wording of Pummel is a little funky though so i'm gonna say to check with your GM for his final ruling there as he may disagree and the GM's word is law.
Post Reply