Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Catastrophic Malfunction (p33) - Armor?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deskepticon
    commented on 's reply
    An exploding "hat" would be checked against Armor since the torso is the default hit location. Just because it's worn on the head, that doesn't give it an automatic Called Shot (otherwise any held device would target the hand, bypassing Armor).

    That said, a player can work with the GM to implement special rules. For example, the periscope hat might be "hands free" activation in exchange for ignoring Armor and dealing +4 damage on a CatMal.

  • TheChemist
    replied
    What it means that is if you're taking damage from something, use common sense when deciding if armor should be included in your toughness or not. If you CatMal your Vigor roll when swallowing Adrenal booster, armor doesn't protect you. If you're wearing a Hat periscope on your head and it explodes, armor doesn't protect you.

    It should be obvious that this is true for any damage, not just damage coming from CatMals.

    Leave a comment:


  • screenmonkey
    replied
    I read it as ghost rock infused consumables (i.e. Infernal Devices such as the Elixirs and Tonics described on the next page), when they have a catastrophic malfunction, do 2d6 damage bypassing all armor. I don't read it as a comment about infernal device armor, just armor period.

    Leave a comment:


  • Varsuuk
    started a topic Catastrophic Malfunction (p33) - Armor?

    Catastrophic Malfunction (p33) - Armor?

    iI understand from reading this section as well as some forum posts and answers I searched here that such a roll will result in the destruction of the item (e.g. goggles shatter) or implied destruction (sprint boots proper user into a wall - alhough I interpreted that initially as just an explanation for why it is doing you damage, reading forum answers it seems they are also poofed - which is understandable)

    But there is an odd (to me) reference at the end of that paragraph regarding armor:
    "... Armor doesn't protect against consumables that are injected, inhaled, or swallowed."

    Disclosure, this is as far as I have read - I am asking now because this is minor enough that I will not likely remember being puzzled if by the end of the book it isn't answered for me. It seems like a "general" statement I'd find in the section describing the EFFECTS of Armor not the area describing the effect of a catastrophic fail with armor - which from the above I took to be for armor: "Snake-eyes on Vigor Soak roll would cause ghostrock based armor to explode for 2d6 damage and stun the user." Not sure how the part about consuming applies here. Like, is it saying if you are making a vigor roll against an ingested poison - the fact that you are wearing ghost rock armor is incidentat? If so, I'd suggest the wording of an extra sentence saying that in regards to armor, soak rolls failing in this manner only trigger a roll on the table if the damage being soaked is normally of the type that the armor could protect against (like if it was some futuristic power suit with breathing gear - sure, sounds like that applies - but a suit of chain? Not so much).

    Especially because that comment on armor technically applies to any of the rolls right? It isn't specific to catastrophic roll on Mishaps but if it was that I thought, telling you if you SHOULD roll there after critical fail on Vigor soak, it would be a comment more in general?
Working...
X