>From: "Jamie" <anti.spam_at_...>
>
>In CJs example the next Major Defeat would take you to Dying.
No, Dying isn't "-100%". In fact, there is no mechanical penalty for dying. In terms of resolution the text implies that all contests become impossible. Which you could interpret as -100%. But even then, nowhere does the text say that -100% means dying. It says that -100% means automatic failure.
There's only one way to get a "Dying" result, and that's due to a Complete Defeat.
Now, if you're at -100%, and the opponent is trying to kill you, and you can't resist? Then that's an "automatic defeat" and the narrator gets to pick what happens to you. But that's not nearly the same thing as saying that a cumulative rating that brings you to to a higher level of impairment.
I forgot to get the cite last night. But isn't there an example in the text of how penalties are applied? Doesn't that make it clear that the percentages are added (as opposed to the proposed multiplication that people are suggesting)?
Mike
Powered by hypermail