Re: [DL] Are We Doing It Correctly?

["Nick Zachariasen" <zacharin@pluto.dsu.edu>]

> >>Umm, oh my God! Glad my posse didn't run into him ;-)<<
>
>    I know. He was supposed to be a campaign long bad guy and a direct
> servant of the Reckoners.

If you want him to be that powerful, he shouldn't be as easy to kill as
"BANG! You're dead!".  The Reckoners grant great power to their most favored
servants, and this guy should be no exception.

>    They discover the town encapulsated with Michael in fog form. The
> sheriff Consecrates his weapon and fires into the fog. I decide that this
> can actual hurt Michael in this form and so he pulls back. The PCs chase
> after him, but loose him.

Consecrate Armament, when used on a gun, consecrates the gun, not the
bullets.  A Conescrated gun would only be useful for buffaloing, unless you
were shooting Consecrated bullets as well.  I can't remember offhand how
many bullets you can Consecrate with one use of the Miracle.

>    Then the PC sheriff casts the Protection Miracle.
>    He holds out a cross and uses the Miracle to force Michael back out of
> the church (which was being used as a meeting hall). At this point the
> towns people start to believe that the new sheriff really is a demon.

This isn't how Protection works.  It would just keep Michael from directly
attacking him.

>    Yeah, but isn't the TN for a Stun check when you've taken a Critical
> wound is 11, right? Trying to get an 11 on a d8 when a -4 is applied to
> each roll is, in my opinion, a little more than "tough." It's not at all
> impossible, but I had no chips of any kind to spend.

You don't use the wound penalty for a wound that you're taking.  If you
ALREADY have a Critical wound, then yes, use the penalty for it, but if
you're wound free and you take a Critical wound, then no, you don't apply
the -4 penalty.  At least, that's how I understand it.

Nick Zachariasen