RAW is pretty clear, it penalizes all "(rolls and totals)", including defense total, soak total, and non-combat soak total. Soak isn't capped at 0 you get a negative total.
So assuming John's soak before penalties is 5, he would have -13 for his soak total and with his roll of 3 -28 for his non-combat soak, and a spectacular 49 for damage.
That said people around here don't like adding the would penalty to the soak total, and only add it to defense or the non-combat soak total leaving him with a much nicer 34.
btw Lamech, it is explicit said in the roll that the penalty does not apply to Combat soak "note that Polandrus’ Wound Penalty does not apply to Soak because
Soak is not rolled", under page 172 combat example.
Lamech, no it does not apply twice.
See the Combat:Simple Example insert on page 172 for a clear example
You apply the wound penalty once (per applicable roll) or to the total. If a roll isn't necessary for something, but a total is, I can see it applying there, certainly.
The example pretty clearly says it doesn't apply because its not rolled, so it wouldn't apply to any non-rolled totals. Of course, that pretty blatantly contradicts the "penalty to all actions (rolls and totals)". Meh, not the worst contradiction I've seen.
The last post in the thread is probably the most important. Interpret it one way, if everyone at the table agrees and understands it, that's that way it is in your saga. I tend to take a very conservative interpretation of RAW, and would see wound penalties applying to soak rolls from non-combat damage (I mean you're weak from losing a gallon of blood, duh).
As long as whatever interpretation you've chosen to follow is applied consistently, I don't think it's wrong. If players at the table start grumbling about the choice not being fun, it's time to reevaluate the issue...
It's already had a penalty to the action and totals involved in combat, it's part of the defense roll, which is used to determine attack advantage, which is used to calculate damage. Now, when comparing Damage total to Soak Total, if you subtract the penalty from the Soak total, you are effectively double counting the wound penalty. You defend worse, and you take more damage? Ars Magica combat is deadly enough as it is.
Maybe there needs to be errata that says, Wound penalties are applied only once in all totals and rolls, including derived totals of combat. Personally, I don't care if they are applied at the beginning or the end, it just makes more sense to apply them with the roll, always.
K. We are a group of new players (for Ars Magica that is) and we are trying to as faithful to the rules as we can, as we are testing the system.
So far we are enjoying it a lot, but the rules can be hard to find sometimes . Luckily it seems that it has a very active community, at least here in this forums. Thanks to all of you.
And I like that rule, "don't apply it twice". Our main question was with it capping at 0 or not. But I think it makes sense.
Actually our first question was "how do people die if they keep getting only 10 damage since there is no limit to wounds and wounds do not agravate in combat?"
And now it makes sense, and it seems you do die fast
I had that same question run through my mind when I first came in contact with the new wound rules, and followed a similar train of thought as yourself.
Corollary: Yes, +10 continuous damage can and does kill you rather quickly.
Actually the downward spiral for Ars once you start accumulating negatives is REALLY FAST! The minuses add up and you will find that after a couple injuries you'd be better of backing of and conceding defeat that staying stalwart. Because in Ars stalwart people fill a lot of graves. That is a significant change over other systems, so be careful!
From what I can tell, nothing caps at 0. If a penalty takes something below zero, it goes below zero.
A zero cap only applies if a negative total makes no sense, for example you can't roll -3 botch dice.
Spell penetration can absolutely go below zero. It is entirely reasonable to successfully cast a formulaic spell with -9 penetration. A magic resistance of 0 will stop it. Heck, a magic resistance of -5 will stop it. But it will still work on someone who has no magic resistance because zero magic resistance and no magic resistance aren't the same thing.
So yes, wound penalties modify rolled soak - as everyone else has said.
Incidentally, if you're wondering how to get a MR of -5 :
Parma 1, relevant art at 8, standing in a divine aura of 6. Divine aura (according to realm interaction chart) has a penalty of -18 to all supernatural rolls and totals - and Parma-based magic resistance is a supernatural total. Base MR in this case is 13, which you subtract the divine aura penalty from for a MR total of -5. Of course, anyone casting spells at you who is also in said divine aura also has a -18 penalty - assuming they're also using magic-realm powers.
Of course if they're standing outside the divine aura then you're pretty much screwed... unless you're carrying a relic.
I'm a bit unsure what you mean by "a negative damage roll" really?
Remember that damage is not rolled seperately from the attack for combat damage, and as for spells, the wound penalty goes on the casting roll, not the damage roll (since it's technically not the magus doing the damage).
But the thing to remember (and this may seem slightly abstract) is that Ars Magica uses an arbitrary baseline for damage. Meaning that you can add any arbitrary number to damage and soak, and it will not change anything as long as you remember to add to both damage and soak.
If negative damage bothers you, add +50 to all damage and all soaks. Since you will add 50 to the damage and then subtract soak (which is 50 higher) it will not change anything. And then you just use the damage table on p. 179 like always.
Ofcourse, if you mean negative total damage (that is, post soak), it means you're not inflicting any kind of wound.
)
. Luckily it seems that it has a very active community, at least here in this forums. Thanks to all of you.
