Rules Question: Specific Additional vs. Standard Consequences

[VVolf]

I didn't see a sub-forum for Rules Questions, so I'm just posting here in the main forum.

And just to frame the question, this isn't intended to be arguing a side, I'm more asking as how I should rule this as a GM.

Say a PC has enough Endurance to gain an additional mild consequence, and chooses to take a physical consequence in combat...

Does the PC have to use his standard, general Mild consequence before he can use his "additional" physical consequence?

Jonathan is sitting at the bar having a drink when an inebriated Steve comes up to him and decks him out of the blue.

Jonathan's player attempts Athletics to dodge Steve's Fists roll and fails miserably.
"Drunken Boxing, FTW!"
"Shut up Steve!"
Jonathan's player decides to take it on the chin, suffering a mild physical consequence, and weighs his character's actions...

Jonathan is slammed across the bar leaving a rattling sensation in his teeth. He glances about the room quickly, sure he could shift into a bear and maul Steve in a heartbeat, but there's too many people in the bar and too many rumors of bear attacks in the city lately. Totally not fair... most of those weren't even me. Argh, Maybe I can talk this guy down, or at least convince him to step out back, then I can slap him around for a bit and call it a night.

Jonathan attempts some Social skills to direct Steve outside, but Steve's having none of it and unloads a mountainous intimidate check, spending almost all his fate points and tagging a few aspects which Jonathan hadn't realized Steve was aware of. With an 11 shift hit, Steve is pressuring Jonathan for a confession, and Jonathan's player is scrambling to avoid it: The drunken detective is hungry for a collar to close the case, Jonathan's not the killer, but confessing to what Steve is accusing him of is enough to get him locked up long enough for the real killer to split town...
"Spill your beans or they'll be making a rug outta you!"
"Shut up Steve!"
Jonathan still has a severe consequence from a rough fight in the previous session (Ok, maybe a bear wearing a cast was much more noticeable... at least he got another fate point on it when Steve tagged it).

"I've got it!" declares Jonathan's player, "I'll take a moderate social consequence, 'Nervous, Uncontrollable Shaking'  for -4, take a check on my 3 and 2 boxes, and take a mild social consequence 'Sweating', 4+3+2+2 is 11."

"You can't do that."
"Gasp, Cheese-monger McRules-laywer speaks!"
"Shut up Steve! You were saying, Cheese-monger?"
"It says an additional mild physical consequence, not an extra mild physical consequence. Additional means in addition to the first, so you can only use the second mild consequence when it's for a physical consequence."
"No, additional means the same as extra, so long as at least one mild consequence is physical I should be fine."
"So then what does subtractional mean?"
"..." "..."
"Shut up Steve!"

So, thoughts, opinions... how should this situation go?

Should Jonathan be able to take another mild consequence?
Should Cheese-monger McRules-Lawyer not argue semantics or is he correct?
Should Steve just stop talking? Is it even physically possible for him to do so?

Find out, in the replies to this topic!

[sinker]

My thought is that since the player has complete control over what the consequence is (including describing the consequence as a result of avoiding the attack instead of getting hit by it) as well as control over whether they've even taken consequences in the first place (it is entirely optional) then there's no reason to assume that they can't also choose which slot they are using (within the rules). Seems kind of a jerk move to run otherwise.

[devonapple]

A) I wouldn't make an issue out of which Mild Consequence came first. I can see where someone thinking more strategically would interpret that as problematic, but it doesn't seem that big a deal to me, IMHO.

B) What *I* disagree with is the "take a check on my 3 and 2 boxes" part because my impression has always been that you take ONE stress hit after taking Consequences, so that 5 stress could not be split up into 3 and 2, or 1 and 4. In my game, this character would probably have had to take a Severe Consequence to stay in the Conflict. I am happy to be corrected with a book reference, of course.

[VVolf]

B) What *I* disagree with is the "take a check on my 3 and 2 boxes" part because my impression has always been that you take ONE stress hit after taking Consequences, so that 5 stress could not be split up into 3 and 2, or 1 and 4. In my game, this character would probably have had to take a Severe Consequence to stay in the Conflict. I am happy to be corrected with a book reference, of course.

*Shuffles through book.* Not specifically stated either way, but the example on page 204 largely implies you are correct, so duly noted about one box per hit.

Easy enough to house-rule if people want to, but should probably be stated to players either way.
If house-ruled players should be probably able to RP how the damage is being broken up:
"I roll into the hit, taking a 3 hit from the baseball ball and a 2 hit as I fall and smack into the pavement."
Which is less easy to do for social or mental attacks.

[sinker]

"I roll into the hit, taking a 3 hit from the baseball ball and a 2 hit as I fall and smack into the pavement."

Actually this isn't necessarily an apt description of someone taking stress. If you look at the way stress is described it becomes clear that stress doesn't equal damage at all. If someone deals you stress but no consequences they haven't even hit you, and as stated in my earlier post even when you take consequences they may not have hit you. Consequences are the only analogue for injury in DFRPG and they don't even have to be injury sustained from the attack, so long as they are injury sustained as a result of the attack. Fate is a pretty abstract and weird system.

[Becq]

Regarding which consequence gets marked off, the player taking the consequence always decide whether to take a consequence in the first place, and if so which consequence or consequences.  So, for example, the player could choose freely between taking one large consequence or several smaller consequences.  In the specific case you mention, if a player had a mild useable only for physical stress, and a mild useable for any type of stress, there's no reason not to mark off the specialized one first, assuming it fits te stress taken.

Regarding splitting the stress into two stress boxes, YS202 says:

"When your character takes stress, mark off that box (and only that box) on the appropriate stress track. For instance, if your character takes a two-point physical hit, you should mark off the second box (and only the second box) from the left on the physical stress track. If your character takes a hit and finds that box already marked off, you should “roll up” to the next empty box on the right and check that off. If there are no empty boxes to the right (in other words, the hit would “roll off ” the end of the stress track), the character is either taken out (page 203) or needs to take consequences to absorb the hit (page 203)."

The parenthetical emphasis is as written in the book.  You only mark one box, and if you don't have a box at the right position, you either are taken out, or have to mark off another consequence to soak more of the stress.  (Player's choice.)  At least, that's the rules as written, you are of course free to change them for your table.

[crusher_bob]

"I've got it!" declares Jonathan's player, "I'll take a moderate social consequence, 'Nervous, Uncontrollable Shaking'  for -4, take a check on my 3 and 2 boxes, and take a mild social consequence 'Sweating', 4+3+2+2 is 11."

To clarify, you can't 'break up' the stress from a single large hit into several smaller hits and take those instead.

So, to use your example:
Our hero is being hit with an 11 stress social attack.
He's got a 4 stress social track.
Even if he takes a mild (2) and a moderate (4) consequence he's still looking at a 5 (11 - 2 - 4 = 5) stress hit, which is still enough to overflow hit stress meter and take him out.  If he had taken, say, a mild (2) and a severe (6) consequence, then he'd only be looking at a stress 3 (11 - 2 - 6 =3) hit, which he can then take on his stress track and keep going.

--------------

Also, minor terminology 'tag' is specifically a reference to the single use you get out of an aspect you created or 'discovered'.  So, if this were the first time that Steve were using the knowledge of those aspects against Jonathon, they'd probably not cost fate points and be 'tags'. Otherwise they are 'invokes', which means they cost fate points.

This can be important when you are stacking aspects together on something, and you get getting 'free' uses out of some of the aspects, but not all of them.  You 'tag' the aspects that you don't need fate points to use, and you 'invoke' the ones you are paying fate points for.  Note also that this is also different from a 'compel' where you use as aspect to try to limit or dictate the action the other guy is going to take.