by tumorous
Ju5tin wrote:
See to the vulnerable I would have to say the attack has to be successful to take 2 damage, one for the effect and then for the actual attack. Meaning that if you(attacker) rolls a star and the blocker(the party that does suffer vulnerable) blocks with two stars. Then the blocker takes one damage for being vulnerable but blocks the actual attack. But the person can still miss, rolling no stars, therefore no damage at all. That's how I understand vulnerable.
That doesn't seem consistent with the statement that the Vulnerable wound is suffered "immediately." Target selection happens prior to rolling the attack (and it's possible for events to happen in between, like using potions).
So if you're targeted with Vulnerable, you immediately take a wound. You're guaranteed one wound: that's what the Vulnerable keyword does. Then the attack goes through, and you may or may not take another wound (or more, or not, depending on what that attack is and other keywords involved).
If the effect inflicted two wounds instead of one (as you're suggesting), the wording would be more like Massive Damage. It wouldn't mention the immediacy or targeting at all.