1. When someone who is wielding is hit by an attack and takes damage, and fails the following concentration check….what then happens? Does he lose control of the wielding effect, and must begin the attempt again on his next turn, or does something else happen?

2. Concentration and Resist checks. If someone must make a resist check in combat, as a result of a wielding effect or other effect, or a concentration check is required from taking damage while wielding, or other similar situation, does this count against their dice pool? Are the limited by dice already used? Or is because this is a reaction to something else, they get a full dice throw for free? That is how I wanted to rule it.

3. Stunning - How long does a stun from a stun baton last?

4. Spending Endurance in combat - is there a limit of how many points can be spent in a single action for boosting damage or reducing exertion rating?

I don’t have my book in front of me but so It’ll be hard to answer number 3 but this is how I’d rule it:

1. Generaly I’d assume the spell is completely botched because the wielder just didn’t have time to finish the spell.  Alternately, for a little fun, you can make up a risky rule that causes the caster to roll whatever dice pool he/she decided minus the number of segments that the caster was interrupted at.  For instance if they decided to use all six dice for an easy casting but then were interrupted at turn 4 when they should have finished the spell at 6 then they get two less dice, so four to use.  I’d say that this spell then comes into play at segment four involuntarily.  Of course if you follow that last sentence then once the wielder gets powerful this could cause problems becuase they could just tell a party member to smack them so they get an easy powerfull spell of in the same segment.

2. As a reaction and for the sake of the player I would not subtract this resist roll from their six for the round.  Using dice in a segment is different becuase you’re actively performing something, like looking around, attacking or wielding.  So resisting shouldn’t involve the character sitting there bulging his pecs in hopes of resisting or concentrating in response of an attack.

3. Dunno

4. It states that you can spend A point to do the following…  in respect of game balance I would not allow one to use a chain of endurance points for anything but wielding (or for some even wielding).  This could cause a character to turn his 1d4 plus 1 damaging punch into a riteous godhand that explodes upon contact instantly incinerating his foe within a mushroom cloud for an easy additional 24 damage.  Likewise lowering the exertion rating by 1 is already incredible because it can give guns like the uzi a cumulative -7 exertion rating.  Plus we wouldn’t want to allow 500 CDP characters to pummel our oh-so-powerful antagonists with 1 exertion rating room-sweepers, would we?

You make great points, but remember, you can only spend endurance to lower the exertion of a melee attack, not a ranged one.

I thought you could spend Endurance to lower the exertion of ANY weapon, but could only spend it to increase the damage on melee.

Hrmmmm… I might have to take a relook at that tonight.  It might make that raust pd-4 an even better assassin weapon for my character…

Nope just checked the RAW, it is melee weapons only… darn.  :-p. I was gonna assassinate some pc’s.

OK, I was wrong, the book says that Endurance can do any of the following:

Increase Movement Rate by 1 for 1 Combat Cycle
Decrease the Exertion Rating of a Melee Weapon by 1 for 1 Segment
Increase Melee Damage by 1 for 1 Combat Cycle
Decrease Wielding Time of an Effect by 1 Segment
Add 1-3 (GM’s discretion) to any physical Success Check rolls
Perform a Called Shot

Though I fail to see why you could not use Endurance to reduce the exertion of a ranged weapon, so I will most likely allow it in my games.

MY OPINION:
well, you could look at it from the approach that melee weapons require endurance from the user to maneuver the weapon back into attack position - hence why the exertion rating on the large polearms and such is so high. 

a ranged weapon, however (with the exception of thrown weapons and bows - i’m talking primarily firearms), only requires endurance to compensate for any uncompensated recoil.  you just point the firearm and shoot.  pulling the trigger additional times does not require gross movements of the firearm as does swinging a melee weapon.  therefore, the exertion rating is more of a game balance factor for comparing the rate of fire between similar classes of firearms, indicating the speed of the firing mechanisms in addition to the recoil compensation required to return the barrel to a somewhat relative position.

as mentioned, this is off-the-cuff here at work and in no way an official response - just something to consider or fuel the fire.

The Arguement could be the same for ranged weapons as well, someone with monstrous bulging biceps may be able to keep the rifle in line; or while consistant fire may wear someone else out, a vigilant pigman could go for hours.  However, the book does state that it’s only melee weapons and for multiple reasons I completely agree with MSL.  My opinion is still that you can only burn one on the exertion rating per attack, it’d make a natural DR completely useless against things like knives or worse.

To MSL-CD: I completely agree with the melee version, but could easily site the physics invovled with keeping an M-16 in line for a 3 shot burst vs. full auto. So from experience, I ruled that Endurance could be used for ranged attacks, due to the concentration and extra effort to remain in line for the next shot to hit.

To Intangible: I may be reading your statement incorrectly, but I don;t see how allowing this makes DR useless against knives and such.

BUt as usual, it’s all about having fun, and as it is stated in RAW, the only application that applies to Ranged attacks is allowing a called shot, which also applies to melee. So I figured lower an exertion rating should apply to ranged as well. But I draw the line at allowing it to increase Ranged damage, since you can shoot the bullet any harder

Note to self… if I ever get to play in KaneSolo’s game, take my pd-3 mini with AP ammo.  Mmmmm exertion rating 2 when I spend endurance…. :-p

Just a word that of course, as a GM you can use, change, or even mangle any of the rules for your home campaign.  Playing during a convention, however, must be done by the book, else the book be thrown at you! 

Alas, I guess I need to wear Kevlar to all conventions going forward. Now, MSL will be planting moles to catch me mangling the rules and I happen to know that those books are heavy. Heaven help me if I get hit by a corner of the book, I’m thinking that might cause serious bodily injury.

Especially if they use some endurance to lower the exertion rating and whip many books at you.
Drekon states exactly what I mean by the dangers of multiple uses of endurance on ranged weapons.
And it would make DR useless against knives becuase more the often you’re probably going to land a blow with a weapon but that natural defense combined with the exertion rating is what prevents you from getting torn to bits in one second.

Well, now you bring up the definition of DR.
My reading is that the DR applies to every single attack.
So even if you get hit 1 time or 4 times with a knife, if your DR is high enough, the knife still won’t actually cause any damage.
That is because I read DR to apply to each of the knife strikes individually.

Yes but that’s not the question in hand.  My point was that if you’re allowed to lower the exertion rating of a knife or any other weapon to one for just a few endurance points then you’re very likely to hit with most attacks.  This would cause game imbalance because nothing would be able avoid getting obliterated unless they used and active dodge, and then they’d probably never have the chance to strike back.