A-

Felling (X) reduces the target's Unnatural Toughness modifier by a number equal to (X) *before* determining the Damage caused by a weapon.

Felling *does not* reduce Unnatural Toughness by (X) when calculating Toughness Bonus as it is applied to True Grit.

First Damage calculation, then applicable Talent mitigation; the Felling Quality has no affect on True Grit.

B-

True Grit (pg 152):

*The character is able to shrug off wounds that would kill lesser men.*

*Whenever the character suffers Critical Damage (after Armour and Toughness), reduce the amount by his Toughness Bonus (to a minimum of 1).*

I am not interested in debating the definition of "lesser men".

I am making a reasonable assumption that when this rule refers to the reduction of Critical Damage due to "Toughness" it means Toughness Bonus. Otherwise, reducing Critical Damage by 40+ points makes True Grit redundant.

I am making a reasonable assumption, based on the rules, adding Unnatural Toughness modifers to TB effectively increases the total TB.

The scenario:

A wounded Ork Meganob (TB 4, Unnatural Toughness +5, Personal AP 14, 7 Wounds remaining, has True Grit) is lumbering through a ruined building (Cover AP 10), and "Lucky" Eddie decides to sneak into Short Range and take a shot with his "trusty" Meltagun. Eddie is lucky; he successfully sneaks into range *and* hits the Meganob. The Pen of the Meltagun is doubled at Short Range (12x2=24), so the Meganob's combined AP is negated. Eddie rolls an 8 and a 9 for Damage, adding 10, for a total Damage of 27. Subtracting the Meganob's combined TB (9), it suffers 18 Wounds, resulting in a -11 Critical Injury (off the Table), but this is reduced by a combined TB of 9 due to True Grit, meaning the Meganob only suffers a -2 Critical Injury.

So, my questions to the forum are as follows:

A- Is this a correct assessment of Felling?

B- Is the final Critical Injury a result of correctly applying the benefit of True Grit?