Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

[name_tamer]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I would venture to say that' date=' although the 13 STR martial artist can deal as much damage with his staff as the 43 STR superhuman, chances are that the superhuman has a HA along the lines of [i']Really Whallop Them![/i]: HA +6d6. Something like that. And a lot of Brick Tricks: Explosion for STR, Area Effect for STR, Entangle up to DEF of material used, x2 Knockback for STR... I'd venture to say that once you reach STR 43, you've become bricky enough to have at least one of these, even as a Powered Armor type. I mean, there's some exceptions, like Ironclad, but 60 STR can usually speak for itself.

So, although our quick, accurate MA can do as much damage with a strike, he's still a bit of a one-trick pony. He certainly can't uproot a streetlight and start hitting things with it if somebody takes his staff.

 

Regarding Ironclad, I will point out that although he doesn't have a lot of typical brick tricks, he does have Find Weakness with Punch on 12-. Not much help against John Q. Normal, but wonderful for smashing up high-DEF inanimate objects (and supervillains) -- something MA with a stick-guy can't do at all effectively. Of course Ironclad also has STR 60 (roughly the strength of 1000 men), so it's not apples-to-apples anyway.

[atlascott]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

If a normal woman slaps you, it is around 1 1/2d6 for damage. But if you give her a martial arts bo staff of boy beating, she can do like 5 1/2d6 of damage. That aint right. Women would be abusing men all over the place. Plus that would kill a normal man. Dead. Head shot, x2 BODY. Dead.

 

What about if she got +2" Running. Then you couldnt even get away. Unless you bought +4" running OIF Rollerblades. But then she could buy like +20" Running and define it as a vehicle and get a big point break. You'll never outrun her with Rollerblades.

 

You could buy up alot of CSL's for your DCV. But she could buy OCV CSL's. Face it, men, we're beat. Surrender now. Or someone please fix these darn rules.

[austenandrews]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

What is the strength of 100 men anyway?

What was the name of that speedster in the Tick comic, who ran "as fast as five really fast guys?"

 

As to the original question, one might just as easily ask if it's reasonable that a fairly athletic guy with a stick hits as hard as someone with the strength of 100 men. Maybe that's too many dice for stick-man? But nobody wants the martial artist to do less damage. It seems more reasonable for the brick to do more damage, what with Champions being the definitive 3D game (Double-Digit Dice). But that's a tangent.

 

The truth is most action genres, and especially comic books, don't particularly want to understand the reality of inertia, energy and all that stuff. In reality Andre the Giant could have taken apart most other wrestlers in ten seconds. In reality Batman or Captain America wouldn't last a microsecond against a villain who could match Superman in a fight. The sheer kinetic energy involved at the high end of the superhero scale goes way beyond common-sense notions. Look at railguns in real life, that shoot plain steel spikes but do more damage than explosive missiles. From that perspective, the very notion of exponential damage increments is technically absurd.

 

But really, the definition of "damage" is fuzzy enough to compensate. STUN, when you boil it down, relates an attack to a target's ability to remain conscious. Nothing more, nothing less. Is it reasonable that an expert at knocking people out does it as effectively as a truck moving at low speed? Makes sense to me. He doesn't "hit as hard" as the truck, but he hits a whole lot better.

 

So to answer the question, no, it doesn't bug me.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

The truth is most action genres' date=' and especially comic books, don't particularly want to understand the reality of inertia, energy and all that stuff.[/quote']

 

Very true.

 

HERO is nicely geared towards comics and action adventure movies. It isn't so hot for highly realistic settings.

 

Even so, I'm very much on the side of those who redefine the lift/power values for the game. It's almost like they shoehorned a DC comics style game of vast power for superheros (lifting aircraft carriers and the like) into far too narrow of a dice range. Doubling for 5 points is just too much IMO.

 

But that's easy to partially correct at least.

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

This argument assumes that lifting ability translates directly to hitting power. But even in the real world that's not the case. Olympic weightlifters don't become heavyweight boxers or streetfighters, and there's probably a good reason for that. Impact energy equals velocity times mass. Ben Grimm isn't necessarily swinging much faster as the Thing than he could before he got his superpowers. Somewhat, sure, but is it really 100X faster and thus hitting with 100X the energy?

 

If a 13 STR martial artist with a staff can hit as hard as a brick with a 63 STR, then I suggest the real problem may be in the granularity of extra damage added by weapons rather than in the strength rules themselves. Having actually trained and fought with a staff, I think it only adds +4d6 damage when it's swung like a baseball bat for maximum power (a tactic that's likely to break most staffs). That's not how it's normally used in combat. In combat a staff is used more like two sticks which add a bit of hitting power (perhaps an extra 1d6 or 2d6) but which has an excellent ability to block with the large portion in the middle, and also can add a bit of reach (an extra foot or two of reach makes a tremendous difference in a fight).

 

Plus, of course, it's nice to hit without bruising your fists on the other person's jaw and/or armor.

Treb is exactly correct in my view.

 

I would add a point here - in heroic fiction, Superman's fist doesn't pass sickeningly through someone as it "should", and even in cosmic-powered action that doesn't happen. It may happen in occassion in a Lobo or such comic, but I think it's a clear exception in the source material. The reason for all this is that while a character can, for example, move the Earth, his hand-to-hand strike is only going to hit so hard, not exponentially higher than the regular guy as his lift is, but just a simple additive higher amount.

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

You guys are missing a really big point. The martial artist with the stick doesn't get the full +4D6. That's because a regular guy with a stick still has to deal with the strength minimum. So he's got his 2 1/2 D6 strength damage, but he needs 10 of that to use his club. It's got a Str Min of 10. So he really only does 4 1/2 D6 damage.

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Treb is exactly correct in my view.

 

I would add a point here - in heroic fiction, Superman's fist doesn't pass sickeningly through someone as it "should", and even in cosmic-powered action that doesn't happen. It may happen in occassion in a Lobo or such comic, but I think it's a clear exception in the source material. The reason for all this is that while a character can, for example, move the Earth, his hand-to-hand strike is only going to hit so hard, not exponentially higher than the regular guy as his lift is, but just a simple additive higher amount.

 

I don't agree. It's not about physics. It's about cinematics. Superman is punching much harder, because he can knock a hole through the Golden Gate Bridge. People don't splatter in Champions because they don't in the comics.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

The reason for all this is that while a character can' date=' for example, move the Earth, his hand-to-hand strike is only going to hit so hard, not exponentially higher than the regular guy as his lift is, but just a simple additive higher amount.[/quote']

Maybe, but would you apply the same argument to "squeeze" damage?

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I don't agree. It's not about physics. It's about cinematics. Superman is punching much harder' date=' because he can knock a hole through the Golden Gate Bridge. People don't splatter in Champions because they don't in the comics.[/quote']

So is Hero only good for Super-Hero type games?

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Does it bother me?

 

It used to; it doesn't any more.

 

It used to bother me for exactly the sort of reason OddHat asked about -- "Does it seem reasonable, etc.?" And the answer to that is, of course, "NO!" -- because it's not reasonable.

 

It quit bothering me when I realized that if damage on STR scaled the same way as lifting capacity, then any super-strong character would have to pull their punch every single time, unless they were fighting someone as strong as or stronger than themselves. If they didn't, they'd be splattering anyone of lower strength that they hit. And they'd have to hope that if they were fighting a stronger person, that person would return the courtesy and pull their own punch.

 

And then there's the question...Would a supervillain pull their punch? Some might; many wouldn't, and there'd be deaths all over the place.

 

And that doesn't fit the conventions of the genre; not even Iron Age is that bloody on a casual or normal basis.

 

Since what I wanted was something that gave the look and feel of the superhero comic book genre, a logarithmic scale for damage coupled with a geometrical scale for lifting capacity seemed the way to go. That's the way Champions (HERO) did it, and so Champions (HERO) was delivering what I actually wanted.

 

In other words, that's how I learned to stop worrying and start loving the bomb.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So is Hero only good for Super-Hero type games?

Nope; if you're doing normal people, for example, it works fine, too.

 

Consider Normal A (STR 10) and Normal B (STR 10).

 

Normal A punches Normal B, doing 2d6 for an average of 2 BODY and 7 STUN.

 

Normal B has a PD of 2, so shrugs all of the BODY and part of the STUN.

 

 

To me, this models a 'real world' fistfight between people who aren't skilled in fighting / a fighting style pretty well. On average, two people of approximately equal strength aren't going to do major damage to each other in a dust-up, but the occassional lucky shot (2 6's) might get some real damage in...a broken nose or jaw, for example.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So is Hero only good for Super-Hero type games?

 

If you're worried about looking behind the curtain, i.e. comparing the game mechanics to the real world...

 

Then it's really only good for over the top action genres.

 

That includes far more than Superheroes.

 

And the use of house rules (such a re-write of the strength chart) and extend that even further.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

And the use of house rules (such a re-write of the strength chart) and extend that even further.

How would you re-write the strength chart?

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I don't agree. It's not about physics. It's about cinematics. Superman is punching much harder' date=' because he can knock a hole through the Golden Gate Bridge. People don't splatter in Champions because they don't in the comics.[/quote']

I though that's what I was saying in my second paragraph.

 

PS - btw, I understand the confusion, I agreed with Treb which was a physics part of it, but my second paragraph was intended to be read as an additional/other point, though I didn't make that at all clear.

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So is Hero only good for Super-Hero type games?

I would argue this is an extremely common "reality" in heroic fiction, so common that HERO necessarily obeys it.

 

As to the squeeze question, I think it applies from this genre perspective, yes.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

a logarithmic scale for damage coupled with a geometrical scale for lifting capacity seemed the way to go. That's the way Champions (HERO) did it, and so Champions (HERO) was delivering what I actually wanted.

Could you explain this a bit more?

 

Don't fire arms also follow the same pattern as STR? (that is doubling kinetic energy for each +DC)

[Phil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So is Hero only good for Super-Hero type games?

 

Very good question, and one worth answering. Low-end (up to 30) probably work fine, but I do think that high end characteristics are geared to supers. I think that HERO is being over-ambitious by trying to be generic without having 'genre rules', what Torg called 'World laws'.

 

There is probably a strong argument for adjusting how strength damage is either calculated or how it is taken, and the four very broad categories I'd use are heroic-gritty, heroic-cinematic, superheroic-gritty, and superheroic-cinematic.

Now, as to how they are differentiated, I'm not sure, but here's one off-the-cuff suggestion:

 

Superheroic cinematic: Pulling punches never costs OCV.

Superheroic gritty: as written

Heroic cinematic: every level of growth (or equivalent for permanently large creatures) includes +1d6HA in addition to +5 STR

Heroic gritty: as heroic cinematic, only normal attacks from creatures with 30+ STR are treated as killing attacks for purposes of PD.

 

Certainly dont suppose they're much good as suggestions go, but maybe it'll get someone else's grey matter ticking over.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I would argue this is an extremely common "reality" in heroic fiction, so common that HERO necessarily obeys it.

 

As to the squeeze question, I think it applies from this genre perspective, yes.

Again, as I mentioned above, how about fire arms?

 

You can argue that 2 X lift is not equal to 2 X damage, but fire-arms follow the pattern of 2 X kinetic energy for each + 1DC. That would imply to me that each +1 DC actually relates to a doubling of damage.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

How would you re-write the strength chart?

 

Check out the link to my webpage below.

 

Basically I changed the progression from 2x for every 5 points to 1.53779192x for every 5 points.

 

The rather strange number was picked because my primary Superhero game was Marvel based. At the time the Marvel Handbook stated that a character with a 100 ton lift hit with the force of a 500 lb bombs.

 

This was the old days and 500 lbs bombs in the rules did 27d6 damage then. With a haymaker that meant I needed a STR of 90... and I worked backwards to get the number above.

 

It also had the advantage of a STR 25 lifting around 800 lbs which is what Captain America was listed at in the same handbook. So life was GOOD.

 

Then they changed the haymaker rule. Sigh.

 

I haven't changed the numbers to match the new haymaker rule. It wouldn't work as good.

 

One can pick other progressions, for example 1.4142 would work nicely as that gives 2x effect for every 10 points.

 

 

Oh, and doing this requires you adjust the Growth and Density increase tables as well.

 

Edit: fixed typo

[austenandrews]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

As to the squeeze question' date=' I think it applies from this genre perspective, yes.[/quote']

Of course characters do squeeze damage in Hero far more often than in any genre (unless you're running pro wrestling or something). In the comics, only bricks do it with any regularity.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Again, as I mentioned above, how about fire arms?

 

You can argue that 2 X lift is not equal to 2 X damage, but fire-arms follow the pattern of 2 X kinetic energy for each + 1DC. That would imply to me that each +1 DC actually relates to a doubling of damage.

 

The general rule in HERO is that every 5 point represents a doubling of power. I could look up the page reference if you like.

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Again, as I mentioned above, how about fire arms?

 

You can argue that 2 X lift is not equal to 2 X damage, but fire-arms follow the pattern of 2 X kinetic energy for each + 1DC. That would imply to me that each +1 DC actually relates to a doubling of damage.

I think I might be confused by your point.

 

I don't see a difference. Bullets fired from a rifle can't lift something, but if we attached something to them to drag along, I think you'd find, like with STR (and speaking of course in HERO terms) it would be most reasonably to double their drag for each DC while the damage they inflict is essentially additive.

 

Of course I say "essentailly" additive. There's a funny thing here going on because under a certain level damage doesn't register, in a certain range it registers partially, and above that it adds the full value for each DC. So even the additive thing is a little bit tricky in the gaming world.

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Of course characters do squeeze damage in Hero far more often than in any genre (unless you're running pro wrestling or something). In the comics' date=' only bricks do it with any regularity.[/quote']

I haven't seen a lot of squeezing going on in general in my games, past or present, so hard for me to say as to what the common experience is.

 

To the original point, though, and I'm not sure if you agree or disagree, but squeezing even in comics doesn't seem to hurt people on the level that the same character's basic lift would indicate the squeeze should hurt those people. I think.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Very good question, and one worth answering. Low-end (up to 30) probably work fine, but I do think that high end characteristics are geared to supers. I think that HERO is being over-ambitious by trying to be generic without having 'genre rules', what Torg called 'World laws'.

 

There is probably a strong argument for adjusting how strength damage is either calculated or how it is taken, and the four very broad categories I'd use are heroic-gritty, heroic-cinematic, superheroic-gritty, and superheroic-cinematic.

Now, as to how they are differentiated, I'm not sure, but here's one off-the-cuff suggestion:

 

Superheroic cinematic: Pulling punches never costs OCV.

Superheroic gritty: as written

Heroic cinematic: every level of growth (or equivalent for permanently large creatures) includes +1d6HA in addition to +5 STR

Heroic gritty: as heroic cinematic, only normal attacks from creatures with 30+ STR are treated as killing attacks for purposes of PD.

 

Certainly dont suppose they're much good as suggestions go, but maybe it'll get someone else's grey matter ticking over.

 

Personally I'd just keep the exponential curve, but I'd do +2 DC (or 10 STR) per each doubling rather than the current method.

 

A .44 mag would be a 3d6+1 RKA (rather than 2d6), and an olympic weight-lifter would have a 30 STR rather than 20. And a guy who could lift 100 tons would come in at 110 STR.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I think I might be confused by your point.

 

I don't see a difference. Bullets fired from a rifle can't lift something, but if we attached something to them to drag along, I think you'd find, like with STR (and speaking of course in HERO terms) it would be most reasonably to double their drag for each DC while the damage they inflict is essentially additive.

 

Of course I say "essentailly" additive. There's a funny thing here going on because under a certain level damage doesn't register, in a certain range it registers partially, and above that it adds the full value for each DC. So even the additive thing is a little bit tricky in the gaming world.

It is not about STR in this case, but damage progression.

 

Does + 1d6 (or 5 points of STR) equal double the damage?

 

As I understand it, you are taking the position that while high STR characters follow an exponential progression in lift, but a more linear progression in damage dealing capability. As I understand it you are saying that +7d6 (or 7DCs) is not the same as X128 damage.

 

I am using the firearm progression as an example where +7 DCs does equal a multiple of 128 in terms of energy (or ability to "do work" on a target).