Jump to content

Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?


OddHat

Recommended Posts

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

To the original point' date=' 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.[/quote']

I would agree. A guy who can crush steel in his fists ought to make kindling out of a normal person's skeleton. But usually he just knocks out his opponent or hurts him until the grabbed character (almost always much weaker) pulls some cool stunt to escape. Again you can posit deliberate care on the part of the brick, but for many villains that doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 413
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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.
Strength has always been a bit of an oddball in HERO. While lifting capability does double for each +5 STR, the same does not hold true for leaping or throwing, which in theory should be the case if each +5 STR equals twice as much energy. So we don't actually have a consistent gauge to determine if each +5 STR is doing twice as much damage. Personally, I've never belonged to that school of thought because it leads to absurd energy levels.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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.

That is how I see things.

 

On the other hand, there are many here who would argue that each 5 points represents only a doubling of lifting power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Then there's the consideration that STR is too overloaded in terms of what it actually means. "Lifting capacity" is very different from "punching capacity" yet they get lumped together for playability. For that reason I think discussions of energy levels and whatnot are largely meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Then there's the consideration that STR is too overloaded in terms of what it actually means. "Lifting capacity" is very different from "punching capacity" yet they get lumped together for playability. For that reason I think discussions of energy levels and whatnot are largely meaningless.

 

I'm afraid so.

 

Even if one did attempt to keep with that, you'd still part with reality on a number of levels. KE for but one example is not the determining fact in the effectiveness of firearms on human targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

"Lifting capacity" is very different from "punching capacity" yet they get lumped together for playability. For that reason I think discussions of energy levels and whatnot are largely meaningless.

In physics terms, lifting capacity probably relates to power (unless we have "pulley-man" who can lift 100 tons, but it takes him an hour to raise it to shoulder height).

 

In the cases I've seen STR basically does relate to Power which is defined in physics as work/time. A person with a great deal of power will be able to do a great deal of damage as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

KE for but one example is not the determining fact in the effectiveness of firearms on human targets.
Correct. It's certainly a factor, but certainly not the only one. Bullet cross section and material, what is hit, and other less tangible things also factor in. Under the right circumstances a .22 LR can be more lethal than a .45 ACP round.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

KE for but one example is not the determining fact in the effectiveness of firearms on human targets.

There are other factors (and people do argue that kind of thing), but ability to do work (which is the definition of energy in physics) on a target sounds pretty good to me.

 

I admit that having a high KE is not important if the bullet simply blows though the target, but that is a different matter. The bullet was doing massive damage, but the target simply did not absorb it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Champsguy

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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

 

When would you have a non-superhero type character with a 60+ strength?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Champsguy

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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.

 

Sorry. Posting at work means I have to read fast and look over my shoulder. :) I might have missed something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

In the cases I've seen STR basically does relate to Power which is defined in physics as work/time. A person with a great deal of power will be able to do a great deal of damage as well.

Lifting and punching both involve power, obviously, but the way the power is used are very different. I've known people (particularly women) who could lift quite a bit but couldn't punch because their strength is more concentrated in their legs than their upper body. Of course they can train to use that leg strength in their punches, but that takes us beyond raw ability into martial arts.

 

You find more exaggerated instances in animals - a horse doesn't kick commensurate to its lifting ability; a dog doesn't lift commensurate to its overall STR - but it's probably not productive to go that far in this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Correct. It's certainly a factor' date=' but certainly not the only one. Bullet cross section and material, what is hit, and other less tangible things also factor in. Under the right circumstances a .22 LR can be more lethal than a .45 ACP round.[/quote']

 

Actually it seems that on most living targets, it's not a factor at all. Or rather that it's a factor only because M*V is a factor and KE=V*V^2. In short, the square of the velocity is given far too much weight for KE to be used for living creature wounding.

 

As for things like shot placement... I figure that's what the random damage roll combined with hit location is for.

 

 

The point is, all things are not equal depending upon what we're looking at.

 

For another example moving twice as fast takes up more than twice the energy in the human body. So a point system that measured result (which HERO does) doubling every five points (which HERO doesn't for running, but lets say it did for this example) would actually have a greater than doubling energy cost.

 

And so on.

 

But I think we're getting lost in the details.

 

 

The simple point is should a guy with a stick be able to throw out damage that can wreck a car in a single blow the same way that a guy who can lift a tank can?

 

In reality? No?

 

In the game, it depends upon the players.

 

Result: House Rules or play a different game if it's a problem.

 

There really isn't much more to say about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

When would you have a non-superhero type character with a 60+ strength?

Well your actual quote was: "People don't splatter in Champions because they don't in the comics." There are many places outside the "standard 4 color comics" (where people don't splatter) that have super-human levels of Strenght, especailly Telekinetic strength.

 

But some examples of non-standard comic books instances of high strength include:

 

Large Mech, or other large vehicle.

 

Yoda : Telekinetic Str.

 

Tetsuo (from Akira) : Telekinetic Str.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Lifting and punching both involve power, obviously, but the way the power is used are very different. I've known people (particularly women) who could lift quite a bit but couldn't punch because their strength is more concentrated in their legs than their upper body.

 

Of course they can train to use that leg strength in their punches, but that takes us beyond raw ability into martial arts.

 

You find more exaggerated instances in animals - a horse doesn't kick commensurate to its lifting ability; a dog doesn't lift commensurate to its overall STR - but it's probably not productive to go that far in this discussion.

I'm not sure I see your point here. Yes, some people (creatures) have limitations on their STR such that it is limited to a specific part of their bodies. But I don't see how it relates to the general discussion of strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Champsguy

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Well your actual quote was: "People don't splatter in Champions because they don't in the comics." There are many places outside the "standard 4 color comics" (where people don't splatter) that have super-human levels of Strenght, especailly Telekinetic strength.

 

But some examples of non-standard comic books instances of high strength include:

 

Large Mech, or other large vehicle.

 

Yoda : Telekinetic Str.

 

Tetsuo (from Akira) : Telekinetic Str.

 

Yeah, but we're talking about regular old strength (or at least I was). Once you get into buying other powers, you can just buy a killing attack. Then they'll splatter nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Let me throw in a few minor points to the discussion, although I'm not going to comment on the actual question (aside from saying that it doesn't really bother me):

 

1.) Herioc games have Characteristic Maxima. I think this does enough for "modifying the strength chart." It is actually roughly equivalent to the 1.5...x per 5 points someone mentioned. It means every 5 character points will be roughly the square-root of 2, or 1.41... times the lifting capability, and it will actually take 10 points to double.

 

2.) Growth or Strength bought as a Power will naturally overcome Characteristic Maxima by adding to Characteristics after the fact and ignoring maxima. (Someone asked what non-superherioc character you would ever build with a 60 str; well, I built an NPC dragon...let's just say, BIG.)

 

3.) Body, Stun, and defenses, and damage should be thought of as "doubling" in a similar manner.

 

4.) As far as realism and physics go, Hero is the best I've seen (without monumental and complex charts and tables). For example, Growth makes a heck of a lot of sense from the perspective of a physicist. Doubling your height should increase your volume and mass by eight (although technically you would actually need a higher density because the strength of your bones goes up with the square of length, not the cube of it--hence the huge leg bones of an elephant).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So could we sum it up that... high STR probably doesn't do as much damage as it should compared to lift and work capacity.

 

It may be hard to create an exact "Increase in lift y should increase damage by x" but that the current system under-represents the damage that STR does. As Trebuchet states, escalating STR damage even relatively commensurate with "work" capacity would likely scroll to the absurd pretty quickly.

 

It does this by design, to reflect a certain genre... so it probably frustrates those of us less inclined to try and simulate that genre.

 

So, while STR not doing enough damage bugs me... I'm more bugged by all those trying to justify why Superman doesn't turn heads into red mist. He doesn't because the writer doesn't have him do it... and there is no "physics" reason why. You either accept that, or you don't.

 

It might be more interesting to scale DOWN the lift/work capacity on the STR chart... so that 100 STR bricks are still only doing 20d6... but maybe that 100 STR only corresponds to something like 20 Tons lift, or whatever. Doesn't effect base combat damage... but does scale down the high end lifting quite a bit.

 

Not for your four color games, obviously... but might work in a more "realistic" (note the quotes) campaign. As I said, I already scale things down on the STR chart. 0-45, basically the same. 50-100... points in STR correspond to tons lifted. This would just be scaling it down more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I'm not sure I see your point here. Yes' date=' some people (creatures) have limitations on their STR such that it is limited to a specific part of their bodies. But I don't see how it relates to the general discussion of strength.[/quote']

The point is that lifting capacity and punching power are not directly related. Therefore mapping the physics numbers behind lifting to the physics numbers behind punching is not technically valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I would agree. A guy who can crush steel in his fists ought to make kindling out of a normal person's skeleton. But usually he just knocks out his opponent or hurts him until the grabbed character (almost always much weaker) pulls some cool stunt to escape. Again you can posit deliberate care on the part of the brick' date=' but for many villains that doesn't make sense.[/quote']

 

How much STR does it take to crush steel in your fists? Let's say 43, just because the thread started there.

 

That's 8d6 1/2 damage, average 8 BOD, so an average human takes 6 BOD after his 2 DEF. Two phase- bleeding to death (-4 BOD from the 8 he started at). 3 phases - dead (-10 BOD). 4 phases - crushed beyond recognition (- double his BOD).

 

Seems to me the issue isn't whether TSR damage rises fast enough, but whether defenses rise too fast. Then again, action heroes tend to soak up horrific amounts of damage and get right back up for more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Can you back that assertion up?

 

This is the modern Internet, a person would find a link that would 'backup' the idea that the world is flat.

 

But here:

 

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm'>http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

 

Check under the heading 'Mechanics of Projectile Wounding' for the concepts of bullet wounding. Here is the reasoning why law enforcement has abandoned the 9mm in favor of the lower KE value weapons such as the .40 S&W and .45 ACP.

 

The site http://www.firearmstactical.com/ as a whole is fine resource.

 

For even more detailed information, look up a journal called Wound Ballistics Review put out by the IWBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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).

I wouldn't call damage exponential. But then again, my physics knowledge is poor enough that I'm sure someone could demonstrate that 1DC = doubling damage and I may not really get it well enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Then there's the consideration that STR is too overloaded in terms of what it actually means. "Lifting capacity" is very different from "punching capacity" yet they get lumped together for playability. For that reason I think discussions of energy levels and whatnot are largely meaningless.

Yeah, well said, AA, I think that's what I'm trying to say, and fumbling around in so doing. Whether 1DC is really a doubling seems to me to be irrelevant; what does seem to be relevant is the actual effect of the scale and that we have a cost structure related to damage classes and damage classes are quantified against defense, STUN, and BOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...