Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Which era of warfare?

 

Well, c'mon, that's hardly fair. I mean, pretty much anything pre-WWI probably has a 0% rate of survivors by now.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

The fact is that "real world" damage is a lot more variable than game system damage (Hero or any other). I suspect any aproach fully capturing the vaguaries of actual injury would be virtually unplayable.

 

This is of course true. It's also true that there are serious limits to our knowledge of how real world damage functions in the first place. It's rather hard to make game rules for something that no expert in the real world can put solid numbers on.

 

So when people raise questions of realism, generally what they are trying to prevent is one of two things.

 

 

1. The "Man that just isn't right" reaction

 

In game rules it's not uncommon for things to be wrong compared to what we know about the real world. If a player happens to know that fact and the problem is a major in your face mechanic- it can wreck one's enjoyment of the game.

 

It's worth noting that some of the "that just isn't right moments" may actually be genre. Just because Aquaman was on the JLA in Superfriends doesn't mean that everyone playing a superhero game thinks that was a good or valid idea. Heck, the very idea is a joke to many in that hobby.

 

Others may think the whole boy wonder thing is the nearly the last decision that a "Dark Knight" of the street would make.

 

And so on.

 

My group has enough of these types of reactions to common comic tropes that we took to calling our superhero campaign Real World Comics as we did away with them.

 

In this case, some people have noticed that the Strength chart increases lift at a such a vast rate that it gives them a "that just isn't right moment" because it allows vastly weaker in real terms characters to do equal or near equal damage.

 

Appeals to the comic genre won't would as a counter to that- they think the idea is silly in the game and likely silly in the comic a well. In one of the two major comic lines in fact, the whole STR chart is out of whack in the first place (Marvel caps their main characters at a 100 ton scale).

 

Appeals to physics could change their mind (i.e., proving that yes it would actually work that way in the real world). Thing is, no one is going to manage that trick in this case. Or rather they are not going to do it without more backing than the flawed Aristotle logic that's been used so far. Such a thing takes facts and proof- not mind experiments and questions.

 

 

2. That mechanic produces unrealistic and/or non-genre tactics

 

Some don't care about the mechanics or rules as such, but rather are more concerned with how their use affects actual decisions in play.

 

The classic example is an AD&D Fighter of say 10th level who has just been threatened by an archer on a rise. In AD&D it very reasonable mechanically to just charge the archer- 1d6 damage isnt' significant except in special cases.

 

Some people don't like that, they'd rather the Fighter ducked for cover from the dangerous arrow instead. In AD&D's case, it's time for a different game system or some major house rules.

 

The strength question before us in this thread also has an impact here. If I want Mr. Strong Bird to punch out the Mr Ant's Super Car with a Def of 12 using his 20 ton lift strength (a mere 9 1/2 dice in HERO with say +4d6 for haymaker), I may be disappointed when he determines that it's much easier and quicker to just carry it high in the air and drop it instead for up to 30d6 damage.

 

And so on.

 

 

 

People who claim either of the two points above as problems in HERO are stating that they are having problem giving their own expectations and desires. You really can't debate their expectations and desires.

 

They aren't really making claims about how others view things. After all there are those who like Aquaman and others who would love to see Batman have two boy wonders.

 

Mostly they are feeling out how other people react to an issue that's caused them some concern and seening if anyone can often them a solution.

[fbdaury]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Okay, I'm too damn lazy to read the whole thread so maybe someone's mentioned this already, but nothing is stopping mr. 43 str from using a car as a AOE:1 hex club that can add anothier 8 1/2d6 damage to his attack. Also, if you want a game that more accurately models superhuman strength damage, look at Aberrant, lots of head exploding goodness there!

[Trebuchet]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Okay' date=' I'm too damn lazy to read the whole thread so maybe someone's mentioned this already, but nothing is stopping mr. 43 str from using a car as a AOE:1 hex club that can add anothier 8 1/2d6 damage to his attack.[/quote']Since Mr. 43 STR has only enough strength to lift a car, it generally won't add anything to his attack beyond the AoE.

[zornwil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Since Mr. 43 STR has only enough strength to lift a car' date=' it generally won't add anything to his attack beyond the AoE.[/quote']

I thought 43 STR could lift much much more than a car? My father could tip over a small European car when he was in the navy, lifting it on one side and turning it over. He was quite strong, but not at all near even the top end of human possibilities or olympic level. But I don't have the book here.

[austenandrews]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Since Mr. 43 STR has only enough strength to lift a car' date=' it generally won't add anything to his attack beyond the AoE.[/quote']

Out of curiosity, where does that come from?

[Phil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

The strength question before us in this thread also has an impact here. If I want Mr. Strong Bird to punch out the Mr Ant's Super Car with a Def of 12 using his 20 ton lift strength (a mere 9 1/2 dice in HERO with say +4d6 for haymaker), I may be disappointed when he determines that it's much easier and quicker to just carry it high in the air and drop it instead for up to 30d6 damage.

 

Now, actually I do find this slightly more of an issue than the MA / Brick problem that was originally raised. And that is purely because we have a clash of genre. At the top end of the strength scale, we're clearly talking superheroes - it can be adapted for giants, huge space aliens and the like, but it's the classic superstrong that it's replicating. On the other hand, the falling rules are trying to be reasonably accurate to real life. Instant dichotomy, superheroics vs. real life. The two just dont get on at all.

 

Of course, given the supers points pay for everything mentality, I'd actually have no problem saying to a player who wanted to employ this as a regular tactic "Fine. Buy it". Occasionally someone may fall off a building, but if you want to pick them up and drop them, that's an attack!

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Since Mr. 43 STR has only enough strength to lift a car' date=' it generally won't add anything to his attack beyond the AoE.[/quote']

 

25-35 STR is enough to lift varying sizes of cars. Any extra STR above this is what determines how far they can throw it as a weapon. However, as a genre convention, Bricks do not usually get to apply extra dice of damage for using them as weapons of opportunity from time to time.

 

Going back to the comparison of the Brick vs. Martial Artist w/stick.

• If the Martial Artist is not paying points for the stick I would let the Brick treat a car or any other large weapon of opportunity as a very LARGE stick and possibly get extra damage (based on body+def) as well as a possible AOE from using it.
  
• If the Martial Artist is paying points for the 'stick' then the Brick would be constrained by genre convention as noted earlier.
  

Regarding the Martial Artist's seemingly high damage potential:

This does not seem that out of line considering that MA experts have shown the ability to break concrete blocks with fists and elbows. UB (Ultimate Brick) lists the defense for concrete at 5-6 and body even higher. This seems to fit with our example Martial Artist w/stick. He's average without a weapon (base 5d6 damage w/ fast strike). Give him a lead pipe and he should be able to put a dent in a concrete block.

HM

[Trebuchet]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I thought 43 STR could lift much much more than a car? My father could tip over a small European car when he was in the navy' date=' lifting it on one side and turning it over. He was quite strong, but not at all near even the top end of human possibilities or olympic level. But I don't have the book here.[/quote']IDHMBIFOM, but 43 STR should be able to lift about 20,000 pounds/9600 Kg, or about the weight of a semi-tractor. Figure most midsized cars will weigh about one quarter of that. Sure, he can easily pick up an ordinary car and use it as a weapon, but it's not going to have enough DEF + BODY to add substantially to the damage above the 8½ he can do with a punch. A die or two, maybe, but essentially any object tough enough to take that hit without breaking will probably be too heavy to use as a weapon. (And certainly lifting and dropping an object isn't going to do any more damage than a punch or squeeze damage by the same character.)

 

And just because your dad could tip over a car doesn't prove anything. I'm sure he was a giant radioactive lizard too.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Re: punching villain's super-car vs. carrying up in the sky and dropping it.

 

I don't see this as a problem with the genre at all. If a mid-level flying brick were to try this tactic vs. the Batmobile tm he would likely get attacked by a multitude of built in or remote control defenses on several of the phases that it would take him to actually fly high enough (at half his inches of Flight going straight up) to get more damage from dropping the vehicle than just punching it with his base STR.

 

HM

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

First of all, I never said (nor, to my knowledge, has any HERO product stated) that a +1 DC with a firearm equates to doubling of kinetic energy.

Whether or not it specifically says that is the case, firearm damage in HERO does fit to a pattern of +1DC per doubling of kinetic energy. (and I am not the first one to point that out)

 

Either it was designed that way, or it is a HUGE concidence.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Re: punching villain's super-car vs. carrying up in the sky and dropping it.

 

I don't see this as a problem with the genre at all. If a mid-level flying brick were to try this tactic vs. the Batmobile tm he would likely get attacked by a multitude of built in or remote control defenses on several of the phases that it would take him to actually fly high enough (at half his inches of Flight going straight up) to get more damage from dropping the vehicle than just punching it with his base STR.

 

HM

 

The question I phrased wasn't about the Batmobile, it was about Mr. Ant's Super Car. It doesn't have defense systems that would work on someone who lifted it up from underneath, behind, or the sides. Or even from the front for that matter. It's just a fast tunneler with a 12 def.

 

Nor do all versions of the Batmobile have such defenses for that matter.

 

 

Answers like this (let's make it impractical by designing all our vehicle with close in defense systems) to the basic problem or attempts to call require one to buy what the rules already specific as possible actions (until the rules for lift and flight) are just dodges. They don't answer the real problem.

 

People like myself don't react well to attempts to weasel around a problem. We like solutions.

 

In my case I re-wrote the STR table so that a haymaker from a 20 ton STR character would do 18d6. Problem solved and I get to match my chosen genre of Marvel comics instead of DC as well.

 

There are still problem, but now they are below my radar and play style. And getting things below a individual group's radar was the point of my point.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I am a little surprised that no one has yet commented on the irony of applying physics equations, real-world ballistics, and comparisons of the damaging and protective qualities of various materials, to a situation that really only occurs in comic books.

 

There is no realistic comparison between a man with a staff and another man a hundred times stronger than the first, because the second man doesn't exist and can't exist. Even if he did exist he couldn't do the things that such characters do in comic books, because those stunts don't follow the laws of physics.

 

You may say that the comparison doesn't follow the principles of logic either, but logic flows from the premises that you start with. Since the situation in question only exists in comics and similar fiction, those premises should be the conventions of the genre, which although widely recognized and accepted for purposes of storytelling, can't be equated to reality in all circumstances. Attempting to apply real-world standards to a situation that's impossible in the real world, creates a logical fallacy that leads to, well, several pages of debate.

Just because we have not sent people to Mars yet does not mean that it is "impossible in the real world."

 

And just because there is nobody around with 100 X the STR of a normal man, it does not mean that the situation is actually physically impossible.

 

You are not likely to get a normal human who is that strong, but what about an android, or robot, or some very bizzare alien?

 

Are you saying that in the whole Universe (in all Space and all Time), there is no possiblity to have an entity who is 100 X as strong as an average human? Because IMO that is what it sounds like you are saying.

 

I would say that it is possible, and I would also say that we can extrapolate as to what that level of STR would be like (at least in ball-park terms). We can make an educated guess. Such a being, even one of super-human strength, should still exist within the framework of Physics.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

The question I phrased wasn't about the Batmobile, it was about Mr. Ant's Super Car. It doesn't have defense systems that would work on someone who lifted it up from underneath, behind, or the sides. Or even from the front for that matter. It's just a fast tunneler with a 12 def.

 

Nor do all versions of the Batmobile have such defenses for that matter.

 

 

Answers like this (let's make it impractical by designing all our vehicle with close in defense systems) to the basic problem or attempts to call require one to buy what the rules already specific as possible actions (until the rules for lift and flight) are just dodges. They don't answer the real problem.

 

People like myself don't react well to attempts to weasel around a problem. We like solutions.

 

In my case I re-wrote the STR table so that a haymaker from a 20 ton STR character would do 18d6. Problem solved and I get to match my chosen genre of Marvel comics instead of DC as well.

 

There are still problem, but now they are below my radar and play style. And getting things below a individual group's radar was the point of my point.

 

While I am one of the advocates of an alternative mass chart (I won't go so far as to say I think the standard Superheroic scale should be dropped... I just think that an alternate should/ could be provided) the repeated references to the Marvel Universe keeps triggering a small alarm in my head. IIRC, shortly after the first run of the Marvel Universe Guide, somebody realized that too many heros had "Class 100" (capable of lifting 100 OR MORE tons) and so they reorganized for later products so that the top rating was Class 1000 strength. Still minor compared to the HERO strength chart. Which is fine, if you like such things. If you want to play a Supes type character who can lift the planet, then the current chart does work, assuming that you don't mind a 200 str brick in your game

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Whether or not it specifically says that is the case, firearm damage in HERO does fit to a pattern of +1DC per doubling of kinetic energy. (and I am not the first one to point that out)

 

Either it was designed that way, or it is a HUGE concidence.

 

No it doesn't.

 

Both the 9mm and the 45 ACP have almost the same KE, yet in the core rule book the damage is 1d6+1 and 2d6-1 with a +1 Stun mod respectively. Or in Active point terms: 9mm is 20 points while the .45 is 31 points (25 without it's advantage).

 

I haven't check other values, but these two represent the two most common semi-auto pistols in the world (if the .40 S&W hasn't changed that in recent years).

[austenandrews]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

However' date=' as a genre convention, Bricks do not usually get to apply extra dice of damage for using them as weapons of opportunity from time to time.[/quote']

What genre? It's been awhile since I've read comics, so maybe this has changed or something, but in my experience a brick punching an enemy with his fists v.s. clobbering him with a truck is analogous to a regular guy punching an enemy v.s. clobbering him with a 2x4. Definitely a higher order of attack.

 

If you're talking about Champions, not comic books, then that's a rules convention not a genre convention. (Yes, I know, I'm being pedantic. )

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

While I am one of the advocates of an alternative mass chart (I won't go so far as to say I think the standard Superheroic scale should be dropped... I just think that an alternate should/ could be provided) the repeated references to the Marvel Universe keeps triggering a small alarm in my head. IIRC' date=' shortly after the first run of the Marvel Universe Guide, somebody realized that too many heros had "Class 100" (capable of lifting 100 [b']OR MORE [/b]tons) and so they reorganized for later products so that the top rating was Class 1000 strength. Still minor compared to the HERO strength chart. Which is fine, if you like such things. If you want to play a Supes type character who can lift the planet, then the current chart does work, assuming that you don't mind a 200 str brick in your game

 

Marvel's strength chart is wrong anyway. Characters like Thor and Hercules can lift far more than a mere hundred tons, as can sub-class 100 characters like the Thing and Colossus. Marvel is just wrong on their strength values.

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Of course, given the supers points pay for everything mentality, I'd actually have no problem saying to a player who wanted to employ this as a regular tactic "Fine. Buy it". Occasionally someone may fall off a building, but if you want to pick them up and drop them, that's an attack!

 

You're not seriously suggesting this, are you?

[RDU Neil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

SNIP

 

but it's not going to have enough DEF + BODY to add substantially to the damage above the 8½ he can do with a punch. A die or two, maybe, but essentially any object tough enough to take that hit without breaking will probably be too heavy to use as a weapon.

 

TANGENT ALERT

 

But then, this gets into the other highly flammable thread about what exactly determines mass and destructibility in Hero. What does Body mean?

 

If I pick up a small car... it's stats say something like 3 Def and 15 Body or so (Making this up... don't have book) and smooshes easily when used as a weapon.

 

But what if I picked up just it's axel? As an individual chunk of metal... the axel probably has a lot more Def, and possibly more Body... than the car itself. It becomes a mega-club worthy of adding significant damage to brick's attack.

 

So if I break the car with a good throw or swing... might I be left with an even better weapon to attack with?

 

Now we are getting into "GM judgement call" territory, which requires all kinds of SFX and "real worldl" rationalizations like. "All the aluminum body work and such just crumples around the target... acting like a padding of sort... so you don't get as much damage out of the swing as you thought."

 

"What? You yank out the axel to use as a club? Ok then... that is much more suitable. I'll give you at least four more dice."

 

Or whatever your decision might be.

 

Anyway... thought I'd just combine two of what I feel are the most contentious aspects of Hero mechanics into one.

 

Fire, meet gasoline... gasoline, this is fire!

[RDU Neil]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

What genre? It's been awhile since I've read comics, so maybe this has changed or something, but in my experience a brick punching an enemy with his fists v.s. clobbering him with a truck is analogous to a regular guy punching an enemy v.s. clobbering him with a 2x4. Definitely a higher order of attack.

 

If you're talking about Champions, not comic books, then that's a rules convention not a genre convention. (Yes, I know, I'm being pedantic. )

 

Not pedantic at all. 100% agreement here. Thing doesn't hit the Hulk with a bus "in order to get an area effect attack." He hits the Hulk with a bus because it is a superhero analogy of a normal guy hitting another guy with a rock. A rock makes my punch nastier... hitting Hulk with a bus makes the Thing's attack nastier.

 

Totally.

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

TANGENT ALERT

 

But then, this gets into the other highly flammable thread about what exactly determines mass and destructibility in Hero. What does Body mean?

 

If I pick up a small car... it's stats say something like 3 Def and 15 Body or so (Making this up... don't have book) and smooshes easily when used as a weapon.

 

But what if I picked up just it's axel? As an individual chunk of metal... the axel probably has a lot more Def, and possibly more Body... than the car itself. It becomes a mega-club worthy of adding significant damage to brick's attack.

 

So if I break the car with a good throw or swing... might I be left with an even better weapon to attack with?

 

Now we are getting into "GM judgement call" territory, which requires all kinds of SFX and "real worldl" rationalizations like. "All the aluminum body work and such just crumples around the target... acting like a padding of sort... so you don't get as much damage out of the swing as you thought."

 

"What? You yank out the axel to use as a club? Ok then... that is much more suitable. I'll give you at least four more dice."

 

Or whatever your decision might be.

 

Anyway... thought I'd just combine two of what I feel are the most contentious aspects of Hero mechanics into one.

 

Fire, meet gasoline... gasoline, this is fire!

 

I actually have no problem with that. If you swing a tiny little Geo rice-burner made of plastic (or whatever) with crumple zones at somebody, it won't give as much extra dice as just a big ol' hunk of steel. Of course, I wouldn't give an axl that much Body.

[Fox1]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Marvel's strength chart is wrong anyway. Characters like Thor and Hercules can lift far more than a mere hundred tons' date=' as can sub-class 100 characters like the Thing and Colossus. Marvel is just wrong on their strength values.[/quote']

 

Marvel is just plain inconsistent. Something true of all comic companies. One issue Cyclops beams are bouncing off rather minor villains and the next he's blowing a canyon in freaking mountain with a single shot (actually happened, I'm not making it up). Try building that in HERO and let me know the active point cost.

 

You pick your place and time with comic characters, I chose the point where they stated 100 tons for most of their top end characters and called it good.

[austenandrews]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I've never much cared for the DEF+BODY damage limit, myself.

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

You pick your place and time with comic characters, I chose the point where they stated 100 tons for most of their top end characters and called it good.

 

That was pretty much editorial fiat that decreed that. You can play there if you want, but I prefer more than a 58 Str Colossus.

[Warp9]

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

No it doesn't.

 

Both the 9mm and the 45 ACP have almost the same KE, yet in the core rule book the damage is 1d6+1 and 2d6-1 with a +1 Stun mod respectively. Or in Active point terms: 9mm is 20 points while the .45 is 31 points (25 without it's advantage).

 

I haven't check other values, but these two represent the two most common semi-auto pistols in the world (if the .40 S&W hasn't changed that in recent years).

Actually you are correct, last time I did the analysis was in 4th ED. And you'll notice that in 4th edition, the 45 ACP submachinegun was 1d6+1, which was the exact same rating as the Browning HP.

 

I thought that most of the weapons did stay the same between 4th and 5th.

 

However, it seems that I should change my statement a bit:

 

Up until 5th edition, HERO firearms damage followed the pattern of +1DC per doubling of kinetic energy. And most of them still follow that pattern.