Jump to content

Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?


OddHat

Recommended Posts

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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...

 

If Marvel is four color, it works there. The typical upper strength limit for their characters (such as Thor) is something around 100 tons.

 

Doesn't work for classic world moving DC so much however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 413
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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.

If you were to give a person an increase in general strengh (not just lower-body strengh, but general strengh), you are saying that there would not be a direct relationship in the increase of lifting capacity and punching power?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Just to answer the initial question of the thread: no, it doesn't bother me, for all the reasons that have been so well expounded on this thread. :)

 

Regarding the difference that Haymaker makes which so many people have raised, one option to get more "realistic" damage might be to return to the Fourth Edition model of the haymaker, in which it increases the base damage of the attack by x1 1/2 (before Pushing and additional HA damage). Once you exceed STR 40/ 8 DCs of base damage, you'll be doing proportionately higher amounts than with the current Haymaker rules. (I've long felt that the DEF and BODY totals of many objects and vehicles in HERO were geared to balance against that Haymaker potential, which is one reason why they seem so high in play now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Since there seems to be a bit of confusion amongst the peanut gallery on weapon damage I am going to attempt to clarify further.

 

The only published reference to Bo Staff I can find is in UMA page 172 listed as:

 

  • Bo (Staff) (4d6) STRMin 8 and a normal cost of 13 points

The closest thing that 5ER has is the Quarterstaff listing on page 481:

  • Quarterstaff (4d6) STRMin 10 and a normal cost of 11 points

A Heroic level character with NCM and a 13 STR with 10 points in Martial Arts and weapon familiarity and weapon element for staff will do a Maximum of (8d6) if using a +4DC manuever (offensive or sacrifice strike), fast strike only gives +2DC though.

  • 4d6 base for Bo Staff + 1d6 for STR (13-8=5 or 1DC) + MA dmg bonus.

However, since we are using Heroic rules for this example, the base damage of the Bo Staff (4d6) can only be doubled before destroying the weapon so the character above will do anywhere from (5d6) up to (8d6 max) depending on MA manuever used.

 

If we assume that it's a Super-Level Martial artist he must spend 13 real points for the Bo Staff as written in UMA or custom build one yourself like many villains in CK&C usually written up as a Billy Club with a 4d6 HA for 10-12 real points. In that case we lose the STRMin and get:

  • 2.5d6 for STR 13 + 4d6 HA for Billy Club + MA dmg bonus.

Using Super rules this allows the Martial Artist to do anywhere from (6.5d6) up to (10.5d6) depending on which (non-movement based) manuever he uses. But remember, he is paying a minimum of 8 extra points (10 for Billy Club - 2 for weapon familiarity).

  • 43 STR brick can still do a (12.5d6) Haymaker punch without counting any possible Brick Trick HA's or Martial Arts himself.

:)

HM

 

 

Not really.

 

If you consider that Spider-Man (who can lift 10tons which works out to ~43 STR) can do a couple of things that the Martial Artist with a Bo Staff can't without spending any additional points on MA or weapon familiarities:

 

 

  1. Toss a car (AOE attack) at an opponent.
  2. Apply the Haymaker manueuver to his punch to do up to 12.5d6 damage.

*The Martial Artist doesn't get any higher bonus for Haymaker than he does for Fast Strike since the Bo Staff does base damage of 4d6. Technically, if you are not paying points for a weapon which your example implies, its maximum damage can only be doubled to 8d6 (not 8.5d6). Also, Fast Strike only adds 2DC's which combined 13 STR and an 8 STR minimum for the weapon only does 7d6 damage. To get a +4DC bonus the MA would need to use an Offensive Strike, Sacrifice Strike or buy 2 additional damage classes with MA's for 8 more points above his base 10 point minimum investment.

 

Seems fair especially with all the complaints of how cheap STR is.

 

HM

 

 

edit: added additional MA info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

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.

 

from the article given:

Mechanics of Projectile Wounding

 

In order to predict the likelihood of incapacitation with any handgun round, an understanding of the mechanics of wounding is necessary. There are four components of projectile wounding.6 Not all of these components relate to incapacitation, but each of them must be considered. They are:

 

(1) Penetration. The tissue through which the projectile passes, and which it disrupts or destroys.

 

(2) Permanent Cavity. The volume of space once occupied by tissue that has been destroyed by the passage of the projectile. This is a function of penetration and the frontal area of the projectile. Quite simply, it is the hole left by the passage of the bullet.

 

(3) Temporary Cavity. The expansion of the permanent cavity by stretching due to the transfer of kinetic energy during the projectile’s passage.

 

(4) Fragmentation. Projectile pieces or secondary fragments of bone which are impelled outward from the permanent cavity and may sever muscle tissues, blood vessels, etc., apart from the permanent cavity.7,8 Fragmentation is not necessarily present in every projectile wound. It may, or may not, occur and can be considered a secondary effect.9

Most of those things listed fall under "work done on the body." For example, I would say that fragmentation could be described as the transfer of KE to fragments of bone and the like. And in the end with no KE there could be no work done on the body, and if no work was done on the body, no tissue would be destroyed.

 

Now it is true that some bullets could make a narrow passage and have most of their energy "blow-through" the target. I don't see how you could rate damage for an attack in a generic way, if you are trying to look at how it will damage a specific type of target.

 

First, we have to accept that it is possible that some of the "damage potential" will spill over into the larger environment (like when a bullet passes through somebody).

 

All things considered, I'd still say that the ability to do work (in this case destructive work) on a target is the very best way to define damage in a general fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

If you were to give a person an increase in general strengh (not just lower-body strengh' date=' but general strengh), you are saying that there would not be a direct relationship in the increase of lifting capacity and punching power?[/quote']

 

Well (and I know I'm not the person you directed the question to :o ), there would certainly be a relationship, but not necessarily a direct one. Punching power is not merely possession of potential force, but the skill to apply that force effectively. HERO already represents that distinction in two other areas of STR application: throwing and leaping. The ranges given for STR for these two abilities certainly don't scale the same as lifting capacity, but to use that STR effectively for these tasks requires at least some training or natural talent.

 

When this issue comes up here I've often seen the comparison made to athletes. A weightlifter has far greater raw strength and lifting capacity than a basketball player, but there's no question of who you'd expect to be able to jump higher. Most quarterbacks can throw a football several times farther than a much-stronger linebacker. And boxers are almost never the strongest people around, but all their training is geared toward using their strength most efficiently to hurt their opponents - to the point that their fists are considered lethal weapons by the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

from the article given:

 

Most of those things listed fall under "work done on the body." For example, I would say that fragmentation could be described as the transfer of KE to fragments of bone and the like. And in the end with no KE there could be no work done on the body, and if no work was done on the body, no tissue would be destroyed.

 

KE doesn't measure "work done on the body", it measures KE. And the full article goes on to say how much if not most of that energy is wasted in creating the temporary cavity. The simple conclusion quote at the bottom of the page states the following: "Kinetic energy does not wound."

 

Two points now...

 

 

1. The FBI used the ideas in the link (together with others) to select their handgun. They chose weapons with lower KE (m*V^2) but higher Momentum (M*V) and Diameter as a result.

 

That started a trend (actually recreated a trend for at least the second time) that has been picked up by nearly the entire world of law enforcement and the military.

 

 

2. We are seriously off topic and need to stop on that basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

HERO already represents that distinction in two other areas of STR application: throwing and leaping. The ranges given for STR for these two abilities certainly don't scale the same as lifting capacity' date=' but to use that STR effectively for these tasks requires at least some training or natural talent.[/quote']

 

Ultimate Brick does scale the same.

 

The standard rules are a simplification and game balance issue (it prevents the tactic of tossing your foes so far way you have removed them from the battle).

 

 

...to the point that their fists are considered lethal weapons by the law.

 

Urban Myth I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

If you were to give a person an increase in general strengh (not just lower-body strengh' date=' but general strengh), you are saying that there would not be a direct relationship in the increase of lifting capacity and punching power?[/quote']

That's the problem - when you break it down, "general strength" is a fairly meaningless concept. Strength is not distributed the same for everyone. But even if we choose some standard muscle distribution and train a "standard person" such that every muscle in his body increases its lifting capacity by exactly the same percentage, I still don't think his punching power (by whatever measure - maybe psi?) would be increased by exactly the same percentage. That's because punching power depends on more than just raw muscle strength. You've also got to consider reach & flexibility (=> distance of acceleration), center of gravity & overall mass (=> conservation of momentum), etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Well (and I know I'm not the person you directed the question to :o ), there would certainly be a relationship, but not necessarily a direct one. Punching power is not merely possession of potential force, but the skill to apply that force effectively.

I agree with you that skill does play a role. But do you think that the strengh table should reflect a character's skill?

 

To me the STR component should be based on raw power (which would apply to both lifting and punching).

 

HERO already represents that distinction in two other areas of STR application: throwing and leaping. The ranges given for STR for these two abilities certainly don't scale the same as lifting capacity, but to use that STR effectively for these tasks requires at least some training or natural talent.

That is definitely true about the throwing and leaping they do NOT follow an exponential curve. I believe that the reason for that is so that the game could be played on a table top, to a scale of 1" = 2 meters. But I do conceed that you are correct about the scale of leaping and throwing.

 

And I think that there are sooo many other indications that damage works exponentially (200d6 EB would destroy the Earth, what more do you need than that?)

 

When this issue comes up here I've often seen the comparison made to athletes. A weightlifter has far greater raw strength and lifting capacity than a basketball player, but there's no question of who you'd expect to be able to jump higher.

Acceleration = Force / Mass.

 

The weightlifter has more force, but also more mass.

 

Most quarterbacks can throw a football several times farther than a much-stronger linebacker. And boxers are almost never the strongest people around, but all their training is geared toward using their strength most efficiently to hurt their opponents - to the point that their fists are considered lethal weapons by the law.

I don't have an easy answer for the throwing thing.

 

As for the boxers, that might be more of a "martial arts" thing than a strength table thing. I'm not arguing martial arts should not play a role. But I am saying that if my STR was somehow increased 10 times, physically speaking that power should translate to both lifting and damage ability. I should be able to do 10 times the damage that I did the day before, and that is the direct relationship that I'm talking about.

 

The bottom line for me is that if a character can manifest 1000 times the power for lifting, then he should be able to manifest that power for punching too. And even if he has a weak upper body or something like that, then he should still be able to manifest that power for kicking (damage).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

That's the problem - when you break it down' date=' "general strength" is a fairly meaningless concept. Strength is not distributed the same for everyone. But even if we choose some standard muscle distribution and train a "standard person" such that every muscle in his body increases its lifting capacity by exactly the same percentage, I still don't think his punching power (by whatever measure - maybe psi?) would be increased by exactly the same percentage. That's because punching power depends on more than just raw muscle strength. You've also got to consider reach & flexibility (=> distance of acceleration), center of gravity & overall mass (=> conservation of momentum), etc.[/quote']

The measure of punching power I'm using is the physics definition of Power which is:

 

Work (which would include the ability to lift X pounds to Y feet off the ground) divided by Time. And Work is also Energy.

 

Power = Work / Time

 

which is the same as saying :

 

Power = Energy / Time

 

If I can do a great deal of Work in a very short time, that is Power.

 

And I see no reason why it would not manifest when a character punches. If you were to double a person's power, the change should apply across the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

If you were to double a person's power' date=' the change should apply across the board.[/quote']

As a simplification for game mechanics, I agree. In reality, what you're saying is that if Joe can punch twice as hard as Jim, then Joe necessarily can lift twice as much as Jim. It would be interesting to run some experiments and see how that bears out. I don't think it would.

 

There's also the question of whether normal-level strength differences should scale to superhero ranges. But that line of thinking almost surely leads us way out of genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

We're not talking about where he maxes out' date='[/quote']

Then what are we talking about...it's clear that the Strength of 100 Men-Man can hit harder.

 

So, in a piece of well written fiction, not a game, who would you expect to do more damage with a single blow; a man with the Strength of 100 Men, or a guy in fairly good shape with some training and a big stick?

There isn't a guy in fairly good shape "with some training and a big stick" in your examle. There's a fairly strong guy with several years of training in martial arts and weapons use carrying a quarterstaff. A subtle, but significent, difference.

 

I did forget something about Heroic campaigns though... STR Min. In a heroic campaign the dude with a stick will only do 6.5d6, or roughly the damage equal to the strength of 25 men.

 

Again, in a Superheroic game, it doesn't matter because it's virtually in genre for a dude with some training to do that much damage with a big stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

So, in a piece of well written fiction, not a game, who would you expect to do more damage with a single blow; a man with the Strength of 100 Men, or a guy in fairly good shape with some training and a big stick?

Also, exactly what are you calling a piece of well written fiction?

 

A good comic book (god, I hope not!)? In that case, I think we're all in agreement that it fits the genre.

 

A heroic novel? In that case, why isn't the guy with the 43 Strength picking up a tree, building, boulder, or really, really, really big sword and doing a monumental amount of damage?

 

Excacly which kind of "realistic," "cinimatic," or, "literary," setting are you looking for? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

reading through all the posts that have cropped up in the last day, I think I may be approaching an alternate idea. I'll leave it up to you scientific types to crunch the numbers...

So I agree that the damage progression seems right, but the lifting power is off... I like the 2 DC per doubling. Now, one thing that I expect is occasionally overlooked, and not really borne out in the rules, is the statement on the Str chart that the maximum lift is the amount an individual can barely get off the ground, stagger a few steps, and then drop. This sounds like a much greater END expenditure than simply paying standard STR endurance, assuming that most semi-realistic portrayls of superstrength will have high enough other stats to allow them to exert themselves for about the same amount of time as a normal would. As pushing is now relegated to the realm of extraordinary adrenaline related circumstances, perhaps we need a "power lift" move that allows a doubling of lift capacity with extra end cost, perhaps full phase and/or reduced DCV. Maybe a "non combat" lift?

This could mesh well with a scaled back lifting capacity

And the +2dc = X2 mass/lift could also shift the mass/body scale to +2 body per X2 mass, which would make some of the bigger items a bit more reasonable. It does raise the damage on killing attacks if you're trying to also change the +1 DC = X2 joules to +2 DC + X2 joules.

hmmmm....

I just realized that this does kind of reverse the "Supers do double damge against inanimate objects" idea...it ould assume that the normal hero chart reflects supers genre conventions, while a 2 for 1 chart would reflect a bit more grit... hmmmm....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

oh... and back to the inital question... yeah it bugs me. its why I don't think a 43 strength should be able to lift that much. I start thinking. I start pondering 10 ton lifting capacities. Figure that only half of that could be applied to an attack as opposed to the whole body lift. then focus those 5 tons of force into a fist sized surface area. Someone who cares more can calculate the foot pounds. So the "guy who can lift 10 tons" with the strength of a 100 men should be splattering people, in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

It's refreshing to see so many people think that STR lift is inflated too much - although I just go with the flow on this one and do it by the rules, back when I had reworked it, many many years ago I thought I was the only one!

 

BTW, I used as a standard that 1000 STR should be able to lift the Earth, but also had a nonlinear curve to get to that (it was actually 3 different curves at different breakpoints). I'd have to find it to relate it, maybe I'll do that tonight just for interest's sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

KE doesn't measure "work done on the body", it measures KE.

In physics terms, Energy IS Work. And when a bullet expends its energy into a target it does work on that target.

 

The simple conclusion quote at the bottom of the page states the following: "Kinetic energy does not wound."

Ripping a pathway through a body or any other object takes work (a.k.a energy). You can't have a wound without energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

As a simplification for game mechanics, I agree. In reality, what you're saying is that if Joe can punch twice as hard as Jim, then Joe necessarily can lift twice as much as Jim.

 

It would be interesting to run some experiments and see how that bears out. I don't think it would.

 

There's also the question of whether normal-level strength differences should scale to superhero ranges. But that line of thinking almost surely leads us way out of genre.

I'm looking at this stuff from the simple perspective of power output.

 

If a person can lift 100 tons in the same span of time that a normal person could lift 100 lbs, then that represents a great deal of power.

 

If a person uses that power in combat, then it should have the potential to do damage on the same scale.

 

Admittedly there are other factors, a person can put on brass knuclkes and do more damage as well without increasing his strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

Ripping a pathway through a body or any other object takes work (a.k.a energy). You can't have a wound without energy.

 

I'm afraid the FBI research and JFK Jungle Warfare School trumps your (surprisingly poor) high school physics.

 

We're done here. Take it to PM if you insist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

(I've long felt that the DEF and BODY totals of many objects and vehicles in HERO were geared to balance against that Haymaker potential' date=' which is one reason why they seem so high in play now.)[/quote']

 

Really? I've often felt that many Hero vehicles and objects seemed kind of fragile....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

As pushing is now relegated to the realm of extraordinary adrenaline related circumstances' date=' perhaps we need a "power lift" move that allows a doubling of lift capacity with extra end cost, perhaps full phase and/or reduced DCV. Maybe a "non combat" lift?[/quote']I find the idea of "non-combat lift" rather appealing, although in practical terms I'm not certain how much it would differ from Pushed lifting. But certainly "picking something and staggering a few steps with it" hardly sounds routine or like full DCV. It's certainly food for thought.

 

As an observation on the thread's topic, I think it's clear that the lifting chart was based on the original Champions game designers' desire for playable supers to be able to pick up heavy objects like in the comics. If it took twice as much strength to lift things as it currently does, very few player characters would be able to pick up a tank or similar heavy object. How many 250 point PCs would buy 120 STR? Very very few. Whether the lifting chart should be reconsidered in light of 350 point Standard 5th Edition characters is fodder for another thread entirely. One obvious advantage to altering the strength chart would be reduction of Hero's granularity. If lifting capability became arithmetic instead of exponential in nature it would make a more relevant difference between having a 13 and a 15 STR or between a 55 and 60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I'm afraid the FBI research and JFK Jungle Warfare School trumps your (surprisingly poor) high school physics.

 

We're done here. Take it to PM if you insist.

Maybe I missed a left turn before this, but that sounds a little harsh. Warp9 may not be getting what you're saying, but I also see his point that behind some sort of tearing or gorging of the flesh energy somewhere is expended. Not that I'm taking any side here, I'm not, but just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Strength Damage: Pathetic or what?

 

I'm afraid the FBI research and JFK Jungle Warfare School trumps your (surprisingly poor) high school physics.

 

We're done here. Take it to PM if you insist.

I am sorry Fox1, but Warp9 was right: it does take energy to wound. The real question is one of scaling. Is the "amount" of damage done proportional to the amount of energy? How are they related? Obviously the amount of damage will go up with increased energy, but how much? Linearly? And with what limit? Is the amount of tissue damage more important in wounding the human body, or where that damage is done (that's what the handgun article that was referenced was talking about)? Perhaps once a bullet goes all the way through something, increasing its speed is not going to do any more to the target.

 

Certainly if we talk about the ability to deform a material, whether it be flesh or iron, kinetic energy plays a significant role. From a physics standpoint, the amount of deformation and the heat dissipated in an object which is struck is proportional to the difference in kinetic energy of the projectile before and after the interaction. Now, how is that deformation and/or heat going to permenantly affect the material, and what affect does that have on the physiology of the human body? That is a vastly different question.

 

The Hero System abstracts damage so that it has similar affects on any material, whether it be flesh or foam rubber or steel. You can build in powers to account for different material properties, but that is beyond the scope of the simple damage rules. A bullet and a big iron club both simply do Body damage, Stun damage, and Knockback in Hero, regardless of whether the bullet relies on puncturing vital organs or the club simply mashes large sections of tissue. Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way, as I like a nice simple game system.

 

As for Strength equating to power, I think this is false. Strength in the Hero System, as in just about all game systems, equates to force. Obviously the two are related. How they are related depends on the physiology of the thing exerting the force. If the body were capable of maintaining constant force over a distance in order to throw something , for example, then the energy (not the velocity) of the projectile would be proportional to the force and the distance (neglecting gravity). I'm not convinced that this is the case, however. It depends too much on geometry, phsiology, etc. Once again, I am pretty comfortable with Hero's abstraction, and pretty skeptical when people think they can do better. It certainly takes a lot of thought and analysis. :)

 

FYI - Conatant accelleration relationships:

 

v = at + v0

d = at^2/2 + v0 t + d0

 

Assuming v0 = 0, d0 = 0:

 

v = at

d = at^2/2 = v^2/2a

KE = mv^2/2 = mad

 

Er, the "mad" part was just coincidence. I'm not all that angry.

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...