Two questions related to muscle-powered damage

[Orochi-art]

No reason to open two threads for two related questions. I also wish to kill two birds with one stone. this way it will be easier to find thread for future reference.

QUESTION 1:

Originally Posted by BASIC SET, page 14

Lifting capacity is proportional to the square of ST. Compared to the average human adult (ST 10 – 10 x 10 = 100), ST 14 is about twice as strong (14 x 14 = 196), ST 17 is roughly three times as strong (17 x 17 = 289), and ST 20 is four times as strong (20 x 20 = 400 = 4 x 100).

ST 14 is about twice as strong
ST 17 is roughly three times as strong
ST 20 is four times as strong

With this I find it strange that damage does not progress in similar manner.

ST 10 swing 1d, avg. 3.5
ST 14 swing 2d, avg. 7.0

So far so good, but as strength increases; dice and average damage decreases progressively.

ST 17 swing 3d-1, avg. 9.5 (should be 3d6 avg 10.5)
ST 20 swing 3d+2, avg 12.5 (should be 4d6 avg. 14.0)

ST 50 is 25 times stronger than ST 10 human.

ST 50 swing 8d-1 (should be 25d) But I already see the problem here. Battle between two ST 50 giants would be over with the first successful blow. Average dice roll would automatically involve Major Wound, Knockdown and Stunning rolls. (and this does not include cutting, impaling modifiers to damage)

So my question is: What is the math behind ST-dmg die and why decrease in number of dices?

QUESTION 2:

Rejiggering Muscle-Powered Weapon Damage

This is line of thought that goes in opposite direction. ST based damage is too "heroic" and should be toned down.



So if you could note to which part of thread (1st or 2nd question) you are answering to. This will help in readability because questions are basically the same.

[DouglasCole]

1. Damage progressions

Basically, while lifting power goes as ST^2, damage goes up at the rate of one point of swing damage per extra point of ST, more or less. Thus, doubling the ST score means you lift four times as much as you used to.

What this means, though, is that ST-based damage goes up darn fast. At ST 19, you're doing 2d-1 damage with a punch, and 3d+1 with a swing. Add +1 to each for a bog-standard weapon, and you're at 2d with a thrust, 3d+2 with a swing.

2. Why tone it down?

Because a 9mm pistol does 2d+2 and a .45ACP does 2d penetration and 3d injury. Can a punch from a strong guy really penetrate armor better than a .45ACP? A swung baton, even by someone with ST 19, do a bunch more damage than a .45?

The alternate scaling of damage is still linear, it just goes as ST/10 or ST/20 (depends on what version you use), that is, ST/10 is +1 die of damage per 10 points of ST. Compare to p. B16, which for swing goes up as +1d per 4 points of ST.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

1. Damage progressions


At ST 19, you're doing 2d-1 damage with a punch, and 3d+1 with a swing. Add +1 to each for a bog-standard weapon, and you're at 2d with a thrust, 3d+2 with a swing.
.

To say what Doug really meant to say "At ST19 you're doing 2D-1 with Thrust attack.". Without bonuses from Skill or brass knuckles or such you do 2D-2 with a punch.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

To say what Doug really meant to say "At ST19 you're doing 2D-1 with Thrust attack.". Without bonuses from Skill or brass knuckles or such you do 2D-2 with a punch.

I really should not post before I've had my second cup of coffee.

[gilbertocarlos]

The formulas from GURPS are using the Square root of the kinetic energy. The damage for high ST is actually too high, it should be lower.

[coyote6]

To get more realistic results, without making whole categories of weapons nigh-useless ("I've attack 26 times, hit a 14 times, and done 3 points of injury; this is boring"), the whole structure of GURPS damage, penetration, and damage absorption needs to be redone from the ground up. Patches just make it uglier, and less playable. IMO, anyways.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by coyote6

Patches just make it uglier, and less playable. IMO, anyways.

Agreed. The reason why we don't issue "errata" or publish optional add-ons that do anything that fundamental is that the bulk of gamers play moderately cinematic games anyway, and are just fine with how things work. Uglifying the system for the minority who want complex, mathematical simulations of reality would be cutting our own throat. That's what Alternate GURPS issues of Pyramid are for.

[Humabout]

Originally Posted by Kromm

That's what Alternate GURPS issues of Pyramid are for.

I thought they were for making me throw money at you!

I'll add my voice to what the others have already said about the first part of your question: Damage is pretty categorically equal to the square root of energy times a constant (except for energy weapons, and don't ask me why; I generally just accept it. If you want energy weapons to scale with the square of energy, there's an Alternate GURPS for that). Since ST relates to the square of energy, increases in damage corresponds linearly with increases in ST. Generally speaking, swing damage is 50% greater than thrust damage to represent the greater energy resulting from employing a lever to whack things.

[Flyndaran]

Despite it's comparisons to other games, Gurps was never meant to be fully realistic. There are plenty of house rules and published variants that allow one to mold it into something more realistic. But gritty realism is too much of a niche market to makes sense as a default assumption.
As much as I love realism as a base in gaming, I'm not the norm for any grouping of humans. If these forums have taught me anything, it is that.
:)

[roguebfl]

Of course if I was going to use a ST damage patch this is the one I would use.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Honestly, we just kept the 3e table as a placeholder until we resolved 4e DR and damage scaling . . . and no resolution led us to alter the table. Personally, I prefer to increment swing for ever ST point, thrust for every two ST points, and apply Nd-1, Nd, Nd+1, Nd+2, (N+1)d-1, (N+1)d, (N+1)d+1, (N+1)d+2, etc. No jogs or padding. Had my attention been drawn to this at the time, I would have done it. It wouldn't even have changed much for most characters.

And for those shocked at this admission . . . try revising half a million words of game. You'd be surprised at how part of a table that only matters for ST 25+ people with melee weapons slips under the radar when you have so many other, more generally applicable things to revise.