Trained Strength for Striking [TG]

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

And if there is such an objection (sniff, sniff, pout), do we also have objections to Strongbow, which is basically Trained ST for bows.

Again not really because I tend run Bow damage via your Deadly spring so your increasing pull rating which isn't really quite as direct for adding damage.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Not +2 damage. +2 per die . . . which is +60% boost to ST! To get that bonus with my Fast progression, you need to have DX+13 AND a GM that allows that table to be extended past +5/+50%.

Only they are both using thrusting damage so it will only be one die unless were talking about ST19+ at which point it's all good because we're well past human realism anyway

[aesir23]

A lot of people posted while I was adding a more detailed argument to this post, so I'll paraphrase here:

Even if you set the limit on Trained ST at ST +10, you're talking about a fairly small amount of damage.

I agree training shouldn't allow someone to cut through armor, but neither should realistic amounts of ST or Striking ST. That's why we have Edge Protection.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by aesir23

.

For Melee weapons, which are almost all Average Progression, DX +10 gets you +4 ST, so +2 Thrusting Damage or +1d Swing Damage (which translates to +4 in pips to dice). This is significant, but it also represents a 40 point investment in a single skill (for an Average skill)! If you wanted to reach that skill level in play, you'd have to study for 8,000 hours.

But that 40 points investment isn't exactly lost without this bonus, it already given you +10 on your skill.

This is the point for me, I'm not seeing +10 in skill as a bad deal here that needs to be incentivised with extra damage for free.

Ultimately it just seems odd to me that in point buy system to make people spend point on thing (increased damage) or just let them have it for free by spending points on something else that they'll probably spend anyway.

I'm not against having the highly skilled hit harder due to their training (and all that entails) as the rationale for why they can do, I just think in point buy system they should pay for the extra benefit of that.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by aesir23

A lot of people posted while I was adding a more detailed argument to this post, so I'll paraphrase here:

Even if you set the limit on Trained ST at ST +10, you're talking about a fairly small amount of damage.

I agree training shouldn't allow someone to cut through armor, but neither should realistic amounts of ST or Striking ST. That's why we have Edge Protection.

ST+10 is more than triple damage (ST10 avg is 3.5, ST20 avg is 12.5, and will defeat edge protection (which is double DR).

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Sorry I don't understand, how are you reducing the cost of skill? The increase on ST just appears to be a freebie on top of the skill?

It's an effective decrease in cost. +3 to skill, once you're past the learning curve, costs [12]. Striking ST (Single Skill) costs [2]. If we're giving the latter away for free to those who purchase the former, that means we've reduced the price of a "+3 to Skill, +1 to Striking ST for that skill" Metatrait from [14] to [12], which would be the same thing as if we reduced the price of that +3 to skill to [10].

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Also I don't see where your getting Striking +1 for every 3 levels from? You table had DX+4 with +2, +3 & +4 ST for Average, fast and v.fast progression (that's a free 4,6 & 8 pts each) the +1 St per +3 levels starts after that.

I'm skipping the learning curve portion, but do note that going from Average to Fast progression is either a +2 to skill difficulty (as in Brawling to Karate) or a +1 to skill difficulty and significant drawbacks (as in Brawling to Boxing). Very Fast is only available if you've invested points into Weapon Master, and is typically a worse deal than that is in RAW (where it's a +60% to damage). That said, you certainly do get better returns during the learning curve portion, but that's realistic, and I don't think an extra +2 or +3 to Striking ST is likely to truly break anything that wasn't broken to begin with.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

To be honest if your allowing +1ST specialised by skill at 2pts per level I'd argue that's cheap enough as is.

It's a fair price, and I can certainly see cause to charge for it with high skill as a justification, but GURPS already gives an effective ST bonus for high skill (for unarmed fighters and those with Weapon Master), so changing it to be more universal doesn't seem problematic to me.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

While I agree training allows you to hit harder then the untrained, I'm actually thinking realistically that there's hard upper limit to how much value is added just from training. (which would match why the bonus for Karate and boxing tops out at +2 damage)

Realistically, training probably does cap out at some point - but as Douglas Cole noted, you need to have ridiculously high skill before you even meet the Boxing/Karate bonus, at which point you are almost invariably already in the realm of cinematic.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

ST+10 is more than triple damage (ST10 avg is 3.5, ST20 avg is 12.5, and will defeat edge protection (which is double DR).

I know you were responding to the comment that +10 still wasn't much damage, but note here that to get ST+10 with a Fast Progression skill would require you to have the skill at DX+25, which is ridiculous in a realistic campaign. To get your tripled swing damage, you probably need to have the skill at DX+28 instead, because (unless using something like my skill system) the only skills with Fast Progression are Boxing and Karate, both of which are restricted to thrust.

Once you're at cinematic levels of skill, I don't have an issue with characters cutting through armor.

[aesir23]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I'm not against having the highly skilled hit harder due to their training (and all that entails) as the rationale for why they can do, I just think in point buy system they should pay for the extra benefit of that.

It's not that cut and dry, since the proposed house rule includes a reduction in weapon damage that must, in a sense, be bought off with high skill. Even unarmed damage, IIRC takes a little longer to improve to RAW levels.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

ST+10 is more than triple damage (ST10 avg is 3.5, ST20 avg is 12.5, and will defeat edge protection (which is double DR).

Sorry, that was a typo on my part. I was suggesting capping Trained ST at the level achieved by having skill at Dex+10

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by aesir23

It's not that cut and dry, since the proposed house rule includes a reduction in weapon damage that must, in a sense, be bought off with high skill. Even unarmed damage, IIRC takes a little longer to improve to RAW levels.

Only it doesn't take that much skill to buy it off, and it's levels of skill you'll be taking anyway, so it's not a real disadvantage or trade off for PC's. But I do like it for untrained or poorly trained mooks

Originally Posted by aesir23

Sorry, that was a typo on my part. I was suggesting capping Trained ST at the level achieved by having skill at Dex+10

Ah, that makes more sense.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Varyon

It's an effective decrease in cost. +3 to skill, once you're past the learning curve, costs [12]. Striking ST (Single Skill) costs [2]. If we're giving the latter away for free to those who purchase the former, that means we've reduced the price of a "+3 to Skill, +1 to Striking ST for that skill" Metatrait from [14] to [12], which would be the same thing as if we reduced the price of that +3 to skill to [10].

Ok right, but as you say it's giving it away free (just it doesn't matter of you call it free extra damage or skill that's reduced in cost by the amount the extra damage would otherwise cost).

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'm skipping the learning curve portion, but do note that going from Average to Fast progression is either a +2 to skill difficulty (as in Brawling to Karate) or a +1 to skill difficulty and significant drawbacks (as in Brawling to Boxing). Very Fast is only available if you've invested points into Weapon Master, and is typically a worse deal than that is in RAW (where it's a +60% to damage). That said, you certainly do get better returns during the learning curve portion, but that's realistic, and I don't think an extra +2 or +3 to Striking ST is likely to truly break anything that wasn't broken to begin with.

But its also the benefit that everyone will get almost as matter of course. How many melee combat orientated PCs do you know who have primary combat skills less than DX+3. (Barring oddball super generalists with ridiculously high DXs of course).

Again it's not matter of not accepting that trained warriors hit harder than the rest of us (certainly at the lower levels of bonus) it's a matter of them not having to pay for it in GURPS terms. As I mentioned earlier World class runners tend to have high HT and fit as well as high running skill, and all are linked and in part due to the benefits of training, but should we give them discount on related advantages once their skill increases?

TBH we could probably think of realistically related and/or linked advantages and bonuses for most skills.

Also it keep getting mentioned but weapon master is cinematic advantage that cost pts, it's not a very useful as a comparison point for realistic tweaks that don't.

Originally Posted by Varyon

It's a fair price, and I can certainly see cause to charge for it with high skill as a justification, but GURPS already gives an effective ST bonus for high skill (for unarmed fighters and those with Weapon Master), so changing it to be more universal doesn't seem problematic to me.

Well weapon master costs at a minimum 20 pts and is cinematic so really not seeing why it's being dragged out as supportive comparison for a free realistic increase to damage.

Karate/brawling do give free bonuses to damage but they are limited to +1/+2 to thrusting damage and come with their own inherent trade offs, (unarmed parries for example).

Originally Posted by Varyon

Realistically, training probably does cap out at some point - but as Douglas Cole noted, you need to have ridiculously high skill before you even meet the Boxing/Karate bonus, at which point you are almost invariably already in the realm of cinematic.

Only as I replied to his post it's not really true at realistic levels (which is the context of what we're talking about). That +2 per dice won't ever apply until your talking about ST19 boxers and brawlers. So it will only ever be +1 or +2. And that really doesn't take very much skill in your progression

Originally Posted by Varyon

...Once you're at cinematic levels of skill, I don't have an issue with characters cutting through armor.

I cut a bit here since it was all from typo anyway, but this last bit is key. I have no problem with all this with a cinematic setting. In fact it give you the best of both worlds. The PC's armour will be realistic against mooks, and the mooks armour will be cinematic against the high skill PC's.

But what I don't like is two highly skilled fighters basically ignoring each others armour to a great extent (edge protection as we have discussed at grate length is not quite the covers all solution here). Both in terms of beating armour, and the point that high skill allows you go around armour.

Armour is a mechanical equaliser in many ways, Obviously it reduces the damage you take, but it addresses a skill imbalance to an extant as well. A high skilled fighter facing someone in armour has to leverage his skill to to get around armour, which means he's limited in how else he chooses to leverage a skill advantage.

What I don't want is high skill fighters just spamming deceptive attacks to ensure hitting and relying on busting through armour to damage.

Originally Posted by Varyon

and I don't think an extra +2 or +3 to Striking ST is likely to truly break anything that wasn't broken to begin with.

Sorry I pulled this out specifically because I think it's describing a key difference of starting point between us on this. If you already think the armour vs. melee damage is borked then yes I can understand why a bit more imbalance won't amount to much. However I don't, but I do recognise that there pretty narrow set of combinations of variables where I can still think this. And this tweak increases the chances of it no longer being true (for me).

However that difference is not either of us is objectively right or wrong, but probably more to do with the decision we make at our own tables when GMing.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Ok right, but as you say it's giving it away free (just it doesn't matter of you call it free extra damage or skill that's reduced in cost by the amount the extra damage would otherwise cost).

It was simply a demonstration of precisely what we're giving away. It's a free [2] that must be spent in a prescribed manner for investing [12] in a specific skill, which I don't think is going to really break the game.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

How many melee combat orientated PCs do you know who have primary combat skills less than DX+3. (Barring oddball super generalists with ridiculously high DXs of course).

I suppose it would depend on what you consider a ridiculously high DX, but most of the DF templates have at least one build that lacks any primary melee skill at DX+3 or better. Regardless, I have no issue with experts striking harder than "mere" professionals.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Also it keep getting mentioned but weapon master is cinematic advantage that cost pts, it's not a very useful as a comparison point for realistic tweaks that don't.

I mentioned it there because you had referenced my Very Fast Progression, which requires Weapon Master.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Karate/brawling do give free bonuses to damage but they are limited to +1/+2 to thrusting damage and come with their own inherent trade offs, (unarmed parries for example).

I don't consider unarmed parries to be intrinsic to Karate and Brawling, I consider them to be intrinsic to fighting unarmed. Note both Karate and Brawling can be used with weapons, and your problem goes away if you equip a tonfa in Reverse Grip (well, goes away for Karate and should go away for Brawling).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Only as I replied to his post it's not really true at realistic levels (which is the context of what we're talking about). That +2 per dice won't ever apply until your talking about ST19 boxers and brawlers. So it will only ever be +1 or +2. And that really doesn't take very much skill in your progression

While I prefer treating +1 to Striking ST as +1 to damage across the board (because I feel thrust is currently undervalued), if you go with it as simply being +1 Striking ST (which is more realistic) you need to have Brawling at DX+4 or Boxing/Karate at DX+7 to reach the current RAW maximum damage output for those skills, and need to have Brawling at DX+10 and Boxing/Karate at DX+13 to exceed them.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Sorry I pulled this out specifically because I think it's describing a key difference of starting point between us on this. If you already think the armour vs. melee damage is borked then yes I can understand why a bit more imbalance won't amount to much. However I don't, but I do recognise that there pretty narrow set of combinations of variables where I can still think this. And this tweak increases the chances of it no longer being true (for me).

I submit that if characters having slightly-higher-than-expected ST results in armor being unrealistically overcome, that's an issue with the melee damage vs armor rules and not with the effect that is (realistically) giving characters slightly higher than expected ST. Requiring characters to pay points for their increased ST won't solve this problem.