02-12-2012, 12:51 PM | #41 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Quote:
And that's only if it's hard, not soft. Anyway, it makes no sense for running into a high HP target that is (slightly) moveable to do more damage than running into an immoveable one, so for running into a stationary target, I always cap it at 2x your HP x velocity/100. If a high HP object is slamming into you, though, I generally use its full HP, at least for knockback purposes. A semi ramming you at 60 mph is bringing a whole lot more kinetic energy to the table if you were running into a parked one on your motorcycle. Last edited by vitruvian; 02-12-2012 at 01:05 PM. |
|
02-12-2012, 12:59 PM | #42 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Somebody has to send that in as a Murphy, guy running down the street gets distracted as someone calls him and Slams into the side of a Godzilla's foot, exploding on contact...
|
02-12-2012, 01:06 PM | #43 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Quote:
|
|
02-12-2012, 01:13 PM | #44 |
Join Date: Feb 2012
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
I like the idea that damage should be proportional to self HP and difference of self velocity before and after collision.
So I made some calculations: If there are two rigid bodies with a mass m1 and m2, and they are colliding with a relative speed Vr, then after collision, velocity of the first object will change by: dV1 = 2 * Vr * m2 / (m1 + m2) or if we assume that we can replace mass with HP dV1 = 2 * Vr * HP2 / (HP1 + HP2) And for second object: dV2 = 2 * Vr * m1 / (m1 + m2). or dV2 = 2 * Vr * HP1 / (HP1 + HP2). In extreme case, when m2 → ∞ (for example, it's an Earth), dV1 → 2 * Vr. Body will bounce back. Ok. In this case, Basic Rules says that damage will be 2*[Self HP]*velocity/100 (for hard object), so, if formula should look something like k*HP*dV, then It probably should be: Damage1 = 2 * HP1 * (Vr * HP2 / (HP1 + HP2)) / 100 (when HP2 → ∞, Damage1 → 2 * HP1 * Vr / 100, exactly as in RAW rules) Damage2 = 2 * HP2 * (Vr * HP1 / (HP1 + HP2)) / 100 (when HP1 → ∞, Damage2 → 2 * HP2 * Vr / 100, exactly as in RAW rules) In fact, Damage1 = Damage2 = 2*Vr*(HP2*HP2)/(HP1 + HP2) / 100 (in dices) for hard bodies. For soft bodies we can divide mutual damage by 2. Example1: Two 10HP people collide at relative speed 10. Damage = 2*10*10*10/(10+10)/100 = 1d (for hard collision), or 0.5d for soft. Example2: 20HP brute collides with 8 HP kid at relative speed 6. Damage = 2*6*20*8/(20+8)/100 = 0.68d (for hard collision), or 0.34d for soft. So your kid won't explode after running into you happily at full speed. Example3: 20HP brute collides with 1 HP tennis ball at relative speed 5. Damage = 2*5*20*1/(20+1)/100 = 0.095d, because ball will just bounce away, not EXPLODE or anything like that. Example4: 10HP character collides with 400HP Giant Stone Armadillo at relative speed 5. Damage = 2*5*10*400/(400+10)/100 = 0.97d. Slightly softer than a brick wall. For Giant Duckling it will be only 0.48d. Bad thing - formula became more complex. Good thing - we need only one calculation for both bodies. How do you think, is that a viable idea to calculate slam damage like this? How would you fix rules for KO to be realistic? Last edited by Silhouette; 02-12-2012 at 01:19 PM. |
02-12-2012, 01:16 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Quote:
|
|
02-12-2012, 01:30 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Yukon, OK
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
The slam thing comes up often enough hat it really should be in the FAQ but I just checked and did not see it there.
There was a long thread on it just a few months ago. I think the consensus was each person takes damage based on their HP. |
02-12-2012, 01:37 PM | #47 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
|
02-12-2012, 01:40 PM | #48 | ||
Join Date: Oct 2009
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Quote:
Quote:
Really, the lower of the two HP is the best guideline for damage to avoid all this nonsense. And the Spaceship fix (larger HP counts only up to twice the lower HP) still leaves some wiggling room to exploit in favor of the larger slammer. Regards Ts |
||
02-12-2012, 02:00 PM | #49 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Quote:
If the larger object is actually the one doing the slamming, though, I'd probably use its full HP, at the very least for knockback purposes if not actual damage inflicted. A semi ought to be able to knock a pedestrian out of their shoes and across the road, and further than a compact car would. For simplicity's sake, I'd probably run this one of two ways: 1) If I've got convenient numbers of differently colored dice available, calculate both full (larger HP x velocity/100) and capped (2 x smaller HP x velocity/100) damage, and use red dice or something for the capped damage and white dice for the remainder. Whole damage counts towards knockback, only red dice count towards injury. But even that's a bit finicky, so 2) Roll all the dice, but cap injury at (12 x smaller HP x velocity/100 in HP of damage - roughly the maximum that could have been rolled on the smaller amount of dice) |
|
02-12-2012, 02:03 PM | #50 |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Re: Unintentional slam suicide
Ah.. I hadn't realized that slam used a different wording for the rules. Cool. I'd just use the rules for collision angle (side on collision) on B432: "The struck object cannot inflict more dice of damage than the striking or falling one."
|
Tags |
slam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|