Trained Strength for Striking [TG]

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Varyon

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.

No I get that, but it's still something for free is my point, even if you decide to call it reduced cost for skills.

Originally Posted by Varyon

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.

I'm guessing those particular DF builds are not the melee combat orientated ones. Basically my point was a reduction that never applies is not in fact a deduction in any meaningful way.

Originally Posted by Varyon

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

Sorry I missed that, is that in addition to the fast progression bonuses?

Originally Posted by Varyon

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).

OK but the majority of attacks from brawling and karate are unarmed so limited to a single dice thrusting cr damage. I.e exactly the range of damage were an extra point or two will have least effect

A ST10 chap's basic punch is 1d-3 after all.

Originally Posted by Varyon

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.

Yes but we're not talking about karate and brawling with progression, we're talking about various melee skills. The bonus from karate is limited to thrusting (and a low damage cr thrusting attack at that). If you were comparing the bonuses to karate to melee weapons that are thrust-1 cr, it would be a valid comparison

To get +2 on a swung attack (i.e to match the karate max bonus) you'll only need DX+4 on avg, DX+2 on fast and DX+1 on V.fast

Originally Posted by Varyon

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.

well we argue about what "slightly" means here of course

and we can get into Higher than average ST's damage vs. higher than average ST's ability to wear protection. (I actually tend to find they even out).

However even if it is an issue, not sure why making it worse is the way to go?

Originally Posted by Varyon

Requiring characters to pay points for their increased ST won't solve this problem.

No but needing to pay points will act as a limiting factor on it. But the point is there's no corresponding mitigation to your tweak, i.e no balancing effect.

A ST barbarian chops through DR6 plate even with edge protection we agree this is 'bad'. But in a ST15-18 world he won't ever be going up against DR6 plate it will be DR12 or higher plate. I.e balance, increased ST in melee damage is countered by increased ST lifting ability.

There's not counter balance to high skill giving more damage, so with no counter it will over match especially as it will also add on top of everything else (watch out for ST18 barbarians with high skills of course).

There's no equivalent free, realistic bonus side effect for "people who trained a lot to fight in armour are able to get more benefit from it" (although given 5 mins I could probably make one up to be fair).

Thing is cinematic games where mighty heroes cleave through armour with either heroic strength or heroic skill or a heady combination of both that's fine, it just not realistic.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I'm guessing those particular DF builds are not the melee combat orientated ones. Basically my point was a reduction that never applies is not in fact a deduction in any meaningful way.

I actually only looked at the melee combat oriented ones. The Barbarian only has DX+3 with shields unless going for a two-handed option, a Flail-wielding Holy Warrior similarly only has DX+3 with shields, a three-skill Knight lacks any melee combat skill above DX+2, and no Martial Artist has one above DX+2.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Sorry I missed that, is that in addition to the fast progression bonuses?

Weapon Master gives +1 to progression, meaning Slow becomes Average, Average becomes Fast, and Fast becomes Very Fast.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Yes but we're not talking about karate and brawling with progression, we're talking about various melee skills. The bonus from karate is limited to thrusting (and a low damage cr thrusting attack at that). If you were comparing the bonuses to karate to melee weapons that are thrust-1 cr, it would be a valid comparison

To get +2 on a swung attack (i.e to match the karate max bonus) you'll only need DX+4 on avg, DX+2 on fast and DX+1 on V.fast

There are no Fast Progression armed skills unless allowing Weapon Master or using my system, where getting to that point increases difficulty by 2 steps (Easy to Hard, Average to Very Hard). Ignoring Weapon Master, this works out to getting the same damage bonus for a given point investment (DX+2 for a Hard skill costs as much as DX+4 for an Easy skill). So, yes, you only need DX+4 to match Karate's current maximum bonus when using swings, and DX+7 to exceed it. As DX+7 is likely to mark you as one of the most competent warriors in your region, I see no issue with it giving such a bonus. Fast Progression armed skills get there at only DX+4, but those are skills where the training specifically emphasizes building up the necessary muscles and learning how to hit much harder, so I'm honestly alright with that.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

However even if it is an issue, not sure why making it worse is the way to go?

It isn't, but I don't see "This realistic rule shouldn't be implemented because it makes this other unrealistic rule more unrealistic" as a valid argument. If the problem lies with the unrealistic rule, you change that one rather than abandoning a realistic one.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

No but needing to pay points will act as a limiting factor on it. But the point is there's no corresponding mitigation to your tweak, i.e no balancing effect.

It's a difference of [2] points per +1 TST. That's not likely to add up to a lot - a character with an Average Progression skill at DX+10 is probably a [300]+ character, at which point the "free" [8] he's managed to get from this rule probably isn't a huge concern.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

A ST barbarian chops through DR6 plate even with edge protection we agree this is 'bad'. But in a ST18 world he won't ever be going up against DR6 plate

Stop right there. ST 18 is possible for humans, and humans are unable to get through DR 6 plate. You think this means that ST 18 humans will only ever face ST 18 humans wearing armor that has been scaled to encumber them as much as DR 6 plate encumbers a person with ST 10. If you gave Andre the Giant a sword, and trained him in its use, it wouldn't matter if he were facing an average man in DR 6 plate or a clone of himself in DR 12, he wouldn't be able to chop through the plate.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

There's no equivalent free, realistic bonus side effect for "people who trained a lot to fight in armour are able to get more benefit from it" (although given 5 mins I could probably make one up to be fair).

People who have trained a lot to fight in armor are indeed going to have strengthened their muscles for purposes of carrying heavy weight around, but this would be a generic boost to Lifting ST, not something armor specific. However, as no GURPS skill is necessary to wear armor (PC's are assumed to be perfectly comfortable with armor on, only suffering for its weight), there really isn't any way to gauge this, so simply charging for Lifting ST is probably the most appropriate. Of course, I'd be tempted to give a character who has purchased Lifting ST with the justification of "I've fought a lot in armor," and who also has a lot of points in skills appropriate to such a character (Armory, Soldier, melee weapons, etc), a bonus when defending against attacks that exploit armor weaknesses (Hitting 'Em Where it Hurts, Armor Chinks, and Armor Gaps) - if the bonus makes the difference, the foe instead hits where the armor defends normally.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, something like a +2 DB when the foe targets a subsection of a hit location, where success by DB results in them instead striking the most heavily-armored part of that subsection, would be a pretty solid Perk. Just wearing bracers and the foe targets your upper arm? +2 to try and get them to hit the bracers instead. Just wearing a pectoral and the foe targets your stomach? +2 to try and get them to hit the pectoral instead. Probably cinematic when you've only got 1/6 protection on the hit location, but probably realistic when up against a foe exploiting Chinks and Armor Gaps.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Varyon

I actually only looked at the melee combat oriented ones. The Barbarian only has DX+3 with shields unless going for a two-handed option, a Flail-wielding Holy Warrior similarly only has DX+3 with shields, a three-skill Knight lacks any melee combat skill above DX+2, and no Martial Artist has one above DX+2.

Fair enough, My experience is skills tend to go higher (but then stats at my table are probably lower). This makes sense when you consider a skill of 14 is seen as professional, experts being 16+ (I'm guessing most 250pt DF PCs are edging more towards experts in specific areas)

Originally Posted by Varyon

Weapon Master gives +1 to progression, meaning Slow becomes Average, Average becomes Fast, and Fast becomes Very Fast.

Ok, but does that replace weapon masters normal bonus (I'm guessing yes) that's a good tweak in terms of linking WM with your system, but may make WM a bit pricey.

Originally Posted by Varyon

There are no Fast Progression armed skills unless allowing Weapon Master or using my system, where getting to that point increases difficulty by 2 steps (Easy to Hard, Average to Very Hard). Ignoring Weapon Master, this works out to getting the same damage bonus for a given point investment (DX+2 for a Hard skill costs as much as DX+4 for an Easy skill). So, yes, you only need DX+4 to match Karate's current maximum bonus when using swings, and DX+7 to exceed it. As DX+7 is likely to mark you as one of the most competent warriors in your region, I see no issue with it giving such a bonus. Fast Progression armed skills get there at only DX+4, but those are skills where the training specifically emphasizes building up the necessary muscles and learning how to hit much harder, so I'm honestly alright with that.

You keep ignoring that using the karate bonus as a comparison point for melee weapon ignores that karate is starting at thrusting -1 cr for punch (or thrust cr for kick). So it not a fair comparison.

Originally Posted by Varyon

It isn't, but I don't see "This realistic rule shouldn't be implemented because it makes this other unrealistic rule more unrealistic" as a valid argument. If the problem lies with the unrealistic rule, you change that one rather than abandoning a realistic one.

Again it not a question of realistic or not, it's a question of cheapness. I don't think your rule's effect isn't realistic (at lower levels of bonus), I just think you should pay for positive effects.
There are lots of realistic things in GURPS there realism doesn't mean they don't cost points.

But yes if you going to up DR or reduce damage in some way this tweak's benefit will change.

Originally Posted by Varyon

It's a difference of [2] points per +1 TST. That's not likely to add up to a lot - a character with an Average Progression skill at DX+10 is probably a [300]+ character, at which point the "free" [8] he's managed to get from this rule probably isn't a huge concern.

Which makes me think 2pts is probably to cheap TBH (but I agree its RAW). But yes 300pt is a lot of realistic Character.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Stop right there. ST 18 is possible for humans, and humans are unable to get through DR 6 plate. You think this means that ST 18 humans will only ever face ST 18 humans wearing armor that has been scaled to encumber them as much as DR 6 plate encumbers a person with ST 10. If you gave Andre the Giant a sword, and trained him in its use, it wouldn't matter if he were facing an average man in DR 6 plate or a clone of himself in DR 12, he wouldn't be able to chop through the plate.

Stop right where? Leaving aside the whole ST18 is realistic (its not IMO, but lets leave that for another day you and I have done this before) my point was that High ST balances against itself because High ST can inflict more damage, but also wear more DR. I.e in like for like comparison ST and DR scales.

However as to your point, your rule has made cutting though DR6 all the more likely? So welcome to your rule I guess?

Andre with his ST18 does basic 3d with swing, so give him a Broadsword and its 3d+1 but give him a skill of DX+4 and assuming broadsword is avg progression (you still haven't said which weapons would be what progression) and he's doing 3d+4. That means he will be cutting through DR6 even with edge protection 75% of the time, as opposed to 37% of the time without the tweak.

Defeating armour has been my issue with this tweak all the way through.

As I said before if you going to reduce melee damage (or increase DR) then fine my balance of opinion on this tweak will change.

EDIT: ah spotted a possible point of miscommunication here I wasn't saying "bad" ironically (as in "bad" = good). But used the bunny ears to indicated all sorts of unwritten reasons why it's bad that we already agree on. Its just that one them which we may not agree on is that I think one of the reasons why ST18 chaps cutting through DR6 plate is un-realistic is because ST18 chaps in abstract are not realistic, and if they were likely than DR6 plate would itself not be the realistic defence employed.

Originally Posted by Varyon

People who have trained a lot to fight in armor are indeed going to have strengthened their muscles for purposes of carrying heavy weight around, but this would be a generic boost to Lifting ST, not something armor specific. However, as no GURPS skill is necessary to wear armor (PC's are assumed to be perfectly comfortable with armor on, only suffering for its weight), there really isn't any way to gauge this, so simply charging for Lifting ST is probably the most appropriate. Of course, I'd be tempted to give a character who has purchased Lifting ST with the justification of "I've fought a lot in armor," and who also has a lot of points in skills appropriate to such a character (Armory, Soldier, melee weapons, etc), a bonus when defending against attacks that exploit armor weaknesses (Hitting 'Em Where it Hurts, Armor Chinks, and Armor Gaps) - if the bonus makes the difference, the foe instead hits where the armor defends normally.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, something like a +2 DB when the foe targets a subsection of a hit location, where success by DB results in them instead striking the most heavily-armored part of that subsection, would be a pretty solid Perk. Just wearing bracers and the foe targets your upper arm? +2 to try and get them to hit the bracers instead. Just wearing a pectoral and the foe targets your stomach? +2 to try and get them to hit the pectoral instead. Probably cinematic when you've only got 1/6 protection on the hit location, but probably realistic when up against a foe exploiting Chinks and Armor Gaps.

Well as I said there's certainly ways to buff DR, or reduce the negative effects of DR vs. this tweak.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Fair enough, My experience is skills tend to go higher (but then stats at my table are probably lower). This makes sense when you consider a skill of 14 is seen as professional, experts being 16+ (I'm guessing most 250pt DF PCs are edging more towards experts in specific areas)

Canonically (IIRC), skill 12 is a professional, 14 or so is an expert. If you are working under different assumptions, this may be part of your disconnect.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Ok, but does that replace weapon masters normal bonus (I'm guessing yes) that's a good tweak in terms of linking WM with your system, but may make WM a bit pricey.

Seeing as I noted that the increased progression was worse than baseline Weapon Master - yes, this replaces the normal bonus.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

You keep ignoring that using the karate bonus as a comparison point for melee weapon ignores that karate is starting at thrusting -1 cr for punch (or thrust cr for kick). So it not a fair comparison.

That's an inappropriate comparison, because weapon skills have 0 damage when unarmed. If we're allowing for weapons (which we must be for weapon skills to have any impact), then Karate should get one too. The bladed hand (MA226) does sw-2 cut or thr imp. Yes, this is inferior to most weapons (and personally I don't think the bladed hand should get swing damage), but is markedly better than thr-1 cr.

Regardless, I don't actually care what the starting point is. One could even argue that the bonus for Karate is more powerful than allowing a comparable bonus for, say, Broadsword - because it's seeing a greater percentage increase.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Again it not a question of realistic or not, it's a question of cheapness. I don't think your rule's effect isn't realistic (at lower levels of bonus), I just think you should pay for positive effects.

I think I'm having issues following you here. You clearly seem to have two different problems with the suggested rule. One is getting the bonus for free - which is easy enough of a fix, you can simply charge for it if you see fit. Your other problem is that you see it giving unrealistic results because it increases the chances of someone penetrating armor. Why I'm having trouble following you is that you seem to only realize one of these problems at a time - you consider it realistic when discussing if we should charge for it, then later turn around and consider it unrealistic when discussing its impact on armor.

So, before we go further - do you think this rule is realistic, or do you not?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Stop right where? Leaving aside the whole ST18 is realistic (its not IMO, but lets leave that for another day you and I have done this before) my point was that High ST balances against itself because High ST can inflict more damage, but also wear more DR.

This assumes a character will only ever face foes that have the same ST. That is, when an ST 14 halberdier comes across an ST 10 squire wearing DR 5 munitions plate, he won't attack him but instead find someone of comparable ST to engage (as he otherwise has a 72% shot at cutting through).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

However as to your point, your rule has made cutting though DR6 all the more likely? So welcome to your rule I guess?

Yes, it exacerbates an existing problem. Fix the existing problem, and this is no longer an issue. With a more realistic damage scale, that ST 14 halberdier from above would do 1.4d swing, which would become 2.1d cut with the +5 from the halberd (see here). That's 1d*2, and a 1/6 chance of hitting a weak point in armor and managing to (just) break through isn't too unrealistic. Make our halberdier one of the best, with a skill of DX+7, and that jumps to 2.52d, or 1d*2+2. Now he's got a 50% chance of pulling it off, which I agree is a bit too high, but that's probably more an issue with resolution (3d6 probably gives a more accurate spread, but that would require multiplying the result by 0.84, changing things to a 1/4 chance of breaking through). A Fine or Very Fine halberd will, of course, make things a bit worse, but at least now we're a good deal closer to reality.
(I should note that if you want to comment on the alternative damage scale I reference above, the linked thread is the appropriate place to do so)

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Canonically (IIRC), skill 12 is a professional, 14 or so is an expert. If you are working under different assumptions, this may be part of your disconnect.

OK but I notice most of the DF build have at least DX13 to start with so are tending towards skills of 16 or higher. Also I tend to go by TS listing since it concentrates more on combat skill which tend to run into a lot of mods. Run combat with melee skills 14 and see if you get expert results. What overall skill levels do most of you fighters end up with.

Although of course if I get there with low stat + high skill, and you get there the DF way with High Stat + medium skill, again our perspectives on the tweak will differ.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Seeing as I noted that the increased progression was worse than baseline Weapon Master - yes, this replaces the normal bonus.

Figured, ok but as WM is 20pts for single weapon and is cinematic you seem o have nerfed a cinematic advantage to make your realistic tweak work?

Originally Posted by Varyon

That's an inappropriate comparison, because weapon skills have 0 damage when unarmed. If we're allowing for weapons (which we must be for weapon skills to have any impact), then Karate should get one too. The bladed hand (MA226) does sw-2 cut or thr imp. Yes, this is inferior to most weapons (and personally I don't think the bladed hand should get swing damage), but is markedly better than thr-1 cr.

Yeah refining the instances of Karate down to a distinct subset of it use doesn't make you comparison any better.

Especially as my point still stands Karate even with a karate skill weapon and the karate bonus is still less damaging them a melee skill and relevant weapon. So saying "I'm only matching the Karate bonus" ignores the reality of the karate bonus in effect.

I agree with you the bladed hand. However if you're having to cite the bladed hand as proof that you comparison is valid, well that's not good is it?

Oh and of course Karate is a (H) skill of course, where as the majority of melee skills are (A).

Originally Posted by Varyon

Regardless, I don't actually care what the starting point is.

Well you should because it puts your comparison in context.

Originally Posted by Varyon

One could even argue that the bonus for Karate is more powerful than allowing a comparable bonus for, say, Broadsword - because it's seeing a greater percentage increase.

Very true., but again irrelevant to the actual bonus in play. If I increase 2 by 100% and 5 by 20% the firt increase is 5x greater then the second. But the reality is the second number is still greater then the first.

Especially important if you hitting DR4.

Increases, bonuses etc in abstract are well abstract, context is king.

Originally Posted by Varyon

I think I'm having issues following you here. You clearly seem to have two different problems with the suggested rule. One is getting the bonus for free - which is easy enough of a fix, you can simply charge for it if you see fit. Your other problem is that you see it giving unrealistic results because it increases the chances of someone penetrating armor. Why I'm having trouble following you is that you seem to only realize one of these problems at a time - you consider it realistic when discussing if we should charge for it, then later turn around and consider it unrealistic when discussing its impact on armor.

I've posted several times that if you going to amend damage overall either by reducing it or increasing DR then my opinion on this may well change.

Originally Posted by Varyon

So, before we go further - do you think this rule is realistic, or do you not?

To an extent, but I'd cap any bonus to max 1-2 pts. And in GURPS terms, it shouldn't be free (however you want to get to 'free')

Originally Posted by Varyon

This assumes a character will only ever face foes that have the same ST. That is, when an ST 14 halberdier comes across an ST 10 squire wearing DR 5 munitions plate, he won't attack him but instead find someone of comparable ST to engage (as he otherwise has a 72% shot at cutting through).

It assumes nothing of the sort, your assuming that the such a wide range of ST's exist in relevant quantities. Oh and I notice you weighted the setup so that the High ST get the leverage of the big weapon and the low ST gets munition plate.

If nothing else ST14 cost 40 points, well for some levels in resources I can buy that Squire better armour than that.

I said High ST balances against high ST, Not high ST with halberds balances against normal ST wearing munitions plate.

Guess what High ST may just not be that realistic. And the problem your running into here is expecting realistic results from unrealistic set ups.

And that's what all these debates always revolve around

Originally Posted by Varyon

Yes, it exacerbates an existing problem. Fix the existing problem, and this is no longer an issue. With a more realistic damage scale, that ST 14 halberdier from above would do 1.4d swing, which would become 2.1d cut with the +5 from the halberd (see here). That's 1d*2, and a 1/6 chance of hitting a weak point in armor and managing to (just) break through isn't too unrealistic. Make our halberdier one of the best, with a skill of DX+7, and that jumps to 2.52d, or 1d*2+2. Now he's got a 50% chance of pulling it off, which I agree is a bit too high, but that's probably more an issue with resolution (3d6 probably gives a more accurate spread, but that would require multiplying the result by 0.84, changing things to a 1/4 chance of breaking through). A Fine or Very Fine halberd will, of course, make things a bit worse, but at least now we're a good deal closer to reality.
(I should note that if you want to comment on the alternative damage scale I reference above, the linked thread is the appropriate place to do so)

Ok so fine yes if you change the underlying system then your tweak may not be unbalanced in terms of damage vs. armour when your ST14 Halberdier goes up against DR5 plate.

However I suspect you just end up with issues with High skill giving you unrealistic results vs. armour rather than high ST, (and of of course high skill in combination with high ST)

EDIT: OK I've looked at the link you gave me sorry it's not very clear how the progression fits onto of the basic damage? Is it (St + Weapon dam mod + progression bonus to ST)/10* all converted into dice and adds?

*assuming realistic Swing

I'll have play and reply in that thread.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Figured, ok but as WM is 20pts for single weapon and is cinematic you seem o have nerfed a cinematic advantage to make your realistic tweak work?

There are rumors that an atomic breakdown of Weapon Master ([n] for damage bonus, [m] for reduced Rapid Strike Penalties, etc) may see publication in the near future, but for now we'll have to work with what we have. Under my system, +1 progression is worth approximately [8] (it's +2 difficulty per +1 progression), so that leaves us with [12]. Are halved Rapid Strike and Multiple Defenses penalties, along with access to cinematic Skills and Techniques worth [12]? Arguably so, but perhaps not - as I've given characters with TbaM more resilient limbs (for purposes of things like Hurting Yourself and Parries), it may be appropriate to have Weapon Masters' weapons be more resilient (hence the reason Li Mu Bai is able to fend off the Green Destiny with nothing more than a reed).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Yeah refining the instances of Karate down to a distinct subset of it use doesn't make you comparison any better.

Whereas your refining it down to a distinct subset (being unarmed, despite such a situation making weapons skills unusable) is perfectly legitimate?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Especially as my point still stands Karate even with a karate skill weapon and the karate bonus is still less damaging them a melee skill and relevant weapon. So saying "I'm only matching the Karate bonus" ignores the reality of the karate bonus in effect.

Long weapons are typically more damaging than short ones, that's a big part of why we use them. I have no issue with a sword being more damaging than a Karate strike. For balance purposes, I consider +2 damage as being +2 damage, regardless of if the initial damage were 1d-3 or 20d (for realism purposes, however, I consider +2 on 1d-3 to be a massive boost compared to +2 on 20d).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I agree with you the bladed hand. However if you're having to cite the bladed hand as proof that you comparison is valid, well that's not good is it?

So, what you're telling me is that RAW works, so long as we don't use RAW? While Karate is typically restricted to thrust damage, and perhaps should always be so restricted, RAW allows for swing damage for Karate - at which point that +2/die can easily become +4 damage (an ST 13 karateka does more damage with the bladed hand than an ST 13 swordsman does with a thrusting broadsword).
Also, while swing damage is inappropriate for Bladed Hand if it simply emulates claws, the intent may be for the weapon to represent longer blades more comparable to knives, which would qualify for swing damage.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Well you should because it puts your comparison in context.

GURPS doesn't charge differently for a +2 to damage if base damage is 1d-3 or 20d, and appears to consider it equivalent in each case.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Very true., but again irrelevant to the actual bonus in play. If I increase 2 by 100% and 5 by 20% the firt increase is 5x greater then the second. But the reality is the second number is still greater then the first.

Assuming the 2 and 5 are average damage numbers, keep in mind that before the increases the character with 5 damage has already paid more to get that - regardless of if his "payment" is in the form of higher ST, a better Innate Attack, or using a better weapon. Also keep in mind that the 100% increase from 2 would cost more than the 20% increase from 5 (the first is +2, the second +1).

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Increases, bonuses etc in abstract are well abstract, context is king.

Except GURPS already does its bonuses and the like in abstract. +1 DX costs [20] regardless of if you're a soldier in World War II or a politician in Transhuman Space.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

To an extent, but I'd cap any bonus to max 1-2 pts. And in GURPS terms, it shouldn't be free (however you want to get to 'free')

There we are then. I think it's realistic for the skill bonus to go beyond Striking ST 2 (and once you get too far beyond it you're at cinematic levels of skill anyway, at which point I see no reason to stop), but whatever works for you.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

It assumes nothing of the sort, your assuming that the such a wide range of ST's exist in relevant quantities. Oh and I notice you weighted the setup so that the High ST get the leverage of the big weapon and the low ST gets munition plate.

I'm assuming they exist at all - because they did. Do you honestly believe there was never a case where a strong halberdier came up against someone in munitions plate?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

If nothing else ST14 cost 40 points, well for some levels in resources I can buy that Squire better armour than that.

So all soldiers on the historical battlefield had equal GURPS point values?

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I said High ST balances against high ST, Not high ST with halberds balances against normal ST wearing munitions plate.

The discussion was about reality, wherein a strong man wielding a halberd and facing down an average man in munitions plate probably wasn't an extremely rare occurrence. Regardless, we should probably drop this part of the argument so that we don't derail the thread into yet another "GURPS ST-based damage vs DR is unrealistic" debate.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

EDIT: OK I've looked at the link you gave me sorry it's not very clear how the progression fits onto of the basic damage? Is it (St + Weapon dam mod + progression bonus to ST)/10* all converted into dice and adds?

It's dice of damage equal to ST/10 + (Damage Modifiers)*ST/100. The progression bonus should simply modify ST, although I run it as a Damage Modifier instead (giving thrust a bit of a boost). Note for damage modifiers I'm simply trying to match the effect of RAW - a +1 to damage for thrust is equivalent to a +2 to ST, while a +1 to damage for swing is equivalent to a +1 to ST. I set it to mimic this at ST 10. Regardless, questions and comments for that system belong in its thread.