Ramming Speed vs Throwing Speed with a side order of Log ST

[Mark Skarr]

I can agree with that as a general idea. Throwing should not always be superior. It should be different.

While it wouldn't be "difficult" to give Pink Light a 28d punch, it would require 50 levels of Striking LogST (which, isn't that expensive). Otherwise, it would require a major re-write of the LogST rules, which I don't think we're up for. Or is really needed.

Looking at it "normally," most people will never see these results. Really a sword that does sw+2 isn't that far off from what the average Fantasy character is going to see for damage. We're in the Supers zone, so, what we think might not fit effectively.

Using a weapon drastically increases the amount of damage that can be done. (The 27d cut throwing axe comes to mind.) If she did 28d in a punch, how much would that bonus have been? Was it +10/die (based off of what I saw, that's what it looked like), so it would be 28d+280 (or 108d cut)?! That's above and beyond (and awesome!).

I think, for LogST, we need to see fewer "huge" bonuses (like sw+17) and see more like sw+2/die. That would scale better with LogST.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Otherwise, it would require a major re-write of the LogST rules, which I don't think we're up for. Or is really needed.

It's not *that* major. Just need to rewrite the damage table.

[Kalzazz]

Well, my proposal was 'using whatever means you deem appropriate, calculate an object's value as a throwing weapon, then, use that same value for melee with that object'

If you use the same value for both, however you arrive at that value, you can't go far amiss

Most people will never see the results sure . . . . but for the people who can wield passenger sedans as personal weapons, it's important to make sure it works for them both as a throwie and in melee, without giving Murphy's Rules level advantage to one form of attack vs another

Since you mentioned Fantasy, I admit, for Fantasy my solution is to not use the throwing damage rules at all, I guesstimate weapon stats and treat the throwing attack as a throwing weapon

[Mark Skarr]

Sorry, at work, major issue I had to deal with when I walked in. It’s better now.

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's not *that* major. Just need to rewrite the damage table.

Well, it is major, because that would require the costs to be re-balanced as well. If we made the increase, say, +1d as opposed to +1 per level of LogST (which I think ramps up wa-ay to fast), we’d have to re-calculate the cost of Striking LogST, from 1 to, probably 4. That would take lifting ST down to 4 as well. But, that would break the lower levels of LogST.

What follows is a stream-of-consciousness, looking for an answer.

But, let’s change it from +1 per level to +2 for damage (starting at LogST 10). Every other level is a full die increase. That’s still pretty brutal, especially at the low levels. Pink Light’s Striking LogST of 40 would be . . . 15d+2/16d. But, a ST 12 would be 1d+2/2d and 14 would be 2d+2/3d. That [i]still[i/] seems too fast for non-supers to me.

If we kept the original LogST damage progression up to ST 16 (base human hard maximum for LogST), then increased it by +2 per level that would give Pink Light a damage of 14d/14d+2. I don’t like having asymmetrical damage progression values, though because we get caught in the old 3e trap of ST costing a different amount depending on how much you have.

Maybe the answer is that LogST has to cost more. Say 20 points per level. It would still be expensive. Pink Light’s LogST 35 would cost her a base of 500 points as opposed to the current base 250. We could then increase the damage curve to +1d per level, if we wanted, but, that still seems cheesy.

Or, maybe, we give LogST characters a discount when purchasing Super Throw. A couple of levels of that would even out the curve pretty aggressively. Pink Light, with 4 levels of Super throw (and her base LogST distance) could throw the van 336 yards and would do (8d +9/die, +72) 28d+2. Granted, that van, as a slam would be doing 228d of damage . . . but, that seems more in line with our other maths.

Edit: The I-Beam, would do 21d+2 in that throw, with 4 levels of Super Throw.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Well, it is major, because that would require the costs to be re-balanced as well.

Honestly, if you allow throwing things for damage that's remotely appropriate, you need to rebalance the costs, so it's no extra effort to also rebalance them for melee damage.

[Mark Skarr]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Honestly, if you allow throwing things for damage that's remotely appropriate, you need to rebalance the costs, so it's no extra effort to also rebalance them for melee damage.

Fair enough.

I'm not adverse to raising the cost of LogST in general (it is a bigger bang-for-your-buck), but, I'm hoping to find an answer that doesn't revolve around that.

A few levels of super throw does seem to help, and it's already a fairly good discount for what we're getting. Buying +50 levels of LogST (Only for throws) would also work, if a little kludgy.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Sorry, at work, major issue I had to deal with when I walked in. It’s better now.



Well, it is major, because that would require the costs to be re-balanced as well. If we made the increase, say, +1d as opposed to +1 per level of LogST (which I think ramps up wa-ay to fast), we’d have to re-calculate the cost of Striking LogST, from 1 to, probably 4. That would take lifting ST down to 4 as well. But, that would break the lower levels of LogST.

What follows is a stream-of-consciousness, looking for an answer.

But, let’s change it from +1 per level to +2 for damage (starting at LogST 10). Every other level is a full die increase. That’s still pretty brutal, especially at the low levels. Pink Light’s Striking LogST of 40 would be . . . 15d+2/16d. But, a ST 12 would be 1d+2/2d and 14 would be 2d+2/3d. That [i]still[i/] seems too fast for non-supers to me.

If we kept the original LogST damage progression up to ST 16 (base human hard maximum for LogST), then increased it by +2 per level that would give Pink Light a damage of 14d/14d+2. I don’t like having asymmetrical damage progression values, though because we get caught in the old 3e trap of ST costing a different amount depending on how much you have.

Maybe the answer is that LogST has to cost more. Say 20 points per level. It would still be expensive. Pink Light’s LogST 35 would cost her a base of 500 points as opposed to the current base 250. We could then increase the damage curve to +1d per level, if we wanted, but, that still seems cheesy.

Or, maybe, we give LogST characters a discount when purchasing Super Throw. A couple of levels of that would even out the curve pretty aggressively. Pink Light, with 4 levels of Super throw (and her base LogST distance) could throw the van 336 yards and would do (8d +9/die, +72) 28d+2. Granted, that van, as a slam would be doing 228d of damage . . . but, that seems more in line with our other maths.

Edit: The I-Beam, would do 21d+2 in that throw, with 4 levels of Super Throw.

Having it progress at +1d for every +2 LogST past 16 looks an awful lot like the Extreme Damage progression from that old Eidetic Memory column. It's still linear, though so at some point you're going to have to give up on keeping the old collision/Slam dice. Damage from throwing should not be orders of magnitude greater than damage from melee, but should be based on your Thrust dice, possibly at +1 per die if it's a really handy weight compared to your BL for throwing.

Now, if we come up with a reasonable formula for throwing distance and Move, we could work backward from those Moves and the HP of a homogenous object of that mass, and the corresponding dice of Thrust damage, in order to derive the new collision/Slam damage formula or table.

[Mark Skarr]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

Having it progress at +1d for every +2 LogST past 16 looks an awful lot like the Extreme Damage progression from that old Eidetic Memory column. It's still linear, though so at some point you're going to have to give up on keeping the old collision/Slam dice. Damage from throwing should not be orders of magnitude greater than damage from melee, but should be based on your Thrust dice, possibly at +1 per die if it's a really handy weight compared to your BL for throwing.

I agree, in general. I could see the range being -1/die to +1/die depending on how useful the object is for throwing.

Originally Posted by vitruvian

Now, if we come up with a reasonable formula for throwing distance and Move, we could work backward from those Moves and the HP of a homogenous object of that mass, and the corresponding dice of Thrust damage, in order to derive the new collision/Slam damage formula or table.

That's part of why I liked my damage idea from a couple of pages ago, it gave high numbers, but they weren't untenable.

(Thrust damage + damage/die from speed/range table for impact speed; damage capped at HP d)

I think part of the solution would be letting homogeneous/unliving objects keep their bonus HP, but figure their slam damage from their non-modified HP. If we keep the original formula. The advantage of my system was that the HP only capped the damage, and it made sense that a homogeneous object could take/hit harder than one that wasn't.

Edit:
Another option, is to go the "Growth" route.

If you have a LogST of 20-25, you must have Super Throw 1.
If you have a LogST of 26-30, you must have Super Throw 2.
If you have a LogST of +5, you mush have a Super Throw +1

It looks like my original numbers were a little off . . . we need Super Throw to come in 1/2 levels.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

I agree, in general. I could see the range being -1/die to +1/die depending on how useful the object is for throwing.


That's part of why I liked my damage idea from a couple of pages ago, it gave high numbers, but they weren't untenable.

(Thrust damage + damage/die from speed/range table for impact speed; damage capped at HP d)

I think part of the solution would be letting homogeneous/unliving objects keep their bonus HP, but figure their slam damage from their non-modified HP. If we keep the original formula. The advantage of my system was that the HP only capped the damage, and it made sense that a homogeneous object could take/hit harder than one that wasn't.

Edit:
Another option, is to go the "Growth" route.

If you have a LogST of 20-25, you must have Super Throw 1.
If you have a LogST of 26-30, you must have Super Throw 2.
If you have a LogST of +5, you mush have a Super Throw +1

It looks like my original numbers were a little off . . . we need Super Throw to come in 1/2 levels.

Those proposals would still result either in throwing damage for characters with, say, 40+ LogST being *whole* lot higher than their striking damage, or having to revise the ST Damage table even more, it seems like.

Better to pick the damage progression you like, then pick the throwing distance progression that makes sense to you (something like x10 distance for each +15 LogST makes sense to me), and then just use those to determine your collision/Slam damage for all objects, not just thrown ones, rather than using any form of the old, linear in velocity, Move x HP/100 formula.

[Mark Skarr]

I would go with 10 levels as it's Log10, and not Log15.

That sorta moves into my idea where we have to change the damage at certain intervals.

Say, LogST 20, being 10x as strong as LogST 10, but only doing 3x as much damage, gets a boost from 3d to say 4d, and then the damage changes to +2/level. At 30, instead of it being 13d, since it's supposed to be 10x as strong as 20, we boost it to 20d, and each level is a die. Instead of ST 40 being 30d, we make it 50d, and each level gives 2 dice.

So, Pink Light's ST 35 would be base 25d, with Striking LogST 40 being 50d. Obviously, she wouldn't need the Striking LogST.

So 20 would be 4d, +2 dmg/ST, x2 to throwing range.
30 would be 10d, +1d dmg/ST, x5 to throwing range.
40 would be 20d, +2d dmg/ST, x10 to throwing range.
50 would be 40d, +3d dmg/ST, x20 to throwing range.
60 would be 70d, +5d dmg/ST, x50 to throwing range.
70 would be 120d, +10d dmg/ST, x100 to throwing range.

I think, at that point, raising the cost of LogST to 15 (or 20) would be fair.

Edit X:
A LogST 30 is an old ST of 100, with a th/sw of 11d/13d.
A LogST 40 is an old ST of 317, with a th/sw of 32d/34d.
A LogST 50 is an old ST of 1,000, with a th/sw of 101d/103d.
A LogST 60 is an old ST of 3,163, with a th/sw of 317d/319d.

So, the damage curve isn't in line with the old ST, but I think it may be playable. Going to do some maths to check on throwing.