What has high SM ever done for us?

[jacobmuller]

Originally Posted by Varyon

One thing I've considered, although I suspect it would go too far, is instead of giving a straight percentage discount, give characters a set ST (following the Size and Speed/Range Table) for each SM

I like it - to whom do I give credit if I use it in my house rules?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

I like it - to whom do I give credit if I use it in my house rules?

Just go with "Varyon." You'll absolutely want to playtest it first, however - as I noted, I rather suspect it goes too far.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Varyon

One thing I've considered, although I suspect it would go too far, is instead of giving a straight percentage discount, give characters a set ST (following the Size and Speed/Range Table) for each SM, and it's [+10] for every +10% to ST. So an SM -2 halfling has ST 5 [0], and every +1 to ST is worth [+20], while an SM +2 giant has ST 20 [0], and every +1 to ST is worth [+5].


To OP, this thread is likely to be of interest to you.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Just go with "Varyon." You'll absolutely want to playtest it first, however - as I noted, I rather suspect it goes too far.

Its probably worth it if you assign SM a base cost to get to that point... and that might be leveled fairly. I'm not sure what the cost per SM should be... between 10 and 20 sounds right... maybe... might be worth messing around with that playtest.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Its probably worth it if you assign SM a base cost to get to that point... and that might be leveled fairly. I'm not sure what the cost per SM should be... between 10 and 20 sounds right... maybe... might be worth messing around with that playtest.

With normal ST a leveled cost is almost essential. With logST, you can make it a flat +X ST per size increase.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Its probably worth it if you assign SM a base cost to get to that point... and that might be leveled fairly. I'm not sure what the cost per SM should be... between 10 and 20 sounds right... maybe... might be worth messing around with that playtest.

Another idea would be to have the amount of ST you get for [10] simply scale with SSR, but not change the [0] point away from 10 - basically the current discount system, but on steroids. For SM+1, you get +1.5 to ST per [10], for SM+2, you get +2 to ST per [10], for SM-2, you get +0.5 to ST per [10], and so forth. This encourages large characters to be strong and small characters to be weak (you get a lot of points for buying down ST), but again, I feel may go too far.

At the very least, you should probably change the current discount to work in reverse for negative SM, so that an SM-2 character pays [12] per +1 ST (+20%)... and gets back [-12] per -1 ST, encouraging small characters to be weak (as it stands, a tiny SM-6 pixie has no more incentive to be weak than an SM+0 human).

[Anders]

Originally Posted by RedMattis

That's a lot less than I was expecting considering a SM 8 creature would probably end up weighing about 2000 ton, and by your measurement a cow is less than half a ton of meat.

In real life, calorie requirements scale as m^0.75. That works up to a 2000 ton creature needing about 2,400 times as much food as a human. A halfling (weighing 1/8 of a human) would need about 1/5 the food. Now all you have to do is figure out the size of the stomach and you're set to go.

Of course, this may be a little too complicated. We already have the perception that GURPS requires calculus to run.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by CarrionPeacock

Higher SM makes you an easy target, hitting average sized foes harder, require more food, armor and weapon are more expensive.
Yes, it increases the cycle of poisons, makes indirect magic more expensive to affect you and grappling better but that's trading serious constant disadvantage for minor situational advantage.
So really, what has high SM ever done for us?

In lower TL games cheap ST/HP, greater reach, and easy grappling is a very powerful combination. It also adds to Intimidation.

In and of itself, being large is probably a bit of a disadvantage, but combined with high ST it's pretty good, especially in settings where lethal combat isn't too common - grappling is a great way to shut someone down without killing them or even harming them much, and a decent Intimidation skill backed by obvious size and strength is a good way to encourage people to not even consider violence in the first place.

So, yes, in a game of high-/ultra-tech murder-hobos large size isn't worth much. In a low-/high-tech game where non-lethal violence is common, it's great.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Anders

In real life, calorie requirements scale as m^0.75. That works up to a 2000 ton creature needing about 2,400 times as much food as a human. A halfling (weighing 1/8 of a human) would need about 1/5 the food. Now all you have to do is figure out the size of the stomach and you're set to go.

Of course, this may be a little too complicated. We already have the perception that GURPS requires calculus to run.

In GURPS Template Toolkit 2: Races I used the 2/3 power rather than the 3/4 power. That's not a huge factor of error (the multiplier for your 2000 ton creature is 1000 rather than 2400, and for realistically huge or tiny creatures the factor is smaller), and it makes food intake per day proportional to Basic Lift.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by whswhs

In GURPS Template Toolkit 2: Races I used the 2/3 power rather than the 3/4 power. That's not a huge factor of error (the multiplier for your 2000 ton creature is 1000 rather than 2400, and for realistically huge or tiny creatures the factor is smaller), and it makes food intake per day proportional to Basic Lift.

It's also consistent with Bio-Tech, which removes a potential source of conflict and confusion.

[Anthony]

Honestly, it's probably more accurate to just scale food requirements on BL (or BL*Move) and ignore size (it's rather tricky to actually determine the equivalent of BL for animals, but it's not the 2/3 power anyway).