Steve Jackson Games Forums Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

 Thread Tools Display Modes
05-24-2010, 07:11 AM   #11
TJA

Join Date: Oct 2004
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole for example, one of the issues with ST-based damage is how quickly it adds up to "I can punch or hit you with a stick with more wounding and penetration than an assault rifle." this is especially egregious with swing damage, particularly in combination with things like Weapon Master.
But assault rifles do 3d, 4d, 5d, 6d, 7d of damage, pi, pi+ or p++ and that 10, 20 or even 30 times per second!
And all this on a range upto some thousand yards!
A Melee swing will always be less efficient.

Not even a ST 20, 3d+2 + Weapon Master = 3d+8 = 5d+1 who uses All-Out-Attack with 3 attacks per second (All-Out and Rapid Strike) can go so far!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole One "fix" I've been tempted to try is to make basic damage equal to ST/10 dice. Swing would be (say) double this (though that represents 4x as much energy in the blow...double damage is a big deal). This would mean ST10 is 1d, ST20 only 2d thrust; at 1.5x, that would be about 1d+2 and 3d, respectively, for swing. The modifiers (like broadsword doing sw+1) would then also scale, as (say) +1/die.
I like this approach!

Do you say, that swing would be 2* thrust?
Or 1.5* thrust?

And the modifiers would would be multiplied as well:
sw+3 at ST 50 would be multiplied with 50/10 for a final 5d+15?!?

One problem i have is, that it is difficult to apply damages for ST between full tens. The more regular tables use the Xd-1, Xd, Xd+1, Xd+2, ... way to calculate this.
__________________
4E books: Basic, Powers, Fantasy, Magic, Thaumatology, High Tech, Ultra-Tech, Martial Art, Supers, Space (SC only), Spaceships plus GCA and 66 of 3E books
PDF: 4E as above plus Bio-Tech, DF and more

05-24-2010, 07:18 AM   #12
TJA

Join Date: Oct 2004
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gudiomen Also, by your proposal, you end up with incredible differences in damage. Which means a guy with half the ST can do as much damage as a guy with double the ST if the first is using swinging weapons and the second is using thrusting. This sort of makes everything extreme.
But this is just true for ST upto 27 anyway!
Why should it be different for greater ST?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gudiomen I'm kind of comfortable with the current model, can't say if it's logical or not, but it works for me. The very few times that I stated gods in my settings, it played rather well, and allowed our divine/demonic entities to use whatever weapons fit their style, instead of all using warhammers or something.
Now, this is NOT about what works for you or me, of if i will ever use such ST in my games at all.

It is about the game system itself - call it a theroretical musing :)
__________________
4E books: Basic, Powers, Fantasy, Magic, Thaumatology, High Tech, Ultra-Tech, Martial Art, Supers, Space (SC only), Spaceships plus GCA and 66 of 3E books
PDF: 4E as above plus Bio-Tech, DF and more

05-24-2010, 07:22 AM   #13
TJA

Join Date: Oct 2004
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Darekun I slapped together a table to analyze this for 4ed: http://darekun.dnsdojo.net/BasicDamage.html (uses JavaScript and , only tested in Firefox 2) Basically, from ST: 10 to ST: 27 swing is twice thrust, and thrust is roughly linear; up to ST: 10 the same is true, but with a different line, so it hits the origin; and above ST: 27, swing settles down to thrust+2d.
Great graphic, thanx!

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Darekun Back in 3ed, for games like Here There Be Dragons(where the PCs are all dragons awakening in a vaguely-Shadowrun-esque world), I linearized damage - there was a base roll(I think it was 2d), which was multiplied by ST, multiplied for lever arm(swing was double thrust, but large weapons had higher multipliers instead of plusses), and then divided by a constant(100 or something round like that). Usually each weapon's net multiplier would be precalculated. I still think something like that is a more-accurate way to go. For the "GURPS in quadrature" idea I've been working on(squaring all damage and DR, probably with a scaling constant, for reasons of realism), it may be convenient to use a calculation like the one for Basic Lift.
Very interesting stuff!

I would like to read more :)
__________________
4E books: Basic, Powers, Fantasy, Magic, Thaumatology, High Tech, Ultra-Tech, Martial Art, Supers, Space (SC only), Spaceships plus GCA and 66 of 3E books
PDF: 4E as above plus Bio-Tech, DF and more

05-24-2010, 07:25 AM   #14
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by TJA Not even a ST 20, 3d+2 + Weapon Master = 3d+8 = 5d+1 who uses All-Out-Attack with 3 attacks per second (All-Out and Rapid Strike) can go so far!
Point, but he shouldn't be able to do it at ALL. It's possible (unlikely, but possible) to punch though plate or mail armor in GURPS without really bending the rules that much. Toss in Weapon Master, and you can rapidly get to the regime where you'd rather attack guys in heavy armor with a stick or sword than a gun. that's just wrong.

Quote:
 I like this approach! Do you say, that swing would be 2* thrust? Or 1.5* thrust?
Not sure. I'd playtest both and see where things rub the wrong way. The assumptions in GURPS seem to suggest that swing (2x damage) has about quadruple the energy of a thrust. that might be correct; 1.5x damage suggests about 2.25x energy; that also might be correct. Not sure.

Quote:
 And the modifiers would would be multiplied as well: sw+3 at ST 50 would be multiplied with 50/10 for a final 5d+15?!?
Yes. At ST20, you swing for 3d and if your weapon is sw+3, you get 3d+9.

The best way to handle this type of scaling is likely to apply a certain fraction of the damage of each roll to the weapon itself, so that really strong people using weapons not built for that ST can and will break them. Regularly. I've broken fencing sabres by misuse this way; larger weapons are no different; all materials will fail if overstressed.

Quote:
 One problem i have is, that it is difficult to apply damages for ST between full tens. The more regular tables use the Xd-1, Xd, Xd+1, Xd+2, ... way to calculate this.
Take the decimal remainder, multiply by 3.5, drop fractions.

This will give (say) 2d, 2d+1, 2d+2, 2d+3, 3d. the nd-1 point is harder to figure, but it would come between 2d+2 and 2d+3.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon

05-24-2010, 07:52 AM   #15
CrimsonDawn

Join Date: Mar 2006
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole Point, but he shouldn't be able to do it at ALL. It's possible (unlikely, but possible) to punch though plate or mail armor in GURPS without really bending the rules that much. Toss in Weapon Master, and you can rapidly get to the regime where you'd rather attack guys in heavy armor with a stick or sword than a gun. that's just wrong.
I don't really see where you're coming from with this.. if you have a guy with Weapon Master, you're already saying that he's a cinematic character. Also, the player of that character most likely wants his character to attack guys with sticks or swords, rather than guns, and is paying the points for that (and has the GM's permission, given that he has the advantage). And another player with Gunslinger will have his own ways of breaking the rules, if he's so inclined.. or not, but that's a GM call, for a certain kind of setting.

In a stat-normalized realistic campaign - the problem doesn't exist. You won't have ST 20 weapon masters running around.

05-24-2010, 10:39 AM   #16
Anthony

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole Point, but he shouldn't be able to do it at ALL.
Well, in that case, he should also pay a lot fewer points for ST; I'm fond of 5/level for ST, 2/level for striking ST (yeah, the parts cost more than the full stat; I don't have a problem with that). I'm also somewhat fond of a model in the form of: Damage = ST*X; X is roughly 0.06 (thrust) or 0.1 (swing), +0.02 per +1 on the weapon. Thus, a ST 20 martial punch (thr+1) would do 0.08*20 or 1.6d or 1d+2. That might reduce Striking ST to *1.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole It's possible (unlikely, but possible) to punch though plate or mail armor in GURPS without really bending the rules that much. Toss in Weapon Master, and you can rapidly get to the regime where you'd rather attack guys in heavy armor with a stick or sword than a gun. that's just wrong.
Um, pretty much no. You have to get way into the superhuman level (and have enough DR to be functionally immune) for melee to be preferable to an assault rifle.

05-24-2010, 11:07 AM   #17
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Anthony Well, in that case, he should also pay a lot fewer points for ST; I'm fond of 5/level for ST, 2/level for striking ST (yeah, the parts cost more than the full stat; I don't have a problem with that). I'm also somewhat fond of a model in the form of: Damage = ST*X; X is roughly 0.06 (thrust) or 0.1 (swing), +0.02 per +1 on the weapon. Thus, a ST 20 martial punch (thr+1) would do 0.08*20 or 1.6d or 1d+2. That might reduce Striking ST to *1.
What I have in my proposal is basically ST*0.1 for thrust and ST*.15 for swing (or maybe ST*0.2); the first proposal is sw = +50% more than thrust.

Yours is basically the same, but down one step, with ST*0.06 and ST*0.1; still +50%. There's only a slight difference from my proposal and yours; playtesting would work it out. For recosting ST, well yes. I think i mentioned that; if not, I should have.

Quote:
 Um, pretty much no. You have to get way into the superhuman level (and have enough DR to be functionally immune) for melee to be preferable to an assault rifle.
ST17 with a swung weapon is 3d-1. WM full version is +2/die. This is 3d+5, or 4d+1. Add in an axe or sword (+3 and +1, IIRC) and you're at 4d+4 and 4d+2, both are entirely within the "normal" non-superhuman budget and basically equivalent to penetration out of an M4 carbine.

And if you punch through DR, you've penetrated; we've tried to handwave this away and rationalize, including in the upcoming Low Tech rules, but there you go.

It's more egregious when you compare ST-based damage to pistols, of course, since 2d+2 for the 9mm is far more easily attained, but still, you are in a territory where "guns are better" starts to get a little squishy.

Of course, with the pistol or rifle, you get tens to hundreds of yards range, ten to thirty shots (100 with a C-mag), and RoF bonuses; for melee, you get to use full skill more often, though, since range penalties stack up quickly.

My point, which still holds, is that a dude swinging an axe rapidly gets to the point where he can really do things that are implausible with human ST alone.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon

 05-24-2010, 11:13 AM #18 lexington   Join Date: Jan 2010 Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage You know looking at the rules at Supers 120 for enormous weapons I think the benefit of swing damage is meant to be telescoped into the weapon damage bonuses. The bonus for using a swinging weapon increased more rapidly than for a thrusting weapon. Specifically: "The swing damage bonus is also proportional to length. On the other hand, the thrust damage bonus is proportional to the square root of length; making a spear twice as long gives it twice the weight, which boosts its damage, but the doubled length by itself has no effect on thrust damage." So that super using the Eiffel Tower as a club gets massively more damage than than his buddy that uses CN Tower like a spear. Presumably at high ST the length of a human arm just isn't long enough to translate into that much extra force.
05-24-2010, 11:17 AM   #19
Anthony

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole ST17 with a swung weapon is 3d-1. WM full version is +2/die. This is 3d+5, or 4d+1. Add in an axe or sword (+3 and +1, IIRC) and you're at 4d+4 and 4d+2, both are entirely within the "normal" non-superhuman budget and basically equivalent to penetration out of an M4 carbine.
I specified assault rifle for a reason. Doing the same damage as a fully automatic ranged weapon with a hand weapon is not tempting.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole Of course, with the pistol or rifle, you get tens to hundreds of yards range, ten to thirty shots (100 with a C-mag), and RoF bonuses; for melee, you get to use full skill more often, though, since range penalties stack up quickly.
At ranges where you can use the axe at all, the ranged weapon doesn't have a skill penalty.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole My point, which still holds, is that a dude swinging an axe rapidly gets to the point where he can really do things that are implausible with human ST alone.
Granted.

05-24-2010, 11:50 AM   #20
CrimsonDawn

Join Date: Mar 2006
Re: Rationale for the progression of ST-based damage

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DouglasCole ST17 with a swung weapon is 3d-1. WM full version is +2/die. This is 3d+5, or 4d+1. Add in an axe or sword (+3 and +1, IIRC) and you're at 4d+4 and 4d+2, both are entirely within the "normal" non-superhuman budget and basically equivalent to penetration out of an M4 carbine. (snip) My point, which still holds, is that a dude swinging an axe rapidly gets to the point where he can really do things that are implausible with human ST alone.
Isn't the axe-guy doing things without human ST alone? Weapon Master?

I think a realistic ST 17 guy would not have Weapon Master, and be something like 600 lbs*.. he should dish out some serious damage with an an axe, but still is somewhat behind from 4d+4.

*If you follow the reasonable formula for living creature's weight from HP from Fantasy - very usable for realistic calculations, not so for usual PC's

 Tags damage, supers, table

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Fnords are Off [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Illuminati Headquarters     SJ Games Discussion     Daily Illuminator     Forum Feedback and Help Warehouse 23     Warehouse 23 General Discussion     Warehouse 23 Digital     Pyramid Munchkin     Munchkin 101     Munchkin     Munchkin Collectible Card Game     Other Munchkin Games Roleplaying     Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game         DFRPG Resources     GURPS         GURPS Resources         GURPS Character Assistant     Transhuman Space     Traveller     The Fantasy Trip         The Fantasy Trip: House Rules     In Nomine     Roleplaying in General     Play By Post Board and Card Games     Car Wars         Car Wars Old Editions     Ogre and G.E.V.         Ogre Video Game         Ogre Scenarios     Board and Dice Games     Card Games     Miniatures The Gnomes of Zurich     The Industry     Conventions     Trading Post     Gamer Finder

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:35 PM.

 -- Default Style ---- Classic Forum Colors Contact Us - Steve Jackson Games - Privacy Statement - Top