How much XP per 'level'

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

which is rules wrong.

 

Sigh. All right. Let's try this, nice and simple.

 

Normal. 10 STR, SPD2, REC 4. In a superheroic game, using encumbrance. Picks up 100 kg. Stands there. He is is using 2 END per turn, recovers 4. Why exactly does he have to drop the object? He has plenty of END, it's not more than his STR. How is this "rules wrong?"

 

If you are using Encumbrance (and I admit I have never seen a Superheroic game that did - apparently, including yours and presumably Hugh's) he can't move, but he can stand there and his OCV/DCV is unaffected.

 

Those are the rules, as written and to me they don't scan with "barely lift, stagger a few steps and drop" because the way they actually work is "pick up, hold, dodging and attacking is unaffected but can't move at all".

 

So yeah - whether you use LTE and encumbrance or not, the game mechanics don't reflect the description very well.

 

Encumbrance Rules are not optional (as was first thought by even myself).

AND in later posts you asserted the Text was essentially meaningless.

 

No, I asserted two things. First: that it gave no details: "stagger a few steps" - how many steps? 2? 10? 50? "Barely lift" Barely lift how high? Knee height? Waist height? Shoulder height? You are suggesting that shoulder height is fine with you as long as he doesn't move (it is with me too - and pretty much every other GM I can think of) but it matches poorly with "barely lift".

Second, that it contradicted the other rules. If using encumbrance rules "a few steps translates to "no movement at all" since that states pretty clearly that out prototypical normal has a total move of -2". If I'm wrong, please explain how "a few steps" (it takes only 3-4 to make 1" movement") squares with the -8" movement allowance given under the encumbrance rules.

 

I don't have a problem with the idea that you don't like the specific penalties Encumbrance imposes.

 

But the fact of the matter remains... The rules do take into account this idea of both lifting and carrying very heavy loads.

 

Really? You have just indicated that you didn't use the encumbrance rules in your games (otherwise you'd know them and the degree to which they are optional), and in the post prior that, suggested that actually you don't have a problem with the normal lifting 100 kg onto his shoulders or even over his head, suggesting that it's the movement that's the problem and that inflicts the penalties.... though you don't use those rules yourself.....

 

In other words, you're doing what virtually every GM does - using the game mechanics - not the rules as written.

 

Now I *have* used the rules - and it rapidly became clear that I had to change one or the other, because you can't use both: they contradict each other. Or does the description of STR have to be read literally but the -8" to movement not have to be?

 

That's a separate - but related - issue to exactly what the penalties are - yes, they are too punitive, but it doesn't take much to fix that problem.

 

As it stands, I decreased the penalties on encumbrance slightly (but didn't remove them) and ignored the descriptive text on STR. If the mechanics are done right, you don't HAVE to have the description because the mechanics enforce behaviour consistent with it.

 

As it stands (in my game) the encumbrance (and LTE) rules now enforce the "you can't carry that very far, or very fast" aspect, and also make using your full STR for lifting a bit problematic - not only do you get exhausted quickly, but you are are reduced CV and reduced movement - in other words, getting rapidly exhausted and staggering along. I also don't have to worry about those ill-defined things like "barely lift" or "a few steps" or "stagger" since a simple change specifies all of those things.

 

cheers, Mark

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

There is more to lifting an object with your strength than the simple expenditure of energy (endurance), if you exceed the tensile strength of your muscles (strength) you will break them.

 

few |fyoō|

adjective & pronoun

1 ( a few) a small number of

 

I would assert 2-3 is an appropriately small number.

 

 

At one point you used the phrase "Mechanics Free Description"

 

Does everything require a number behind it? You can't take a description and logically interpret the results?

 

It seems to me if it doesn't appear in a table somewhere you don't believe it has consequences.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

There is more to lifting an object with your strength than the simple expenditure of energy (endurance)' date=' if you exceed the tensile strength of your muscles (strength) you will break them.[/quote']

 

Sure - but you normally need to go well beyond the normal limits of your strength to tear muscles*. You're making a huge jump here - and one for which again there is no rules justification: there's nothing even remotely suggesting you suffer BOD damage for trying to lift 100 kg or a little more at STR 10.

 

*Note: I said normally: as I know from my own experience it is possible to tear muscles if you move badly even when you are not lifting anything at all - apart from your own upper body.

 

I would assert 2-3 is an appropriately small number.

 

Ah - so three strides would take you about 1" - and you therefore reject the exact wording of the rules on page 250, in favour of adhering to the exact text on page 20? I used the word "contradict" advisedly, since the encumbrance rules make it plain that a normal can't move 100 kg at all, at all.

 

At one point you used the phrase "Mechanics Free Description"

 

Does everything require a number behind it? You can't take a description and logically interpret the results?

 

It seems to me if it doesn't appear in a table somewhere you don't believe it has consequences.

 

Actually that's pretty close to the truth (at least when it comes to games rules). If a 4d6 EB was described as "devastating" I would not pay much attention to the description - it's a 4d6 EB, for pete's sakes. Likewise, in most settings, a 20d6 EB is devastating, regardless of the description.

 

The consequences are what happens. If a 4d6 neural blaster is described as "4d6 NND: incapacitates target with excruciating pain leading rapidly to unconsciousness" then I wouldn't insist that a Brick with CON 20 was "incapacitated by pain" on being shot - though I'd tell him he felt pain. The 16 STUN he takes is the consequence - the descriptor is mechanics-free and there for flavour.

 

Same for the STR rules. The mechanics-free descriptor suggests minimal, hindered movement. The consequences (ie: rules) specify no hindrance (DCV unaffected in superheroic games) and no movement at all.

 

So the consquences in the rules as written are actually laid out if you use LTE and encumbrance - they're punitive at the heroic level and trivial at the superheroic level.

 

Once you start altering them - as I have done, or making up new consequences as you suggested with muscle-tearing, then you are in house rule territory. Which is (sigh) what I said in my first post.

 

And I admit, had the encumbrance rules not existed - and made the in-game consequences clear - I would probably have used the descriptor text as written and just house-ruled my way through questions of END-use, LTE and "how far you can move X".

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Heh - I used to work in a warehouse and I move weights when needed in the gym. My experience is the exact opposite. Getting a 70 kg roll of linoleum up onto my shoulder required far more effort than walking with it once it was actually up there. Same for weights - getting them up and balanced on my should requires more effort than walking away with them once there.

 

I suggest that the shape of that 70 kg of Lino has a lot to do with the difficulty of getting it up onto the shoulder. Hero doesn't handle weight distribution or leverage at all - if you have enough STR, you can lift an aircraft carrier just as easily from one end, waving it like a stick, as from the middle.

 

Which' date=' according to what you are writing now, is 100% true, since you are staying that the encumbrance rules only kick when you are moving. Of course, of you take this approach, someone carrying a heavy load can improve their DCV massively by, uuhh, stopping moving. Isn't that kind of weird?[/quote']

 

I would use "maintaining the weight off the ground? rather than "only if moving". Would you suggest a weightlifter (clearly trying to lift all his STR will allow) has the same DCV as an unencumbered person?

 

No' date=' the original post stated - and I've quoted it above - that as it stands, a normal can pick up and hold - essentially for as long as he likes (even if you use the optional LTE rules) - 100 kg. You have just [b']agreed with that[/b] and said as long as he doesn't move, that's fine, since hey, encumbrance only kicks in when he moves.

 

No, he can't - by the rules, he can lift that weight briefly, enough time to stagger forward a few steps. You're only reading the chart. He could, however, continue to lift and stagger each phase for an extended period of time. Which I have done with fairly heavy objects to get them where they needed to be. Unfortunately, the system does not handle "movement of less than 1"" on a granular basis.

 

If you are using the encumbrance rules then the ability to hold up heavy weights for ever changes. They would rapidly force a person just holding his maximum weight to drop it' date=' and if you add the optional LTE rules he'll get exhausted. Trouble is, if you use those rules, even people using casual STR rapidly become exhausted.[/quote']

 

How so? They use casual STR to heft the object, then spend what, 2 or 4 END per turn?

 

They are optional in that they are explicitly recommended not for use in Superheroic games - meaning they will be in use in some games and not in others. Or does the concept that the rules are all the words written in the description not apply in this case?

 

To me, they are not used in superhero games because encumbrance is not generally an issue in the genre. That is, Supers don't carry a ton of equipment around with them. Similarly, the LTE rules are generally not recommended for use in Supers games. However, that doesn't mean I would not invoke them when Ben Blaster, stuck behind a wall of force, decides to continually fire his 12d6 EB every phase until he rolls 24 BOD and breaks the 23 DEF force wall.

 

I don't think anyone's suggested "pushing at player's discretion". I agree that if it were allowed' date=' it can lead to some bizarre outcomes. I merely pointed out that the fact that NPCs can't push has little to no relevance to a discussion about what [b']PCs[/b] can do.

 

And I'm suggesting that it has no relevance to a discussion of what anyone, PC or otherwise, can routinely do.

 

As stated by the rules (p. 286 in 5th) people only lose LTE if they are passing the 1:2 threshold of END use to REC. In a superheroic game our prototypical normal can pick up a 100 kg object' date=' stagger with it as long as he is allowed (a few steps? However far that is: presumably somewhere between 1" and 6") and then rest for 6 seconds. He uses 1 END and has a REC of 4 - he can keep this up all day and lose no LTE. In a heroic game, as written, he can't move it all, since his move is reduced by -8".[/quote']

 

In both heroic and superheroic, he can run 24 meters per turn (6" x 2 for noncombat, but one phase of 2) all day and lose no LTE. He's using the same 1 end. That's start and stop movement at 7.2 km/hour all day. But if he walks at a steady pace of 3.6 km/hour (only using 1.5" of running, but using it every phase), he will exhaust himself, as LTE kicks in since he is now using 2 END per turn (1 end to move, minimum). This is a strict mechanical application of the rules to a long-term usage of an ability (running, rather than STR, in this case), just like your strict application of the STR rules designed for lift to a situation of carrying (moving or otherwise) over the long term.

 

If we go down to 50 kg (casual STR)' date=' again in a superheroic game, the normal can carry it without any penalty all day at normal speed, while in a heroic game, he'd be able to go 20 minutes at 2/3rds speed before collapsing from utter exhaustion and being unable to do much without burning STUN for the next hour (or 5 hours depending on how you prorate recovery). The math is simple - he's using 2 END due to encumbrance (50 kg) and 1 END to lift the object - 3 END vs 4 REC puts him in the 1/min LTE loss category, so he's used up all his END in 20 min.[/quote']

 

Now let me ask you a simple question. In a Superheroic game, how often do you need mechanics for a forced march for a group of Normals? To me, it is the lack of relevance of these rules that results in them not being recommended for a Supers game. If a situation where they are actually relevant arises, they would be my starting point for adjudicating that situation.

 

Agreed - this is one of the problems with the encumbramce rules I didn't bother to note - but in answer to the statement above that one' date=' "can't move at all" and "can't move out of the hex" come to the same thing when trying to actually move things over more than a single phase (and a total move of -2" would certainly imply to me "can't move at all")[/quote']

 

To me, it's a problem with the granularity of the system. A character can move to get out of the way of an attack between his own phases. Sometimes, that sidestep should step over the line between two hexes. We accept this for simplicity, not because it is 100% accurate.

 

It isn't - but then that's neither what I wrote' date=' nor what the rules state. A normal lifting 50kg has his DCV reduced by three to a total DCV of -1 (and yes, I know he can't actually go below 0, so maybe I should have written DCV 0 - either way, he remains a sitting duck)[/quote']

 

He starts with a 3 DCV. How does a reduction of 3 get him to minus 1? That's the source of my confusion.

 

And do so so poorly' date=' as noted, that house rules are all but mandatory, even if we accept the assertion that lifting an object over your head is easier than bearing the same object on your back - an assertion I do not in fact, accept.[/quote']

 

I suggest that the actual assertion is that "lifting an object over your head for a second or two is easier than bearing the same object on your back for an extended period of time

 

The problem with the statement you keep referring to is that there's no definition of "briefly" or "a few steps" (note - nothing anywhere in the rules says you cannot move while lifting the the object' date=' though for a normal human in a heroic setting, that would be implied by the encumbrance rules)[/quote']

 

There is no definition for "arm" or "biped" either. I would suggest "briefly" means "a short period of time, short enough that it does not matter for game purposes", which implies that holding the object does not last for the entirety of a phase.

 

Sigh. All right. Let's try this, nice and simple.

 

Normal. 10 STR, SPD2, REC 4. In a superheroic game, using encumbrance. Picks up 100 kg. Stands there. He is is using 2 END per turn, recovers 4. Why exactly does he have to drop the object? He has plenty of END, it's not more than his STR. How is this "rules wrong?"

 

Because the chart says it is the maximum he can lift and the rules say he can only hold that maximum up briefly.

 

No' date=' I asserted two things. First: that it gave no details: "stagger a few steps" - how many steps? 2? 10? 50?[/quote']

 

In context? A very short distance, less than 2 meters. So two or three steps. Perhaps we should eliminate "running" in favour of rules for stride length and number of steps taken per phase, but that seems excessively detailed to me.

 

"Barely lift" Barely lift how high? Knee height? Waist height? Shoulder height? You are suggesting that shoulder height is fine with you as long as he doesn't move (it is with me too - and pretty much every other GM I can think of) but it matches poorly with "barely lift".

 

I'm not actually suggesting shoulder height. "Barely lift" to me would get to knee level, stagger, stagger, drop.

 

Second' date=' that it contradicted the other rules. If using encumbrance rules "a few steps translates to "no movement at all" since that states pretty clearly that out prototypical normal has a total move of -2". If I'm wrong, please explain how "a few steps" (it takes only 3-4 to make 1" movement") squares with the -8" movement allowance given under the encumbrance rules.[/quote']

 

"stagger", to me, implies something less than a typical stride. However, I would replace the -8" provision with 1/8 of normal movement.

 

The rules fail somewhat at very small increments. How is it that a 1" move can move the same 2 meters in both a half move and a full move? Why can't I take two half moves instead of a full move and travel 2"?

[CTaylor]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I would say that the encumbrance rules are not in the "optional rules" portion of the book but it's as optional as any rule in the book. And certainly in a superheroic game it has absolutely no place.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I would use "maintaining the weight off the ground? rather than "only if moving". Would you suggest a weightlifter (clearly trying to lift all his STR will allow) has the same DCV as an unencumbered person?

 

Not at all - though in a superheroic game he does have an unaltered DCV and given the genre, I can live with that. Your question is specifically why I favour using the encumbrance rules - but I found that when I did, it became impossible for PCs to move objects which the STR rules said specifically they could lift and move a small distance.

 

Hence, my use of the word "contradiction".

 

I'm still not seeing why this is so hard to accept. For that matter, I'm not seeing what your argument is - it seems to shift from post to post. So now you are saying the reverse of the earlier posts that it's not movement but lifting, which encumbers? In that case, I'd agree - but it still doesn't address the contradiction I alluded to.

 

No' date=' he can't - by the rules, he can lift that weight briefly, enough time to stagger forward a few steps. You're only reading the chart. He could, however, continue to lift and stagger each phase for an extended period of time. Which I have done with fairly heavy objects to get them where they needed to be. Unfortunately, the system does not handle "movement of less than 1"" on a granular basis.[/quote']

 

Yep, I'm reading the chart. That's where the numeric values are given, after all. I don't think it's unreasonable that it should match the text.

 

To me' date=' they are not used in superhero games because encumbrance is not generally an issue in the genre. That is, Supers don't carry a ton of equipment around with them. Similarly, the LTE rules are generally not recommended for use in Supers games. However, that doesn't mean I would not invoke them when Ben Blaster, stuck behind a wall of force, decides to continually fire his 12d6 EB every phase until he rolls 24 BOD and breaks the 23 DEF force wall.[/quote']

 

And I'd agree. I know the movement penalties are supposed to be used in superheroic games, but I don't do so, and in truth, I don't know any GM who uses them. I don't have a problem with it, frankly. If the Incredible Bulk can lift a tank over his head without sinking up to his knees in the ground, I can accept that he can also run with it, without more harm to my suspension of disbelief.

 

However, I GM mostly heroic level games. There, it's an issue - and this I know, because it's come up multiple times: not just in my games.

 

And I'm suggesting that it has no relevance to a discussion of what anyone' date=' PC or otherwise, can [b']routinely[/b] do.

 

Ah, but it does define the upper limit of what's possible: if you can push in emergency situations and lift 200 kg without ripping the muscles from your bones, it's a pretty solid indicator that lifting 100 kg isn't going to do that to you.

 

 

In both heroic and superheroic' date=' he can run 24 meters per turn (6" x 2 for noncombat, but one phase of 2) all day and lose no LTE. He's using the same 1 end. That's start and stop movement at 7.2 km/hour all day. But if he walks at a steady pace of 3.6 km/hour (only using 1.5" of running, but using it every phase), he will exhaust himself, as LTE kicks in since he is now using 2 END per turn (1 end to move, minimum). This is a strict mechanical application of the rules to a long-term usage of an ability (running, rather than STR, in this case), just like your strict application of the STR rules designed for lift to a situation of carrying (moving or otherwise) over the long term.[/quote']

 

The point is reasonable, though in this case inaccurate - he has to accelerate up to running speed, taking an extra phase, so the runner will still get tired first. You can't go directly from a standstill to NCM.

 

Now let me ask you a simple question. In a Superheroic game' date=' how often do you need mechanics for a forced march for a group of Normals? To me, it is the lack of relevance of these rules that results in them not being recommended for a Supers game. If a situation where they are actually relevant arises, they would be my starting point for adjudicating that situation.[/quote']

 

I've already noted above, I don't use 'em in Superheroic games - I don't know anyone who does, and I'd agree that's because they are genre-inappropriate.

 

However, I mostly run heroic level games and the issue of "how much can we carry and how fast can we move?" comes up frequently. And it should be covered: unlike Supers, the pursuit or the race against time and terrain is a genre staple (both in fact, have come up in my current FH game, though the STR issue thankfully did not this time, since the players had plenty of pack animals)

 

To me' date=' it's a problem with the granularity of the system. A character can move to get out of the way of an attack between his own phases. Sometimes, that sidestep should step over the line between two hexes. We accept this for simplicity, not because it is 100% accurate.[/quote']

 

Acually we have specific rules (Dive for cover) when a character needs to get out of his hex to get out of the way of an attack. One can quibble about the mechanics used for that (I think it's unnecessarily complicated myself) but in this case the rules are there (and clear).

 

He starts with a 3 DCV. How does a reduction of 3 get him to minus 1? That's the source of my confusion.

 

No - the confusion is mine Ahem - I dashed that off and I was thinking, "2 END, 2 DCV". Sorry.

 

I suggest that the actual assertion is that "lifting an object over your head for a second or two is easier than bearing the same object on your back for an extended period of time

 

There is no definition for "arm" or "biped" either. I would suggest "briefly" means "a short period of time, short enough that it does not matter for game purposes", which implies that holding the object does not last for the entirety of a phase.

 

Which is reasonable - but now we're moving into the realms of "well, it could be interpreted like this" - nothing I have seen anywhere in the rules suggest that if you are holding a rope for a climbing team-mate, you have to drop him "because you can only hold that much weight for an instant".

 

To me, all this discussion seems to be adding extra layers of complication in an attempt to avoid accepting that the contradiction is there. Why not simply say "You know - there's a disconect here. It can be easily fixed by ..."

 

Because the chart says it is the maximum he can lift and the rules say he can only hold that maximum up briefly.

 

Ah - briefly. How briefly? A phase? You are now saying less (though I'd hazard a guess that this is not actually how you play, since I've never seen any GM do this). I'd always assumed a minimum of a phase, and based on real life, probbaly several phases. Certainly less than a minute. Based on the STR rules as written, any of those interpretations could be valid. Hence my use of the words "Mechanics-free".

 

Whne player are routinely performing heroic actions, falling off things and being caught, running away carrying fallen comrades, trying to hold up the descending portculis to allow a friend to wiggle underneath, etc, it's not like the issue rarely comes up. How much you can lift and how long you can hold it, is a basic issue.

 

You seem to be deciding that PCs can only hold their weight allowance for an instant - less than a phase - in order to try and reconcile the description with the mechanics. That's fair enough I suppose, but in a game where encumbrance is in play that makes it even more confusing and reduces playability further.

 

I'm not actually suggesting shoulder height. "Barely lift" to me would get to knee level' date=' stagger, stagger, drop.[/quote']

 

So how much can you get to shoulder height? How much can you lift over your head? You're suggesting it's impossible for a STR10 person (healthy-fitter than average person) to carry a similar character over his shoulder in a fireman's lift?

 

Seriously, by contorting your interpretation to try to conform to both sets of rules, you are simply ending up with more questions and further game issues.

 

"stagger"' date=' to me, implies something less than a typical stride. However, I would replace the -8" provision with 1/8 of normal movement.[/quote']

 

Ahhhhh .... now that makes sense! By doing what I advocated from the very beginning - using the encumbrance rules and some handwavium, you solve the problem.

 

I admit your solution is more realistic than the one I use: I don't want to have to calculate "1/8th" in game, so I use a flat penalty of -4" because it's simpler. But that bit of handwavium (house rule, if you like) resolves the contradiction. Now "stagger a few steps" becomes "move 1" (1/8th of 6") at -4DCV". If you use LTE in addition, the character doing this will be come exhausted after a very short period.

 

Voila! We now have a mechanical effect, that matches the flavor text: it gives the appropriate consequences (to use Ghost-Angel's phrase).

 

By reconciling the inherent contradiction in the rules (mostly due to that pesky -8" movement) and focusing on (and fixing) the mechanics, the problem goes away.

 

Because of course "barely lift" doesn't imply anything about lifting to head height, or shoulder height or ankle height: there's nothing in the rules about it - that's all made up. "Barely lift" covers both "grab with both hands and shuffle along just above the ground" as well as "kneel down, put on shoulder, stand up and stagger along under the weight".

 

If the mechanics are clear - and they are using the fix you suggested, or the one I use - then both actions are valid and match the flavour text and both make sense, leaving the GM and players a clear sense of what's possible. How you lift an object now depends on its weight and shape, not "How far off the ground is "barely lift"?"

 

It makes the actions possible (and their consequences) clear to everyone and lets the game flow smoothly, which is, after all, the goal, no?

 

Problem solved!

 

The rules fail somewhat at very small increments. How is it that a 1" move can move the same 2 meters in both a half move and a full move? Why can't I take two half moves instead of a full move and travel 2"?

 

Because of rounding. Your 1/2" half move is just enough to get you out of your current hex into the next one. Your remaining 1/2" half move is enough to move you to the far edge of your current hex, but not into the next one. That was simple enough.

 

Your basic point is reasonable enough, though - you can, if you hunt, find places where the rules break. This whole issue of STR and carrying capacity however was not such an attempt - it's something that came to my notice because it occurs repeatedly in-game. In heroic games players are forever trying to carry heavy objects/bodies hither and yon, lift heavy things and so on. And there's a contradiction - one which is very easily fixed - in the rules as soon as that becomes a focus of activity.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

For that matter' date=' I'm not seeing what your argument is - it seems to shift from post to post.[/quote']

 

Much like whether you are discussing Superheroic or Heroic rules. The nature of a text discussion, rather than face to face, really.

 

Yep' date=' I'm reading the chart. That's where the numeric values are given, after all. I don't think it's unreasonable that it should match the text.[/quote']

 

Unless you are prepared to accept movement rates of less than 1 hex, it is

impossible to achieve a situation where a character can still move, but at a rate of less than 2 meters per phase. I don't consider 2 meters a short stagger.

 

However' date=' I GM mostly heroic level games. [b']There[/b], it's an issue - and this I know, because it's come up multiple times: not just in my games.

 

And, with this in mind, let's stick to heroic level examples.

 

Ah' date=' but it does define the upper limit of what's possible: if you can push in emergency situations and lift 200 kg without ripping the muscles from your bones, it's a pretty solid indicator that lifting 100 kg isn't going to do that to you.[/quote']

 

Now we're just discussing ranges. The system doesn't address ripping the muscles from your bones, whether you can lift and carry 200 kg pushed, 100 kg normally, or whether you can just barely get that 200 kg off the ground and shift it a few inches when pushing, 100 kg without pushing.

 

However' date=' I mostly run heroic level games and the issue of "how much can we carry and how fast can we move?" comes up [b']frequently[/b]. And it should be covered: unlike Supers, the pursuit or the race against time and terrain is a genre staple (both in fact, have come up in my current FH game, though the STR issue thankfully did not this time, since the players had plenty of pack animals)

 

So, if we accept that the "STR maximum lift" is, in fact, the maximum amount the character can lift and carry for a protracted period of time, albeit at reduced movement rates, how do we adjudicate the maximum amount a character can lift and stagger a couple of steps? I find this is also useful in a heroic game. Can the hero shift the debris blocking the cave entrance so he can get out and not starve (or prevent the hungry bear deeper in the cave from starving)? Can he move the stone disc off the hole in that ground, allowing him access to the ladder beneath, connecting with the catacombs, or is he stuck waiting for the Evil Priest's minions to catch up with him? Can he shift the stone sarcophagus lid in time to stake the vampire within before the sun sets, in mere moments?

 

Under the rules as written, 100 kg is the maximum he can move in any meaningful fashion, heavier than he can carry on a march. Under your rules, how much can he just barely shift? Presumably, this is more than what he can heft up on his shoulder and march a mile with. And let's assume, to simplify the exercise, the situation is one where he cannot push - it will be a situation which does not mandate a heroic exertion exceeding the character's normal limits. It just gets heavier if he pushes, it still presumably has a limit.

 

Acually we have specific rules (Dive for cover) when a character needs to get out of his hex to get out of the way of an attack. One can quibble about the mechanics used for that (I think it's unnecessarily complicated myself) but in this case the rules are there (and clear).

 

So after the 20 DEX Archer fires his arrow, he stands stock still within his hex until he either aborts his next phase, or his next phase rolls around? I think, rather, that even from his move at 20 DEX to the end of the phase, he is still able to turn his head to look behind him, shift right or left to avoid a weapon swung at him, etc. But there are no rules for this.

 

Which is reasonable - but now we're moving into the realms of "well' date=' it could be interpreted like this" - nothing I have seen anywhere in the rules suggest that if you are holding a rope for a climbing team-mate, you have to drop him "because you can only hold that much weight for an instant".[/quote']

 

Where in the rules does it say that the character with 10 STR holding a rope for a climbing teammate whose weight is precisely at his maximum lift CAN hold the rope for several phases to allow his teammate to climb up? The fact that something is not stated does not demonstrate it is, or is not, possible. The statement that the character can maintain his maximum lift for only a very brief time (long enough to stagger a few steps) implies that he cannot maintain that maximum lift for several phases.

 

Ah - briefly. How briefly? A phase? You are now saying less (though I'd hazard a guess that this is not actually how you play' date=' since I've never seen any GM do this). I'd always assumed a minimum of a phase, and based on real life, probbaly several phases. Certainly less than a minute. Based on the STR rules as written, any of those interpretations could be valid. Hence my use of the words "Mechanics-free".[/quote']

 

How does one apply "in real life" to a game mechanic. There is certainly a weight which, in real life, I can lift and hold for several phases. There is also a heavier weight that I can just heft, stagger a bit, then drop. You are arguing that the first is my "max STR lift". The book's description, however, suggests the second is my "max STR lift". The rules/reality disconnect is also exacerbated by the fact that, in real life, I might try and fail to lift a very heavy object, then try again and succeed. The rules do not account for a variability in my maximum lift - they provide a fixed maximum.

 

So how much can you get to shoulder height? How much can you lift over your head? You're suggesting it's impossible for a STR10 person (healthy-fitter than average person) to carry a similar character over his shoulder in a fireman's lift?

 

Under the rules as written, he cannot. Either he cannot because he can "only lift the character and stagger a couple of steps forward" or it is because his 6" movement rate is eliminated by the -8" maximum encumbrance penalty. If this is a problem (and concluding it is requires concluding that a 10 STR should be able to accomplish this, which requires setting a 10 STR in real life), then I suggest it attributes to one of the following:

 

- the STR limits are too low. This is a definite possibility - look at the unencumbered weight an 8 STR character can lift, then tell me that an 8 STR Fantasy character is viable.

 

- the system should better address the impact of various forms of lifting, leverage and carrying - that "guy over the shoulder" is a lot easier to carry than, say, a 100 kg tub of lard, or 100 kg of 8' long, 1' wide boards lifted from one end. Consider carrying the man over your shoulder, in your arms outstretched in front of you, cradled into your torso, or carrying him with hands under his shoulders, arms fully stretched. I suggest the amount you can carry varies under these three options.

 

It also bears noting that our 100 kg person to be carried. That's 225 lb. Wikipedia says the average male weighs 176 lb (UK), 182 lb (Canada) or 190 lb (US), all falling quite a bit short of that 100 kg shorthand used in game.

 

I admit your solution is more realistic than the one I use: I don't want to have to calculate "1/8th" in game, so I use a flat penalty of -4" because it's simpler. But that bit of handwavium (house rule, if you like) resolves the contradiction. Now "stagger a few steps" becomes "move 1" (1/8th of 6") at -4DCV". If you use LTE in addition, the character doing this will be come exhausted after a very short period.

 

Voila! We now have a mechanical effect, that matches the flavor text: it gives the appropriate consequences (to use Ghost-Angel's phrase).

 

I could easily live with both -8" and 1/8 movement reducing movement to under 1", so not an appreciable ability to move that level of weight, in tactical game scale. I don't like the idea that the guy with 16" running can move 8". I'm not thrilled with 2", but it's a definite improvement.

 

Because of course "barely lift" doesn't imply anything about lifting to head height' date=' or shoulder height or ankle height: there's nothing in the rules about it - that's all made up. "Barely lift" covers both "grab with both hands and shuffle along just above the ground" as well as "kneel down, put on shoulder, stand up and stagger along under the weight".[/quote']

 

Does your solution adjudicate these differentiations? Say - has anyone still reading (yes, BOTH of you ) read the Ultimate Brick? Does it add any further gradations to the ability to lift and carry?

 

Your basic point is reasonable enough' date=' though - you can, if you hunt, find places where the rules break. This whole issue of STR and carrying capacity however was not such an attempt - it's something that came to my notice because it occurs repeatedly in-game. In heroic games players are forever trying to carry heavy objects/bodies hither and yon, lift heavy things and so on. And there's a contradiction - one which is very easily fixed - in the rules as soon as that becomes a focus of activity.[/quote']

 

The present text says you can't move an appreciable distance hefting your maximum weight. The Encumbrance rules say the same (absent a substantial increase in movement rates, at least). Your fix says you can. As such, while I may agree your fix is an improvement, I cannot agree that it is not a CHANGE to the rules.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I want to know why it's impossible to consider the idea of moving only a few feet instead of in 2 Meter increments... are you holding yourself that rigidly to the "rules" that you can't say "Ok, you're able to lift it and move it a little under two feet down the hall."

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I want to know why it's impossible to consider the idea of moving only a few feet instead of in 2 Meter increments... are you holding yourself that rigidly to the "rules" that you can't say "Ok' date=' you're able to lift it and move it a little under two feet down the hall."[/quote']

 

Because to me, a -8" movement penalty on a character who normally has 6" means pretty definately "no movement".

 

Although as as Hugh points out for a character with 16" move "stagger a few steps" actually means "move at more than a normal man's sprint"

 

As I said, the contradiction is not in the description of STR - it's in the description of STR, plus the encumbrance rules. Had the encumbrance rules not specified a number, then your suggestion would probably be exactly how I'd have done it and I'd have just houseruled longer periods of time.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Unless you are prepared to accept movement rates of less than 1 hex' date=' it is impossible to achieve a situation where a character can still move, but at a rate of less than 2 meters per phase. I don't consider 2 meters a short stagger.[/quote']

 

Agreed. That was the basic assumption I made when I suggested that the rules specify "no movement" - particular since the actual move indicated is -2", which is less than no movement.

 

Now we're just discussing ranges. The system doesn't address ripping the muscles from your bones' date=' whether you can lift and carry 200 kg pushed, 100 kg normally, or whether you can just barely get that 200 kg off the ground and shift it a few inches when pushing, 100 kg without pushing. [/quote']

 

Agreed - but I didn't bring it up. It was suggested as a reason people could not carry the maximum lift allowance.

 

So, if we accept that the "STR maximum lift" is, in fact, the maximum amount the character can lift and carry for a protracted period of time, albeit at reduced movement rates, how do we adjudicate the maximum amount a character can lift and stagger a couple of steps? I find this is also useful in a heroic game. Can the hero shift the debris blocking the cave entrance so he can get out and not starve (or prevent the hungry bear deeper in the cave from starving)? Can he move the stone disc off the hole in that ground, allowing him access to the ladder beneath, connecting with the catacombs, or is he stuck waiting for the Evil Priest's minions to catch up with him? Can he shift the stone sarcophagus lid in time to stake the vampire within before the sun sets, in mere moments?

 

Under the rules as written, 100 kg is the maximum he can move in any meaningful fashion, heavier than he can carry on a march. Under your rules, how much can he just barely shift? Presumably, this is more than what he can heft up on his shoulder and march a mile with. And let's assume, to simplify the exercise, the situation is one where he cannot push - it will be a situation which does not mandate a heroic exertion exceeding the character's normal limits. It just gets heavier if he pushes, it still presumably has a limit.

 

Well, depending on how desperate the need, the maximum he can shift is up to his maximum pushing level. In less desperate situations (using a fix to the encumbrance rules), our STR 10 guy is stuck with 100 kg. That's the most he can shift, and if he can find some way of getting it up on to his back, or similarly make it mobile, he can actually shift it as far as he can go in 20 phases (40 metres in your system, 80 metres in mine) before reaching utter exhaustion (assuming we're using LTE - otherwise he can drag or push carry it for ever). Obviously he's not going to able to hump it a mile - he's not going to make it that that with even 75 kg if you're using LTE.

 

I take your point: in real life there will probably be things you can move a little, but not actually lift, and the system isn't granular enough to model that. My assumption is that you can drag/push double what you can lift, but that's not from the rules. Otherwise, you can move your maximum lift.

 

Where in the rules does it say that the character with 10 STR holding a rope for a climbing teammate whose weight is precisely at his maximum lift CAN hold the rope for several phases to allow his teammate to climb up? The fact that something is not stated does not demonstrate it is' date=' or is not, possible. The statement that the character can maintain his maximum lift for only a very brief time (long enough to stagger a few steps) implies that he cannot maintain that maximum lift for several phases.[/quote']

 

I've never suggested it's in the rules - the rules provide no indication of how long a "brief period" is - god knows how many times I've made that statement and now you're making the same point - we agree: good. You were the one who suggested that it was less than a phase, not I. Now you seem to be suggesting the reverse, if I understand you.

 

How does one apply "in real life" to a game mechanic. There is certainly a weight which' date=' in real life, I can lift and hold for several phases. There is also a heavier weight that I can just heft, stagger a bit, then drop. You are arguing that the first is my "max STR lift". The book's description, however, suggests the second is my "max STR lift". The rules/reality disconnect is also exacerbated by the fact that, in real life, I might try and fail to lift a very heavy object, then try again and succeed. The rules do not account for a variability in my maximum lift - they provide a fixed maximum.[/quote']

 

Actually the amount you can lift and hold for several phases and the weight you can barely heft are probably not significantly different - there are so many other factors (tiredness, position, etc) that this difference is lost in granularity. There are days when I can do 30 curls with either arm at 20 kg - there are days when I can't go past 20 with the exact same machine. And as you note, this sort of variability is not modelled - frankly it's way more detail than I need.

 

 

Under the rules as written, he cannot. Either he cannot because he can "only lift the character and stagger a couple of steps forward" or it is because his 6" movement rate is eliminated by the -8" maximum encumbrance penalty. If this is a problem (and concluding it is requires concluding that a 10 STR should be able to accomplish this, which requires setting a 10 STR in real life), then I suggest it attributes to one of the following:

 

- the STR limits are too low. This is a definite possibility - look at the unencumbered weight an 8 STR character can lift, then tell me that an 8 STR Fantasy character is viable.

 

- the system should better address the impact of various forms of lifting, leverage and carrying - that "guy over the shoulder" is a lot easier to carry than, say, a 100 kg tub of lard, or 100 kg of 8' long, 1' wide boards lifted from one end. Consider carrying the man over your shoulder, in your arms outstretched in front of you, cradled into your torso, or carrying him with hands under his shoulders, arms fully stretched. I suggest the amount you can carry varies under these three options.

 

Agreed. But again, this is more granularity than I really need - as stated above, while you are free to add such detail in your games, it doesn't bear on my original points at all. And I've reached the point where writing them out again feels like a waste of time.

 

I could easily live with both -8" and 1/8 movement reducing movement to under 1", so not an appreciable ability to move that level of weight, in tactical game scale. I don't like the idea that the guy with 16" running can move 8". I'm not thrilled with 2", but it's a definite improvement.

 

Does your solution adjudicate these differentiations? Say - has anyone still reading (yes, BOTH of you ) read the Ultimate Brick? Does it add any further gradations to the ability to lift and carry?

 

I haven't read it, but the earlier post suggest that it offers a definition different from that suggested by either the STR rules or the encumbrance rules

 

As for my suggestion - yes, it covers these issues. Your max lift governs how much you can get up off the ground (however you do it), your END governs how long you can hold it up and your move governs how fast you can stagger, the encumbrance rules define how penalised you are and LTE defines how long you can keep all of this up before you collapse.

 

It's not terribly granular with regard to object size and shape - but then it doesn't need to be.

 

The present text says you can't move an appreciable distance hefting your maximum weight. The Encumbrance rules say the same (absent a substantial increase in movement rates' date=' at least). Your fix says you can. As such, while I may agree your fix is an improvement, I cannot agree that it is not a CHANGE to the rules.[/quote']

 

Of course it's a CHANGE. I've said from the very beginning a CHANGE is required! And you mistate the point above - it's that the STR rules say you can't move your maximum lift very far - the encumbrance rules say you can't move it at all. Big - very big - difference, as the examples you gave above with regard to stones and hungry bears indicate.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Agreed. That was the basic assumption I made when I suggested that the rules specify "no movement" - particular since the actual move indicated is -2"' date=' which is less than no movement. [/quote']

 

If you can't fall below 0 DCV, can you fall below 0" of movement? Or, perhaps, movement which is so slow as to be insignificant on a tactical scale?

 

Well' date=' depending on how desperate the need, the maximum he can shift is up to his maximum pushing level. In less desperate situations (using a fix to the encumbrance rules), our STR 10 guy is stuck with 100 kg. That's the most he can shift, and if he can find some way of getting it up on to his back, or similarly make it mobile, he can actually shift it as far as he can go in 20 phases (40 metres in your system, 80 metres in mine) before reaching utter exhaustion (assuming we're using LTE - otherwise he can drag or push carry it for ever). Obviously he's not going to able to hump it a mile - he's not going to make it that that with even 75 kg if you're using LTE.[/quote']

 

Somehow, it has to get on your back. Now you're staggering forward until you drop.

 

I take your point: in real life there will probably be things you can move a little' date=' but not actually lift, and the system isn't granular enough to model that. My assumption is that you can drag/push double what you can lift, but that's not from the rules. Otherwise, you can move your maximum lift.[/quote']

 

See, mine would be that the maximum is your actual maximum. By the rules, you can just barely shift that 100 kg, and you can't move it an appreciable distance. You've simply doubled the maximum weight he can shift.

 

I've never suggested it's in the rules - the rules provide no indication of how long a "brief period" is - god knows how many times I've made that statement and now you're making the same point - we agree: good. You were the one who suggested that it was less than a phase' date=' not I. Now you seem to be suggesting the reverse, if I understand you.[/quote']

 

To my simple mind, this can readily be interpreted as "so brief as to fall below measurable in game terms", much like the distance traveled is "so small as to fall below measurable in game terms". That's less than one full phase.

 

Actually the amount you can lift and hold for several phases and the weight you can barely heft are probably not significantly different - there are so many other factors (tiredness' date=' position, etc) that this difference is lost in granularity. There are days when I can do 30 curls with either arm at 20 kg - there are days when I can't go past 20 with the exact same machine. And as you note, this sort of variability is not modelled - frankly it's way more detail than I need.[/quote']

 

I agree. I also find the length of a "brief" period of time, and the distance of a "few step stagger" is more detail than I require.

 

And all of your examples use this increased level of granularity, so if I accept them as valid, I am forced to assume you DO need that detail.

 

Of course it's a CHANGE. I've said from the very beginning a CHANGE is required! And you mistate the point above - it's that the STR rules say you can't move your maximum lift very far - the encumbrance rules say you can't move it at all. Big - very big - difference' date=' as the examples you gave above with regard to stones and hungry bears indicate.[/quote']

 

So how big a stone can our bear fleeing friend move? If I accept the rules as written, it's the lift max on the chart (whether at regular STR or some higher pushed amount). Maybe I make him roll a STR check to see if he shifts it in time (or shifts it back in time), or maybe not. But I have a by the book figure as to his maximum. If he is able to use 10 STR, it's 100 kg.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

So how big a stone can our bear fleeing friend move? If I accept the rules as written' date=' it's the lift max on the chart (whether at regular STR or some higher pushed amount). Maybe I make him roll a STR check to see if he shifts it in time (or shifts it back in time), or maybe not. But I have a by the book figure as to his maximum. If he is able to use 10 STR, it's 100 kg.[/quote']

 

Yeah, by the book he can lift it. But also by the book he can't actually move it. This is the rules contradiction I mention every post and which you are not addressing. Saying "He can only lift it for less than a phase" or "He moves it an infinitesimal distance which even over a long period of time adds up to no appreciable distance" (ie: clearly less than the stated few steps, even if we assume tiny steps) adds extra logic-defying notes to the song, but it's still the same song.

 

Thus we are back to the contradiction I started with. If you use the rules as written, there are plenty of object that you can lift, but not actually move at all (when in real life, it's normally much easier to move something than lift it), and oddly, since you are supposedly straining your muscles to the limit, it doesn't actually tire you that much.

 

And I will admit to a certain wry amusement that despite your defence of this paradox, you admit to doing exactly what I do - not using the encumbrance rules as written, in your own games.

 

I think I'm done with the discussion, though I thank you for staying courteous throughout. It has actually been interesting to me - it's made me re-examine the way I've houseruled encumbrance and think about the issue again. But at this point, I can't think of anything new to say. You have managed to convince me that the contradiction in the rules is more than just perception and that a house rule is necessary - after all both you, I and Ghost-angel all houserule it (actually every GM I know does). Let's just agree to leave it at that.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Yeah' date=' by the book he can lift it. But also by the book he can't actually move it. This is the rules contradiction I mention every post and which you are not addressing. Saying "He can only lift it for less than a phase" or "He moves it an infinitesimal distance which even over a long period of time adds up to no appreciable distance" (ie: clearly less than the stated few steps, even if we assume tiny steps) adds extra logic-defying notes to the song, but it's still the same song.[/quote']

 

sigh He can move it a small distance, under a full 2 meter hex, but enough to shift it. That would seem reasonably to mean enough to squeeze past the boulder and escape the cave. The mechanic tells me the heaviest object a 15 STR character can have an effect on is a 200 kg object. If the boulder weighs more, he can't shift it. If it weighs 200 kg, he can shift it, but not take it home with him. If it weighs 100 kg, he can carry it away.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

sigh He can move it a small distance' date=' under a full 2 meter hex, but enough to shift it. That would seem reasonably to mean enough to squeeze past the boulder and escape the cave. The mechanic tells me the heaviest object a 15 STR character can have an effect on is a 200 kg object. If the boulder weighs more, he can't shift it. If it weighs 200 kg, he can shift it, but not take it home with him. If it weighs 100 kg, he can carry it away.[/quote']

 

and no House Rule required! Because that's how I read the book as working.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Been away for a few days. It's interesting how the threads develop.

 

To lift something, you need two things: STR and END.

 

If you have 20 END, you can lift 100,000,000,000 tons, assuming you also have the 200 STR to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

If you have 10 STR, you can lift 100 kg, assuming you also have the 1 END to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

Those are the rules. There is no contradiction in them. It's the same with any power:

 

20 END is enough to fire a 40d6 EB, but in order to actually fire such a huge EB, you have to also have that EB power. Just having the END is not enough.

 

The limits of one's Strength, are not simply the limits at which one's bones break or muscles tear. There is only so much lifting force one can apply with one's arms/hands/fingers. If you can position yourself under a weight, so that you can lift with your legs, bearing the weight on your shoulders in a balanced way, you can probably lift about twice as much as your "max STR lift", and you may even be able to walk around with such a weight, with effort, and probably at a reduced speed, and probably also reduced DCV.

 

The numbers I cited back in post 33 were taken from The Ultimate Brick. "Barely lift off the floor" is not the same as "clean and jerk" etc.

 

The "max STR lift" is generally enough to lift a heavy object off of someone long enough for them to scramble out from under it, or have someone else pull them out from under it, before dropping it again. The "few staggering steps" will in many cases be enough to move the object off of the pinned person, so that it won't be on top of them again when you drop it.

 

When performing such a feat of Strength, you're probably not in combat, since you can barely move. It you can't move at all, you're DCV 0. So if you can only take a few staggering steps, maybe you're DCV 1. But you can always Abort to drop the object and Dodge or perform some other combat maneuver, in which case you should probably get your full DCV back.

[Nightlord256]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

is it just me?

 

How much XP per 'level'

 

or has this post derailed just a bit?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Been away for a few days. It's interesting how the threads develop.

 

To lift something, you need two things: STR and END.

 

If you have 20 END, you can lift 100,000,000,000 tons, assuming you also have the 200 STR to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

If you have 10 STR, you can lift 100 kg, assuming you also have the 1 END to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

Those are the rules. There is no contradiction in them. It's the same with any power:

 

20 END is enough to fire a 40d6 EB, but in order to actually fire such a huge EB, you have to also have that EB power. Just having the END is not enough.

 

The limits of one's Strength, are not simply the limits at which one's bones break or muscles tear. There is only so much lifting force one can apply with one's arms/hands/fingers. If you can position yourself under a weight, so that you can lift with your legs, bearing the weight on your shoulders in a balanced way, you can probably lift about twice as much as your "max STR lift", and you may even be able to walk around with such a weight, with effort, and probably at a reduced speed, and probably also reduced DCV.

 

The numbers I cited back in post 33 were taken from The Ultimate Brick. "Barely lift off the floor" is not the same as "clean and jerk" etc.

 

The "max STR lift" is generally enough to lift a heavy object off of someone long enough for them to scramble out from under it, or have someone else pull them out from under it, before dropping it again. The "few staggering steps" will in many cases be enough to move the object off of the pinned person, so that it won't be on top of them again when you drop it.

 

When performing such a feat of Strength, you're probably not in combat, since you can barely move. It you can't move at all, you're DCV 0. So if you can only take a few staggering steps, maybe you're DCV 1. But you can always Abort to drop the object and Dodge or perform some other combat maneuver, in which case you should probably get your full DCV back.

 

You must spread rep around

 

 

Well said, Phil.

[Kristopher]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Been away for a few days. It's interesting how the threads develop.

 

To lift something, you need two things: STR and END.

 

If you have 20 END, you can lift 100,000,000,000 tons, assuming you also have the 200 STR to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

If you have 10 STR, you can lift 100 kg, assuming you also have the 1 END to do so. This would allow you to hoist the weight off the floor, take a few staggering steps, and then drop the weight.

 

Those are the rules. There is no contradiction in them. It's the same with any power:

 

20 END is enough to fire a 40d6 EB, but in order to actually fire such a huge EB, you have to also have that EB power. Just having the END is not enough.

 

The limits of one's Strength, are not simply the limits at which one's bones break or muscles tear. There is only so much lifting force one can apply with one's arms/hands/fingers. If you can position yourself under a weight, so that you can lift with your legs, bearing the weight on your shoulders in a balanced way, you can probably lift about twice as much as your "max STR lift", and you may even be able to walk around with such a weight, with effort, and probably at a reduced speed, and probably also reduced DCV.

 

The numbers I cited back in post 33 were taken from The Ultimate Brick. "Barely lift off the floor" is not the same as "clean and jerk" etc.

 

The "max STR lift" is generally enough to lift a heavy object off of someone long enough for them to scramble out from under it, or have someone else pull them out from under it, before dropping it again. The "few staggering steps" will in many cases be enough to move the object off of the pinned person, so that it won't be on top of them again when you drop it.

 

When performing such a feat of Strength, you're probably not in combat, since you can barely move. It you can't move at all, you're DCV 0. So if you can only take a few staggering steps, maybe you're DCV 1. But you can always Abort to drop the object and Dodge or perform some other combat maneuver, in which case you should probably get your full DCV back.

 

It seems obvious to me that there's a serious disconnect between the rules and what the rules are meant to simulate, in this case.

 

(And if I or anyone I knew had TUB, I might consider an argument based in part on TUB instead of the main rulebook to be more compelling. I really don't want HERO to turn into a game that needs more than one book for the rules to work. )

[Kristopher]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/StrengthStandards.htm

 

http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/DeadliftStandards.html

 

Deadlift is most like the "just barely lift" standard that's been talked about.

 

Compare those numbers to the human maximum STR, and see what you get. (Don't forget 2.2 lbs = 1kg.)

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

It seems obvious to me that there's a serious disconnect between the rules and what the rules are meant to simulate, in this case.

 

(And if I or anyone I knew had TUB, I might consider an argument based in part on TUB instead of the main rulebook to be more compelling. I really don't want HERO to turn into a game that needs more than one book for the rules to work. )

I don't see any disconnect. Nothing I said in my last post relies on anything from TUB. The "barely lift and stagger" bit comes from the main rulebook.

[Kristopher]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I don't see any disconnect. Nothing I said in my last post relies on anything from TUB. The "barely lift and stagger" bit comes from the main rulebook.

 

(I only mentioned TUB parenthetically because of your previous reference and your reference to your previous reference.)

 

And yeah, I think there is a disconnect between the way strength and endurance work in real life, and the way they work in the game. But getting that kind of thing right in detail is probably too complex for any game to handle in a smooth and enjoyable way.

 

Kinda like combat.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

(I only mentioned TUB parenthetically because of your previous reference and your reference to your previous reference.)

 

And yeah, I think there is a disconnect between the way strength and endurance work in real life, and the way they work in the game. But getting that kind of thing right in detail is probably too complex for any game to handle in a smooth and enjoyable way.

 

Kinda like combat.

 

To "get it right" you'd have to break Strength down by the kind of strength being used... explosive, continuous, etc etc etc... there about a dozen different ways you can get strong and train your muscles for different activities...

[Captain Obvious]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

To "get it right" you'd have to break Strength down by the kind of strength being used... explosive' date=' continuous, etc etc etc... there about a dozen different ways you can get strong and train your muscles for different activities...[/quote']

 

And once you do that, you have to break INT down into memory, pattern recognition, problem solving...DEX becomes athleticism, hand-eye coordination, steadiness...there are cans of cans of worms when you start breaking down characteristics, and your game turns into HYBRID.

 

Which, apparently, has added a new rule recently.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

To "get it right" you'd have to break Strength down by the kind of strength being used... explosive' date=' continuous, etc etc etc... there about a dozen different ways you can get strong and train your muscles for different activities...[/quote']

And you'd have to break down END into muscle fatigue, for each muscle or muscle group, and overall energy, and probably many other things as well (mental fatigue, eyestrain, digestion, etc.).

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

I"m sorry .... did we just start reconstructing FATAL?