How much XP per 'level'

[Captain Obvious]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Well, we don't have anyone working on a sexual characteristics generation table yet....

[Markdoc]

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']

 

That's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. I'd certainly have no problem with it. But it's also a house rule, since the rules state clearly that he CAN lift and move 200 kg and that he can lift 100 kg without appreciable effort.

 

In other words, after pages of saying the rules are not contradictory and that they cover the situations as needed - you're now saying "But of course, I don't actually use them as written, myself."

 

Fair enough. I don't use them as written either. Actually, I don't know any GM who does.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Well' date=' we don't have anyone working on a sexual characteristics generation table yet....[/quote']

 

Have you checked with Steve L.?

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

That's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. I'd certainly have no problem with it. But it's also a house rule' date='[/i'] since the rules state clearly that he CAN lift and move 200 kg and that he can lift 100 kg without appreciable effort.

 

I use "shift" as shorthand for push it with your shoulder or heft it just off the ground and stagger a few steps away, so the "barely lift and stagger a few steps" definition remains in my interpretation.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

That's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. I'd certainly have no problem with it. But it's also a house rule' date='[/i'] since the rules state clearly that he CAN lift and move 200 kg and that he can lift 100 kg without appreciable effort.

 

In other words, after pages of saying the rules are not contradictory and that they cover the situations as needed - you're now saying "But of course, I don't actually use them as written, myself."

 

Fair enough. I don't use them as written either. Actually, I don't know any GM who does.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Well here's the disconnect... What you see as a house rule we see as a correct interpretation of the book.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

That's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. I'd certainly have no problem with it. But it's also a house rule' date='[/i'] since the rules state clearly that he CAN lift and move 200 kg and that he can lift 100 kg without appreciable effort.

But it's not a house rule. The rules clearly state that all he can do with a 200-kg weight is "barely lift it, stagger a few steps, and drop it." You seem to be ignoring that rule. Again, there's more to lifting and carrying that just having enough END. You also need enough STR. And 15 STR is not enough to press 200 kg over one's head or pick it up and carry it at one's full movement rate. That is the actual rule, in the rulebook.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

But it's not a house rule. The rules clearly state that all he can do with a 200-kg weight is "barely lift it' date=' stagger a few steps, and drop it." You seem to be ignoring that rule. [/quote']

 

Not in the slightest. That part you quote clearly indicates that the player can lift and move it. The encumbrance rules (as I mentioned at the start) clearly indicate he can lift but not move it.

 

A contradiction, simple as that.

 

Poor old Hugh is tying himself in knots trying to reconcile those two things - we've had multiple definitions of what that sentence means - his latest version is that lifting now includes not lifting, but shoving with your shoulder. That's not a slam on him - at least he's thinking through his approach and trying to logically justify it.

 

Trouble is, with such a clear contradiction, that's not gonna help. None of those changes or suggestions address the basic contradiction.

 

Even if you use the LTE rules, a normal can expect 40 phases of effort before they become exhausted trying to shift their maximum lift. Without it, he can struggle for hours. However you decide on that aspect, the encumbrance rules (whether you use the Superheroic or heroic rules) define that you can move the object precisely 0" in that time. So actually, you can't shift anything of that weight, while the STR description says you can.

 

Now you - and Ghost-angel and Hugh - have all admitted that actually you houserule this bit and don't use the encumbrance rules which is (grits teeth and writes it for about the 30th time) exactly what I said was required in my first post. I do the same, albeit with an explicit houserule.

 

Like it or not, we've all admitted to houseruling the encumbrance rules.

 

That brings us to the STR description. The rules say "barely lift it". From that we have drifted to houserules like "can only just get it off the ground - can't lift to shoulder height" - which is of course nowhere stated in the rules: that's also a houserule or an interpretation. "Barely lift" could just as easily mean "can barely get up onto your shoulder and stand up" (which is, in fact my interpretation: you can, after all lift more that way, than you can in your arms).

 

Note, END figures nowhere into this discussion. The lack of END use is merely an oddity that results from the current interpretation of STR.

 

cheers, Mark

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Now you - and Ghost-angel and Hugh - have all admitted that actually you houserule this bit and don't use the encumbrance rules which is (grits teeth and writes it for about the 30th time) exactly what I said was required in my first post. I do the same' date=' albeit with an explicit houserule.[/quote']

 

No. Wrong. Incorrect. False Statement. Words In My Mouth.

 

I do not use a house rule as my interpretation of the Rules As Written as someone can lift their maximum weight and move a few steps, which I interpret to be significantly less than a full Game Inch Of Two Meters. A foot or two at most.

 

No house rules. Just how I read the book as working.

 

You need to get over it and accept that there is more than one interpretation of the rules at this point.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

No. Wrong. Incorrect. False Statement. Words In My Mouth.

 

I do not use a house rule as my interpretation of the Rules As Written as someone can lift their maximum weight and move a few steps, which I interpret to be significantly less than a full Game Inch Of Two Meters. A foot or two at most.

 

No house rules. Just how I read the book as working.

 

You need to get over it and accept that there is more than one interpretation of the rules at this point.

 

Umm - haven't I been saying for some time now that the rules are open to interpretation? (checks post immediately above this - yep, that's what I wrote) You can, if you like decide that your interpretation is not a house rule. For me, when I interpret the rules, I'd call that a house rule, but OK, I can see you might not agree.

 

Now let's take your statement at face value - "move an object a foot or two at most". OK, that sounds reasonable. So in several phases, they can move it more than a hex. Even if you are using LTE, they can move it many hexes before becoming exhausted - in direct contradiction to the encumbrance rules, which state a movement rate of 0.

 

However, you have already stated that you didn't know the encumbrance rules and didn't use them. To me, dropping out the specific (technically speaking, non-optional) rule that specifically covers the issue of how much you can lift and how far you can carry it is most definitely a houserule. Moreover that particular houserule (don't use encumbrance table) is not only common, but the simplest way to resolve the contradiction.

 

And it is - for Pete's sake, how many times do I have to write this! - exactly what I said was required in my very first post on this subject. I don't know how to put it any simpler.

 

cheers, Mark

[Manic Typist]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Remember. It's all fun and games, until people take it too seriously.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Umm - haven't I been saying for some time now that the rules are open to interpretation? (checks post immediately above this - yep' date=' that's what I wrote[/i']) You can, if you like decide that your interpretation is not a house rule. For me, when I interpret the rules, I'd call that a house rule, but OK, I can see you might not agree.

 

Now let's take your statement at face value - "move an object a foot or two at most". OK, that sounds reasonable. So in several phases, they can move it more than a hex. Even if you are using LTE, they can move it many hexes before becoming exhausted - in direct contradiction to the encumbrance rules, which state a movement rate of 0.

 

However, you have already stated that you didn't know the encumbrance rules and didn't use them. To me, dropping out the specific (technically speaking, non-optional) rule that specifically covers the issue of how much you can lift and how far you can carry it is most definitely a houserule. Moreover that particular houserule (don't use encumbrance table) is not only common, but the simplest way to resolve the contradiction.

 

And it is - for Pete's sake, how many times do I have to write this! - exactly what I said was required in my very first post on this subject. I don't know how to put it any simpler.

 

cheers, Mark

 

I said I didn't know the Encumbrance Rules weren't Optional, not that I didn't use them or know what they were. I use them in all Heroic games.

 

No, I don't see a disconnect between what's written under STR and what the Encumbrance Rules are. A movement of 0" tells me that a character cannot, in a single Phase, make it One Game Inch/Two Meters. Immobile means they cannot move.

 

If there's any House Rule invoked, it's the idea of being able to move less than One Game Inch. And I don't see that as a House Rule, just common f-ing sense.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not using a House Rule, I'm using the rules as written. I'm not only willing to recognize, but do recognize, that different people will interpret the rules differently - that DOES NOT mean one person is using a House Rule.

 

So how many times do I have to say this: I'm Not Using A House Rule. I Don't See A Disconnect Between Lifting And Encumbrance And Movement As Written.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Not in the slightest. That part you quote clearly indicates that the player can lift and move it. The encumbrance rules (as I mentioned at the start) clearly indicate he can lift but not move it.

 

A contradiction, simple as that.

A normal person, fully encumbered, can move at 4" per phase. 12" (non-combat) -8" for encumbrance = 4". No contradiction at all.

 

Poor old Hugh is tying himself in knots trying to reconcile those two things - we've had multiple definitions of what that sentence means - his latest version is that lifting now includes not lifting, but shoving with your shoulder. That's not a slam on him - at least he's thinking through his approach and trying to logically justify it.

You seem to be approaching the game as if it were a video game - where if the programmers didn't include a command for "shove heavy thing with your shoulder," then you can't do it. All actual Role-Playing Games make the assumption (even it isn't specifically stated int the rulebook), that if you're a human or reasonably close to one, you can do all the things a human can do in the real world - your body can move in the same ways.

 

Even if you use the LTE rules, a normal can expect 40 phases of effort before they become exhausted trying to shift their maximum lift. Without it, he can struggle for hours. However you decide on that aspect, the encumbrance rules (whether you use the Superheroic or heroic rules) define that you can move the object precisely 0" in that time. So actually, you can't shift anything of that weight, while the STR description says you can.

The rulebook assumes you can read English, and understand the meaning of simple phrases like "barely lift" and "a few steps". Hoisting something onto your shoulders and holding it there for 40 phases does not fit within my understanding of the phrase "barely lift."

 

Now you - and Ghost-angel and Hugh - have all admitted that actually you houserule this bit and don't use the encumbrance rules which is (grits teeth and writes it for about the 30th time) exactly what I said was required in my first post. I do the same, albeit with an explicit houserule.

 

Like it or not, we've all admitted to houseruling the encumbrance rules.

No, we haven't. I will add my name to ghost-angel's and say that I too, have admitted no such thing. I simply understand the meaning of English words. "A few steps" is not a difficult concept to understand (at least not for me). I don't need a "house rule" to understand it.

 

Note, END figures nowhere into this discussion. The lack of END use is merely an oddity that results from the current interpretation of STR.

I agree, but you're the one who keeps bringing it up. You're the one who seems to be making the agrument that since it only costs 1 END to use 10 STR, such a character ought to be able to lift and hold his maximum capacity for a long time because he still has END left.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

You seem to be approaching the game as if it were a video game - where if the programmers didn't include a command for "shove heavy thing with your shoulder' date='" then you can't do it.[/quote']

 

A fair analogy, I think.

 

The rulebook assumes you can read English, and understand the meaning of simple phrases like "barely lift" and "a few steps". Hoisting something onto your shoulders and holding it there for 40 phases does not fit within my understanding of the phrase "barely lift."

 

No, we haven't. I will add my name to ghost-angel's and say that I too, have admitted no such thing. I simply understand the meaning of English words. "A few steps" is not a difficult concept to understand (at least not for me). I don't need a "house rule" to understand it.

 

I can do nothing here but agree.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

A normal person' date=' fully encumbered, can move at 4" per phase. 12" (non-combat) -8" for encumbrance = 4". No contradiction at all.[/quote']

 

Except as already pointed out, you can't go directly from 0 to NCM, you need to spend a turn moving at your regular move first. I suppose you could resolve the contradiction by assuming that the reduction is to total speed, not to your move and that you "move" at a speed of 0" for a phase and then get up to a fast NCM stagger, the next phase. You'd also have to accept that "briefly lift" in this context is at least a couple of phases. It's a bit odd to assume that you can run with a heavy load, but not walk with it, but mechanically, I suppose it would work. In any case, it's not something I'd thought of.

 

You seem to be approaching the game as if it were a video game - where if the programmers didn't include a command for "shove heavy thing with your shoulder' date='" then you can't do it.[/quote']

 

Not in the slightest - I was simply pointing out that despite claims of "it's self-evident" how many permutations of "barely lift" you guys have gone through in this thread, from the earlier posts that you could lift and hold 100 kg - it was only movement to the problem, then that actually you could only lift for a phase, then actually only lift for part of a phase, then that now "lift" apparently includes "not actually lift at all" through to your suggestion under NCM movement that it's at least 2 phases.

 

My approach from the very first has been to advocate a more liberal interpretation of lifting than the one in the post I replied to, as I have noted a couple of times. I assume a character's maximum lift is exactly that - how much he can get off the ground. Nothing less, nothing more. How high you can lift it, and what you can do with it, depends on the object itself. A 100 kg hollow Brass sphere is going to be almost impossible to hold for any length of time - a 100 kg roll of linoleum could quite conceivably go over the shoulder and be carried for a prolonged period of time (prolonged in this case being minutes, not hours). If you accept that, then we have to blow by the repeated insistence on "can't lift to shoulder height" from the earlier part of the thread, as well as accept that "briefly lift" is bare description that can cover a variety of different time periods.

 

Hang on - isn't that what I've been saying over and over?

 

All actual Role-Playing Games make the assumption (even it isn't specifically stated int the rulebook)' date=' that if you're a human or reasonably close to one, you can do all the things a human can do in the real world - your body can move in the same ways.[/quote']

 

Right - but that's certainly not the impression I am getting from the fairly dogmatic responses I've read so far: we've even had suggestions that trying to lift and carry your maximum weight will tear the muscles from your bones

 

The rulebook assumes you can read English' date=' and understand the meaning of simple phrases like "barely lift" and "a few steps". Hoisting something onto your shoulders and holding it there for 40 phases does not fit within my understanding of the phrase "barely lift."[/quote']

 

Nor mine - but then I've never suggested that. However, this debate has shown multiple interpretations of "briefly lift" as noted above, and a "few steps" has been interpreted anywhere from a movement on a tactical time scale of nothing (your posts 82 and 86) to Ghostangels' suggestion a couple of posts up, about a half hex per phase and now your suggestion above of 4 hexes a phase.

 

No' date=' we haven't. I will add my name to ghost-angel's and say that I too, have admitted no such thing. I simply understand the meaning of English words. "A few steps" is not a difficult concept to understand (at least not for me). I don't need a "house rule" to understand it.[/quote']

 

OK, my bad - I had assumed that if you used the encumbrance rules, you would be familiar with them. I got the impression from your initial posts that you were not.

 

I agree' date=' but you're the one who keeps bringing it up. You're the one who seems to be making the agrument that since it only costs 1 END to use 10 STR, such a character ought to be able to lift and hold his maximum capacity for a long time because he still has END left.[/quote']

 

Actually, while it is a curious and repeatedly commented-on anomaly of the rules that exerting your maximum STR to lift something - even repeatedly for prolonged periods of time - doesn't tire you, but it's not not the core issue.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

So how many times do I have to say this: I'm Not Using A House Rule. I Don't See A Disconnect Between Lifting And Encumbrance And Movement As Written.

 

OK, then we'll have to disagree. For me, having your movement reduced by 8" when you only have 6", means pretty explicitly that you can't move, just as having your move Drained to 0" does. I guess neither of us is going to convince the other on this point - and since it doesn't affect the way we run our games, suggest we leave it at that.

 

cheers, Mark

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Except as already pointed out' date=' you can't go directly from 0 to NCM, you need to spend a turn moving at your regular move first.[/quote']

 

No you don't. You can go directly to NCM Movement, you can only ACCELERATE at a maximum of your Combat Move Per Phase.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

OK' date=' then we'll have to disagree. For me, having your movement reduced by 8" when you only have 6", means pretty explicitly that you can't move, just as having your move Drained to 0" does. I guess neither of us is going to convince the other on this point - and since it doesn't affect the way we run our games, suggest we leave it at that.[/quote']

 

6" - 8" = -2", not 0". Do you assume that the person holding his full lift moves 2" backwards, or that the character drained 8" Running moves 2" backwards? I suspect not. I suspect we all approach this on the basis that the amount can be positive or nil, but not negative. I expect it says that somewhere in the rules.

 

Now we get to what it means to move at 0", whether by Drain or by mass carried. Let's assume a drain. Do you assume the character is now frozen in place, or that he can still make small moves, but moves which are tactically insignificant (ie well under 2 meters in a phase)? If he is frozen in place, doesn't that mean he can't change his facing, and can't dodge, neither of which are indicated anywhere in the rules?

 

I assume he can't move appreciably. If a character has unlimited time, I would assume that, despite being drained to 0" movement, he could slowly, painfully crawl a few feet forward. Similarly, given unlimited time, that 15 STR character could slowly, painfully, move that 200 kg object appreciably. But this requires enough time that, as a simplifying assumption, the game sets tactical movement at 0".

 

The issue is, to me, less an inherent contradiction in the rules and more a need for the reader to apply some logic to their interpretation. The rules don't say that my 15 STR character can't pick up 100 kg of loose sand and walk away, but I know that the sand will not stick together to permit such a result (despite the fact that "the rules" say he can carry 100 kg of weight and walk away, I have to use my own common sense to assess how that carrying capacity interacts with the material to be carried). This is no different from your point that an object of a weight you would permit to be carried (100 kg) has other characteristics that would impact your ability to carry it (lino vs brass ball). All you are doing is enhancing the maximum he can carry.

 

You assume the 10 STR character can carry that 100 kg of lino on his shoulders for a few minutes. How many kg of lino can we balance on his shoulder, and he can only stagger a few feet forward before dropping it? By the book, I would say 100 kg. How much lino will, when placed on his shoulder, force him to collapse because he can't even barely lift and stagger - it's above his weight limit? I'd say "anything over 100 kg" as that's the by the book answer. Your system doesn't change these results, it just raises the weight limits.

[Markdoc]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

6" - 8" = -2", not 0". Do you assume that the person holding his full lift moves 2" backwards, or that the character drained 8" Running moves 2" backwards? I suspect not. I suspect we all approach this on the basis that the amount can be positive or nil, but not negative. I expect it says that somewhere in the rules.

 

Now we get to what it means to move at 0", whether by Drain or by mass carried. Let's assume a drain. Do you assume the character is now frozen in place, or that he can still make small moves, but moves which are tactically insignificant (ie well under 2 meters in a phase)? If he is frozen in place, doesn't that mean he can't change his facing, and can't dodge, neither of which are indicated anywhere in the rules?

 

I assume he can't move appreciably. If a character has unlimited time, I would assume that, despite being drained to 0" movement, he could slowly, painfully crawl a few feet forward. Similarly, given unlimited time, that 15 STR character could slowly, painfully, move that 200 kg object appreciably. But this requires enough time that, as a simplifying assumption, the game sets tactical movement at 0".

 

The rules do specify it - you can only go to 0. However, the rules on drain also make it plain that you can "destroy", though only temporarily, a power or ability by draining it to 0, so yeah, anyone with running drained to 0" in my game stays where they are, unless they have other means of movement. Now of course, just as with clinging UAA "unable to move away" does not mean frozen in place: so reduced DCV, inability to dodge, etc don't apply - if the attacker wants that, he needs to either buy his drain vs multiple characteristics/powers or use entangle or TK.

 

And as I have said repeatedly, it's not mostly the tactical scale that concerns me: the question often comes up on how far/how long/how heavy. Now you can just handwave it, as you suggest above. Many GM's do, which is why I referred to handwavium in my first post. I prefer not to.

 

Here's a real-life example. One character in my game had a Conan homage. She did the "tireless thews of bronze" thing and bought down END use on his STR and Running, so he could cover the ground at an endless lope, never got tired in combat, etc. Now what happens when the fight is over and he tosses a comely maiden over one shoulder and a sack of coins over the other and runs off into the sunset?

 

Saying "You can't move an appreciable distance" is one approach I guess, but doesn't really cut it. Since he has two casual STR items, he can in fact pick each one up "effortlessly" so there's no question he can get them over his shoulders. However, if you fix the apparent contradiction between "stagger a few steps" and "can't move at all" (I did it by simply changing the move penalty in Encumbrance - the same fix you suggested), he can stagger off at a slow walk, and reduced DCV. He'll get (far) further than a lesser man will, but even his tireless thews can't evade the LTE penalty and eventually, he's gonna either collapse or make the maiden walk (or steal a horse).

 

And as an aside, it doesn't seem reasonable that his capacity to shift heavy weights for a period of time is equivalent to that of the equally strong, but fat and out of condition eunuch he got the maiden from, who'd be burning END every phase just to pick her up.

 

Now, most GM's handwave it or ignore the problem entirely. Personally I'd rather FIX the contradiction - and at that point, pretty much everything falls neatly into place. I know how much PCs can lift, how far they can move it, how tired they get, how long it takes and how long it takes them to recover from such sustained effort.

 

The issue is' date=' to me, less an inherent contradiction in the rules and more a need for the reader to apply some logic to their interpretation. The rules don't say that my 15 STR character can't pick up 100 kg of loose sand and walk away, but I know that the sand will not stick together to permit such a result (despite the fact that "the rules" say he can carry 100 kg of weight and walk away, I have to use my own common sense to assess how that carrying capacity interacts with the material to be carried). This is no different from your point that an object of a weight you would permit to be carried (100 kg) has other characteristics that would impact your ability to carry it (lino vs brass ball). [b']All you are doing is enhancing the maximum he can carry[/b].

 

Not in the slightest. As I construe it, 100 kg is the most he can get off the floor AT ALL. Depending on how it's constructed, he may or may not be able to balance or carry it: to me, that logically determines whether he needs to put it down. But if he can't lift it at all, then he obviously can't get it onto his shoulder - and if he somehow did, his legs or back would give out: you were the one who suggested that a person could carry more than their STR lift if they could get it onto their back, not I.

 

As for lifting obviously to be able to lift a weight it needs to be in a form you can lift. However, from my point of view, some things are pretty clear. 100 kg means 100 kg. A minus 8" penalty on your movement is exactly that. A "brief period" however is entirely dependant on context. It could be a phase or it could be 4 phases. That has quite different implications even on a tactical timescale.

 

You assume the 10 STR character can carry that 100 kg of lino on his shoulders for a few minutes. How many kg of lino can we balance on his shoulder' date=' and he can only stagger a few feet forward before dropping it? By the book, I would say 100 kg. How much lino will, when placed on his shoulder, force him to collapse because he can't even barely lift and stagger - it's above his weight limit? I'd say "anything over 100 kg" as that's the by the book answer. Your system doesn't change these results, it just raises the weight limits.[/quote']

 

As noted above, I would say nothing of the sort. I'd say 100 kg is his limit. But if he can get that weight up onto his shoulder, then logically he should be able to stagger forward until his energy gives out. On the other hand, if he has to pick up that big brass ball, I'd expect his arms will give out much sooner (I'd rule a phase or two, maybe longer with increasingly penalised EGO rolls). In both cases, they are carrying the object for "a brief time" but as "a brief time" is not an exact number, their progress could easily be quite different. Of course, going back to the encumbrance tables, however long they hold it up, it certainly looks like they can't move either object - unless you allow them to use NCM and hold the object up for a phase or two while they accelerate to NCM. At that point, you are already accepting that a "brief time" is more than a phase.

 

cheers, Mark

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

It's a bit odd to assume that you can run with a heavy load' date=' but not walk with it, but mechanically, I suppose it would work.[/quote']

It is odd, but I'm not making any such assumption. I was merely pointing out how there isn't a contradiction in the rules there. I did not mean to imply that a 10 STR person can carry 100 kg 4" in a phase. That's simply the restriction imposed by the Encumbrance rules. There is also the STR rule (the "barely lift and stagger" thing) which also have to be taken into account.

 

Not in the slightest - I was simply pointing out that despite claims of "it's self-evident" how many permutations of "barely lift" you guys have gone through in this thread,

To me, it looks like just one.

 

My approach from the very first has been to advocate a more liberal interpretation of lifting than the one in the post I replied to, as I have noted a couple of times.

You've made that clear, and you're certainly entitled to do so in your games.

 

Hang on - isn't that what I've been saying over and over?

Maybe I've misunderstood, but it seemed to me you were saying that a 10-STR character could lift 100 kg and hold it (and even walk around with it) for as long as he has the END to pay.

 

And yes, there are more efficient ways to carry things than just the "dead lift." A weight balanced on the shoulders so that most of the weight it born by the legs can be held, and even carried around, more easily. I happen to like the guidelines given in TUB for this. And like in real life, as opposed to limited video games, a person could "barely lift" a heavy weight onto a chair, for example, and then squat down an lift it again on his shoulders by lifting with his legs. As you said, it depends on the other properties of the object being lifted.

 

Right - but that's certainly not the impression I am getting from the fairly dogmatic responses I've read so far: we've even had suggestions that trying to lift and carry your maximum weight will tear the muscles from your bones

No one has said that.

 

Nor mine - but then I've never suggested that. However, this debate has shown multiple interpretations of "briefly lift" as noted above, and a "few steps" has been interpreted anywhere from a movement on a tactical time scale of nothing (your posts 82 and 86) to Ghostangels' suggestion a couple of posts up, about a half hex per phase and now your suggestion above of 4 hexes a phase.

I don't think you understood my previous posts correctly. And I explained above that the 4" figure is not an interpretation of "a few steps," but a simple calculation from the Encumbrance rules. I really don't see any real differences between anyone's interpretations of "a few steps" on this thread. Including yours, since you seem to want to ignore the "few steps" rule in the first place (which again, is fine).

 

Actually, while it is a curious and repeatedly commented-on anomaly of the rules that exerting your maximum STR to lift something - even repeatedly for prolonged periods of time - doesn't tire you, but it's not not the core issue.

Hmmm. Well, I don't find it particularly curious or anomalous. Muscle fatigue in my arms doesn't mean my whole body is out of energy.

[ghost-angel]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

[nevermind, this conversation went stupid]

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Here's a real-life example. One character in my game had a Conan homage. She did the "tireless thews of bronze" thing and bought down END use on his STR and Running, so he could cover the ground at an endless lope, never got tired in combat, etc. Now what happens when the fight is over and he tosses a comely maiden over one shoulder and a sack of coins over the other and runs off into the sunset?

 

Saying "You can't move an appreciable distance" is one approach I guess, but doesn't really cut it. Since he has two casual STR items, he can in fact pick each one up "effortlessly" so there's no question he can get them over his shoulders. However, if you fix the apparent contradiction between "stagger a few steps" and "can't move at all" (I did it by simply changing the move penalty in Encumbrance - the same fix you suggested), he can stagger off at a slow walk, and reduced DCV. He'll get (far) further than a lesser man will, but even his tireless thews can't evade the LTE penalty and eventually, he's gonna either collapse or make the maiden walk (or steal a horse).

 

I'm assuming a 15 STR, as he has two 100 kg items. How will LTE hit him? He isn't spending any END from your description, so he can't be spending enough END to be subject to LTE. He's tireless and can carry on forever.

 

Effectively, under my read of the rules, he would stagger forward, get a few feet and collapse to his knees. You can only lift and hold that maximum weight for a brief time. He could then gather his strength, push upward again (once again "barely lifting his maximum weight"), stagger a few feet forward, then again collapse to his knees. That 0 END for STR and movement (which is a deceptively powerful ability, one which lacks any scientific basis) allows him to keep doing this indefinitely, as he never tires. So he can stagger along at some very low rate of speed. Call it, say, 1 meter per phase, and he can move 1.5" per turn with a 3 SPD. Now that we're out of tactical, I see no reason we can't just divide the actual distance by the distance he can stagger to determine how long he takes to get anywhere. After an hour, he's managed to move 450", almost a km.

 

Pretty amazing. But the amazing part arises from his tirelessness. Someone who became fatigued would run into LTE issues. He'd probably collapse in under an hour, though a heroic character might make it a little further.

 

And as an aside' date=' it doesn't seem reasonable that his capacity to shift heavy weights for a period of time is equivalent to that of the equally strong, but fat and out of condition eunuch he got the maiden from, who'd be burning END every phase just to pick her up.[/quote']

 

It isn't. The barbarian isn't spending END, so LTE should never weigh him down. And that fat, out of shape eunuch shouldn't have the same STR. Maybe he has an ability called "That's not fat - it's pure muscle".

 

Now' date=' most GM's handwave it or ignore the problem entirely. Personally I'd rather FIX the contradiction - and at that point, pretty much everything falls neatly into place. I know how much PCs can lift, how far they can move it, how tired they get, how long it takes and how long it takes them to recover from such sustained effort.[/quote']

 

You seem to define handwaving the rule that a character may only stagger a few steps forward carrying his maximum weight as a "fix".

 

As noted above' date=' I would say nothing of the sort. I'd say 100 kg is his limit. But if he can get that weight up onto his shoulder, then logically he should be able to stagger forward until his energy gives out. [/quote']

 

He should? Why? If an Olympic weightlifter had his world record lift strapped to his back by others, do you really think he could stroll out of the stadium with this on his back, or would he quickly collapse under that "maximum lift" weight?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

[Finger hovers over the lock thread button]

[casualplayer]

Re: How much XP per 'level'

 

Try this:

 

Sell back 6" Running and 12 STR and make

 

12 12pt Multipower

2 m +12 STR

2 m 6" Running

 

The more you lift, the slower you move.