[Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 14, Issue 12

[Julian Lord]

Brad :

 I just stumbled onto this below in my archives. The velocity/momentum/
> kinetic energy topic resurfaces routinely, doesn't it? The thing to
> remember about that square component is that it refers to measuring a
> fall proportional to the length of _time_ of falling. Since we
> parameterize falls proportional to _distance_, then _linear_ is the
> better choice.
>
>
> On Jul 25, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Tom Cantine wrote:
>
> > I worked out the following table of damage scales for impact at
> > various speeds, although I suppose I should expand it to take into
> > account the enormous amounts of knockback a giant can deliver.
> >
> >       Damage  Equivalent speed        Typical situation
> >       1D3             1-2 m/SR                Walking into wall;
> tripping over cat
> >       1D4             3-4 m/SR                Running into wall; falling
> from 1 m
> >       1D6             5-6 m/SR                Sprinting into wall;
> falling from 2-3 m.
> >       2D6             7-8 m/SR                Trotting horse.
> >       3D6             9-10 m/SR       Charging horse
> >
> > I based these values loosely on the falling damage rule, noting
> > that every 3 m of height adds a d6 of damage, and so I inferred
> > that damage is linear with kinetic energy. Actually, that seems
> > pretty reasonable, all other things being equal.
> >
> > However, it seems to me that knockback distance is a linear
> > function of velocity, not of kinetic energy (which is proportional
> > to the square of velocity). To fling someone 60m would require a
> > minimum velocity of about 45 m/s, which is about the speed one
> > would attain after falling about 100 m. So damage on landing should
> > be about 33d6.
> >
> > I don't think that damage should max out at 12d6, because the
> > entire body is hitting a solid surface, and while 12d6 is every bit
> > as lethal as 33d6, the degree of overkill is a useful indication of
> > how recognizable the residue will be.
>
>
> Brad Furst
> If you've seen one non-sequitur, then all the tea in china.


Brad, it's long been worked out that all RQ stats are actually logarithmic
in nature, and that simple algebra is sufficient to compare the various
forces against each other --- ie distance fallen/velocity has a similar
structure as SIZ+CON/Hit Points

The rules have been designed (or re-designed depending on your POV) to use
the same logarithmic scale for all relevant forces, so that simple algebra
can handle all scaling issues... :-)

Julian Lord
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061128/eb73bd2a/attachment.html