Size and Bash

[FightClub]

I believe this is a case of how you use your weight, not how much you have.  Sure weight should have some influence in it, but it's not substitution for skill.

[Quirk]

While I think strength and weight should definitely factor into bash, I think that reversing a bash could quite legitimately consider agility. If bash is a brute force attack, it should be terribly vulnerable to the redirections of that force. It doesn't require any real strength to step aside and trip your charging opponent.

If bash is just a brute force attack, though, the impact skill has on the outcome should be pretty limited. If it's not, strength and agility and weight all have a huge impact, and having a lack in any of these will hurt your effectiveness.

[Clearsighted]

While I think strength and weight should definitely factor into bash, I think that reversing a bash could quite legitimately consider agility. If bash is a brute force attack, it should be terribly vulnerable to the redirections of that force. It doesn't require any real strength to step aside and trip your charging opponent.

If bash is just a brute force attack, though, the impact skill has on the outcome should be pretty limited. If it's not, strength and agility and weight all have a huge impact, and having a lack in any of these will hurt your effectiveness.

Well...

The failure of a bash is your opponent nimbly darting out of a way, whereupon you fall down. That could be agility.

The reverse of the bash is them *meeting* your charge and knocking you down, which shows an exertion of greater strength and weight.

I can see an elf nimbly darting out of the way and letting the dwarf fall down. But there is something sick about a tall, spindly elf meeting a dwarf with brute strength/size and knocking them down in an reverse-bash.

[Tuannon]

Just out of curiosity, how does one get real life experience knocking a few animals with four legs off their balance?

Cow Tipping.

To use the judo example given, we should amend the small woman throwing someone who is apparently a lot larger to:

Small person with good control of their centre of gravity throws unskilled taller, larger person under favourable circumstances.

In essence the skill thing comes back into the equation, as does the element of randomness.

On the subject of multiple legs, a passive four legged animal is one thing a hostile one is another. And then in a Zalanthan example you have scrabs which are quick, fairly large (man size but not as heavy), low to the ground and have six legs.

It should be very difficult to bash a scrab for a man, near impossible for a half giant.

[Sephiroto]

Regarding the height-weight ratio:  I was thinking some kind of Pythagorean Theorem concept where height and weight are A and B, and the modifier is C then couple that with your strength and possibly offense/defense to get your roll.

How heavily height versus weight is . . . weighed in these calculations would be subjectively based on a lot of things, but I think this formula might help get a large field of roll values when using height and weight.

Hopefully you can make sense of my cluttered thoughts.

[Tuannon]

Some sort of algebraic expression for the force applied at the height it is applied?

[Fnord]

1) Weight should figure into bashing at least twice more than height.

2) A shield should add a bash bonus, if it does not already.

That being said, height/weight figuring into bash has always annoyed me, because it means certain character builds are "better" than others. The short, light warrior would be at a disadvantage to the big, heavy one. While that's realistic (skill being equal, a larger creature will usually win contests of force), it's unfortunate because people will favor that body type for the advantage.

3) The solution here might be to remove size/weight based bash bonuses, and just give half-giants (and larger creatures) a large bash bonus behind the scenes.

[X-D]

Hey, Somebody answered for me.
Cow Tipping.

Also works on a few others, but cows are the funniest.

Also Large dogs and play, very easy to bowl over from the side or any reasonable side angle.

[Clearsighted]

I really hope this gets seen to sometime soon to put more emphasis on weight, skill and strength, rather than height. Because right now, a newish elf warrior with max height can bash far more effectively and easily knock down those who try in the exact same manner that a HG does. And I just don't see that as coherent with the lanky, weak but fast nature of their face. At the moment, it seems more than 50% of what decides a bash is relative height.

[Forty Winks]

That being said, height/weight figuring into bash has always annoyed me, because it means certain character builds are "better" than others. The short, light warrior would be at a disadvantage to the big, heavy one. While that's realistic (skill being equal, a larger creature will usually win contests of force), it's unfortunate because people will favor that body type for the advantage.

Throwing my two sids in, I don't see anything wrong with people choosing a bulkier body for warriors, considering warriors who are slender and tall may not be as successful when compared with the bulkier, perhaps more muscular warriors in a "strong live, weak die" society. If a character is tall and light-weight, he likely wouldn't focus upon a style that relies upon bash anyway, and those who are built for a bashing style will use that more often. Like you said, Fnord, its realistic, but not unfortunate, IMO.

Personally, I really find tall, slender warriors difficult to imagine in a rugged, gritty atmosphere. When you think of a mercenary, or a soldier, do you picture an elf-like human leading units and armies? Almost all the time those who are successful as a warrior will be of the heavily built, muscular type. The only light-weight warriors I could imagine are those in Tuluk, who don't focus upon strength and straight-forward attacking, but with style and smooth motions.

[Forty Winks]

Perhaps as a counter to those warriors who are short and bulky, those with a lighter frame get a better bonus to evading bashes? I find that that would set a good balance between the two body types.

For an inexperienced half-giant to be able to successfully bash a fairly experienced human, for example, should be difficult due to the amount of mass required for the half-giant to move in comparison to the amount the human can move, though the gurth of the half-giant could very well make up the difference, if he was skilled enough at bashing. The same reasoning could apply to an inexperienced dwarven warrior vs. an inexperienced human, who though shorter and heavier, may not have the knowledge to successful bash the human due to his body-mass, and the human who doesn't have the leverage and weight to barrel over the dwarf.

Also, something that I'd like to see are more are of the critical failure bash attempts when done with a tall, lighter person against a short, stockier one, considering the stockier one is more experienced. I think if weight vs height issue was adjusted, this would occur more realistically.

The only times I've ever witnessed a critical failure was when done against a sparring dummy...  :lol:

[Forty Winks]

Hehe, another thing that came to mind, though perhaps a different topic, would be allowing those who are taller to have a bonus on those who are shorter when kicking them. For some reason I find it hilarious to picture a half-giant trying to kick a dwarf. It would be the new game of soccer in Zalanthas!  :lol:

With all these adjustments made, (with a few tweaks where needed, of course) I'd find combat to truly be more of a strategic battle when coupled between two (master) warriors of equal experience.

A human warrior who is up against a dwarven warrior, for example, would have to consider using bash at a disadvantage to try and prevent the opponent from bashing -him-, or to continue with his more effective kicks and see if he can evade the dwarf's bashes.

[Clearsighted]

Right now it is fairly easy for an inexperienced elf or half giant to bash a human-sized or lower character.  Not just bash, but actually have the basher /bounce/ off them and take damage.

I don't have a problem with this for giants...They are incredibly strong and enormously heavy.

It is just sad that I know its their /height/ the code is factoring into account, and very little of the weight.

(I.E, the way it's been explained in the past is that being 68 inches to 66 inches is as much a size difference as being 9 ten-stone to 8 ten-stone which just aint right...)

Frankly, I think Dwarves, Humans and Elves should all have roughly equitable sizes. Dwarves are short but broad and heavy, elves are tall but slim, and humans are a mix. A max weight-height specimen of each should probably be about the same. (Yes, 20-40 added more pounds of muscle should more than make up for a foot or two of height)

[Forty Winks]

A max weight-height specimen of each should probably be about the same.

That I highly doubt and disagree with. A dwarf would be knee-height on a max height elf, and considering that the weight is about equal, it would be like trying to bash a solid chunk of metal that comes to the knee in RL.

[UnderSeven]

I'm not entirely in agreement with either.  The dwarf will have a lower center of gravity and mass focused in a smaller space.  In that sense I agree entirly with FW.  However, it isn't like the elf has to charge the dwarf at full height.  You can assume the elf will approach the dwarf in such a way to best use their own size and mass, ducking down and pushing forward on the dwarf's level.  While I don't feel that should even out the difference, I think the difference shouldn't be huge, at least not nearly as big as current bash is with racial differences seeming to make a bigger difference in some cases then skill level.  Though this is all assuming the elf and dwarf have the same total mass.

[Clearsighted]

A dwarf would be knee-height on a max height elf

Knee-high? A Dwarf's max height is 58 inches, and their max weight is 10 ten stone.

I'm not entirely in agreement with either.  The dwarf will have a lower center of gravity and mass focused in a smaller space.  In that sense I agree entirly with FW.  However, it isn't like the elf has to charge the dwarf at full height.  You can assume the elf will approach the dwarf in such a way to best use their own size and mass, ducking down and pushing forward on the dwarf's level.  While I don't feel that should even out the difference, I think the difference shouldn't be huge, at least not nearly as big as current bash is with racial differences seeming to make a bigger difference in some cases then skill level.  Though this is all assuming the elf and dwarf have the same total mass.

And if you're assuming that elf and dwarf have the same total mass, you're assuming wrong. Dwarves have a much higher total mass. Currently, the difference in dwarf and elf height makes it possible for even a newbish elf warrior to have his way bashing-wise with a dwarven warrior.

Which is why roughly, at the end of the day, when size and height are taken into account, I do not see the maximum specimen of either non-karma race having a significant coded advantage.

The vast majority of it however should depend on strength and skill. Which it does not right now.

[UnderSeven]

Ugh, Okay, I didn't explain myself well.  I'm not saying a dwarf and elf have the same total mass. I am saying IF you had a situation like that for the sake of experiment or arguement.  

I realize they don't have the same total mass, that's why they're called different races.

Basically my point was supposed to be the last line of your post.

[Clearsighted]

I see now.

[Forty Winks]

Heh, I guess a 58 inch dwarf compared to a 96 inch elf wouldn't come to the knee, but it's a 2:1 ratio in height. Though I don't know the exact range of weight between the two races, they should be near the same range, meaning the dwarf will have a larger density.

The dwarf will have a lower center of gravity and mass focused in a smaller space. In that sense I agree entirly with FW. However, it isn't like the elf has to charge the dwarf at full height. You can assume the elf will approach the dwarf in such a way to best use their own size and mass, ducking down and pushing forward on the dwarf's level.

You forget to take into consideration the dwarf stooping down to take the elf's bash as well. The elf will need to get down to about the height of his knee to get any leverage on the dwarf, while the dwarf is already at an advantage in terms of leverage, and gets further benefits by tucking himself in to take the bash. And if they're both standing upright, the dwarf still has the advantage with a higher density -and- leverage than the elf.

:lol:  In the end though, we're still all agreeing that the current code needs change to take into account weight over height.

[Forty Winks]

Which is why roughly, at the end of the day, when size and height are taken into account, I do not see the maximum specimen of either non-karma race having a significant coded advantage.

The vast majority of it however should depend on strength and skill. Which it does not right now.

From reasons stated earlier, I think there should be a -noticeable- coded advantage, just not significant as you say. Also, I think the density of a humanoid should be taken into higher consideration than strength, seeing how strength still needs to overcome the body's center of gravity which has alot to do with weight to push someone over. Though strength and skill should come in as close second and thirds to the factors determining bash. If the code could figure in density of a character, then it would fix the height/weight issue.

To balance this, I'll mention this again. The lighter a character is, the larger the chance to evade from a heavier character it should be, though perhaps not as significant a factor. Also, the taller someone is, the easier it should be to kick a shorter person.

-FW, who had way too much time on his hand today.

[Vesperas]

Okey, dokey, my turn!  


I agree that racial mods should -not- be used: the reason being is that a height/weight ratio should work realistically well without any baggage from your race selection.  If you are a half-giant, you'll never be as light as a human, and if you are a human, you'll never be as heavy as a dwarf.  The height/weight stats takes care of the racial bonuses all by itself.

The PROBLEM that I forsee with using height and weight is that it would really encourage players who figure it out to always pick the most optimal range -- guessing by the way this discussion is going, that would smallest height and greatest weight.

This could probably be balanced by adding disadvantages throughout the ranges (perhaps determined by racial max/mins) that may balance out the annoyance-factor and the oh-so-kewl-leet-ability-bonuses.

An example of such a 'disadvantage' would perhaps be the hunger counter:  a human that is much larger than other humans (max height/max weight) may find that their hunger/thirst counter will change more quickly than smaller humans, and be more difficult to satisfy.

Someone who is much shorter than everyone else may also find that its a tiny bit more difficult to wilderness-travel or run -- they have a much shorter stride and require more endurance to achieve the same lengths as someone who is tall.


I also think that STRENGTH needs to be a big factor.

For example, I am a fairly large person in real life -- I certainly weigh a lot more than the 'heavy' humans of Zalanthas.  I can do a lot of serious damage if I wanted to, but I have had smaller, shorter people shove me across a room easily in a test of strength.  

Oh, and skill, of course.

So:
- skill level comparison
- weight/height ratio vs. weight/height ration
- strength

Those are my suggestions.

EDITED:  To add, that the above list is given in the order of priority.

[UnderSeven]

Personally I think skill needs to be the big factor.

When you get down to it, bash is to a lesser extent a wrestling move like a subdue or a trip of some kind.  You're knocking your opponent over but it isn't just two brutes bumping heads.  Someone with a lot of strength can have that strength used against them, say they see a person coming to bash them and they figure, okay, I'm a wall of muscle, I'll just give appropriate force back at them and knock them over instead.  EXCEPT the person bashing them being the more skilled basher goes, okay, well that person figures I'm so small he'll just knock me over, I'm going to shift my weight at the last moment and I'm going to throw him on his ass.  In other words, size could be used against someone by a skilled enough person.

Basically the way I view bash at least is to a lesser extent like a martial arts throw, and really strength should be a big factor, but skill needs to be the biggest.  With the possible exception of extreme size differences, when considering halflings and half giants.

[Clearsighted]

Well...

The optimal range is a half giant's weight and height.

Among dwarves, half-elves, elves and humans, strength and skill should be 90% of the equation.

[Forty Winks]

As skill should be a higher priority than weight, I would think weight would be a higher priority over strength.

An obese human, for example, though not having much muscle density, could still fairly easily resist a bash from an average human who's muscular, when skills are the same. The muscular human would need to overcome both the inherit strength of the obese person, but also more so the center of gravity of this large man.

BUT, this is considering the success of a bash. The amount of damage done by a bash should be affected much more so by strength, as it currently is IG I believe.

[Clearsighted]

At the moment, it would take a special app to play an obese human. (Or really, an obese member of any race). All their weight ranges are pretty narrow.