RE: (TFT) Killing Joe

["Jay Carlisle" <selfinflicted_wounds@boardermail.com>]

Keep 'em comming ;-}

I totally agree
It's a game afterall. Not a Physics Lab.
Mr. Jackson assumed a limit of STR30 for a 'Realistic' game and I think that I can show that this appears in a couple of other aeras (HTHdam and EXP spring to mind just now). And there are other major problems with the data I'm working with now. The Mythbuster test on femurs was a iron pipe across a bare femur (prob dry also. purchased at 'the bone yard' in Frisco) with the pipe placed right across the middle. No flesh to get through. I'll keep tossin it around...




> ----- Original Message -----
> From: pvk@oz.net
> To: tft@brainiac.com
> Subject: RE: (TFT) Killing Joe
> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:34:20 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> 
> Aw! Hehe. :-) Sorry, I couldn't resist.
> 
> I like the approach, and it's an interesting start, but my feeling is that
> the real situation is really complex, and there are many ways to decide to
> try to map (and necessarily, abstract) game effects to real values. Having
> a basis is at least good for a sanity check, and you've got to start
> somewhere. There are just many other factors you could consider, and you
> might try on what you make your calculation mean. As in, you might try not
> mapping kinetic energy to average damage, but maybe to maximum possible
> damage (or even, double or triple max damage).
> 
> My perspective is that although it's interesting and important to me to do
> this kind of thinking, I don't expect it'll ever be an accurate predictor
> except in situations that are very limited, such as the distance something
> will fly if launched with a known mass, force, and trajectory. Even then
> reality has wind, aerodynamics, potential errors in the mechanism or aim,
> etc., which in a brain-powered pen&paper counters&dice game make more
> sense to abstract and randomize than to calculate. But by running numbers
> on the limits, one can figure out what reasonable abstract dice formulas
> might be.
> 
> In the kinetic damage case, not only did you not have mass in some of the
> examples, but also the surface area of contact, and the solidity of the
> objects. Randomness also comes from the specific ways things come into
> contact. Really you're interested in the effect on human health (damage
> points) compared to the energy of something that hits them, but where and
> how they're hit is a huge factor. Most real weapons can kill someone in
> one blow, or do only superficial damage, depending on where and how they
> hit. (E.g. like the Miyamoto Musashi duel mentioned - it's not that a
> bokken does 4d6 and a katana does 2d-2 - it's that the katana hit Mushashi
> in the clothing or skin, and the bokken hit his opponent's head in just
> the right place, reportedly due to superior skill and/or weapon
> maneuverabilty or dodging skill or reflexes, training, body-language
> reading, etc.). I.e., the weapon damage in that duel was the least
> relevant factor in the specific thing that happened. A katana hit is
> usually more lethal than a bokken hit, but a bokken hit can be lethal and
> may give an advantage in getting the first hit.
> 
> On Sun, August 26, 2007 11:40 am, Jay Carlisle wrote:
> > Well if you put it THAT way...
> > (hangs head and walks slowly away, tail between my legs and teardrops
> > spotting the ground.... SNIFF)
> ...
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"

>


-- 
_______________________________________________
Get your free email from http://www.boardermail.com
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"