[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (TFT) High Level Play

Well you do keep track of where things are carried... to tell the truth I've never used any games encumbrance rules (except for a coupla wargames that had heavy weapon users move slower...) cause they are imperfect. I find that just letting players carry things up until the point where it makes no sense is best.... I mean, using a series of belts and such to tie it all to you back and hold it down, i'm sure you could carry a dozen short swords and barely feel it (each one would be only 2-3 pounds in real life).... so yea.
Basically, i assume they can carry things unless its ridiculous, and it usually works. 
On Nov 4, 2010, at 7:23 PM, Thomas Fulmer wrote:


I can speak to this point directly due to recent time in Iraq -- in a
recent TFT game, I and some other players were talking about this vary
issue and just about everyone agreed that the encumbrance rules were
silly.

In terms of a text book mission, I would generally be wearing uniform
and boots, ballistic vest with front, back and side plates, advanced
combat helmet, M-16 + 700 rounds of ammo, M-9 + 45 rounds of ammo,
assorted small tools (Strap cutters, etc), two canteens or two 1 liter
water bottles, first aid kit and any special mission gear.

We keep rifles (normally) on a 3 point sling which allows you to have
it in your hands, combat read, but with the weight resting on your
shoulders. Additionally, the bullet proof vests could be adjusted to
make them very tight around the Torso...this extra distribution (whole
torso instead of just weight on the shoulders) made a huge difference.

The reality of weight carried is that it is all about how you carry
the weight. All of that gear was supported on shoulders and Torso
(some on legs) and I could function normally for hours. Had I been
carrying that weight in my arms, I'd have muscle failure in very short
order. In fact, I even remember once I was wearing all my gear and me
and another soldier were carrying a 50lbs box with handles (We were
both on either side holding one handle each). With this weight in our
hands we were exhausted after a half mile to a mile of walking. Weight
in your hands fatigues faster than weight in your arms which is faster
than weight on your body.

So if you want to look at carry in real world terms, it is all about
how it is carried. If you walk around holding a giant battle axe in
your hands, you'll get tired a lot faster than if you had the same
weight of sword strapped to your back.

TFT does not really have a mechanism for keeping track of where it is
carried though, so really your best bet is probably just to make it a
simple exponential growth instead of linear growth. Still inaccurate,
but at least you can carry realistic amounts of weight.

--Thomas
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Skipper <tywyll@yahoo.com> wrote:
I found this article about soldier's loads on average and I found it quite interesting. I think that if 20+ Str is supposed to be 'super' then the encumbrance should probably not increase in a linear fashion. Because 'average' soldiers are carrying anywhere from 40+ Kilos to nearly 50 kilos on a typical mission. While it is effecting them, if they couldn't maintain it with relative effectiveness (i.e. not suffer much penalty) they would not be 
viable combatants.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_01-15_ch11.ht
m
Matthew

--- On Thu, 4/11/10, Nathan Easton <n.m.easton@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Nathan Easton <n.m.easton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (TFT) High Level Play
To: tft@brainiac.com
Date: Thursday, 4 November, 2010, 22:09
I think you could use the encumbrance rules as a guideline. Someone with, 
for example, 25 strength is strong enough to haul around 50 kilos or
thereabouts before they get into much of a penalty. So, you're as strong as 
a guy who could run around with a hundred pound backpack and not be
particularly inconvenienced by it. A guy with 30 strength could carry around 60 kilos, so still not up over 200 pounds without being substantially 
slowed.
What that tells us is that strength ratings increase at a more linear rate 
than the exponential one you'd see for a superhero type character.



On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, <mejobo@comcast.net> wrote:


I'd say that points (for ST, DX, and IQ) are relative...
I view it like this:
ST
1-5 small animals, very weak old people or species, children.
6-7: Very weak person, like a very old man (who isn't on his death bed, as 
above) or perhaps a 10 year old.
8: Weaker person, but not so much that they are considered ridiculously 
abnormal- most teenaged girls, an out of shape fellow, etc.
9: At this point you are more like 'average.' Still a bit on the low end, but you are strong enough to do most things- use a sword, a bow, break down 
a light door if necessary and given a few tries, etc.
10: You are truly about average in strength.
11: You are truly about average in strength. And I'm serious. I think 10/11 is around average for a stat, and really this one just varies for different 
sized people, sexes, etc. But 10-11 is basically average strength.
12: A strong guy, but not like really strong. This is probably more like 
average for a soldier.
13-15: At this point you are pretty strong.... still not like abnormally so, and many people are like you, but you are one of the tougher guys. 16-20: You are really, really strong. Still within human norms, but you are well muscled, can easily carry large weapons and lift large amounts of 
weight, and exert a large amount of force.
20+: You are in the "super strong" level..... mostly, in real life, this 
involves steroids. Could be a low level superhero even.


DX
1-7: absolute clutz. On the lower end its not even possible... you'd need 
to be nigh on brain dead for such a low DX>
8: You are not very good at hand eye coordination and such. The regular 
'kinda clutzy' dude.
9: Still not a great athlete or anything, but you aren't so bad. Probably 
this is close to average for many people who aren't in their 20s.
10: this is average for people who are younger/fairly healthy.
11: Average for slightly more athletic types, but not for great swordsmen 
and archers... more like someone who has good control of their body
naturally, but not a lot of training for applying it to much.
12-14: You are starting to be a good archer, or a good swordsmen. Not nearly the best, but you are capable in a fight, and can easily do simpler 
tasks like jumping a small chasm.
15-17: Really skilled, a sharpshooter or fencer.
18+: as you get really high you are truly god like in control over your body and such, and are accurate no matter what, but at the lower end you 
are
more like a really, really good person in real life... one of the top 
archers, fighters, etc.


IQ:
6-7: dumb.
8: Far from intelligent, but this shows more a lack of experience and skill 
than a lack of intelligence.
9: Same as above but slightly better.
10: about average intelligence/experience. You can learn the skills needed 
to do most work at this point.
11-12: Above average. More skilled labor, more experience, or just plain 
smarter.
13-16: Quite bright. Can learn most anything and quite a few things too. At 
this point its hard to get this high without a fairly good natural
intelligence, although experience is important too to get this high.
17-18: Really, really experienced, educated, and very smart naturally. Higher than 18: getting into the genius bits then. Unlike DX and ST, I think IQ can easily get up into the 30's and still be 'possible in real 
life.'



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Carlisle" <Jay_Carlisle@charter.net>
To: tft@brainiac.com
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2010 12:22:22 AM
Subject: Re: (TFT) High Level Play

What does 1 point of Strength mean exactally?
If you wanna allow a Connan that's three times as strong as the strongest "muggle" then the only way I know what your talking about is if the bloody 
term is defined ahead of time so I know what you mean by 36 ST.
As it is 36 ST may as well equal the following characters <$TF(Q
Has anybody ever considered that if a player gets their Figure up around Pomfrey brothers ST then they are likely to be able to beat their way outta 
much "standard" construstion?
If I make the pesants build with wattle and daub then there will be a 
pit/pond around most of that construction.
Any of those poor wattle and daub consturction guys would be screwed out 
where "I" live as the "soil" is practically sand.
I love bouncing theory with folks but the part that makes us all "playing the same game" is an agreement of the terms like 'what does 1 pt of ST 
mean?'
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body 
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body 
"unsubscribe tft"

=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body 
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body 
"unsubscribe tft"





--
"Do not imagine that, if something is hard for you to achieve, it is
therefore impossible for any man: but rather consider anything that is
humanly possible and appropriate to lie within your own reach too." --
Marcus Aurelius
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"

=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"