The Forge Archives

QuoteSpartan wrote (http://www.shadowharn.net/viewtopic.php?t=741): My main beef with the system is the TOUGHNESS stat. It functions the same as armour reduction, and I find that to be a bit unrealistic. If your character has a TOUGHNESS of say 6, that reduces damage as much as plate does. Kind of weird. It's a simple enough thing to put a limit on the stat by race... say a limit of 4 or 5 for a human.

Jake, what is the reasoning behind this point?

Quote from: Durgil

QuoteSpartan wrote (http://www.shadowharn.net/viewtopic.php?t=741): My main beef with the system is the TOUGHNESS stat. It functions the same as armour reduction, and I find that to be a bit unrealistic. If your character has a TOUGHNESS of say 6, that reduces damage as much as plate does. Kind of weird. It's a simple enough thing to put a limit on the stat by race... say a limit of 4 or 5 for a human.

Jake, what is the reasoning behind this point?

It's been suggested in the past that Toughness be limited to 7 in humans.

Brian.

That's still better than wearing a full suit of mail (AV4) and a TO of 2.  That just seems quite a big difference to me.  A character with a TO of 2 would have to wear armour with an AV of 5 to withstand the same strike that a character with an TO of 7 could withstand.

It should be a big difference. Someone with TO 2 is *very* weak. I would imagine very, very old people as having TO 2.
Anything less than 3 is either not human or disease or old age.
In my book, humans range from 3 to 6 or 7.

Toughness in a real and only real campaign shouldn't pass 5 or maybe 6. It's in there as-is to protect dnd types. That's really it. It just depends on what you're going for.

TO of 2 is really frail. If you got hit with a sword in full plate and had a TO of 2 you'd judt get all banged around and would still be hurtin'.

Jake

Quote from: Jake NorwoodTO of 2 is really frail. If you got hit with a sword in full plate and had a TO of 2 you'd judt get all banged around and would still be hurtin'.

Jake, would it be reasonable to limit Toughness to say 5 for a human and increase the AVs by one or two?  Or would this make armour too effective against weapons?

-Mark

I don't know about this "limiting toughness" stuff.  I don't think it's quite... in line with The Riddle of Steel.  My take on it is as such:

You want to spend all your Spiritual Attribute points in being tough?  Is it your lifelong goal to become a Shaolin monk, who can bend spears with his throat?  Go ahead.  That's precisely what you'll become.

The way I see it is that after a point, it isn't worth it to spend anything on becoming tougher unless that is part of your character's life, drive, goals and such.

BTW, the average Gol has a TO of 6.  I don't think that should be off-limits to higher-end humans.  7 or 8 seems to be a good cap to me, because it represents being as tough as a normal person wearing chain mail.  Six is as tough as a normal person wearing leather, and 5 would be a silly cap, IMO, because that's the average Stahlner, not even the extra-tough ones.

And don't look at it as "TO of 6 is like wearing plate armor" because that's TO of 10 (remember that most people are TO 4).  And a TO of 10 is just insane.  No human would ever have enough desire to get toughness that high, unless maybe they've already achieved enlightenment through sword skill and are really bored.

Quote from: LyraxI don't know about this "limiting toughness" stuff.  I don't think it's quite... in line with The Riddle of Steel.  My take on it is as such:

You want to spend all your Spiritual Attribute points in being tough?  Is it your lifelong goal to become a Shaolin monk, who can bend spears with his throat?  Go ahead.  That's precisely what you'll become.

The way I see it is that after a point, it isn't worth it to spend anything on becoming tougher unless that is part of your character's life, drive, goals and such.

BTW, the average Gol has a TO of 6.  I don't think that should be off-limits to higher-end humans.  7 or 8 seems to be a good cap to me, because it represents being as tough as a normal person wearing chain mail.  Six is as tough as a normal person wearing leather, and 5 would be a silly cap, IMO, because that's the average Stahlner, not even the extra-tough ones.

And don't look at it as "TO of 6 is like wearing plate armor" because that's TO of 10 (remember that most people are TO 4).  And a TO of 10 is just insane.  No human would ever have enough desire to get toughness that high, unless maybe they've already achieved enlightenment through sword skill and are really bored.

Ulrich of Stahl started play with a TO of 8.

Not TOO far to go from there to 10.

But what was really sick was when we gave him ARMOR.

The function of TO and ST in the game needs to be re-thought. Limiting TO isn't the answer. It's not even AN answer. :)

My take on it is that if I got swung at by a sword and it hit me, my toughness would not have very little to do with how far it penitrated into my flesh.  Just trying to imagine this in a real world setting, a really tough character might continue fighting like nothing happened, only to find out after winning the fight that he is in danger of bleeding to death, where the wimpy guy falls to the ground after the same hit screaming in agony.  I might have an idea, Jake, that would be tide into those house rules conserning armour that I brought up in that Armour Question thread.  I'll start to hammer a rough draft out at work today and try to get it to you by the end of the week.

I don't think a linear toughness that subtracts from all types of damage equally is necessarily realistic.  However, I don't think you're going to come up with a better system, where 'better' includes ease-of-use.

On the subject of how high to let toughness go, I do know this: people are capable of far greater acts of strength then toughness.  In otherwords, they can do amazing feats of strength, but ruin their bodies in the process.  We see this over and over again with steroids & other drugs.

In my head, a strength of 10 represents lifting roughly 1000lbs, which is the world record.  This is simply yanking something off the ground and establishing control for a few seconds.  Now, if that's the max strength, then I hold my thumb to the air and say...hmmm, let's call '7' max toughness and deal with that.  Sure, someone from stahl will manage and 8, but it's a fantasy game afterall.

-Jeff

Maybe a possible solution is to move the damage reduction quality of toughness into a derived stat based on toughness and endurance.  I just had someone make a character with a TO 8 and EN 2.  In armor he will be a tank (for the few rounds he can fight before passing out but that is usually enough).  

My reasoning for combining them and making it a derived stat (TO+EN)/2 is that a combined toughness/endurance can represent not only the characters innate toughness but also his ability to keep on fighting as the damage wears him down.  

Just my 2 coppers.

-Bogie

I can see points on both side of the argument, but without going into the extremes, I think that TO works as a good counterbalance to ST. Two guys with average ST and TO are dueling... 4 ST and 4 TO on both sides, and it all comes down to the weapons, the armor, and the skills of the two opponents... Which is where it ought to be.

Still, though... It does bear thought, and better yet, testing. I think, once I get the Gladiators project fleshed out enough, I think that it would be an excellent method for putting the system through it's paces in more than simple duels. Dueling is fun, but it can get dull if repeated the same way every time, so the Gladiators idea can stimulate the fun aspect, as well as creating really new and interesting situations in which the system's breaking points can be determined.

Which isn't to say the system is broken, of course. Not in the least. But all systems have their breaking points, no matter how well put together, and it is a good idea to fully recognize where those points are, and how they can be minimized and patched over, if not fixed entirely. ST -vs- TO may very well be one of those points.

One last point, something that struck me as wrong for no discernable reason:

Quote from: JaifOn the subject of how high to let toughness go, I do know this: people are capable of far greater acts of strength then toughness.

Forgive me, but how do you know this? Feats of strength are more common, that is true.. But that is, I believe, because strength is more glorious to demonstrate, easier to develop, and easier to observe and measure. Human toughness rarely ever gets a spotlight, though.

I'm not saying you are wrong, Jaif. If you have actual proof of your statement, I would definitely like to see it. It's just that your stated surety struck a false chord in me. I think the topic far too little studied to be making such sweeping statements. [/quote]

One thing I would like to throw in:

TO reduces the wound level, not the effects of a wound level taken. For example, it's harder to decapitate a guy with TO 6 than TO 3, but if his head comes off, he's dead.

IRL, people get stabbed 57 times and live. Others get stabbed once and dice.

Perhaps we're interpereting what TO is wrongly...

Just a thought.

Jake

Maybe WP dives a character onward instead of succumbing to Shock and TO would be a character's ability to withstand pain.  I can see Arnold Swartzenager (sp?), in one of his tough guy movies referring to an open wound on his huge shoulder as "it's just a scratch."

Quote from: DurgilMaybe WP dives a character onward instead of succumbing to Shock and TO would be a character's ability to withstand pain.  I can see Arnold Swartzenager (sp?), in one of his tough guy movies referring to an open wound on his huge shoulder as "it's just a scratch."

Nah, pain is all WP. TO prevents bigger wounds--it doesn't dull the ones you have. That's what we're missing. TO is metaphysical, in a sense. It isn't like more hit points, it just makes you harder to kill. It increase the chance that you're simily grazed and not swewered without increasing your CP. It does not dull-down the effects of a skewer, though! Think about it.

Jake
who is one tough SOB...