So, how flawed is BRP ... ?

[Atgxtg]

Yeah, BRP's whole SIZ, ENC, weight, fatigue relationship is all messed up.

Mostly, messed. Up.

From around 8-88 SIZ follows a doubling progression, where x2 mass = +8 SIZ.

The problem is that past that point it usies an increasing scaleuntil it become linerar at SIZ 330.

I did do up a expanded SIZ table that could help in converting any SIZ to a mass. It is on the board. I also got one for converting SIZ by Volume, ut it won't give you the same value as by mass, unless you are dealing with something of the same desnity as humans.

Part of the difficulty with vehiclsis that Jason chose tofactor down the SIZ of big vehicles to try and keep the numbers small enough for supers to interact with.

IMO, what was should have been done was to use the SIZ table from Superworld, rather than CoC. That way it would scale up perfectly. It would solve most of the SIZ problems, too.

[Atgxtg]

Well, we could take the average of those numbers, arriving at about 15,500 ...

That actually isn't such a bad idea. It is what they do with die rolls for stats.

Reminds me of "statistical death". If you fire your gun at someone and first miss

1 meter to the left and then 1 meter to the right, he is statistically dead.

Reminds me of a short lived campaign I ran. The Pcs had robbed a dragon, and it hunted them down. The dragon breathed fire at one PC, mised and wound up hitin they guy hiding behind the bushes. The player was a bit miffed and argued that he was hidden and that the dragon couldn7t see him. It didn't see him. It thought that it just fried a bush.

[Atgxtg]

Actually, if the average human is SIZ 13 at 75 kg, the average blue whale should be size 31200 at 180 metric tons or, going at 6 enc = 1 siz , size 30k.

If we go by body length, the same siz 13 175cm human has an average blue whale counterpart of 222 siz , but then again, a blue whale is WAY more bulky than a human the same size, so id add a 50% more size for a grand total of 333.

So, make your pick: 222, 333, 30000 or 31200 =)

I7d say just go with SIZ by mass, and ingore the old 1 SIZ = 1 ENC thing.

That would give you SIZ 13 for a man (SIZ 12 for 75kg),

SIZ 126 for a 180mt blue whale,

and SIZ 5000 or so for a Iowa class Batleship.

Not too bad.

Of coruse, if we stuck with the doubling progession the whale would be around SIZ 102 and the battleship SIZ 167 or so. Numbers that would be quite usable for Supers yet still big enough to illustrate the differences.

[icebrand]

I7d say just go with SIZ by mass, and ingore the old 1 SIZ = 1 ENC thing.

That would give you SIZ 13 for a man (SIZ 12 for 75kg),

SIZ 126 for a 180mt blue whale,

and SIZ 5000 or so for a Iowa class Batleship.

Not too bad.

Of coruse, if we stuck with the doubling progession the whale would be around SIZ 102 and the battleship SIZ 167 or so. Numbers that would be quite usable for Supers yet still big enough to illustrate the differences.

Blue whales are 30 mts / 90 ft, so yours with 126 SIZ would be actually smaller than a horse when scaled :S

But a 126 SIZ whale is 10 people worth of mass, while a real life whale is 2400 people worth of mass (YES, it is friggin huge, as in "the biggest animal that ever lived)

[Atgxtg]

Blue whales are 30 mts / 90 ft, so yours with 126 SIZ would be actually smaller than a horse when scaled :S

But a 126 SIZ whale is 10 people worth of mass, while a real life whale is 2400 people worth of mass (YES, it is friggin huge, as in "the biggest animal that ever lived)

For example, a SIZ 12 rock is 75kg. But a rock with twice the mass (150kg) would be SIZ 20 (base 12 plus 8 for doubling). A rock 16 times the mass, or 1200kg, would be SIZ 44(base 12 plus 32 for doubling four times).

[icebrand]

For example, a SIZ 12 rock is 75kg. But a rock with twice the mass (150kg) would be SIZ 20 (base 12 plus 8 for doubling). A rock 16 times the mass, or 1200kg, would be SIZ 44(base 12 plus 32 for doubling four times).

Why are we still using SIZ again?

[rust]

Why are we still using SIZ again?

[Smoking Frog]

Why are we still using SIZ again?

I've suggested limiting SIZ to uses where it is a handy approximation of something. (We can argue about what the limit of those situations is, of course, but presumably the damage modifier is one place.) But for other purposes, dimensions and mass are much more useful. What, really, does it get you if you could actually come up with an "appropriate" SIZ for a blue whale? My answer would be: not much. Since we know they are around 180 metric tons and about 30 m long, it's friggin' huge and won't fit most places. And if something can't lift 180 metric tons, it's not gonna lift a blue whale. And if the whale fell on your character, he'd be jelly; no need to roll 53D6 + 17D4 + 13 to see how much actual damage he takes -- just start rolling up his replacement.

And how often is the SIZ equivalent of 1,000 pounds (or kg) of grain going to be helpful? Since I know its mass, if I know the density, I can tell you roughly what volume it has, so I can know whether it fits into whatever it is I'm trying to fit it in. If a 50 kg barrel is hard to lift because it's awkward to hold, I can make an easy ruling about the ability to carry it for a distance. I don't need to try to quantify a SIZ equivalent because it's bulky just to fit into a rule about what SIZ someone can carry. Why not just have a rule about how much mass a person can: lift with arms and legs, lift with just arms, and carry on his back while traveling some distance. Then I could deal with oddities like a barrel that is heavy and won't fit on a character's back. However helpful SIZ might be in some instances, it doesn't seem to make sense to try to force every game mechanic that deals with mass and dimension to accommodate SIZ.

[Atgxtg]

Why are we still using SIZ again?

Because it is useful. Just becuase a scale isn't linear doesn't mean that it isn't useful. Look at the Richter scale. In fact, much of the game isn't linear. If if were, we7d end up with .50 cals doing 32D8! SIZ helps to factor in for mass in damage, and for lifting things.

The problem is that the SIZ table isn't consistent in the 89-329 range.

IOf the formula were consistent, we could do a lot more with the SIZ table. It would be fairly easy to add SIZ scores, and work up vehicle ACC ratings if SIZ increased to some sort of consitient formula. For example, with the doubling formula that is used for the "sweet spot" that gets used for most things, we could use STR-SIZ to get the thrust/mass ratio of a rocket and thus it's acceleration.

[Atgxtg]

I've suggested limiting SIZ to uses where it is a handy approximation of something. ....

....And how often is the SIZ equivalent of 1,000 pounds (or kg) of grain going to be helpful?

Yeah, that is basically correct. SIZ is a tool that we should use when it helps us to do so. Orgianlly it was for things like "can we move this rock?". Putting cargo capacity SIZ doesn't really help. I7d much rather see "one ton" listed than SIZ 42.

[rust]

Because it is useful. Just becuase a scale isn't linear doesn't mean that it isn't useful.

The fact that the SIZ scale is not linear would not irritate me, but that it does

not distinguish between "low weight / high volume" and "high weight / low vo-

lume" really does. This way both the dirigible on BGB page 271 and the locomo-

tive on BGB page 277 have SIZ 100, and to me this does not make any sense.

[MrJealousy]

I'm going to ignore the non-linear SIZ issue for the moment...

and suggest that the problem seems to be that SIZ is linked to height and weight. So how about using SIZ to define height and CON to define weight. Makes more sense when thinking about locomotives and dirigibles.

Its the way I've always tended to think of it in the past (whatever the rulebook says). A character with SIZ 18 and CON 6 is tall and skinny, reverse those stats and he is short and fat.

[vagabond]

I'm going to ignore the non-linear SIZ issue for the moment...

and suggest that the problem seems to be that SIZ is linked to height and weight. So how about using SIZ to define height and CON to define weight. Makes more sense when thinking about locomotives and dirigibles.

Its the way I've always tended to think of it in the past (whatever the rulebook says). A character with SIZ 18 and CON 6 is tall and skinny, reverse those stats and he is short and fat.

But CON is a measure of health. A fat person is not generally regarded as healthy.

I'd hate to add stats, but perhaps we need to replace SIZ with MAS (mass) and VOL (volume - though this still requires some intuitiveness) or MAS and LEN (length along the longest axis i.e. a bird's wingspan, a human's height, and a snake's lenght).

Ian

[rust]

I'd hate to add stats, but perhaps we need to replace SIZ with MAS (mass) and VOL (volume - though this still requires some intuitiveness) ...

This is how the BRP-based Ringworld RPG did it, replacing SIZ with MAS in the

creature stats and with Mass and Volume / Dimensions in the technology stats.

[Atgxtg]

This is how the BRP-based Ringworld RPG did it, replacing SIZ with MAS in the

creature stats and with Mass and Volume / Dimensions in the technology stats.

VOL and MAS sound good to me.

I got a table that did this awhile back, for airships. Basically, you can use the same table, and just give a shift for density. For instance, water could be the default at sg1, and something twice as dense would be +8 to MAS for a given VOL. Something like an airship would be -80 MAS for a given volume (or +80 volume for a given MAS).

[icebrand]

VOL and MAS sound good to me.

I got a table that did this awhile back, for airships. Basically, you can use the same table, and just give a shift for density. For instance, water could be the default at sg1, and something twice as dense would be +8 to MAS for a given VOL. Something like an airship would be -80 MAS for a given volume (or +80 volume for a given MAS).

Why'd you have to go and make things so complicated? Siz is a mess :'(

[Atgxtg]

Why'd you have to go and make things so complicated? Siz is a mess :'(

How is it complicated? Please Clarify.

[icebrand]

How is it complicated? Please Clarify.

SIZ alone is messy enough for me... Splitting it is 2x work and no benefit at all.

Also i was just listening to avril lavigne and copy pasted the lyrics

[vagabond]

This is how the BRP-based Ringworld RPG did it, replacing SIZ with MAS in the

creature stats and with Mass and Volume / Dimensions in the technology stats.

Yep - which is why I brought it up.

[Atgxtg]

SIZ alone is messy enough for me... Splitting it is 2x work and no benefit at all.

Acutally there are several benefits. Forone thingit would make it much easier to determine SIZ and MAS scores if the two were seperate. As it is now, there is a problme when compaing blocks of different material of the same size.

For instance, a 1m cube of water masses 1 metric ton. But the same cube made of steel masses 7 tons,and one of gold masses 19.3 tons. All three cubes have the same "size", but they all have differernt masses. Veryi mportant if you are trying to haul them off in a truck.

Conversely, a 100 ton train and 100 ton airship both have he same mass, but the airship is much, much, larger, something like 100 times the 'size" for the same mass. That would make the airship a much easier target.

Another benefit is in determining things like accelration, or where or not a vehicle will flloat, sink or fly.

A ship with a MAS greater than it SIZ will sink. A vehicle that produces more lift (STR) that it MAS will fly. And so on.

[Smoking Frog]

For the example of your cubes and a truck, leaving SIZ out accomplishes everything you want: you know the carrying capacity of your truck -- assume for example, it is 12 tons -- so you know it can carry the cube of water and the cube of steel, but not the cube of gold. Haven't we solved all the problems that the GM and players would have in that situation? The question is whether this fits in my truck and if it does can I cart it away. If I know mass and dimensions, I'm in business, so long as I give my vehicle a carrying capacity in a real measurement, like mass rather than SIZ or ENC.

[Atgxtg]

For the example of your cubes and a truck, leaving SIZ out accomplishes everything you want: you know the carrying capacity of your truck -- assume for example, it is 12 tons -- so you know it can carry the cube of water and the cube of steel, but not the cube of gold. Haven't we solved all the problems that the GM and players would have in that situation? The question is whether this fits in my truck and if it does can I cart it away. If I know mass and dimensions, I'm in business, so long as I give my vehicle a carrying capacity in a real measurement, like mass rather than SIZ or ENC.

Yes, as long as you got stuff like carry capacity and such to begin with. But what if you have no idea how much the trcuk can carry (and most pickup trucks can't haul 12 tons).

That is where you need STR or some sort of real world method to get a value.

Now, I have no problem with using real world formulas and math to find out some real world answers. But, considering how well the BRP cirtical/special table goes over, I7m not sure if that would fly. Most people would want simple math, and simple math will give gargage answers .

Plus, having a SIZ 8and STR) would help when you have to plow that truck into a dragon.

[seneschal]

"Plus, having a SIZ 8and STR) would help when you have to plow that truck into a dragon."

Great minds think alike! Ever seen the old B movie Dinosaurus? The finale involves a battle between a T-rex and a construction vehicle.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053768/

[Mankcam]

I would make skill modifiers simple, but not reinvent the wheel. Either an action is Standard, Easy, or Difficult, using the BRP rules as written.

For a BRP-lite system I'ld actually get rid of the mega-broad Characteristic Rolls (ie: Agility, Effort, etc) and just have Skill Categories, that then allow you to do anything you want , making liberal use of the whole Standard, Easy, Difficult thingy. The skill categories are less broad than the Characteristic Rolls, but cover every action you'ld need to make. Anything outside of these would be an Attribute vs Resistance on the RES Table instead, for things such as Strength rolls etc.

Perhaps a few Notable Skills/Traits are known, which are bought in +15% increments. These ones gain Skill Checks as per usual, but they actually gain Skill Development Points instead, which transfer into actual skill % increase at 15% increments (eg: 15%, 30%, 45%, 60%, and so forth). Keeps the maths very simple.

But I think something like this is more worthy of the title' Basic Roleplaying' than the standard system actually is - BRP certainly isn't complicated, but it's too 'crunchy' to be "Basic", I would of preffered the standard system to be called 'Chaosium System' after it's parent company, but I'm digressing.

All in all though I like what I'm seeing in RetroQuest for a brp-lite set of rules, but it needs to go 'lighter' I reckon...

Edited June 26, 2011 by Mankcam

[Atgxtg]

"Plus, having a SIZ 8and STR) would help when you have to plow that truck into a dragon."

Great minds think alike! Ever seen the old B movie Dinosaurus? The finale involves a battle between a T-rex and a construction vehicle.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053768/

I might have seen it. I don't remember. But, IMO the whole point of putting everything together in one book is that we can use all of it.

IMO vehicle STR is as important as SIZ, since performace is tied to STR.