Strength vs damage

Ovatha's picture


What the difference between a human with 10 strength and the other with 18 for the damage output. They do the same damage? How this game represente the fact that one human is stronger than the other?

sorry for my english, i do my best

pokep's picture

There is a strength minimum for each weapon. The man with the 18 could use a heftier weapon than the smaller man. But if he uses the same weapon he does the same damage.

Jack's picture

Which on the surface sounds inherently ridiculous - surely the stronger man must hit harder, right? Consider it from this perspective:

Most melee weapon skills are at least partially based upon strength. Therefore, a person with a higher strength will likely have a higher SB, ML, and even a higher EML due to the impact of strength upon endurance and the impact of endurance upon encumbrance and injury penalties. So, the person with the higher strength hits more often, which is better, but how does that mean more damage (aside from using a heavier weapon)?

If a weak man swings his sword and hits a shield, then the shield may deflect the blow or not, depending upon the opposed rolls. A strong man has a better chance to prevail - he has a better chance to "power through" the shield. Likewise, more strength often means more speed in the swing of the sword, giving the target an overall smaller chance of dodging.

Finally, while canon HarnMaster compares the value of the armor against the impact of the weapon after a hit, it is nonetheless easy to imagine that some "misses" are weaker blows that do not have the potential to pass through the armor, and again a strong man would have a higher chance of doing this than a weak man would.

A strong man may not get a bonus to damage as in Dungeons & Dragons, but he does do more damage in a typical fight, all else being equal. He also resists damage better. And, as mentioned, he can choose to buy a heavier weapon that grants an impact bonus.

Tempest13's picture

This is an old issue. Robin was always defending his approach to weapon damage from similar arguements. The issue is you are looking at one aspect of combat (from a D&D perspective) and finding it lacking. Almost all weapons use Strength as a component of Skill determination. This makes the stronger man more capable of achieving a good hit with it. This also corresponds with him being able to use a heavier weapon made for his strength without penalty. This actually more accurately reflects the way the physics works. A ballpeen hammer wielded by a stronger man may do a little more damage than the same weapon wielded by a weaker man but it cannot compare with the ability of the stronger man to pick up a sledgehammer and wallop the poor weaker individual who cannot even heft it. Because the damage is not a linear value like in d&d but a modified bell curve it makes more sense to not artificially increase the weaker weapons as the distortion introduced skews the results on the injury tables. Besides it introduces a reason to wield a battleaxe or pol axe instead of the (yawn) almighty longsword - which is usually what happens in AD&D (in my experience at least).

Ovatha's picture

Thanx for yours answer, you have some good points.

I like the point that it help with the endurance and encumbrance, the avantage that you can carry heavier weapon.

for most player, they see the % skill to represente a chance to hit a target and they associate strength for damage. They need to feel that strength influence the damage. Strong men hit harder !

what do you respond to a player when he say

let imagine there are 2 warrior, both are master in boxing or something like that. Both have 100 in skill. The first have 10 in strength and the other have 20. the stongest boxer will need less punch to take the other because of his strength?

but i fear to add more damage to deadly game :)

Tempest13's picture

Actually that one is easy. A 10 strength person has a base bash damage of 0 (zero) and a 20 strength person has a base damage of 2 (two) in Harnmaster Gold. Assuming no armor (cloth is 0 vs bash) that means that on a 1 die attack the 10 Str person will never get to the second tier of damage (requiring a 7+) while the 20 strength person will get thee on 1/3 of his punches. since blunt damage follows the breakpoints of 1+,7+,13+,19+ the 20 strength person will have a increased chance of getting in the next bracket with every additional die (though with diminishing returns as the bell curve makes the top end statistically less likely to occur with each additional die). As for the skill involved that is a factor of enviroment and experience. A 10 strength person with a 100 skill knows his weakness and probably should look to cultivate a edge. This edge can be increasing dodge or even honing special unarmed traits by following a specific unarmed regimen. A true master of unarmed does not rely on strength alone but also on speed and knowledge of where to strike for the most impact.