Aberrant RPG - Uber Claws

[Matthew]

I am curious to know people's opinion on the idea of taking Range and Armor Piercing with claws.

[SkyLion]

Mechnically? Ouch!

,,

Thematically? Claws mod strength damage...how are you describing having ranged strength?

,,

Of course, if you ST allows it, its like having a low cost maintenace q-bolt!

[Alex Green]

The good news is it can be done.

The bad news is it only affects the "Claws" damage, not the strength damage.

Claws stacks with Strength, Strength doesn't stack with claws. Making the claws ranged doesn't make Mega-Str ranged (see also the Kenetic claw's extra or whatever it's called).

[SkyLion]

On the other hand you can do pretty much the same thing with tendrils or the flexibilty enhancement....

[metaphysician]

OTOH, Ranged Claws with some modifiers and limits could be used to represent some kind of magic ability to summon guns. Not the most efficient purchase though; I like Claws ( Kinetic Transfer ) plus some kind of ranged weapon better, and so does my GM apparently.

[Alex Green]

I see no reason why you couldn't combine Claws+KT with Armor Piercing.

[metaphysician]

You could, certainly, except my GM has dropped Armor Piercing into the waste basket. ::happy

[Alex Green]

RQC then.

[metaphysician]

Hmm, that is a question. . .

Okay, Claws has the normal maintenance costing for a power. In addition, if you have the Kinetic Transfer extra, for 1 qp you can apply that damage bonus to a ranged attack weapon.

If you also have RQC, how is the cost calced? Is the 1 point cost unaffected? Is the 1 point cost halved and rounded, thus meaning no cost? Is it somehow added to the maintenance cost before RQC applies ( given the ranged effect cost is per attack, separate from the power activation, I haven't the foggiest how that'd be done )?

Option 2 seems the most logical to me, and it'd make Claws + KT + RQC one quite nice power for any weapon user.

[Alex Green]

A few powers have set costs. Q-conversion, Claws+KE, Q-Leech. Increasing the power doen't change those because their cost isn't related to their level. RQC says you take it's normal cost and half it, rounding down.

So it's half of one (i.e. zero) per shot.

[Matthew]

Thanks for point out about the "range" extra. I looked it over and it doesn't do what I wanted it to do. The original intent was to have long reaching "swords" (read: Claws) that could slice through armor like butter.

It seems now that the best thing to do is just take Claws with AP. Later I will take Mastery, that will cut it's Q.cost down.

Here and Idea that I had. If you wanted to, you could have claws at range with the RQC. If you did that you would have mini-q.bolts. Think of a powerful nova who loves old westerns. If he tweaks claws enough and buys and one of the two extras. He could have Pistols that have infinite ammo.

[metaphysician]

Rory Kincaid, a character in the Ancient Aberrant campaign I am a part of, has just such an effect. Or at least, he probably had such an effect at some point; he probably converted over to a RQC Mastered QBolt with a pistol SFX at some point prior to "present."

[metaphysician]

Just had a thought. Claws stacks with Strength, Strength doesn't stack with Claws, so you can't use Ranged on Claws to make your Strength ranged.

However. . . bows. If you had a bow built to stand up to mega strength levels of pull, *that* could let you make your strength ranged, and turn your damage from bashing to lethal for free.

[Alex Green]

You'd probably have to make your bow (very) special, and you'd probably also have to do the same thing for your bolts.

[metaphysician]

The bow at least, yeah. Anything beyond Mega Str 2 would probably require superscience materials. The arrows, I'm not so certain. All they have to do is be able to withstand the forces of the launch, so making them out of steel would probably work. They'd likely resemble finned sabots more than arrows, though.

[SkyLion]

Not neccesarily super science materials. If you had High Mega Str due to sizemorph: growth, then a well engineered giant bow (made from some kind of high tensile composites) could work. Of course the arrows would do massively more damage too. Similar thing for say, giant swords or axes...they should so more damage as well.

[Alex Green]

They already do.

[SkyLion]

Really? I must have missed the section on giant sized weapons.

[Alex Green]

I mean that someone using an Ax with Mega-Str 5 is already doing more damage. Giant sized means that it's possible to attack with your full strength, which is pretty huge right there.

[SkyLion]

I still think a giant sized weapon is going to cause a more grevious wound than a tiny one. Like a spear will make a bigger hole than an arrow for example. Another example is that a sword does more damage than a dagger. Weapon damage is separate from strength. Consider a 60 foot tall nova swinging a super science strong yet normal sized dagger..like a toothpick yeah and say he slashes a building. it would make a little cut. Now imagine the same Nova slashing a building with a 60-foot long two handed greataxe....

[Alex Green]

Scale is very tricky with these sorts of things, and not at all intuitive.

Put an amount of force on a fist and hit someone. Now with the same amount of force use a knife. The knife is much worse because the pounds per square inch is much greater (this increases as surface area decreases). Now use the same amount of force behind a car.

All things being equal, if you get the choice, you're probably better off with the car, then the fist, then the knife.

Things don't do more damage because they are bigger, they do more damage because with the extra size you can put more force on them.

[SkyLion]

Incorrect.

,,

The amount of force is equal to Mass times acceleration. A heavy giant massive object swung with alot of strength (acceleration) is going to have more force delivered.

,,

Also say its not a knofe but an axe. An axe blade is beveled and designed for chopping...it is going to take all that force and send it sideways splitting the object.

,,

There is no way you are going to tell me that a crane wrecking ball wont do more damage than a human sized ball and chain...

[Alex Green]

The amount of force is equal to Mass times acceleration. A heavy giant massive object swung with alot of strength (acceleration) is going to have more force delivered.

You're assuming the acceleration is constant, thus the amount of Strength used is drastically greater for the larger object. Try assuming that the amount of Strength is the same for both of them.,,

There is no way you are going to tell me that a crane wrecking ball wont do more damage than a human sized ball and chain...

Try picking up both and hitting something. I'm pretty sure you'll find the human sized one does more damage.

[SkyLion]

Try picking up both and hitting something. I'm pretty sure you'll find the human sized one does more damage.

,,

Now you are being silly Alex. We are assuming you can lift and swing them both. Again...a giant sized Nova swings a ball and chain at a building....then a wrecking ball...c'mon now...which is going to damage the structure more?

[archer]

Now you are being silly Alex. We are assuming you can lift and swing them both. Again...a giant sized Nova swings a ball and chain at a building....then a wrecking ball...c'mon now...which is going to damage the structure more?

I believe what Alex is saying relates to basic physics, though, Sky. It's not that the wrecking ball won't make a bigger hole, it's that the surface area of such a large object reduces the amount of force applied to any single point. And of course, the difficulty in moving such a massive object at a speed high enough to really make it a weapon.

It's like a medicine ball vs a dagger. Moving at the same speed, the dagger will, according to physics, end up causing a higher intensity of damage. The ball will affect a greater area, but less effectively.

[Alex Green]

Now you are being silly Alex. We are assuming you can lift and swing them both. Again...a giant sized Nova swings a ball and chain at a building....then a wrecking ball...c'mon now...which is going to damage the structure more?

Then put that big ball on ice so you can slide it around. Or use a bus of equal mass on a flat road with the engine in neutral. If the strength is the same, then the bigger object is moving slower, and it's force is being absorbed by a larger impact area.

For a different example, compare a full body tackle to a bullet. The bullet is very small but moving very, very fast. I don't know off hand if the two energies are equal, but I'd guess that the bullet actually has a lot less energy considering that a gun doesn't throw the wielder back all that much.

Moving back to aberrant, that big Giant Nova (M-Str 5) has equal strength as a 5 foot tall nova with M-Str 5. Both of them can pick up cars and throw them at you. By abby rules, an ax wielded by either of them, even sized approprately, do equal damage.

However... considering the strength is the same, Giant Man's axe should probably do less damage. It's (much) bigger, he's moving it (much) slower, etc.

[SkyLion]

Re: tackle vs. bullets.

,,

it depends. the force is mass times acceleration, so you would have to measure the mass of the person and the bullet. Of course the bullet has much more velocity. regarding the knife vs. mace issue again it depends. Slashing weapons cause large cuts but bludgeoning weapons are often considered to be more destructive: crushing bone and tissue and internal damage.

,,

Back to aberrant...a mega str 5 nova with a dagger is going to punch a hole right through a car. A giant mega str nova with a wrecking ball is going to totally demolish it.

,,

To me this is a simple matter of playing the tapes through in our minds. Of course anyone with high mega str is going to destroy a baseline but I see a giant axe cleaving someone in twain to be a lot more messy than stabbing through them....

,,

Sorry for being stubborn but it seems like y'all are just trying to reverse engineer reality to fit a game system that doesn't automatically account for something like giant scale weapons and combat.

[Alex Green]

Problem is scale isn't intuitive. Lots and lots of things that work at our scale simply don't at larger or smaller scales.

And then to make matters much worse Mega-Strength doesn't work intuitively either.

[SkyLion]

look.

,,

If acceleration remains equal, the object with the larger mass is going to carry more force. Its simple physics.

,,

Of course, physics isn't our friend in Abby, so Im at a loss as to how i can get my point across... ::shrug

[Alex Green]

If acceleration remains equal, the object with the larger mass is going to carry more force. Its simple physics.

Why is acceleration going to be equal?

[Centimane]

Re: tackle vs. bullets.

,,

it depends. the force is mass times acceleration, so you would have to measure the mass of the person and the bullet. Of course the bullet has much more velocity. regarding the knife vs. mace issue again it depends. Slashing weapons cause large cuts but bludgeoning weapons are often considered to be more destructive: crushing bone and tissue and internal damage.

It's mass times acceleration, but in an earthlike environment (or really, in anything other than a true vacuum) you also have to take drag and gravity into account, and a few other factors as well. So a bullet, which is traveling faster, is much smaller, and therefore is less affected by drag, does more damage at its point of impact than a large, much slower moving person does in a tackle.

Further, while a mace might do more damage over a larger area, the knife or sword will do much more damage in a much narrower area. And if you use the knife or sword intelligently it'll do that damage to a part of the body that's vital to your opponent's continued well-being. Which is why the sword has been considered the ultimate weapon all over the world since prehistory. And here is where part of the problem with this debate comes in. Health Levels are not a pure measure of damage per se, they're a measure of how far away from being dead you are. So a giant axe will certainly look messier than a hole punched through a person's ribcage, but the victim is just as dead either way.

,,

Back to aberrant...a mega str 5 nova with a dagger is going to punch a hole right through a car. A giant mega str nova with a wrecking ball is going to totally demolish it.

If the nova punches a hole through the engine block of the car, then the car is just as useless as the car that was hit with the wrecking ball. Again, Health Levels (or in this case, Structural Damage Levels) are not a measure of pure damage, they're a measure of how close an object or person is to no longer functioning. That's all.

If acceleration remains equal, the object with the larger mass is going to carry more force. Its simple physics.

But the object with the larger mass will necassarily spread its force over a larger area as well. And within Earth's atmosphere the larger object will be subjected to significantly more drag, which becomes a larger and larger factor the more the object accelerates, which is also simple physics.

Lastly, bear in mind that what makes a weapon effective is not its size at all, nor its weight. What makes a weapon effective (a hand-held weapon) is leverage. Leverage is why big strong guys don't just go out and find a small tree trunk to hit people with. Instead they go find something like an aluminum bat, or even just the aforementioned knife, and they use that instead. A tree trunk has terrible leverage, so it sucks as a weapon.

If all things really are equal (acceleration, leverage, strength, whatever) then it's the lighter weapon that hits at a smaller point of impact, not the heavier weapon that hits over a large area of impact, that rules the day every single time.

[SkyLion]

Why is acceleration going to be equal?

because with that much mega strength weight becomes negligible. Both the small weapon and the large one can be swung at the same speed since they are so incredibly light to the nova throwing them.

Re: leverage. Mega-Strength gets around leverage. Otherwise Novas wouldn't be able to lift mountains or battleships.

If all things really are equal (acceleration, leverage, strength, whatever) then it's the lighter weapon that hits at a smaller point of impact, not the heavier weapon that hits over a large area of impact, that rules the day every single time.

Prove it.

Id also submit it as hearsay that the sword is considered the ultimate weapon. I have read tretise on weapons and armor that show bashing weapons can cause instant fatal wounds by shattering bones and arteries at the point of impact. They also worked better against plate armor which was designed to deflect cutting edges. a mace however, would just plow right through...IN fact the flanged mace was considered an armor-piercing weapon...though to concede you a point this was due to its mass and force being directed onto the point of the flange.

[archer]

because with that much mega strength weight becomes negligible. Both the small weapon and the large one can be swung at the same speed since they are so incredibly light to the nova throwing them.

Re: leverage. Mega-Strength gets around leverage. Otherwise Novas wouldn't be able to lift mountains or battleships.

Prove it.

Id also submit it as hearsay that the sword is considered the ultimate weapon. I have read tretise on weapons and armor that show bashing weapons can cause instant fatal wounds by shattering bones and arteries at the point of impact. They also worked better against plate armor which was designed to deflect cutting edges. a mace however, would just plow right through...IN fact the flanged mace was considered an armor-piercing weapon...though to concede you a point this was due to its mass and force being directed onto the point of the flange.

Weight may become negligible, but drag and gravity do not. If we're talking real-world vs Abby physics, anyways.

Bar none, the sword has ruled the roost of hand-held weapons for thousands of years. It is true that bashing weapons can cause horrendous injuries, and I've no doubt that they can cause instantly fatal wounds. However, outside of the relatively brief historical periods where weapons like the mace were used to solve the problem of sword-resistant armor, they didn't really see much use.

It's not hearsay if based on accurate, and actual history. 'Ultimate' may be a bit strong, but there is no question that historically, swords were more commonly used than maces.

[Centimane]

Re: leverage. Mega-Strength gets around leverage. Otherwise Novas wouldn't be able to lift mountains or battleships.

Sure, they can lift it, and they don't need a point of leverage to do so. But the book doesn't give any indication that it gets around the problem of needing a good point of leverage to properly swing a weapon. And if it did, then there's not much point to having the Melee ability other than to parry. The striking part is all about how well you can apply leverage with your weapon. All about it. Even if you say that the ability also reflects how accurate you are with the weapon, you're still talking about leverage. Because it's a matter of how "accurately" you apply the leverage you've mastered that's important.

Prove it.

Sure, no problem. You only live about 4 hours away from me, so why don't you come on down to where I live. I'll give you a ten foot long, 40 pound length of wood (if you think you can handle larger and heavier then great, there's plenty of that laying around my property too. And if you think you'd like to take a 5 foot, 20 pound length instead, that's fine too). I'll take a 3 and a half foot, 4 pound length of wood, which I'll use like a sword, not a mace, a staff, or a club.

And I'll use it to trounce all over you. ::smile

((No, this isn't a threat or anything like that, so please, no one get offended. Sky and I really do live pretty close to each other, and he knows I have no desire to hurt him. I'm just being sarcastic and making a point.))

Id also submit it as hearsay that the sword is considered the ultimate weapon. I have read tretise on weapons and armor that show bashing weapons can cause instant fatal wounds by shattering bones and arteries at the point of impact. They also worked better against plate armor which was designed to deflect cutting edges. a mace however, would just plow right through...IN fact the flanged mace was considered an armor-piercing weapon...though to concede you a point this was due to its mass and force being directed onto the point of the flange.

Sky, I'm not going to argue that the mace (or most other military weapons of history, for that matter) is an ineffective weapon. But I have over 4,000 years of history agreeing with me when I say that the sword is the superior weapon for close, man to man fighting.

Within the generic term "sword" there are a few different varieties. The "saber" is generally considered the easiest and most effective weapon, pound for pound, ever created. The "straight sword" is considered even more effective, but it's more difficult to learn to use because it's main attack is a stabbing motion rather than a slashing one. A rapier is more effective still, but only in specific types of combat, and it sacrifices the slashing attack almost entirely in exchange for a highly superior stabbing attack (stabbing attacks being more difficult to defend against than almost any single form of close combat attack). You also have "short" and "long" swords to take into account as well. And also "single-bladed" vs. "double-bladed". After that you have different types of handles, different types of points, differing opinions on where the best point of balance is, and different types of edges that take advantage of various kinds of curves and angles.

After the sword, the spear is generally considered to be the next simplest and most effective weapon ever made. And there again, there are a few different varieties that are more or less useful in different situations. Short spears, long spears, spears with longer or shorter points/blades. The shape of the spear's head is also very important as well. The main advantage of a spear is its length, the fact that most can be thrown, and that it's stabbing attack is almost unparralelled amongst melee weapons.

The mace's big advantage is, duh duduh DUH!, LEVERAGE!!!! A mace has all of its weight (however light or heavy it actually is compared to other weapons) focused towards the attacking end. This provides awesome leverage, though this also makes it a bit slow and cumbersome compared to many types of swords, and even some kinds of spears/halberds. In regards to your point that the mace was more effective against plate armor, well that's mostly because plate armor was designed specifically to withstand swords and spears/halberds (though they didn't always do such a great job against those either), which were considered the more dangerous weapons. As to your point about blunt weapons dealing lethal wounds to victims: sure, I'm not going to argue with that, but swords and knives deal lethal wounds just as well as maces, and swords in particular have the further advantage of being much better for defending with and being much more accurate (the whole point of a well-made mace is that you don't really have to be accurate, you just swing).

So yeah, the mace is a great weapon, it has strengths that no other weapon has, but it also has weaknesses. And it isn't the weight per se that makes it so deadly, it's how the weight is applied through leverage. So my point still stands.

[Alex Green]

because with that much mega strength weight becomes negligible. Both the small weapon and the large one can be swung at the same speed since they are so incredibly light to the nova throwing them.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

The ability to pick up 100 tons doesn't imply that you can swing it at the same speed as you can swing something that's 1-100th of the size.

[SkyLion]

The evidence I have (and this relates to what Cottus was saying earlier about me coming down to trounce him ::wink ) is based on experience. With so much more mega strength than one would need to lift an object it would "feel" featherweight. like how some people may have trouble lifting and moving something heavy but because I am so strong I can easily pick it up or swing it around quickly. A nova with such massive strength is going to barely feel the weight of a steel girder. Swinging it around will be easy and drag wont be an issue because the the nova is so strong that the weight isnt going to drag him down. True the nova may not be able to swing a 100 ton object as fast as a small one but you are unfairly using the maximum weight. A nova that can lift 100 tons should be able to (especially as a giant) easily swing a 1 ton wrecking ball with such trmendous speed and force that we can scarcely imagine it.

The more yoked you are the more leverage you have with such heavy objects....if you were so strong that a mace felt like a penny its weight wouldnt slow you much at all in swiniging it, in spite of its forward heavy weight distribution.

[Alex Green]

RE: Bullets vs. Tackle

The more I think about it, the more I'm sure that the energy involved in bullet is FAR less than the tackle. It's all kenetic, so if it were anything close to a tackle then the person firing the gun would go flying backward.

RE: Light as a feather

First of all, Giant man probably would be using an axe somewhat close to his weight limit.

Second of all, being light as a feather doesn't imply that it can be moved as fast as the smaller object. This is one of many places were scale matters. The bigger object is going to move slower.

[metaphysician]

There's another factor thats being overlooked here: durability. If the weapon isn't sufficiently tough, swinging it at mega-str speeds may mostly just deform it. The problem gets worse if the target is superhumanly durable.

[SkyLion]

The more I think about it, the more I'm sure that the energy involved in bullet is FAR less than the tackle. It's all kenetic, so if it were anything close to a tackle then the person firing the gun would go flying backward.

,,

People do get kicked back from firing a gun. Doesnt mean there is less energy. A person goes flying back from a tacke by being knocked off balance. For that matter getting shot will spin you/knock you back *very* forcefully...

,,,,,,

RE: Light as a feather

First of all, Giant man probably would be using an axe somewhat close to his weight limit.

,,

Not necesarily. Why would he want to do that. If i was a giant filthy rich nova (wait...I am! ::tongue j/k) and I had a giant sword or axe or what have you made i would make it as light and strong and balanced as possible.

,,,,

Second of all, being light as a feather doesn't imply that it can be moved as fast as the smaller object. This is one of many places were scale matters. The bigger object is going to move slower.

,,

Look here you. If I have a heavy bat. And i swing it once. Its going to be hard to back swing it due to its weight and the momentum I just generated. If I have a bamboo switch, Im going to be able to backswing it just as fast as the swing. Why? My strength to its weight ratio is such that the weight is negligible.

,,

Apply that level of strength to weight ratio for a nova. Something that is so relatively light is going to be just like that bamboo switch...negligible.

,,

There's another factor thats being overlooked here: durability. If the weapon isn't sufficiently tough, swinging it at mega-str speeds may mostly just deform it.

,,

And whatever it strikes. I still have this image of a giant nova swinging a teeny ball and chain at a skyscraper. It would surely smash thought the windows, but maybe a girder would break the less durable chain. Still it would damage the building due to the tremendous velocity (from such massive strength and size). The i imagine the same nova ripping the wrecking ball and chain off a crane and swinging that. I imagine the damage to the buildiing would be *far* greater to the building, especialy if the giant novas strength is such that even the 1 ton wrecking ball feels like no weight at all.

[astronomer]

You still have the force-applied-to-area problem, don't you? Your nova swinging an axe will rip open the part of a wall the edge hits. Using a car, he punches out a car-wide hole. Even if he's using the same force, spreading it over a greater area can cause more overall destruction unless you hit a support beam or such. Against a small target, an axe focusses energy on a small area. For buildings, I'd want a car. I still have this picture of Superman trying to pick up a building and having the bit in his hands crumbling. Without area TK, you can't pick up buildings of current materials, 'cause you can't spread your awesome strength over the whole thing. It's not always about the power, it's the tools you use. ::laugh