Picturing strength?

[Svata]

Looks like someone was unaware of your POWER, Afro.

[Vhaidara]

Why Mr. Afroakuma, what a coincidence that you should ask. I happen to have exactly such a thing stashed away here somewhere. It's a little bit of an obscure rulebook though, can't blame some folks for not knowin' about it. Unless of course these folks were playing D&D, because the book in question is the Player's Handbook. Why, Mr. Afroakuma, I can hardly fathom of an individual who would claim to be an aficionado of this here game and yet have such lack of familiarity with this manual!

Ah, but Mr. Flickerdart, that book is only used by

good little book zombie-robots

Real Roleplayers just make **** up as they go along.

[Flickerdart]

Ah, but Mr. Flickerdart, that book is only used by



Real Roleplayers just make **** up as they go along.

That is a sensible and defensible position that's definitely not meant to be inflammatory, Mr. Keledrath. However, one (not I, of course, for my confidence in the good faith of our fellows' intentions is absolute and unshakable) might wonder, if this is indeed the case, why these Real Roleplayers would trouble themselves to descend to the level of the rabble and request their input on a matter.

[Snowbluff]

Keledrath, why is 'rule' censored in your post?

Nice avatar, by the way. Warforged totemist?

[Squidfist]

Typically stats don't interact, and things like a penalty to hide because you're a bulky warrior is taken into account passively, rather than with active penalties.

If you're a barbarian with 18 STR, presumably you are bad at hiding because you have a low-ish DEX and (probably) didn't invest skills into hide. Rather than an active penalty, your character creation process has left you poor at hiding.

On the other hand, it's not impossible for someone bulky to be good at hiding. If you invest the skills and have the appropriate attribute for a high score in that skill, it makes sense. You've trained to be good at hiding, and probably trained while being a big meat-brick.

And keep in mind, if your size actually moves to Large then there would be an active penalty.

[Hamste]

Keledrath, why is 'rule' censored in your post?

Nice avatar, by the way. Warforged totemist?

Dang it, why does everyone guess it right but not me. (I thought it was a Psionic warforged)

[Vhaidara]

Keledrath, why is 'rule' censored in your post?

Nice avatar, by the way. Warforged totemist?

Correct.

Dang it, why does everyone guess it right but not me. (I thought it was a Psionic warforged)

Probably because I post around here a fair bit about how much I love both warforged and Incarnum. Also, you said it yourself, you don't really know Incarnum

[Sir Chuckles]

If Riddick, Thor or the Hulk was to sit down at a table with you and ask to ''open the pickle jar they can't open'', would you ever fall for that?

Even if Thor ''had a cloak on'', he would still he a tall, huge, broad shouldered man. He can't ''look like Loki'' no matter what his ranks in anything.

Except that is the point of disguise. Slapping a thick quilt under your shoulders to make you look hunched and old. Putting crabapples in your cheeks to make you look less like a chiseled man-beast. Wearing puffy sleeves so that they can't see the corded beef.
As someone who is a 5'4 200lb wall of muscle and has a small handful of 1st place trophies for acting in a variety of roles throughout my very early college years, I can say that what you look like is only a small part of disguising yourself.

I can't disagree with implementing a penalty for a Arnold-type situation, but outright saying it's impossible is just mean to players. To force players to look like one stereotype is breaking the spirit of roleplay.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I'm just gonna point out that in 3.5, Climb is a skill keyed to strength. And Adam Ondra, pictured in the spoiler, is by far the strongest climber in the world, and probably the strongest ever. The strongest woman climber in the world is 5'2" and less than a hundred pounds. There's a lot of ways to be strong without being a massive slab of meat. So strong players look like whatever they say they look like, and strong NPCs look like whatever the DM says they look like.

Spoiler

Show

[Snowbluff]

Having good climb != having str. Not that I don't agree with you, but climb is a SKILL. A learned trait. Factotums climb from int. I think you can climb from dex. Mundane humans would gain more from ranks and feat than they would str.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Ranks, sure. Other modifiers? Not really. Climbing is entirely about optimizing functional strength. That's a real-world thing applied to a game system, though, so it doesn't work exactly. But if we're talking about physical descriptions of stats, it seems appropriate to point out that many of the things keyed to Strength in 3.5 aren't generally associated with being huge muscle people.

[Vhaidara]

Having good climb != having str. Not that I don't agree with you, but climb is a SKILL. A learned trait. Factotums climb from int. I think you can climb from dex. Mundane humans would gain more from ranks and feat than they would str.

There's a feat that switches it to Dex.

I would probably put him as a Human Factotum with said feat, and stats would go Dex>Int>Con(depending on length of climbs)>Str>Wis=Cha

[Snowbluff]

Mhm.

A 100 pound person would not have power in the real world, too. By being light, she gets through by having to lift less. This isn't represented well in DnD, but it's not a great model.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Mhm.

A 100 pound person would not have power in the real world, too. By being light, she gets through by having to lift less. This isn't represented well in DnD, but it's not a great model.

I think DnD's mechanics are a total misunderstanding of strength, and that the majority of functional strength isn't well represented by either Str or Dex. So depending on how you assign credit, you end up either with people who are 5'2 and sub-100 pounds lifting five times their body weight, or or modelling people who are incredibly, insanely strong as instead being agile/smart/experienced, depending on how you choose to do it. I tend to believe that the carrying capacity rules are just badly tuned.

I've met Sasha. I can definitely say she has tremendous physical power.

[Mellack]

I just want to throw in that there is a man named Dennis Rogers who is well known for his feats of strength. You would not look at him twice as anything more than a man in reasonably good shape.

Spoiler: photo

Show

[r2d2go]

Dang it, why does everyone guess it right but not me. (I thought it was a Psionic warforged)

That's what I thought too only vaguely familiar with incarnum, so that's probably why...

Anyway. To answer the OP - there are already rules in place for "picturing strength". They're called circumstance modifiers, and the DM applies them. Want a guideline? You can make it yourself.

[Snowbluff]

I've met Sasha. I can definitely say she has tremendous physical power.

Which is unlikely as you've described her. She may know how to use the strength she has in the tasks she's trained in, but that doesn't mean she has a large amount of strength. Frankly put, the universe equates mass with power. Either you are lying, or are misunderstanding the difference between a strength check and a skill check when modeled against the world. For example, at 100 pounds and a +2 bonus (really good, but still not outweighing skill ranks at first level), she would be able to carry 60% of her mass unencumbered.

She may be strong for her size, but being light and skilled is doing more.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Expand on that. I don't follow, unless you're saying that having a high strength should apply a circumstance modifier to some other skill, in which case I don't agree.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Which is unlikely as you've described her. She may know how to use the strength she has in the tasks she's trained in, but that doesn't mean she has a large amount of strength. Frankly put, the universe equates mass with power. Either you are lying, or are misunderstanding the difference between a strength check and a skill check when modeled against the world. For example, at 100 pounds and a +2 bonus (really good, but still not outweighing skill ranks at first level), she would be able to carry 60% of her mass unencumbered.

Either way, what I said in the post prior stands; you've not actually addressed it at all.

Edited to remove flaming.

[Fax Celestis]

Your personal weight does not count against your encumbrance.

[Snowbluff]

The others are jumping and swimming. Straight physics, mostly. Again the problem here is size isn't very well accounted for in a size category. If I have strong legs, I produce more force. If I have more skills, I know to extend my legs at the right time, etc.

The point here is that strength isn't the whole story on skill checks.

EDIT: Fax, of course it doesn't. That's one of the problems with the model. This is a part of the disconnection between what we're being told and how it's supposed to relate to the topic.

[jedipotter]

Really. You're really going to do this.

Sure, of course. Leave no stone unturned.

What answer were you hoping for, specifically? Was it 1) It's only sensible to demand characters look bulky and muscular if they have high Strength scores and not have massive muscles otherwise, or 2) It's only sensible to create rules relating your choice of appearance to NPC reactions and ability to react to you?

I don't really hope anymore, I know everyone thinks like 180 degrees from me. I did kinda figure everyone was going to go the Anime route of ''this nine year old girl has a strength of 25 because Orcus.''

Those are both fatuous ideas. Appearance in real life, as it turns out, does not matter by real-life rules. I happen to know a girl who wears high heels to reach 5 ft. and might break 110 pounds soaking wet wearing welding gear who's a good deal stronger than grown men a lot more massive than her.

Sure, me too. The important thing is: for each ''exception'' there are a thousand ''normals.

Know what is a factor? Things like seeing how people carry themselves, how they move and what they do. My karate sensei is tiny, but to anyone who knows what a trained athlete moves like she's obviously got a lot of background in it. Similarly, it's difficult for someone uncoordinated or sluggardly to carry themselves in a way that suggests a great deal of physical fitness, even if they're wearing football pads under a snazzy suit. If Strong Hermione and Weak Tyson are observed, it should be pretty easy to gauge them on relative fitness, even without having one to compare to the other.

From the military/cop side....most can tell if someone has had training. Watch someone draw and fire a guy and you can tell if they have had some training at it or if they are just a country boy shooting for funs. And sure, like one in a hundred country boys will have taught themselves good all on their own......but the other bunch like just watched a you tube video. You can spot people that have gotten professional training.

You can tell if someone has had any type of hand to hand training too. ''Normal folks'' just kinda flap around, but people with training react in set ways.

Unless they deliberately act otherwise. Which would be some sort of... skill, I believe. Possibly Charisma-based. Shame I don't know of any. Mr. Flickerdart, do you know of any Charisma-based skills useful for acting in a fashion that might conceal or obscure some information about your nature to others?

And like I said in my first post, this comes from the Hollywood thing. Take anyone with a huge build, or for that matter anyone beautiful, should they not get a penalty to ''blending in like a normal joe''.

Honestly, I have no idea why you keep starting these threads if the whole point is to just find people to disagree with and then insult them for not subscribing to your style of play.

Sure, I PM everyone first and tell them to disagree with me.

[jedipotter]

I can't disagree with implementing a penalty for a Arnold-type situation, but outright saying it's impossible is just mean to players. To force players to look like one stereotype is breaking the spirit of roleplay.

And that is what I said...... The Hulk gets a big penalty if he tries to hide as a scribe, and a penalty in general when around normal looking folks. When you line up the people, and most of them are between 5-6 feet tall with average builds....that one eight foot tall guy with biceps bigger then ever ones heads(oh and green skin) stands out.

You would not look at him twice as anything more than a man in reasonably good shape.

But you can tell Dennis Rogers is ''in good shape''.....see that is what I'm talking about: he can't hide his build.

[Flickerdart]

Sure, me too. The important thing is: for each ''exception'' there are a thousand ''normals.

Today we learn that people who are strong but not bodybuilders are abnormal. Purge the heretic! Shun the freak! Suffer ye not the abomination of...oh, this is a lie? There are plenty of strong people who aren't build like trucks, and can disguise their muscles just by putting on a long sleeved shirt with a pillow tucked inside? There are way more of these regular, strong people than there are those who sculpt muscles to look big and impressive on purpose? Heavens gracious, and I've already lit the torches.

I don't really hope anymore, I know everyone thinks like 180 degrees from me. I did kinda figure everyone was going to go the Anime route of ''this nine year old girl has a strength of 25 because Orcus.''

It's hilarious every time you open your mouth and hyperbole comes out. Everyone who's not stacked is a 9 year old girl. Everyone who tries to disguise muscles is a disgusting powergames with a never-fail Bluff check. It's like you don't understand anything except absurd extremes.

Since we're in the business of proving jedipotter wrong with real examples instead of fever dreams, let me make one as well.

Peter Romanov, Emperor of Russia, is single-handedly responsible for the "Russian Bear" myth thanks to his travels in Western Europe before he assumed the throne. This was a man who used his tremendous strength to bend iron pokers for fun, and worked as a ship-builder because he liked the exercise. What did this magnificent stack of man muscle look like?

Spoiler

Show

Like a dandy.

[jedipotter]

It's hilarious every time you open your mouth and hyperbole comes out. Everyone who's not stacked is a 9 year old girl. Everyone who tries to disguise muscles is a disgusting powergames with a never-fail Bluff check. It's like you don't understand anything except absurd extremes.

Um.....Marklar?

Spoiler: Marklar

Show

[Flickerdart]

Um.....Marklar?

Do they speak English in Marklar?

[TheIronGolem]

I did kinda figure everyone was going to go the Anime route of ''this nine year old girl has a strength of 25 because Orcus.''

Nobody did.

[Sir Chuckles]

And that is what I said...... The Hulk gets a big penalty if he tries to hide as a scribe, and a penalty in general when around normal looking folks. When you line up the people, and most of them are between 5-6 feet tall with average builds....that one eight foot tall guy with biceps bigger then ever ones heads(oh and green skin) stands out.

But it should not disclude him from making the check. He could pass pretty well as an Orc in a standard D&D setting, but I would definitely say "Are you sure you want to attempt that?" if full Hulk tried to hide as a normal human. Of course, Bruce Banner isn't like that.

The problem that we're having is that you're unable to see it any differently. There are numbers between 0 and 180, and most people hold opinions that occupy those degrees, when compared to yours. You can't be using ad absurdum and expect to get any results.

[Flickerdart]

But it should not disclude him from making the check. He could pass pretty well as an Orc in a standard D&D setting, but I would definitely say "Are you sure you want to attempt that?" if full Hulk tried to hide as a normal human. Of course, Bruce Banner isn't like that.

One of the smaller Hulks (as jedipotter puts it, 8ft tall) could masquerade as a 6ft tall human with a -25 penalty on his Disguise check. Naturally, such a penalty represents tremendous difficulty, and getting 25 on a check is something that doesn't seem possible when you're just a normal person. However, given that this is fantasy, there's no reason someone can't be really freakin' good at Disguise and manage to make the check with this penalty. That's what being good at something means - you can do really hard stuff.

Of course, we can also play a special version of D&D where people's abilities are capped by what jedipotter is personally capable of accomplishing, to make him feel better about his lack of imagination. But then the game would be called Commoners & Commoners.

[Oneris]

And like I said in my first post, this comes from the Hollywood thing. Take anyone with a huge build, or for that matter anyone beautiful, should they not get a penalty to ''blending in like a normal joe''.

Except there are plenty of 'normal joes' who could have exceptional builds. The pig farmer from across town who bodily carries his 500lb+ swine to market, the exceptionally beautiful daughter of the local alchemist, the bastard half-orc apprentice of the blacksmith. The only reason these exceptionally-built NPCs don't stand out in a game world and the exceptionally-built PCs do is because of the law of conservation of detail. Just because the PCs fail to look 'completely normal' does not mean they're failing to blend in.

Now, if they behave with far more skill and dexterity than a normal person in reacting to a sneak attack, then that might be a failure of disguise.

Personal Rule: Don't penalize for what they are, penalize for what they do.