Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Strength and dexterity in RPGs

SymbolicFrank

Magister
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
1,668
In reality, the primary thing you need to effectively use a bow is strength. Great strength for longbows and composite bows. About 50 kg on average for a bow used in war. And you need to be able to keep it drawn for a bit, so you can aim.

Someone found himself Lindybeige's youtube channel I see.

Ah, yes, the only bow expert alive. The man is a miracle!

Eh, who are you talking about? I just liked bows when I was young and googled a bit.

Pole-arm users would mildly benefit from strength for endurance in long-lasting battles. But as individual battles lasted mere seconds and even in large battles with many combatants the actual fighting tended to be over in minutes, that wasn't a concern very often.

Why use strength for a weapon that requires endurance.

If only there was another stat for that...

But playing along, another wep that would require that would be a rapier, since the way they're used often means constantly holding them up around head length that is far more taxing than other swords that came before them.

1. women (male attribute strength vs female attribute dexterity/agility)

Haven't played a game in awhile with gender differenced stats, but IIRC, isn't high constitution and lower more the thing for females?

A brain implant might help the comprehension.
 

Beastro

Arcane
Joined
May 11, 2015
Messages
7,938
But what nation that didn't adopt superior things from other cultures has survived or atleast succeeded as a nation?

Until the late 18th century Japan was a very underdeveloped country in terms of technology. If they wanted to survive or become a powerful country that was the natural thing to do at the time. They developed really fast and became a first world country because of that. Losing the war and having the USA "help" them rebuild their country only strengthened that mentality. So in my opinion it has more to do with being smart(or not dumb for that matter) and with certain circumstances than with their particular culture like many people like to state.

Hence why I said they had it, only in a more pronounced way.

It's an arrogant, pragmatic mentality that the British once had in a very similar way, back when they declared in Elizabeth's time that they held the world's oceans as their domain, and then spent the next two centuries working hard to make that claim a reality. Now it seems like their self-deprecating side has consumed them with self-loathing.
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,823
Would Diablo be a better game if the name of the statistics were more pertinent to reality? I really don't think so.
Actually in diablo dexterity gave you your chance to hit, and STR mostly allowed you to use bigger weapons.
But im used to people making these statements, retarded shits that havent played diablo but think they know the game.

Diablo is NOT diablo 2, diablo is diablo, and its p. damn good.
 

SymbolicFrank

Magister
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
1,668
But what nation that didn't adopt superior things from other cultures has survived or atleast succeeded as a nation?

Until the late 18th century Japan was a very underdeveloped country in terms of technology. If they wanted to survive or become a powerful country that was the natural thing to do at the time. They developed really fast and became a first world country because of that. Losing the war and having the USA "help" them rebuild their country only strengthened that mentality. So in my opinion it has more to do with being smart(or not dumb for that matter) and with certain circumstances than with their particular culture like many people like to state.

Hence why I said they had it, only in a more pronounced way.

It's an arrogant, pragmatic mentality that the British once had in a very similar way, back when they declared in Elizabeth's time that they held the world's oceans as their domain, and then spent the next two centuries working hard to make that claim a reality. Now it seems like their self-deprecating side has consumed them with self-loathing.

In general, people see their nation like when it was the most powerful. They keep on reliving that time, like "in the past, everything was better". And they still take decisions which they think might make that time come again.

Strange, but true.

Most people call that "traditions".

Culture is like that as well, it was what they were renown for in that time. That's why the USA is one of the few nations that mostly has traditions and culture that is less than a few hundred years old. Simply because that's about how long it exists.
 

Beastro

Arcane
Joined
May 11, 2015
Messages
7,938
In general, people see their nation like when it was the most powerful. They keep on reliving that time, like "in the past, everything was better". And they still take decisions which they think might make that time come again.

Strange, but true.

Most people call that "traditions".

Culture is like that as well, it was what they were renown for in that time. That's why the USA is one of the few nations that mostly has traditions and culture that is less than a few hundred years old. Simply because that's about how long it exists.

From what I've seen of history that has more to do with the amount of talking a people do oppose to shutting up and working towards their stated goal.

One can see that in the difference between the French and Germans and how each handled their losses in the Franco-Prussian War and WWI respectively. You can also see it today in how much Russia, Serbia, and increasingly, the US, talk about how great they are which belies insecurity.

Japan kept going on working to make themselves as great as they thought under the US while Britain and Europe, save for places like France when really pushed, are so full of self-loathing. If you thinks it's bad when people idealize the past, it's far worse when they demonize it and point to it as the reason why their people should now be weak and fade into ingloriously into history.
 

varangos

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
393
Yes,but you must understand that a samurai on foot armed with a meteor steel katana could beat 10 knights on horse,the katana was so strong and flexible that it could deflect arrows mid flight and then turn them back to the thrower.
Why you think samurais didn't use a shield,katana could do both,deflect blows and cut through armor like butter
 

Beastro

Arcane
Joined
May 11, 2015
Messages
7,938
Yes,but you must understand that a samurai on foot armed with a meteor steel katana could beat 10 knights on horse,the katana was so strong and flexible that it could deflect arrows mid flight and then turn them back to the thrower.
Why you think samurais didn't use a shield,katana could do both,deflect blows and cut through armor like butter

Call it a day. The shtick got old after the second or third post.
 

varangos

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
393
I'm afraid you are blinded to the simple truth,the martial prowess of the samurai was unparalleled in human history,they were the best swordsmen in history armed with the best sword in history,made from meteor ore.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
I'm afraid you are blinded to the simple truth,the martial prowess of the samurai was unparalleled in human history,they were the best swordsmen in history armed with the best sword in history,made from meteor ore.
You're thinking of witchers.
:M
Yes,but you must understand that a samurai on foot armed with a meteor steel katana could beat 10 knights on horse,the katana was so strong and flexible that it could deflect arrows mid flight and then turn them back to the thrower.
Why you think samurais didn't use a shield,katana could do both,deflect blows and cut through armor like butter
Well, butter doesn't cut through armor all that well either so I guess you have a point.
:troll:
 

Jrpgfan

Erudite
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
2,007
Didn't the Samurai use mainly spears and bows because they were more effective in actual battles?

Pretty sure I read somewhere the katana only got more popular when there weren't many wars going on and people didn't care walking around on regular clothes. I'm not an expert on the subject though, so I might be completely wrong on this one.
 

Ninjerk

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
14,323
Didn't the Samurai use mainly spears and bows because they were more effective in actual battles?

Pretty sure I read somewhere the katana only got more popular when there weren't many wars going on and people didn't care walking around on regular clothes. I'm not an expert on the subject though, so I might be completely wrong on this one.
Same shit that dominated late middle ages, no?
 

gaussgunner

Arcane
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
6,151
Location
ХУДШИЕ США
Japanese had longer swords and other deadlier weapons like the Naginata. They were banned in modern Japan, that's probably why the Katana become so iconic. This is what little I know from doing background research for my games.

I'm doing an ARPG with a realtime fighting simulation that accounts for weapon weight and leverage. Instead of stats for each class of weapon I decided to have multiple strength stats. Nothing overly realistic, just a few simplified muscle groups. Arms, shoulders, and legs.

Arm strength lets you swing a sword faster, increasing hit chance and damage. Stronger arms let you handle a longer or heavier sword. Legs help too.. more so for spears, throwing, running, jumping, kicking. Shoulder strength is key for bow draw speed and steadiness, and helps with swords and shit.

Stamina/endurance (basically your heart muscle strength) also comes into play. So if you mash buttons and run around and swing wildly, or use a weapon that's too big, all your muscle groups lose strength until you catch your breath or get owned.
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
Didn't the Samurai use mainly spears and bows because they were more effective in actual battles?

Pretty sure I read somewhere the katana only got more popular when there weren't many wars going on and people didn't care walking around on regular clothes. I'm not an expert on the subject though, so I might be completely wrong on this one.
Yes. The Katana was mainly a ceremonial symbol of office. Sure, they could be used as a sidearm, but the actual weapons of war are the spear and bow. It would be insanely expensive to make an army out of all samurai, anyway. The samuri was basically a noble elite, the bulk of your army is going to be your ashigaru conscripts, armed with basically pointy things on sticks that are often repurposed farm implements.
 

Telengard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
1,621
Location
The end of every place
In the hoary old days, the pnp rpgs didn't have attributes affecting combat like this, and for good reason. Strength was there for your ability to carry stuff (more loot!) and to break stuff open (to find more loot!), and that's all. Bows all did the same damage, because it's the arrowhead that matters most for the damage, not the size and pull of the bow. Size and pull mattered for range and countering wind, and thus were all about the range increments (plus penetration at close ranges in rpgs that factored that in). Melee wasn't that much different, as application of any additional strength than is necessary to cut a hole in someone's vitals is just wasted effort. And in the old days, those kinds of things mattered, back when rpgs were closer to war games.

But all of this is moot anyways. Having Strength affect melee damage as it does is just one of those things that "makes sense" to people. So much so that they endlessly whine and cry about it if it isn't there. More than a BSN dweller who hears there won't be romances, if you can imagine.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,103
The way stats are used in cRPGs is typically derived from D&D, and yes, it's completely retarded if you think in realistic terms. Now, I don't blame the D&D guys for that, they created a pretty good system back in the day, which was better than most other stuff available at the time, and as amateurs who didn't have easy access to relevant material (ie youtube videos of all these HEMA types), they did an alright job.

But what's sad, is that all these decades later, most RPGs still use the same retarded stat approach. As you pointed out, strength has almost nothing to do with melee combat. Sure, you need to be somewhat in shape and not a couch potato, but you sure as hell don't need to have a lot of strength. Even in boxing and MMA, where you are fighting with your own hands/feet and not a sharp weapon, strength is not as important as people think. Most old school boxers don't even lift weights, as they believe it makes them slow, and instead just do calisthenics. Mike Tyson, in his prime, did not lift weights. When you have a sharp weapon, it's even less relevant. Even for mauls, you don't need a lot of strength, because mauls aren't an actual weapon outside of video games. In real fighting, speed is everything, and no one would go out there with something tremendously top heavy just so they would swing it once and leave themselves open to everyone around them. Check out actual historical 2 handed axes, they had relatively tiny axe-heads and could be wielded with great speed and little strength.

All the power in melee weapon fighting and boxing and MMA is generated not with your muscle strength but with coordinated body movements which use physics to generate power. It pretty much always starts with the feet, then with hips, then the arms and upper body simple transmit the power generated in the lower body to your opponent or into the weapon. And weapons are really light, otherwise they would be useless.
 

adrix89

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
700
Location
Why are there so many of my country here?
true that,but really it wasnt possible for a longbow arrow to pierce plate armour at standard battlefield distances.
What people don't understand about longbow versus plate armor is the concept of More Dakka!! With mass volleys while the first arrow might only dent with continuous fire an arrow will eventually find a weakness.
Armor is not invulnerable, to be effective in battle you have to have a trade-of between the amount of protection you have and actually going up to an enemy and fighting.
You can make yourself a turtle that is invulnerable but there is no point if you can't kill your enemy. In fact its more easy to grapple you and incapacitate where you will be at their mercy just like a real turtle.
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
I don't think I've ever seen strength tied to chance to hit. Increased melee damage, sure. And that makes sense because the stronger you are the harder you're going to hit something.
 
Self-Ejected

Ludo Lense

Self-Ejected
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
936
Would Diablo be a better game if the name of the statistics were more pertinent to reality? I really don't think so.
Actually in diablo dexterity gave you your chance to hit, and STR mostly allowed you to use bigger weapons.
But im used to people making these statements, retarded shits that havent played diablo but think they know the game.

Diablo is NOT diablo 2, diablo is diablo, and its p. damn good.

Neither which properly reflect how such things are used in real combat which was the point of the comment.

Wielding large weapons has more to do with footwork and learning how your maximize your power upon impact (obviously you need some body conditioning). In essence if you can properly use a Longsword you can properly use a Claymore from a strength perspective.

As for dexterity, even people with basic weapon training don't miss their attacks, they either get blocked or parried. Perception is quite important in fight since even if you are a faster, a block is still a block, thus finding the angle is half of connecting. We can say that dexterity could represent the other half but I am being generous since it is a nebulous term in the weapon handling context (hand eye coordination would be more exact).

But feel free to be contentious if it brings you any sort of emotional satisfaction.
 

Zanzoken

Arcane
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
3,558
Realism is a factor in attribute design (and design in general) but certainly not the most important one... things do need to make sense, but only kinda.

It's more important that your attributes are able to create clear distinctions among characters. Let me explain what I mean.

1) Assume there are only three attributes
2) STR = damage, DEX = hit and dodge, and CON = HP
3) You can only pick 2 out of 3

Even with a very simple system like this, interesting character concepts can still emerge.

STR + DEX = Duelist type. This guy is deadly and hard to reach, but if you manage to land a solid strike then he's going down. Good in one-on-one combat.
STR + CON = Barbarian type. He's powerful and can take a beating, but not very skilled. Good at AoE and also beating on large monsters/beasts.
DEX + CON = Paladin type. High defense and able to survive more than a few blows, but he lacks true stopping power. Good at protecting teammates and more versatile than the other two.

All three of these characters have strengths and weaknesses and would play very differently. Your attribute choices are meaningful, because they have a huge impact on how your character functions and how you approach encounters. And usually that leads to interesting gameplay.

tl;dr -- Just do the opposite of what Pillars of Eternity did and you'll probably be fine.
 

Ninjerk

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
14,323
I don't think I've ever seen strength tied to chance to hit. Increased melee damage, sure. And that makes sense because the stronger you are the harder you're going to hit something.
Advanced_Dungeons_and_Dragons_2nd_Edition_Player's_Handbook.jpg
 

adrix89

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
700
Location
Why are there so many of my country here?
When it comes to abstract combat attributes what do you guys think about this?
Strength - As in overall muscle bulk and fitness.
Perception - As in combat awareness, prediction and accuracy.
Agility - As in overall maneuverability,adaptability,flexibility.
Willpower - As in your determination, wits, concentration, spiritual power.

What I find interesting is by combining you get secondary attributes:
Dexterity/Dodge = Agility + Perception
Toughness/Constitution = Strength + Willpower
Stamina/Endurance = Strength + Agility
Bows/Throwing = Strength + Perception

It also have multiple different attacks equal in value.
Strength can have powerful blows,
Perception can have deadly critical attacks(as in target vitals or chinks in the armor),
Agility for a flurry of attacks,
While willpower focuses on defense.
It even creates a RPS system where Strength<Perception<Agility<Willpower<Strength.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom