From: Steven A. Schrader 237 - 8196 (S9S%PSUVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU)
Date: Sat 18 Aug 1990 - 09:56:33 EEST
[Ed's note: I got this article in time for 1.11, and managed to forget to put
it in. As a penalty for my negligence, I'm cutting my salary in half. :-)]
I still think the two should be removed from the same classification. Although weight IS related to height it is not dependent on it. There is a lower limit to the survivability of weight to a given height. For example, a 2 meter tall person would probably be dead if they weighed 100 pounds; however, that same person could get as heavy as 1000 pounds. This should be taken into account. That is what I have tried to do with the following. I do like the Idea of basing weight on height, and to my surprise one of my initial methods seems to be valid. One other consideration of weight is strength. It is impossible to be light and very strong. Look at all of your body builders, boxers, and Amateur wrestlers. Though they look light they are quite dense. There could be a case built for CON adding to the weight or at least keeping it from being low. This is too complex for me to handle now. This is getting long so I will wait for responses.
[Sorry about the long wait. - Ed.]
Frame
Decimeters Meters Mixed SR Small Medium Large
1 2 3 4
1 0.1 0'3" 3 1 1 1 1
2 0.2 0'7" 3 1 1 1 1
3 0.3 0'11" 3 1 1 1 1
4 0.4 1'3" 3 1 1 1 1
5 0.5 1'7" 3 1 1 1 1
6 0.6 1'11" 3 1 1 1 1
7 0.7 2'3" 3 1 1 1 2
8 0.8 2'7" 3 1 1 2 3
9 0.9 2'11" 3 1 2 3 4
10 1 3'3" 2 2 3 4 5
11 1.1 3'7" 2 3 4 5 6
12 1.2 3'11" 2 4 5 6 7
13 1.3 4'3" 2 5 6 7 8
14 1.4 4'7" 2 6 7 8 9
15 1.5 4'11" 2 7 8 9 10
16 1.6 5'2" 2 8 9 10 11
17 1.7 5'6" 2 9 10 11 12
18 1.8 5'10" 2 10 11 12 13
19 1.9 6'2" 2 11 12 13 14
20 2 6'6" 2 12 13 14 15
21 2.1 6'10" 2 13 14 15 16
22 2.2 7'2" 2 14 15 16 17
23 2.3 7'6" 2 15 16 17 18
24 2.4 7'10" 2 16 17 18 19
25 2.5 8'2" 2 17 18 19 20
26 2.6 8'6" 2 18 19 20 21
27 2.7 8'10" 2 19 20 21 22
28 2.8 9'2" 2 20 21 22 23
29 2.9 9'6" 2 21 22 23 24
30 3 9'10" 2 22 23 24 25
31 3.1 10'2" 2 23 24 25 26
32 3.2 10'5" 2 24 25 26 27
33 3.3 10'9" 2 25 26 27 28
34 3.4 11'1" 2 26 27 28 29
35 3.5 11'5" 2 27 28 29 30
36 3.6 11'9" 1 28 29 30 31
Equation for Weight from Height is as follows:
Siz = Hit-9+1D4+Abs((Str-10)/2)
The above was checked on the Metropolitan Life Insurance chart
for recommended weights for Heights.
Some changes to Siz such be made based on str (perhaps an argument
can be made for con . . . Suggestion?). Perhaps STR can be used as a
Modifier. For example, for every 2 points greater OR less than 10 add 1
to the SIZ (always round down).
For example, a character rolls up a person with a 16 Str, and using my previous rules, rolls a character with a HIT of 19. For his weight he rolls 1D4 + 10. He rolls a 2, medium build SIZ of 12. He is strong and since muscle is heavier than fat, he adds 6. He has a SIZ of 15. The person is 1.9 meters tall(6' 2") and 202 - 219 pounds heavy.
Another person rolls a character with a str of 4 and a HIT of 16. The Siz roll is a 1, SIZ 8. Adding in the Str modifier, SIZ goes from 8 to 11, or 143 - 155 pounds. this person has more fat than muscle.
Also, when succesfully raising STR, a character's Siz will be affected Another note, I suggest the following classification changes.
Agility
DEX = Primary STR = Secondary SIZ = Negative
Boat
Dodge
Ride
Locomotion
DEX = Primary STR = Secondary HIT = Secondary SIZ = Negative
Climb
Jump
Swim
Manipulation
DEX = Primary
INT = Secondary
Same As RQ III
Attack% = Locomotion
Parry% = Primary(DEX) + Primary(Str) + Negative(HIT)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:54:01 EEST