Should Str and Con be one stat?

[Celebrim]

Soo... does a soccer player have good dex ? No.

Huh?

You canøt say a strong person normally have a good dex too.

First of all, that's not what I said. I said that people with a good dex are normally stronger than people with a low dex.

Does a soccer player have a good dex? Well, again, here we must ask what 'dexterity' means, and unfortunately, in D&D it means to many unrelated things. The English word 'dexterity' refers to skill with ones hands. A person can have alot of 'dexterity' without having a particularly high dexterity in D&D terms. That's because the D&D attribute dexterity also includes things like flexibility, agility, coordination, and raw speed that are only loosely connected to manual dexterity. We could expect to find people with alot of agility, that have hands like meat clubs and we could expect to find people with alot of dexterity - say skilled piano players - who are as stiff as boards and who wouldn't have the reflexes to play a sport.

Soccer players are - if they are good - certainly agile people with quick feet, fast reflexes, and a rapid easy grace to thier movements. And to do that, one of the preconditions is that you have to be strong enough to accelerate your own mass quickly. And if you can do that, you are far stronger than average people. But this causes us another problem. What does strong mean? Once again, D&D's definition of strength is of little help because it bundles many things together. In real life, the sort of person that can hurl a javelin a great distance or punch you hard in the face, or who can jump explosively, isn't necessarily the same sort of person that can carry or drag or push a great weight and vica versa. If it were, 'tough guys' would necessarily make the best boxers.

I use to play soccer with a guy who was really good. Selected for 'All State', full atheletic scholarship to play soccer, all time scoring leader for state at the High School level. He could hurl a ball from the sideline over the width of the pitch. He could kick a shot on goal with a pace on it from mid-field. He had like a 38 in vertical, and could slam dunk a basketball even though he was just 5'7" or so. All these things require a great deal of strength, far more than I've got. Yet if it came to a shoving match between us, he'd probably have been disadvantaged. His muscles were all whips and wires. He had alot of power, but he wasn't necessarily that 'strong'.

 

[mmadsen]

In real life, the sort of person that can hurl a javelin a great distance or punch you hard in the face, or who can jump explosively, isn't necessarily the same sort of person that can carry or drag or push a great weight and vica versa.

Although there are differences between limit strength (e.g. max deadlift or max bench press) and explosive strength (e.g. jumping, throwing), and these differences can be important for elite athletes specializing in one or the other, they really are quite closely linked.

Also, Olympic-style weightlifters (who contest two explosive lifts, the snatch and the clean & jerk) are fantastic jumpers. In fact, they have the highest vertical leaps of any athletes, despite their squat frames, which aren't ideal for basketball or volleyball in other ways. And track & field athletes who compete in throwing events use the Olympic lifts extensively in their training.

If it were, 'tough guys' would necessarily make the best boxers.

Boxing requires an amazing combination of strength, power, agility, reflex speed, endurance, courage, insensitivity to pain and concussion, etc. That said, many of those traits are of exaggerated importance in the sport, because it's weight-classed. Often a giant without a total lack of the other qualities can compete with smaller elite athletes. (Watch videos of Bob Sapp in K-1 kickboxing to see a beast of a man compete with the best in the world, despite his lack of speed, skill, etc.)

At any rate, I think we need to acknowledge that absolute strength, which is closely tied to size, is related to, but different from, relative strength, or "pound for pound" strength, which is an important factor in agility, or what D&D would call dexterity.

 

[Celebrim]

Although there are differences between limit strength (e.g. max deadlift or max bench press) and explosive strength (e.g. jumping, throwing), and these differences can be important for elite athletes specializing in one or the other, they really are quite closely linked.

I don't think I said otherwise. I believe I said somewhere that it was difficult to train one sort of strength without at least somewhat training the other. I was merely trying to highlight the fact that there is more than one sort of strength.

Also, Olympic-style weightlifters (who contest two explosive lifts, the snatch and the clean & jerk) are fantastic jumpers.

I know.

In fact, they have the highest vertical leaps of any athletes...

The highest? The highest??? I've seen olympic style weightlifters with 36-38 in. verts, but there are basketball players and high jumpers with verticals in the 40's. Wouldn't it make sense that the people with the highest jumps are the ones that train and are judged specifically for that? So, lets not stretch your point too far. They can jump well, because jumping requires explosive power and so does jerking a weight over your head.

In any event, the lifts in the olympics are more or less explosive lifts. There is a whole separate class of weight lifting (ironically called 'powerlifting') that deals with entirely different less explosive lifts, and the dominating figures in that sport don't have (and don't need) nearly the 'snap' and speed you see in an olympic weight lifter.

That said, many of those traits are of exaggerated importance in the sport, because it's weight-classed.

I haven't even begun to deal with the effects of size. And Bob Sapp has incredible hand speed and coordination for such a big muscular man and his skill is often highly underrated, so lets not assume that all he's got going for him is raw size either.

At any rate, I think we need to acknowledge that absolute strength, which is closely tied to size, is related to, but different from, relative strength, or "pound for pound" strength, which is an important factor in agility, or what D&D would call dexterity.

Isn't that where I started? I'm glad you think we need to acknowledge my main point.

 

[Roman]

I love discussions on how 'real world attributes' work and interact and how they are distributed. Even when I don't contribute, I generally learn something new, like this time about the differences between explosive strength and 'heavy lifting' strength. Does anybody have any more detailed sources on the differences between the two, how they are measured and how different biological mechanisms underlie them? Thanks!

 

[Celebrim]

I love discussions on how 'real world attributes' work and interact and how they are distributed. Even when I don't contribute, I generally learn something new, like this time about the differences between explosive strength and 'heavy lifting' strength. Does anybody have any more detailed sources on the differences between the two, how they are measured and how different biological mechanisms underlie them? Thanks!

I don't have anything in particular, except to say that Wikipedia is almost always your friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeletal_muscle

Note that there are different sorts of muscle fibers that are good at various things.

Different combinations of the various muscle fibers and bone mass lead to different sorts of 'strength' and atheletic potential.

 

[papastebu]

A marathon runner would have a high CON, but not necessarily be physically strong. Endurance is a marathon runner's main forte.

An ex-bodybuilder who has let himself go, putting on loads of weight, could still be very strong, but be very unfit.

I know this from personal experience--the unfit bodybuilder, that is.

If you wanted to, and I'm not saying you should, because I don't think so, you could make all the physical stats into one and all of the mental stats into one, or even go so far as to crunch everything into one number that generates one modifier. Extremely simplified, but yes, just extreme as well.
The reason I said this is that I'm trying to illustrate something of what you'd lose if you combined--or eliminated one--two or more stats. If your players aren't into roleplaying as much as action, then they might enjoy the streamlined approach. I think that those who enjoy the other aspect of D&D or any other RPG like to have something that they can point to that says, "My character can lift this much, and do it for this long."
Granted, if strength and con were combined, you could still do that, but they really are only related, rather than the same thing. I have found that loss of strength can drag down health and vice-versa, but for a long time I've been overweight, and that is definitely unhealthy, but my strength hadn't decreased much until recently when I actually injured myself and had to have a fairly major surgery.
I would only go so far as to make them synergetic or symbiotic of one another, rather than combining them outright, if that even.

 

[Jhaelen]

I kind of like the idea that strength and constitution are two different stats, but I'm not sure how realistic it is.

If you are looking for a more 'realistic' set of stats, you'd probably have to add several, rather than remove one of the existing ones.

There's quite a difference between manual dexterity, good reflexes and agility/balance.
Likewise you'd have to get rid of wisdom in favour of perception-based stats: one for each sense.
Charisma also covers at least two areas that are quite distinct: physical attractiveness and force of personality.

 

[mmadsen]

I don't think I said otherwise.

I goal was not to contradict you; I was just adding more information on the topic.

The highest? The highest??? I've seen olympic style weightlifters with 36-38 in. verts, but there are basketball players and high jumpers with verticals in the 40's.

My understanding is that the average vertical leap of a Division 1 college basketball player is 28 inches, and that Olympic weightlifters average higher than that, with some over 40". (For more info, check out this article.)

Another interesting stat, this time from Increase your Vertical Jump - An Interview with Kelly Baggett:

The average NBA prospect has an average one-step vertical jump of 28-30 inches. In contrast, I have a list from last years NFL combine and the average linebacker, at an average weight of 250 lbs, has a standing vertical jump of 36+ inches!​

Wouldn't it make sense that the people with the highest jumps are the ones that train and are judged specifically for that?

Basketball and volleyball do not specifically reward the highest vertical leap; they reward being able to get your hands roughly 10 feet in the air. It's more important to be tall and to be able to jump high than specifically to have the highest vertical leap.

And Bob Sapp has incredible hand speed and coordination for such a big muscular man and his skill is often highly underrated, so lets not assume that all he's got going for him is raw size either.

He is nowhere near as skilled as the men he's competing against -- and he certainly wasn't early in his kickboxing career. Nonetheless, with that kind of strength and size -- and decent but not superlative skill -- he has been competitive.

 

[mmadsen]

I love discussions on how 'real world attributes' work and interact and how they are distributed. Even when I don't contribute, I generally learn something new, like this time about the differences between explosive strength and 'heavy lifting' strength. Does anybody have any more detailed sources on the differences between the two, how they are measured and how different biological mechanisms underlie them? Thanks!

If you have the inclination, I'd recommend picking up an exercise physiology textbook and even taking a class or two.

On the topic of strength, academics love to enumerate dozens of "different" strengths, but generally your strength in any movement comes down to your skill in that movement, your muscularity (especially in the muscles used by that movement), and your frame.

A competitive thrower, for instance, manages to use his entire body to throw, he is muscular -- especially through the shoulders, chest, back, hips, and legs -- and he has long arms, which better impart velocity.

A competitive powerlifter might be similarly muscular but unable to throw nearly as far, because (a) he's not a skilled thrower, and (b) he has short, stubby arms, which are great for bench press (if not deadlift) but not for throwing.

Addendum: I found some decent articles on strength and athletic performance.

 

[snarfoogle]

Alright, then how about Jack Nickleson in The Shining. Takes a pounding, but, he's not exactly strong.

Yeah, must be the Haunting template buffing up his CON.