Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6259997" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I'm a runner.  I'll try to keep this brief and hopefully clear.Here are some primary factors to contend with:1)  Biomechanics:  Taller bipeds have no advantage over shorter bipeds on biomechanics so long as there is no deformity.  This is primarily technique-driven but there will be some genetic advantages with hip to footstrike alignment.2)  Footstriking power/frequency/efficiency:  As much as anything, this is about technique (driven by 1), strength in the calf/hamstring/glute for loading rate, and rebound elasticity in the calf, achilles tendon and surrounding infrastructure.  Taller bipeds don't have a precedent for clear advantage here.  In fact, there are strong studies showing the achiles tendon length (and corresponding elasticity) may be the primary driver here.  This will vary wildly across people of the same size (1.75 meter tall folks can have achiles lengths from ~ 190 mm to 265 mm).  Athletes universally have much longer achiles than your average person.3)  VO2 max or maximal oxygen consumption:  This is the maximum amount of oxygen your body can take in and actually utilize at max exertion.  Put simply, if you increase your O2 uptake, you'll run faster.  Taller bipeds do not have an advantage here.  This is training but also genetics.  Insofar as D&D is capable of simulating process (which is to say not much at all!), this would be a racial Con bonus.  Dwarves and certain Halfling and Gnome subraces?4)  Drag:  This is exacerbated in bipeds with higher profiles.  Smaller is better here.I'll let people do their own math.  Meanwhile, I'll vote for keeping the game quick and easy with uniform speeds and I won't pretend that D&D is good at simulating real world biophysics or combat even at gross levels of abstraction.</blockquote>

Verification