Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8372762" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Are they really stronger? Like, honestly and truly, the scale of human achievements in strength seems to go from (translating human IRL to DnD) 8 to 36 for men, and 8 to 24 for women. &quot;Human&quot; is a scale that has that broad of a spread. Goliaths are a single point stronger on average? That's nothing if we are talking about real life. Human men have a scale of 28 points to work with, do we really think that Goliaths going from 9 to 37 is some grand difference that changes everything? That is 27 points of overlap, larger than the entire SCALE of DnD attributes. This is trivial. A difference of 30 lbs. It might be incredibly impress at the high end, when athletes are competing for ounces, but in day to day living? It doesn't mean a thing. So, why raise such a fuss about it? In terms of mechanics, I can see it making a difference, but in terms of &quot;realism&quot; this is ludicrous.Sure you can, we call it &quot;improving&quot;. Something we've done for a long long time. Also, it was broken, because a lot of us feel a lot more free with our concepts now, so clearly something wasn't working. Maybe go back and reread the first few posts in this thread, before people came to start decrying the ruin of DnD again, where people were saying &quot;you know, this really did make a difference&quot;So, the peak of achievement in the 1920's is nowhere near the peak of achievment in the 1920's? I'm not comparing him to someone in the modern era, I'm comparing him to someone from his own era. So, how does this work? A guy at the peak of manly achievement in the 20's was beaten by a woman because she was a time traveler who knew modern training regimes? What are you trying to argue here?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8372762, member: 6801228"] Are they really stronger? Like, honestly and truly, the scale of human achievements in strength seems to go from (translating human IRL to DnD) 8 to 36 for men, and 8 to 24 for women. "Human" is a scale that has that broad of a spread. Goliaths are a single point stronger on average? That's nothing if we are talking about real life. Human men have a scale of 28 points to work with, do we really think that Goliaths going from 9 to 37 is some grand difference that changes everything? That is 27 points of overlap, larger than the entire SCALE of DnD attributes. This is trivial. A difference of 30 lbs. It might be incredibly impress at the high end, when athletes are competing for ounces, but in day to day living? It doesn't mean a thing. So, why raise such a fuss about it? In terms of mechanics, I can see it making a difference, but in terms of "realism" this is ludicrous. Sure you can, we call it "improving". Something we've done for a long long time. Also, it was broken, because a lot of us feel a lot more free with our concepts now, so clearly something wasn't working. Maybe go back and reread the first few posts in this thread, before people came to start decrying the ruin of DnD again, where people were saying "you know, this really did make a difference" So, the peak of achievement in the 1920's is nowhere near the peak of achievment in the 1920's? I'm not comparing him to someone in the modern era, I'm comparing him to someone from his own era. So, how does this work? A guy at the peak of manly achievement in the 20's was beaten by a woman because she was a time traveler who knew modern training regimes? What are you trying to argue here? [/QUOTE]

Verification