How they decided carrying capacity x strength?

[fireinthedust]

So I'm looking at the weight allowance/carrying capacity table today (which is something I'm certain no one ever does normally... Definite GM use to nail greedy players, but otherwise...).

How did whoever decide how much weight a given strength score can carry?

I mean, the numbers are fairly... random for the most part. a light load is 30 for 9str, 33 for 10, 38 for 11, 43 for 12... I don't get the pattern.

I mean, how much should a given Strength be, in terms of what it's signifying? And at what strength point do we say "yeah, that's super-human strength, let's increase this exponentially"? I mean, otherwise you've got Iron Golems either doing too much bonus damage, or not being able to overturn a wagon. Then to balance that, epic heroes can suddenly throw horses as ammo (example, i don't know), but they do just the right amout of bonus Str damage.

See what I'm saying?


What's the logic behind this?

 

[El Mahdi]

That's an interesting question.

Lifting and carrying capacites have definitely changed through the editions, though how much I honestly don't know. (If I have the time, I may try to chart a side-by-side comparison of the evolution of this through the editions...for my own curiosity.)

But as to what reference they used (whether real world, an approximation of a fictional source, or just arbitrary), I honestly don't know.

I'd definitely be interested if anyone around here had any info to enlighten us with.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yesterday, 09:46 PM #3 (permalink)
Albert07
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

ValerSterling
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[Straybow]

Hmmm, if you're talking about d20, mechanically they started at 100 lb max for Str 10 and went up logarithmically, doubling every 5 points. It's explained in the SRD that way.

I'd say they just decided 100 lb was a convenient, round number to be a reasonable maximum sustained load for an average human and went with it.

 

[Scott DeWar]

I see a possible pattern of increase by what is posted, but I will double check to see if the possible pattern pans out.

 

[fireinthedust]

I figured it was something like that.

I wonder, though, what the average lifting ability for a human in a medieval world would be. Everyone should be more active than modern computer users would be (walking vs. sitting and driving, sitting and watching TV, sitting and working, etc.).

 

[El Mahdi]

True. But nutrition would likely be poorer, as well as water quality, and healthcare. Lack of immunizations also. With life expectancies being only about half of what we expect today, I think carrying capacities would likely be, at best, the same as today.

But I'm just guessing.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I figured it was something like that.

I wonder, though, what the average lifting ability for a human in a medieval world would be. Everyone should be more active than modern computer users would be (walking vs. sitting and driving, sitting and watching TV, sitting and working, etc.).

People were a few inches shorter in those days, probably due to poorer nutrition. However, certain "classes" (peasants, knights) would have fantastic endurance. Peasants often had to work long hours wearing inadequate clothing in the cold rain, while knights would (according to one source, anyway) practice hours and hours of fighting in full armor because they didn't want to lose to someone who was just as skilled "but showed more dedication than you" during training and therefore didn't get tired as quickly.

The effect of disease might be ... mixed. People would be sick all the time (lack of healthcare and health knowledge, people didn't wash hands or use T-P, sometimes they didn't even bathe) but could develop immunity/resistance to the great variety of diseases they'd been exposed to. People with various health conditions might simply never live to adulthood, or not much longer. Someone with diabetes, for instance, would probably die young because no one knows how to keep them alive. This would make the "average" person healthier, unless you're counting the early victims, in which case the average person is less healthy.

Reported

Reported.

Can someone explain this?

 

[JamesonCourage]

Can someone explain this?

Spam bots. Danny is taking a note of their user name, etc. and reporting them to the mods, who then delete their posts entirely, leaving just Danny's comments remaining.