Stat Scale Doubling

[tomBitonti]

I’ve always found these sorts of charts to be very interesting.

Spot checking the energy column, and at least several are off. As an easy rule of thumb: 2^10 (1024) is very close to 10^3 (1000). That is, multiplying by 1000 makes for a 10 row shift downward.

Some values span too many rows … a fission bombs range from 100 tons (I kid you not) to up to 500kt. Fusion bombs seem to range from 1mt up to 50mt. Bigger could be made — that’s where we stopped testing.

Firearms seem to range from 100j to about 10kj. A 22 bullet has about 200j, one from a .46 magnum has about 10kj.

Impactors (meteorites; probably using the same term for meteorites that start as asteroids) have a huge range. Say, 1 m^3 to 10 km^3 and speeds of 10km/s up to 70km/sec. More examples than ”large” and Chicxulub may be needed.

Tom B

 

[Morrus]

I’ve always found these sorts of charts to be very interesting.

Spot checking the energy column, and at least several are off. As an easy rule of thumb: 2^10 (1024) is very close to 10^3 (1000). That is, multiplying by 1000 makes for a 10 row shift downward.

Some values span too many rows … a fission bombs range from 100 tons (I kid you not) to up to 500kt. Fusion bombs seem to range from 1mt up to 50mt. Bigger could be made — that’s where we stopped testing.

Firearms seem to range from 100j to about 10kj. A 22 bullet has about 200j, one from a .46 magnum has about 10kj.

Impactors (meteorites; probably using the same term for meteorites that start as asteroids) have a huge range. Say, 1 m^3 to 10 km^3 and speeds of 10km/s up to 70km/sec. More examples than ”large” and Chicxulub may be needed.

Tom B

Sure. The examples are generally quite sparse so far. It's a WIP.

 

[Davies]

That'll be me.

I didn't want to assume.

 

[John Desmarais]

In many ways it’s a wonderful solution to the scaling problem, easy to understand and avoiding some of the pitfalls of alternative system.

On the other hand, it does introduce its own problems. In DC Heroes, for example, the Joker was twice as strong as Batman, while Saturn and Jupiter were the same distance from the sun. There comes a point where the range being encompassed ceases to have a useful real-world meaning.

This is one of those areas where I think the Hero System scale worked a bit better. Instead of each point doubling the effect, every five points doubled it. It sacrificed the ability to lift the Moon within PC range, but allowed for a bit more granularity (particularly noticeable at the low end).

 

[Staffan]

TORG uses a similar scale (which isn't surprising given that they had the same primary designer, Greg Gorden) except there it's based on +5 steps equaling a multiple of 10 (which translates into about 1.6 per step, though for convenience the scale goes 1, 1.5, 2.5, 4, 6, 10). I find this more practical since it keeps returning to round numbers and is slightly more granular, but that's more a matter of taste.

Also, if you're doing temperatures you should probably use Kelvins so you start from absolute zero. One of the weaknesses of exponential scales is that they can't handle negative things: there is no way to solve 2^x = -100, for example. On the other hand, that would put all day-to-day temperatures in the 9 to 10 range (256 to 512 K = -17 to 239 degrees Celsius) or 12 to 13 on the TORG scale (250 to 400 K = -23 to 127 degrees Celsius).

 

[Morrus]

Also, if you're doing temperatures you should probably use Kelvins so you start from absolute zero.

Being able to blast somebody with absolute zero temperature blasts with a rank of 1? That should require some effort. It needs to be deviation from the norm +/- degrees from room temp (I should change that heater to +/-). Though I went with 0 Celsius as it’s not far from there and is a round number.

 

[le Redoutable]

TORG uses a similar scale (which isn't surprising given that they had the same primary designer, Greg Gorden) except there it's based on +5 steps equaling a multiple of 10 (which translates into about 1.6 per step, though for convenience the scale goes 1, 1.5, 2.5, 4, 6, 10). I find this more practical since it keeps returning to round numbers and is slightly more granular, but that's more a matter of taste.

Also, if you're doing temperatures you should probably use Kelvins so you start from absolute zero. One of the weaknesses of exponential scales is that they can't handle negative things: there is no way to solve 2^x = -100, for example. On the other hand, that would put all day-to-day temperatures in the 9 to 10 range (256 to 512 K = -17 to 239 degrees Celsius) or 12 to 13 on the TORG scale (250 to 400 K = -23 to 127 degrees Celsius).

I would go further :

+10 = x10

Lvl - score
1 -- 1
2 -- 2
3 -- 3
4 -- 4
5 -- 5
6 -- 6
7 -- 7
8 -- 8
9 -- 9
10 -- 10
11 -- 12
12 -- 16
13 -- 20
14 -- 25
15 -- 32
16 -- 40
17 -- 50
18 -- 64
19 -- 80
20 -- 100
21 -- 125
22 -- 160
23 -- 200
24 -- 250
25 -- 320
26 -- 400
27 -- 500
28 -- 640
29 -- 800
30 -- 1000

etc

 

[Davies]

On the other hand, absolute zero is "only" -273 Celsius, or a rank 8 effect if we use the ratings above. It seems like it should probably be a bit higher ...

 

[Umbran]

Being able to blast somebody with absolute zero temperature blasts with a rank of 1? That should require some effort. It needs to be deviation from the norm +/- degrees from room temp (I should change that heater to +/-). Though I went with 0 Celsius as it’s not far from there and is a round number.

Yeah, but then you end up with the temperature of a nuclear explosion on scale of the energy of a modestly moving car, which are not nearly equivalent.

 

[Morrus]

Yeah, but then you end up with the temperature of a nuclear explosion on scale of the energy of a modestly moving car, which are not nearly equivalent.

Yeah, the scale needs to be adjusted for sure.