Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

[KLOL506]

Have we reached a sufficient staff consensus here for revisions to be applied?

This is all that was agreed I think.

Everything else was rejected.

 

[KLOL506]

There seem to be two kinds of complaints in the OP.

One that go in the direction of using feats against perceived author intent and the other about actual issues in evaluating the physics of feats.
We generally only have very little consideration for author intent. Generally, what actually happens overrules. It really is only relevant for the interpretation of statements. There's the outlier policy for the worst cases, but generally if the author made the character more impressive than intended we aren't going to downgrade them for that.
Author intent is generally not known anyways and taking precautions for the eventuality that the author didn't intend what they wrote makes no sense.

Meanwhile, I have the impression that any physics-related problems are already handled in a reasonable way by our existing rules.

Personally, I see no need to change any policies right now.

DT also said this.

 

[Antvasima]

This is all that was agreed I think.

Everything else was rejected.

Thank you. Which staff members have accepted that suggestion already?

DT also said this.

Okay. Thank you for the information.

 

[Antvasima]

About lifting strength. I suggest we add a new rule. Something along the lines "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds"

Just because a character can launch a football to space or punch a dent in a sheet of metal doesn't mean he can exort this level of force long enough to lift an object with coresponding mass of Earth. This will also copletely separate consepts of lifting and striking strengths.

@DontTalkDT

What do you think about this suggestion? Other staff members here seem to approve of it.

 

[KLOL506]

Thank you. Which staff members have accepted that suggestion already?

Me, Clover (Before his retirement), Bambu, Damage, Planck (I think? He disagreed with the rest of OP but I don't recall him giving input on Ugarik's proposal), DDM (Same as Planck)

 

[KLOL506]

About lifting strength. I suggest we add a new rule. Something along the lines "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds"

Just because a character can launch a football to space or punch a dent in a sheet of metal doesn't mean he can exort this level of force long enough to lift an object with coresponding mass of Earth. This will also copletely separate consepts of lifting and striking strengths.

@Planck69 @DarkDragonMedeus Y'all good with this?

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

About lifting strength. I suggest we add a new rule. Something along the lines "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds"

Just because a character can launch a football to space or punch a dent in a sheet of metal doesn't mean he can exort this level of force long enough to lift an object with coresponding mass of Earth. This will also copletely separate consepts of lifting and striking strengths.

Looks good

 

[Planck69]

Ugarik's proposal makes sense to me.

 

[DontTalkDT]

@DontTalkDT

What do you think about this suggestion? Other staff members here seem to approve of it.

I like the idea in spirit. That is, collisions not being considered for lifting strength.
One change needed in practice is to relativise the timeframe somewhat. You can't expect characters fighting at 10x the speed of light to do anything for several seconds.

I'm also not sure if, for example, a feat where a character juggles with mountains shouldn't count towards lifting strength.
I guess if one gets really technical, a good criterion might be that the force that matters should be the one applied form rest, rather than being the result of KE being converted into force... or something like that. Not sure if that works out with the principle of relativity...

Hmmm... I guess just saying "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds or the equivalent of that for the speed of perception of superhumanly fast characters." should work well enough.

 

[Antvasima]

I guess just saying "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds or the equivalent of that for the speed of perception of superhumanly fast characters." should work well enough.

Thank you for helping out. That seems good to me as well.

What do other staff members here think, and which ones have contributed in this thread previously, so we can ping them?

 

[Dalesean027]

I like the idea in spirit. That is, collisions not being considered for lifting strength.
One change needed in practice is to relativise the timeframe somewhat. You can't expect characters fighting at 10x the speed of light to do anything for several seconds.

I'm also not sure if, for example, a feat where a character juggles with mountains shouldn't count towards lifting strength.
I guess if one gets really technical, a good criterion might be that the force that matters should be the one applied form rest, rather than being the result of KE being converted into force... or something like that. Not sure if that works out with the principle of relativity...

Hmmm... I guess just saying "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds or the equivalent of that for the speed of perception of superhumanly fast characters." should work well enough.

Im gonna have to disagree with this as a whole, requiring a timeframe isn't going to solve the issue at hand here and neglects many other forms of actual valid LS feats that characters have been able to perform in an without it taking them straining for several seconds to do any any timeframe you choose is going to be arbitrary as there's no real basis to say whether like 2 seconds is better than 4 or maybe 5 or even up to 10 seconds, like anyone can just throw out a number for this suggestion but I don't think thats valid because all this really is doing is screwing over a large number or valid LS feats by adding a timeframe requirement for the work involved

Spoiler: Examples

Throwing something around the work quickly like this wouldn't work as LS since the throw was casually and didn't require a ton of work in regards to movements needed to perform the feat



Same here, the dude swings a weapon larger than mountains at a guy in like a second



This blouder toss here (17s mark) was pretty instant but its obviously presented as being a LS feat


Or this didn't require several seconds worth of straining but are clearly LS feats

Point is though we've got most if not a vasf amount more of our LS feats not being something constrained to being a over time thing because you can have characters who are strong enough to casually so the thing they are performing in no time at all which that doesn't make it not a feat all of a sudden. I think we're creating more trouble than its worth doing something like that

 

[KLOL506]

I don't think anyone is proposing to apply this to throwing feats or swinging feats, since those still require the character to start from rest, build up potential energy in their arms and then impart it on the rock over several seconds. Those feats are obviously fine for LS.

 

[Dalesean027]

I don't think anyone is proposing to apply this to throwing feats or swinging feats, since those still require the character to start from rest, build up potential energy in their arms and then impart it on the rock over several seconds. Those feats are obviously fine for LS.

I get that but then this definition of what is a valid LS feat should be adjusted and expanded then because otherwise it's not going to include the things I brought up if that alone is used for the changes

Edit: Well also they did directly mention something like throwing feats falling under what shouldn't be a valid feat above so that is concerning too

"A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds or the equivalent of that for the speed of perception of superhumanly fast characters." should work well enough.

 

[Antvasima]

Dalesean seems tp make good points here. Maybe this change would be a very bad idea to apply?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I know they can be difficult to notice, but I agree with some parts DontTalkDT might say where repelling a large object that was launched with a punch or kick, it would just be ss rather than ls, but stopping a falling or launched large object dead in its tracks before tossing it back would still be ls like Dalesean pointed out.

 

[KLOL506]

A punch is a punch. A kick is a kick. They can't be compared to tossing stuff with your hand or leg-presses where you provide a steady stream of force with contact for several seconds. Should be very easy to differentiate.

 

[Antvasima]

A punch is a punch. A kick is a kick. They can't be compared to tossing stuff with your hand or leg-presses where you provide a steady stream of force with contact for several seconds. Should be very easy to differentiate.

Yes. That is true,

 

[Armorchompy]

I feel like there's a lot of logical issues that are gonna arise with the timeframe issue that the rule as written doesn't address. Hell Dale brought up a few random examples that outline the issues pretty well, a lot of clear cut feats of strength are going to happen quickly but still obviously be LS. In fact just about any kind of lifting strength that isn't outright carrying something will not uncommonly stop working for this. Ripping or crushing an object, jumping or throwing something are all usually pretty sudden. If "A valid lifting strength feat should be performed for a duration of at least several seconds." then is something like this not a LS feat anymore just because it happens quickly?

A punch is a punch. A kick is a kick. They can't be compared to tossing stuff with your hand or leg-presses where you provide a steady stream of force with contact for several seconds. Should be very easy to differentiate.

You can't chalk something up to common sense ("should be easy to differentiate") when you're setting down a specific standard, and besides you're contradicting yourself. "Tossing stuff with your hand" very rarely takes several seconds of steady application of force unless it's something like Olympic-style shot put.

 

[Dalesean027]

A punch is a punch. A kick is a kick. They can't be compared to tossing stuff with your hand or leg-presses where you provide a steady stream of force with contact for several seconds. Should be very easy to differentiate.

Well yeah but we already don't include punching and kicking it any kind of striking feats for matter as LS feats already we even revised jumping feats to require specifc motions and work to be valid so what are we actually adding by including the usage of a arbitrary timeframe requirement

 

[Antvasima]

So what do you two think that we should do here then?

 

[Armorchompy]

I think the rule as proposed is going to do a lot of harm. I disagree with it barring drastic changes.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for your evaluation.

Do you think that we should close this thread then, or can any positive revisions be based on it?

 

[Armorchompy]

I think that's a question for the other side of the discussion right now.

 

[Dalesean027]

So what do you two think that we should do here then?

I don't have a particular solution but if the problem is simply just not treating striking feats as LS feats we already make sure to not do that and as CGMs we also already evaluate the feats in question so nothing falling under striking feats as LS should be getting approved to begin with for this to be a problem. So I don't think there is any particular fix here other than just saying CGMs be more weary of what we're evaluating or to provide more detailed and varied methods for different situations in calcs to avoid having these problems or prompt people to really just research the stuff they are trying to calc like yeah obviously denting the hood of a car or its door isn't Class M since that shit is made to crumple to protect drivers and this would be a problem with people not doing proper research imo

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out to you as well.

 

[Dalesean027]

Okay. Thank you for helping out to you as well.

No problem but I do wanna wait as well to see how others feel

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. Of course.

 

[Random-Helper323]

Unless the feat is explicitly striking strength with no bearing on lifting, such as a character charging into an object and knocking it away with kinetic energy, the timeframe probably shouldn't matter that much. If someone lifts something off the ground very quickly, that's still clearly lifting strength. Alex Mercer in Prototype has a feat of lifting a tank up one handed and flinging it into the air all in a quick movement. That wouldn't be possible if he didn't have the lifting strength for it, short timeframe or not. Dalesean already named some other examples of such characters and feats.

 

[Antvasima]

Random seems to make sense to me here.

 

[KLOL506]

I hereby change my vote to "not caring" for the particular "for a few seconds" proposal.

If that proposal gets rejected then this thread in turn is just folly and should be closed (As all of OP has basically been tossed into the trash heap).

 

[Antvasima]

Given that we already have another newer lifting strength revision thread active now, and nothing seems to happen based on this one, I will close this thread then. I hope that isn't a problem, and thank you to everybody who helped out here.