- 10,499
- 11,547
So, I recently had a calc approved, not knowing there already was a calc for that feat.
So as is custom we need a thread to decide which calc is better.
And... well, Fanta's calc makes the assumption that the fractured area has the diameter of the tree at its thickest part and is as high as that diameter. I.e. the volume he uses is Pi*(Diameter of thickest part / 2)^2 * (Diameter of Thickest part)
And... that's just a completely arbitrary and provably wrong assumption? I have no idea how that got approved.(I blame all those common feats calcs not properly spelling out assumptions) We see the fractured area and it's neither at the thickest part of the tree nor is it that high.
So yeah, for my calc I scaled the diameter at the part where the tree was fractured and just scaled the actual height of the fractured area, too. Simple and straightforward.
Hence... I think we should use my version.
So as is custom we need a thread to decide which calc is better.
And... well, Fanta's calc makes the assumption that the fractured area has the diameter of the tree at its thickest part and is as high as that diameter. I.e. the volume he uses is Pi*(Diameter of thickest part / 2)^2 * (Diameter of Thickest part)
And... that's just a completely arbitrary and provably wrong assumption? I have no idea how that got approved.
So yeah, for my calc I scaled the diameter at the part where the tree was fractured and just scaled the actual height of the fractured area, too. Simple and straightforward.
Hence... I think we should use my version.