Khamulcalle
Mongoose
Does 1 ENC equal 1 kg? (or roughly 2 pounds)
//K
//K
ENC= 1 kg?
- Thread starter Khamulcalle
- Start date
Khamulcalle said:Does 1 ENC equal 1 kg? (or roughly 2 pounds)
//K
ENC is an abstraction of an items mass and weight, basically how heavy and awkward it is to carry.
An approximate weight for smaller items is often useful, so as a rule of thumb I tend to use 1 ENC = 1 Kg.
If you look at the fact that most broadswords and bastard swords weight between 1.3kg to 1.8kg, then this seems roughly about right.
Simulacrum
Mongoose
Where this falls down is in calculating a person as a load. Most beasts of burden have a load capacity in the range of 40+, but are OK with carrying a person, who would have, let's say, an ENC of 60-100 on a 1ENC = 1kg equivalency.
Now of course people are not dead weight (unless dead, natch). But I have not seen anything in the rules relating to how many people or how much SIZ can be carried by a horse, mule or whatever. Counting a person as an ENC load of 2XSIZ seems to (roughly) work in this respect. An average person would come in at 26, two people would slow an average horse, while one person plus kit would be OK. Any thoughts or advice?
Now of course people are not dead weight (unless dead, natch). But I have not seen anything in the rules relating to how many people or how much SIZ can be carried by a horse, mule or whatever. Counting a person as an ENC load of 2XSIZ seems to (roughly) work in this respect. An average person would come in at 26, two people would slow an average horse, while one person plus kit would be OK. Any thoughts or advice?
Well, I believe you can only translate 1 ENC = 1 KG at the lowest range of stats. As far as I can see all stats (SIZ specifically) does not scale linearly (meaning there is a greater difference from SIZ 22 to SIZ 23, than from SIZ 5 to SIZ 6). I base this on the monster SIZes.
A unicorn (or horse, or lion) is SIZ 19, but a dragon is SIZ 65. If SIZ scaled linearly, then this would mean that a dragon was only roughly 4 times larger than a horse (19 * 4 = 64). However, dragons are much larger than this, so I can only conclude that SIZ does not scale linearly.
When that is taken into account, I believe the same goes for ENC and other stats. So, for a range of 1-15, it may be true that 1 ENC = 1 KG. But later on, (say, for carrying a lion) this might not be true.
Also, if 1 ENC = 1 KG, then why not just use KG, which most people can relate to? I think the use of ENC is a deliberate choice from the game designers, to avoid linear-scaling stats.
- Dan
A unicorn (or horse, or lion) is SIZ 19, but a dragon is SIZ 65. If SIZ scaled linearly, then this would mean that a dragon was only roughly 4 times larger than a horse (19 * 4 = 64). However, dragons are much larger than this, so I can only conclude that SIZ does not scale linearly.
When that is taken into account, I believe the same goes for ENC and other stats. So, for a range of 1-15, it may be true that 1 ENC = 1 KG. But later on, (say, for carrying a lion) this might not be true.
Also, if 1 ENC = 1 KG, then why not just use KG, which most people can relate to? I think the use of ENC is a deliberate choice from the game designers, to avoid linear-scaling stats.
- Dan
Vagni said:
Yeah, but again that can only be true for human-sized creatures. Again with the unicorn and dragon example this would mean a unicorn would weigh 19*5 = 95 kg (15 kg more than me! For a HORSE!) and a dragon weigh 65 * 5 = 325 KG (little more than a large male Tiger!).
- Dan
Deleriad
Mongoose
As a pure measure of mass, I believe that when it was worked out for RQ3 they used something like a log base e exponential progress with SIZ 1 representing 0-5kg. This was why the damage bonus table went up in steps of +16. I don't remember the maths that well.
It used to be (I think) that 1 ENC was a little less than 1kg. (I think it may have been 6 ENC per SIZ)
The whole thing got a little screwy though. At a human scale you can roughly say that 1 ENC = 1 Kg and that 1 SIZ = 5kg and you're close enough because if you look at it too closely it doesn't work.
Again, at a human scale you can roughly say that STR X can lift SIZ X normally and can lift more with a Brawn roll.
It's a bit of a shame that there's not a nice easy way to look at STR and SIZ and just read off what it represents. I spent a long time playing the old DC Heroes and the universal AP scale was great.
For me the closest approximation is to say that for inanimate mass:
0-20 - weight =SIZ *5kg (0-100kg)
21-30 - weight = SIZ *10kg (100-200kg)
31-40 - weight = SIZ *20kg (200-400kg) and so on.
Means creatures have a SIZ that is too little purely for weight but you can gloss that by saying that for living things SIZ is an abstract combination of body shape and weight.
As I say, you probably don't want to look at it too closely.[/i]
It used to be (I think) that 1 ENC was a little less than 1kg. (I think it may have been 6 ENC per SIZ)
The whole thing got a little screwy though. At a human scale you can roughly say that 1 ENC = 1 Kg and that 1 SIZ = 5kg and you're close enough because if you look at it too closely it doesn't work.
Again, at a human scale you can roughly say that STR X can lift SIZ X normally and can lift more with a Brawn roll.
It's a bit of a shame that there's not a nice easy way to look at STR and SIZ and just read off what it represents. I spent a long time playing the old DC Heroes and the universal AP scale was great.
For me the closest approximation is to say that for inanimate mass:
0-20 - weight =SIZ *5kg (0-100kg)
21-30 - weight = SIZ *10kg (100-200kg)
31-40 - weight = SIZ *20kg (200-400kg) and so on.
Means creatures have a SIZ that is too little purely for weight but you can gloss that by saying that for living things SIZ is an abstract combination of body shape and weight.
As I say, you probably don't want to look at it too closely.[/i]
There is a major discrepancy between SIZ scaling of giants and of elementals. Giants SIZ scales up with their height, whereas the SIZ of an elemental scales with their volume. The lesson here is, stats are fairly arbitrary and the rules are written with simplicity in mind more than real physics.Dan True said:
