Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

Jumping rules are silly

10 posts / 0 new

Last post

Tue, 2010-11-09 20:17

OneTrikPony OneTrikPony's picture

Jumping rules are silly

thebook wrote:
use SOM ÷ 20 (round up) meters for standing jumps

Huuh? s) So the average person with SOM 15 can't even clear one meter with a standing jump? Whata bunch of transhuman sissies! My mom with her hip replacement can clear one meter. Shouldn't this be SOM/10 at least?

—

Mea Culpa: My mode of speech can make others feel uninvited to argue or participate. This is the EXACT opposite of what I intend when I post.

Wed, 2010-11-10 09:35

750

Re: Jumping rules are silly

perhaps, the current documented record seems to be 3.71 meters: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Standing_long_jump

Wed, 2010-11-10 15:17

OneTrikPony OneTrikPony's picture

Re: Jumping rules are silly

So are you saying that SOM ÷ 10 is the better model? It seems to fit well to me. Normal people can clear a meter, maximized people can clear 4 meters. SOM is a wierd mix of both strength and physicality. In many cases it seems to be a poor basis for modeling strength alone.

—

Mea Culpa: My mode of speech can make others feel uninvited to argue or participate. This is the EXACT opposite of what I intend when I post.

Wed, 2010-11-10 18:12

Prime Mover Prime Mover's picture

Re: Jumping rules are silly

3.71 is record, whats the average? (edit: Found it, 1.91 to 2.5 meters is the male average.) Can get .25 meters per 10 MoS but this still seems to fall short.

—

"The difference between truth and fiction, people expect fiction to make sense."

Wed, 2010-11-10 18:18

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Jumping rules are silly

And remember that that is the average for someone who has a SOM of 8-12. The Transhuman average, at least outside of the Jovians, is 13-17. So a SOM of 15 should be on the upper end of the current average distance. SOM/10 is actually slightly too low if anything. SOM/5 is too high. (SOM/10)+0.5m is probably best if you want to alter the numbers.

—

Thu, 2010-11-11 03:01

750

Re: Jumping rules are silly

lets not forget the "round up" bit of the rule. so anything below 1 is 1, anything above 1 but below 2 is 2 and so on...

Thu, 2010-11-11 20:47

babayaga

Re: Jumping rules are silly

CodeBreaker wrote:
And remember that that is the average for someone who has a SOM of 8-12.

Actually, according to the rulebook, characteristics for the "average" adult flat fall in the 6-10 range. So 10 is the high end of average; 8 is "average average". Similarly, transhuman average is 13 (i.e. the average of the 11-15 range), not 15. Player characters are on the high end of average. I could not find standing jump statistics for females, but long jump records for females appear about 20% shorter than those for males. Thus, 1.5-2.1 m would seem a reasonable "average" standing jump for females. And thus SOM/4 meters (without rounding) seems about right *if* you want the distance to scale linearly with SOM (it does scale linearly with energy if you disregard air friction), yielding jumps of 1.5m with SOM 6, up to 2.5m with SOM 10. A world record of 3.71m would then correspond to SOM 15, which is kind of lowish. But a SOM 30 Olympian performing 7.5m standing jumps sounds about right :)

Thu, 2010-11-11 20:57

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Jumping rules are silly

From reading the Aptitude Range table you would thing that 8 would be the normal human average, however the text on the previous page trumps that. Specifically; "Aptitudes range in value from 1 to 30, with 10 being the unaugmented human average and 15 representing the average of most genetically modified transhumans. Since aptitudes represent untrained ability, they are capped at a maximum rating of 30." So basically the table on 174 is written weird, so that the average is at the top and anything better than that is considered transhuman.

—

Thu, 2010-11-11 21:11

babayaga

Re: Jumping rules are silly

CodeBreaker wrote:
From reading the Aptitude Range table you would thing that 8 would be the normal human average, however the text on the previous page [b]trumps[/b] that.

I'd substitute "contradicts" for "trumps". It's not obvious which should be given precedence. Personally, I like the table better.

Thu, 2010-11-11 21:32

#10

CodeBreaker CodeBreaker's picture

Re: Jumping rules are silly

One is specific, the other general. The quoted text states the human/transhuman average as clear as possible, while the table has a range of values that include the previously stated set value. I would say that the specific text has more precedence over something that is as vague as the table. Edit: Not that it really matters either way. Edit 2: It is also supported in other places. Page 122; "with 10 being average for a baseline, unmodified human."

—