What's new
  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 May and June 2024 are YE 46.4 in the RP.

Applying SDR values to quantities of TNT.

D

Drakconus

Inactive Member
I have a question for the more experienced players here.

Is there a system for comparing/converting/applying SDR values to that of a quantity of TNT (a.k.a. kiloton, megaton, gigaton)?

I have already have had a small part of this answered. I asked in another topic what megaton range SDR4 and SDR52 was and I only got the rough answer that a SDR4 was around the same as Hiroshima.

This equates to around 13 kilotons.

Now after some dividing and adding I came up with 169 kilotons for a SDR52.

Now is this right or is there someway that this is calculated or is it all just arbitrarily chosen?
 
This question should be put on hold until the player in question creates a character and starts participating on the site.
 
It's arbitrary.

And seriously dude, it's not the first time the Jun-man asks you to come and invest yourself more in the site. Read, look up plots and create a character for one already.

You seems to have pretty decent written english and interest. I don't know what's stopping you from coming over to join us and roleplay. roleplaying is the point of this site, y'know?
 
You know ... lately I been curious what DR values we put to explosions besides antimatter.

Therefor, I would like to ask a broader questions:

What is typical Damage Rating given to TNT on SARP? If you need a number lets say from 1-10 kg or 1-5 pounds.


What is the typical Damage Rating give to explosive bullet rounds?
 
The SDR 52 number was just to show that the DR scale doesn't actually scale very well to the descriptions of weapons on the site. The problem in part being that star ships can carry weapons that do many orders of magnitude more damage than even the largest nukes. (for example the Aether shock cannon can kill an entire planet, continue through, and destroy another planet with ease and has a DR of 5. Nukes end up around DR 3-4 and can generally only blow up a city. Large scale anti-matter rail guns that can cause extinction level events are also DR 4 along with some rail guns and lasers that can't kill cities.

In the end the DR system could use some loving to make it easier to use and to give a reasonable approximation of how much damage these weapons can do. But until then it is a very vague guideline that doesn't always make sense.
 
Yeah,

I wasn't exactly meaning nuclear weapons or anything heavy

but I was kind of curious becuase for thugs to be carrying around like grenades of TNT. I was just kind of curious what damage value a normal 1 pound or ton of TNT would be in SARP.

So I guess I should specify, I was curious what Damage Rating values in terms of small arms would be if they used light explosives like TNT or C4.
 
I'd honestly prefer it if we kept it to a relative value that expresses the rough average between penetrative power and overall energy transfer in a weapon. Specific values would just lead to internal inconsistencies.
 
Exhack said:
I'd honestly prefer it if we kept it to a relative value that expresses the rough average between penetrative power and overall energy transfer in a weapon. Specific values would just lead to internal inconsistencies.
Click to expand...
Seconded. Using it as a general guideline is best if we want to avoid plotholes while giving the GMs and players enough room to fudge for sake of drama or Rule of Cool. Exact numbers are something we've kind of avoided ever since the early profiles became cluttered with numbers.
 
The DR system is already inconsistent, so changes/issues really can only help because the internal inconsistencies already exist in the RP.

Having approximate energy values tacked onto the DR system would be nice. It would allow people to easily figure out how big/fast their weapons would need to be in order to get the damage they want and would add a lot to the standardization of armor and weapons.

We get a question like this on the Questions page pretty frequently, and we already know this is a problem...
 
Horse + Time = Dead Horse

Dead Horse + Time + Thread = Thread Necromancy

Dead Horse + Stick = Dead Horse being beaten on

Dead horse being beaten on + "Your Questions Answered" forum + Thread Necromancy = Thread Lock

the above variables can also be streamlined as...

((Horse + Time) + Stick) + "Your Questions Answered" forum + ((Horse + Time) + Time + Thread) = Thread Lock

Therefore...

Thread Lock = 2Horse + 3Time + Stick + "Your Questions Answered" forum + Thread

Yes, I had piss-poor grades in algebra. Don't hurt me.
Click to expand...
 
If you guys choose to ignore this it is going to keep coming up because new players are always going to have a problem using the system.
 
Honestly, New players SHOULDN'T have a problem. The only times it really matters are for GMs, or tech creation, neither of which should be something a new player is doing.
 
New players create tech all the time and constantly use weapons with a DR rating. Naturally they are going to be comparing what they do to the DR system (a good example being TnT and other generic explosive item usage).

So you can not say that they shouldn't be having a problem, that is kinda just ignoring the problem at hand.
 
How often do New Players' creations in the NTSE forum get approved? The ones who make Tech right off the bat rarely even read the rules.

As to using weapons and comparing DR values... I've never done it. I've always trusted my GM to do it, and as a GM I didn't even look at the DR values, to be honest.

Edit: "I never did it as a new player. I don't do it just as a player." <-- Place that statement somewhere and call it my quote.
 
I have to sit in the camp of "Leave it alone"

Ease of access should be the key. The DR system is an easy system to understand, and it is best to simply leave it alone(I could see adding another DR group for like large mecha/fighters/tanks) But other then that this system works just fine.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.
 
But it isn't easy to understand, people keep asking questions about it because they don't understand it.

It is clearly broke, we can do the math and see where the system doesn't make sense, we can see new people posting about the system and how it doesn't make sense to them, we can even see people wanting to get their own changes put into the DR system or ignoring the DR system entirely because it is broke to the point it is not useful to them.

Given that this question keeps coming up, I do not see how anyone can view the system as working well in its intended goals.
 
Then, and this is not the first time I say so, if you believe better can be done... do it.

I'm sick and tired of seeing you harp about this like a drunken harpy in your holier-than-thou critical "I know better and I am smarter than everyone else" tone.

I, for one, welcome any improvement you believe you could bring to SARP as long as it's obviously an improvement for everyone involved and not a "this way is better for me".

Because, damn it, I'm not happy with the DR system either. Wes bungled it with his insistence that aether should be king rather than intended weapon damage, creating large discrepancies on what kind of unit ought to have what kind of weapon (result: large mecha and small power armor can apparently carry weapons with similar damage potentials). There are added complexities I wanted to have, that I ditched for ease of accessibility too.

There was a compromise. I'm not happy with the compromise. You're not happy with it either. That's what compromises are about: having many people unhappy about a broad idea so that the idea in question can work with everyone involved to a degree. Now, stop rubbing it in, or live up to your word and actually improve on it.

Otherwise, please, be quiet about it!
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top