Belvidere
Jul 9 2010, 01:04 AM
Something about that seems off to me. It says in their description that they basically stop maturing at age 8. I know my wording is off there, but that's the body they have effectively. Hence the neonety (Spelling is very off I think, but it gives them 6+half body instead of 8+). So a metatype that has less mature body shouldn't get a bonus to str, or am I just crazy? Or did I miss something?
Saint Sithney
Jul 9 2010, 01:15 AM
Yeah, it would make more sense to give them Str2 and Agl2 than Str3, but thems the stats.
Belvidere
Jul 9 2010, 01:33 AM
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Jul 8 2010, 09:15 PM)

Yeah, it would make more sense to give them Str2 and Agl2 than Str3, but thems the stats.
Okay, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something somewhere that said they had lower strength and body for the bonus of one of the best qualities in the game. Arcane Arrester
Shinobi Killfist
Jul 9 2010, 01:37 AM
It is the flaw in making things metavariants instead of new metatypes. They are based on the dwarf type so there stats are base dwarf with some minor mods that fall within the changeling rules. In SR3 I think they called things variants but just changed the stats around as they saw fit. I think in this regard SR3 had the better solution.
Hagga
Jul 9 2010, 01:47 AM
Just take Impaired (strength). Extra bp!
Belvidere
Jul 9 2010, 01:49 AM
QUOTE (Hagga @ Jul 8 2010, 09:47 PM)

Just take Impaired (strength). Extra bp!
Well if I'm
playing one, I'm not going to complain.

I just noticed it when I was reading through the metavariants. Haha
Shinobi Killfist
Jul 9 2010, 01:57 AM
Gnomes like a dwarf but much more bad ass. 1/2 the force of hostile spells? Yes please.
Hagga
Jul 9 2010, 02:07 AM
QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Jul 9 2010, 01:57 AM)

Gnomes like a dwarf but much more bad ass. 1/2 the force of hostile spells? Yes please.
The person who came up with Arcane Arrester should be shot. After a while of throwing people with that quality at my players, I forgot how to use regular anti-magic tactics. *facepalm*
Shinobi Killfist
Jul 9 2010, 02:25 AM
QUOTE (Hagga @ Jul 8 2010, 09:07 PM)

The person who came up with Arcane Arrester should be shot. After a while of throwing people with that quality at my players, I forgot how to use regular anti-magic tactics. *facepalm*
Arcane arrester feels like a patch. Ah crap magic is too powerful lets make a talent that nerfs it...
Well it actually kind of works out because the spells hit at the probably game balance intended force of magic instead of magicx2.
Lansdren
Jul 9 2010, 12:20 PM
In my understanding Dwarfs are supposed to be stronger then humans generally (something about denser muscles) so a Younger looking Dwarf being the same strength as a average human isnt to far fetched if you take the line that Base 3's in a human is about typical.
Combat Mage
Jul 9 2010, 12:37 PM
But they start with 3 strength so an average gnome would have strength 5.
Yerameyahu
Jul 9 2010, 01:45 PM
I guess they're just magically strong little buggers.
CanRay
Jul 9 2010, 02:08 PM
They're small, but fierce!
And probably have that "Muscle Structure similar to Lizards" deal going that Dwarves have.
Lansdren
Jul 9 2010, 02:18 PM
QUOTE (Combat Mage @ Jul 9 2010, 01:37 PM)

But they start with 3 strength so an average gnome would have strength 5.
Thats the point with the average thing.
If a base line for a race is N and the average is N+2 then yes a dwarf average strength is 5 with troll average strengeth being 7 which is above that of all but the most amazing natural humans.
It does appear to be inline with rules and setting
Venom
Jul 9 2010, 02:39 PM
Personally I dont think Dwarfs should have any bonus to strength.
The higher muscle density should be offset by their lack of leverage due to smaller size. I would give them the same strength range as humans - thats already a big effective bonus?
Making them tougher is fair enough though.
Lansdren
Jul 9 2010, 02:44 PM
QUOTE (Venom @ Jul 9 2010, 03:39 PM)

Personally I dont think Dwarfs should have any bonus to strength.
The higher muscle density should be offset by their lack of leverage due to smaller size. I would give them the same strength range as humans - thats already a big effective bonus?
Making them tougher is fair enough though.
Well I would say if your that concerned ask your GM to swap strength for body in this case for the bonuses. Each to their own.
Karoline
Jul 11 2010, 05:31 PM
QUOTE (Venom @ Jul 9 2010, 09:39 AM)

Personally I dont think Dwarfs should have any bonus to strength.
The higher muscle density should be offset by their lack of leverage due to smaller size. I would give them the same strength range as humans - thats already a big effective bonus?
Making them tougher is fair enough though.
Depends on what they are using the strength for. Most of the time though leverage isn't an issue when strength is applied. Gripping something, lifting something that isn't unwieldy, holding closed a door, whatever.
I do agree though, that since a dwarf is smaller, the high muscle density should simply offset the fact that they are smaller, meaning they don't get a penalty as opposed to giving a bonus over a human.
Yerameyahu
Jul 11 2010, 05:35 PM
So, they have *much* higher 'muscle density' then. It's just fluff, after all.
Karoline
Jul 11 2010, 05:41 PM
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 11 2010, 12:35 PM)

So, they have *much* higher 'muscle density' then. It's just fluff, after all.

Now the only image I can manage in my head is of midget body builders for dwarves
Shinobi Killfist
Jul 11 2010, 05:47 PM
Well I've always viewed dwarves as almost as wide as they are tall, with super broad shoulders even for a human sized guy. And besides who wants weak dwarves. Though gnomes yeah I got nothing.
Stahlseele
Jul 11 2010, 06:24 PM
Gnome with everything pumped into strength and then dwarfism as a flaw.
Blue-Skin and you have either SMURFS or the Wee Free Men, the Nac Mac Feegle.
Mr. Unpronounceable
Jul 12 2010, 07:32 PM
QUOTE (Karoline @ Jul 11 2010, 06:31 PM)

Depends on what they are using the strength for. Most of the time though leverage isn't an issue when strength is applied. Gripping something, lifting something that isn't unwieldy, holding closed a door, whatever.
I do agree though, that since a dwarf is smaller, the high muscle density should simply offset the fact that they are smaller, meaning they don't get a penalty as opposed to giving a bonus over a human.
It doesn't always work that way.
For instance, they did a strength experiment with chimps once.
A 165 lb man could do a one-handed pull of 210 lbs.
A 165 lb male chimp did one of 847 lbs.
A 135 lb female chimp pulled 1260 lbs.
Yerameyahu
Jul 12 2010, 07:32 PM
Conclusion: stay the hell away from chimps.
CanRay
Jul 12 2010, 07:35 PM
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Jul 12 2010, 02:32 PM)

Conclusion: stay the hell away from chimps.
Exactly. They can throw poo really, really hard!
Stahlseele
Jul 12 2010, 07:36 PM
Well, they are about the same size as dwarfs . . but they don't even LOOK that strong O.o
Dwarves at least have the decency to be the burly muscular type usually . .
CanRay
Jul 12 2010, 07:39 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Jul 12 2010, 02:36 PM)

Dwarves at least have the decency to be the burly muscular type usually . .
Except for Decker/Hacker Dwarves... They tend to let themselves go just as much as any of the other Metahuman races.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.