[3.5] Help with some Real World stats

[Thurbane]

Hey all,

I was wondering if you could help me rank the D&D 3.5 Strength scores of two real world weight lifters by their results:

Becca Swanston –

Bench = 501 lb
Deadlift = 650lb
Squat = 843 lb


Viktor Yanksy –

Snatch = 237 lb
Clean & jerk = 297 lb


Cheers - T

[Urpriest]

Well, if Viktor can Snatch, then he must be at least Huge, so that needs to be taken into account.

[paddyfool]

"A character can lift as much as his or her maximum load over his or her head.

A character can lift as much as double his or her maximum load off the ground, but he or she can only stagger around with it. "

Maximum load can be found at the upper end of the "heavy load" scale on this table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm).

So, ignoring for now that these people would have some kind of lifting class or feat bonus to represent specialised training and musculature for that task, and the fact that I know nothing about weight lifting... let's treat Deadlift as double maximum load, and Clean & Jerk as maximum load. Ish. That would make Viktor Strength 18 and Becca Strength 19.

[Thurbane]

Well, if Viktor can Snatch, then he must be at least Huge, so that needs to be taken into account.
I LOLd. :smallbiggrin:

Actually, he's quite the opposite, weighing in at only 119 lbs.

"A character can lift as much as his or her maximum load over his or her head.

A character can lift as much as double his or her maximum load off the ground, but he or she can only stagger around with it. "

Maximum load can be found at the upper end of the "heavy load" scale on this table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm).

So, ignoring for now that these people would have some kind of lifting class or feat bonus to represent specialised training and musculature for that task, and the fact that I know nothing about weight lifting... let's treat Deadlift as double maximum load, and Clean & Jerk as maximum load. Ish. That would make Viktor Strength 18 and Becca Strength 19.
Cool...yeah, I was having trouble getting my head around plugging those figures into that table.

The reason I ask, my current DM has some odd houserules about maximum strength for female humans and "dwarfs" (dwarfs are not Tolkienesque dwarves in his game, rather diminutive humans, like Bushmen or coalminers during the industrial revolution).

I'm trying to find him some compelling physcial evidence (rather than anecdotal) that the max Strength limits he has in place aren't that accurate. His limits impose a max STR of 13 for "dwarfs" and something like 12 for female humans. (Halflings are capped at STR 9). It's a throwback to the system used by AD&D 1E.

PLEASE: no debate on the inherent "sexism"/"racism" of his rules - they are (in his mind) grounded in physics and not bias.

[Curious]

. . .
. . .
What? Even AD&D didn't have 12 as the max strength. That would mean the strongest female in the world wouldn't even be able to lift more than about a hundred pounds!

[Jarian]

. . .
What?

Those were pretty much my thoughts as well.

[Thurbane]

. . .
. . .
What? Even AD&D didn't have 12 as the max strength. That would mean the strongest female in the world wouldn't even be able to lift more than about a hundred pounds!
That's from memory, I don't have his rules document in front of me...it may have been higher, but that's about the range I remember.

Part of the problem with his houserules is he only has a fairly basic grasp of 3.5 rules, and his rules are a mix of 1E, 3.5 and homebrew.

[paddyfool]

Ah, biophysics... the real science can be condensed down to the following:

- Men's arms are at different angles to women's at the elbow, a trade-off which makes men slightly better at throwing and women slightly better at carrying.
- Male hormones vs female, lead to greater physical size in general and greater muscle mass gain for the same amount of exercise in particular. For instance, the male world record holder for "Snatch & Jerk" lifted 580.9 pounds (Str 22-23), but for women the world record holder lifted 412.3 pounds (Str 20-21).
- Women tend to live longer, by about 4 years in almost all countries around the world, and generally age better etc.
- Neither men nor women are smarter overall; however, the ideal external temperature for mental function is lower for men than it is for women. Possibly this is something to do with muscle mass being a major source of endogenous body heat. There are also specialised areas in which each gender tends to do better.

If you're really going to risk the oppobrium of modelling these differences (and I wish to state firmly at this point that I mean no-one any offense by these numbers):

- Give male humans a +1 to hit with throwing weapons, and maybe greater cold tolerance
- Give female humans -2 Str, +2 (choice of Dex or Con), but treat their carrying capacity for a "Light" or "Medium" load as if their Str was 2 higher, and maybe greater heat tolerance.

As for dwarves as smaller humans, and their strength, the world record for the lowest olympic weight lifting category (where the lifter weighs in at <123.5 lb) is 370.4 lb, which would be in the Str 19-20 region. Combined with the 3/4 carrying capacity for being small sized, this means the standard -2 Str for halflings and gnomes should be fine; and your GM might do best to refluff them as being a bit taller and as two different types of smaller human. Dwarves could similarly be refluffed to a generally rugged and tough human (akin to Sherpas, perhaps).

Gender differences as for humans could be stacked on top, with the proviso that the "being female" stat boost applies only to a stat that isn't already boosted. (Which would make female gnomes and halflings rather similar, and awesome as casters, but it's still not such a bad fudge).

This might be a good half-way solution, overall. But it's up to your GM, of course.

[Sacrieur]

- Give female humans -2 Str, +2 (choice of Dex or Con), but treat their carrying capacity for a "Light" or "Medium" load as if their Str was 2 higher, and maybe greater heat tolerance.


It's a common misconception that females are more enduring or dexterous (http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1996-06256-004). They're more flexible, and that's about it.

Men have the advantage in both endurance and strength.

[Marnath]

PLEASE: no debate on the inherent "sexism"/"racism" of his rules - they are (in his mind) grounded in physics and not bias.

There was going to be a clever anecdote here about girls I've known who could throw me with one hand, but then I noticed this last bit. :smallwink:

[paddyfool]

It's a common misconception that females are more enduring or dexterous (http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1996-06256-004). They're more flexible, and that's about it.

Men have the advantage in both endurance and strength.

However, you can fluff the increased flexibility as Dex, or the increased life expectancy (which includes lower mortality from infancy onwards) as Con. Otherwise, it's very hard to balance the Str hit in D&D, because the only alternatives come from the mental stats, and that's going altogether too far into this minefield than I'm comfortable with.

[Sacrieur]

However, you can fluff the increased flexibility as Dex, or the increased life expectancy (which includes lower mortality from infancy onwards) as Con. Otherwise, it's very hard to balance the Str hit in D&D, because the only alternatives come from the mental stats, and that's going altogether too far into this minefield than I'm comfortable with.

you could give them higher charisma scores. Men and women are equal in wisdom and intelligence, but they don't tend to be as brusque as men. It's even proven that they tend to deal with conflict through social interaction rather than in physical confrontation.

---

It's unfair to give them a higher Con when Con has nothing to do with life expectancy and everything to do with how long you can endure strenuous activity - which males exceed women at. The world record of the marathon is 2:03:59 set by Haile Gebrselassie. The top woman competitor, by comparison, has a record of 2:15:25 (Paula Radcliffe).

This is a difference of 9.22%.

([women's time in seconds]/[men's time in seconds])*100 - 100 = [% difference]

Example:

(8125 s/7439 s)*100 - 100 = (1.0922)*100 - 100 = 109.22 - 100 = 9.22%

It's reasonable to assume that in the area of strict non-muscular endurance factor, men and women are relatively equal (I should see if this is true). The differences arise in shorter distance races, such as the 5k. Here's a chart of the races and their world records, starting with 100m.

{table=head]
Race|Male Record|Female Record|% Difference
100m|
9.58|
10.49|
9.50%|
200m|
19.19|
21.34 |
11.20%|
400m|
43.18|
47.60|
10.24%|
800m|
1:41.01|
1:53.28|
12.15%|
1600m|
4:14.4|
4:37.0|
8.88%|
5k|
12:37.35|
14:11.15|
12.38%|
10k|
26:17.53|
29:31.78|
12.31%|
Half-Marathon|
58:23|
1:05:50|
12.76%|
Marathon|
2:03.59|
2:15:25|
9.22%|
100k|
6:13:33|
6:33:11|
5.26%|[/table]

---

While this isn't a good evaluation of the differences between men and women (a much larger comparative study must be done to evaluate that), the results still carry some weight as far as showing the difference between men and women (notice that the 100k record especially isn't as good as judge, since that's not nearly as competitive as say, a marathon or a 5k).

There's also my anecdotal evidence from being an endurance runner for years. Trust me, there's a huge difference. As an average athlete in the competitive 5k world, my best record was the best record of the top female athletes.

---

It's interesting to note that physical strength and body weight factors into endurance. There's an extremely important concept to bodyweight athletes such as runners and freerunners called force to mass ratio. This is considered the golden measure of one's speed and power within the aspect of bodyweight movements.

This is because in physics, you're attempting to move a mass. Due to gravity, the more mass you have, the more force you must apply to move that mass. So a huge 300 lb. guy who can beat you, a 150 lb. guy, in a 100m dash has a higher force to mass ratio (which also means he's helluva lot stronger than you).

Now, because women typically tend to be lighter, they do not require as much force to move, thus decreasing the difference in endurance.

In the area of pure physical strength, it carries over into endurance. This is because if lifting a weight that is 50 lbs. is 60% of your max, you can do it more times. Compare this to the guy who can lift 50 lbs. at 100% of his max.

---

AND this is why you should probably give men a +1 increase to Con. This would represent an increase of 10% to the average value of 10. +2 Str isn't entirely out of the question either.

Keep women's Str and Con values the same (no adjustment). Give them a +2 to Cha and +1 to Wis (women are better at multitasking, no joke, this is confirmed with SCIENCE =P).

You may then stack this on top of any race, but be warned optimizers are going to jump on it like a pack of hungry dogs. (For example, a female half-orc will have an adjustment of +2 str, -2 Int, and +1 Wis, while a male half-orc will have an adjustment of +4 str, +1 Con, -2 Int, and -2 Cha.)