The guys Lormyr was facing in Thailand was probably as "maxed out" strength-wise as he was - but being bigger, matters.
Haha, while I appreciate the sentiment, I am nowhere near "maxed out" in terms of human strength potential. On a SR scale I'd be a solid 4. Up from me would be powerful guys like Dwayne Johnson, and then your 6's would be the Halfthor Bjornson's that measure deadlifts in the thousands of pounds instead of hundreds. You could argue that many of those fellas are..."augmented", though.
Anyhow...
Well, the question of chemical augmentation aside... I'm sure he's a real life example of not just hitting racial maximum, but also having benefit of Exceptional Attribute as well. For sure an example of a real life STR 7. (damn you wall of text posts! Slipped by Tecumseh!)
The disconnect does not seem to be if Strength (but also Armor) give you an advantage or not (because it seem as they do), the disconnect rather seem to be that the mechanical advantage you gain by investing into strength (but also Armor) is not perceived to be as potent as some of the other attributes.
This is sort of the issue. Strength adds to AR, and worn armor adds to DR. This means two things:
1). The addition may or may not matter, because you already have enough to gain/deny edge, or even with the addition you lack sufficient number to gain/deny edge. The attribute/armor can literally potentially do nothing at all.
2). More is not better. It's a simple all or nothing, where as more of everything else is strictly better because it continues to increase odds of success and/or magnitude of success (extra hits). Extra hits matter in every single opposed test in the game.
The rebuttal some have made that extra defense test dice, drain dice, damage resistance dice, ect. "did nothing" because you didn't get a hit on the die when rolled that some have made is a completely non sequitur response too. It's not remotely the same.
Adding to STR gets you more AR, and more AR gets you more Edge. Granted, we're talking about enough +STR to cross the 4 pip threshold, so that bonus isn't necessarily only +1 STR (although, also +1STR
could be enough to get that Edge...) I think we agree that when you're reliably out-edging your opponent, you win. Maybe STR didn't do it on its own, and maybe you got edge from more than just AR to DR comparison, but it still CONTRIBUTED.
Ok, so that serves to address the next complaint: Armor does nothing! Ok, you get some armor, and you get enough +DR (same 4 pip threshold disclaimer as above) and now the other guy ISN'T auto-beating you because he's not out edging you. ARMOR CONTRIBUTED!
So, near as I can see, you're saying that increasing STR, and increasing Armor, when they cancel each other out neither did anything? That's silly. They canceled each other out is what they did.
If there's a whole new calculus to arrive at the same (or similar) DVs for non-extreme cases, is the process truly worth it to cover the extreme cases?
What do you find extreme about them?
The ranged damage codes I listed are already basically identical to current ranged codes, it was just the melee portion that was altered significantly.
I meant extreme stat values. 2 is now the "norm", although I expect most players still consider a 2 to be "sub par". Either through familiarity inertia from 5e, or from the belief that a PC should be better than NPCs. We're new in the edition and we don't have many published NPCs for 6we, but there's an opportunity for the game writers to keep stat inflation from happening. But, I don't like the early signs we've seen so far. (Free Seattle has Bunraku dolls with
6 Charisma. Really, NPCs that are by definition lacking their own personality are somehow the human pinnacle of it? ALL of them?!?)
Anyway. As is, everyone has 2S as a damage code for unarmed. Pre-errata, Strength values 3-4 had 2S. You had to be 5+ Strength to suffer a base DV nerf, which is somewhat "extreme" if you consider 2 the norm. Of course, if you had really high STR, you're looking at a big nerf.
However.
The ones who had pre-errata unarmed DVs of 8+ DON'T have DVs of 2S now. Because those examples with huge STR will naturally self-select into also taking qualities/augmentations/powers that helped increase their DVs. Sure, someone MIGHT have had 9 strength but no bone lacing, bone density, critical strike, and etc. They would have had 5S, now down to 2S. Yeah, that blows. But I submit that it's reasonable to presume that anyone who makes that investment in strength also got some of those other toys. Mathematically, they must have in order to hit 8+ DV. They're likely now down to 4-5DV, which is a nerf yes, but that was exactly the point. They NEEDED one, compared to other combat options. Where they are now is still very attractive compared to other options.
I honestly look at your anecdote and see it validating the current mechanics, not contradicting them...
I wouldn't begin to know how to equate game Edge to any real world factor other than perhaps "luck", and my "luck" is
and always has been garbage :p.
A better way to look at it would be this: when I attacked, I missed a lot or was neutralized well because they were much better technical fighters. Once I got a good hit in though, the fight was over from that one hit, or the two that followed it while they were reeling.
How you choose to interpret that is up to your perceptions, and valid.
Well, I'd say remember that Edge ceased being Luck. That's 5e thinking. It's now more than luck... it's.. well.. Edge. Call Edge points Tactical Advantage, and your Edge stat your capacity to capitalize upon Tactical Advantage. Real life infantry combat schools naturally teach some skills and condition physical and mental stats, right? I submit to you that they're also training up your Edge stat. Military leadership schools for combat officers and squad leaders? Developing your Edge stat is what they're primarily doing!
If you spent edge to force your opponent to reroll a hit on you, it's not representing you "inflicting some bad luck" on your opponent. It's you taking advantage of a minor bit of cover most lacking your advantage wouldn't have recognized, or recognizing that you can move through a patch of terrain that has compromised vision from the shooter's field of view, or juking your opponent with a skillful head bob, or whatever. It's not "luck", not anymore.
In my adaptation of my example to your anecdote, your superior strength granted you edge that ultimately manifested in the Knockout Blow edge action you used to bring an abrupt end to the fight(s). What did your Strength do along the way BEFORE generating that Knockout Blow edge action? Well you know this kind of fighting much better than I do, but I'm sure moving around the ring, keeping your guard up, and so on require Strength, yes? In my layman's familiarity with MMA, I know that getting tired and letting your guard drop results in disaster. You were strong enough to keep your guard up until you got an opening, and BOOM. Knockout Blow after generating some Edge. It's not so unrepresentative of your experience, is it?
A couple of points. The only guns that hit particularly high on the damage scale are big and not particularly concealable
True, and fair. That said, how often have you played (or anyone) played and thought "Damn, if I only I had my real gun" vs. been playing and it was a non issue?
For me, 80 something(?) sessions of Chicago Missions, times this came up: counted on one hand.
And, I'm going to quibble with you about how much of an advantage range really is. Shadowrun isn't simulating 6th world warfare... most of the time the range to target is moot because he's in the same room with you. Again, in the case of big guns that do the highest damage, they're not used in close quarters combat that Shadowrun simulates. And if you try it, you suffer the penalty of a terrible Close range AR.
Haha, my friend, no argument there, but our brains are in two completely different spaces.
Yours: The range is not a big deal because usually close enough confines. (valid)
Me: That melee guy moved up to attack whoever, now he can't avoid the grenades or aoe spells at all! (valid)
It's not the range itself that is the major problem (though it is always an advantage), it is the movement restrictions.
I think, once, we had a sniper shot worked into our entire Chicago experience. And the stupid thing is we
had a sniper. It was just far more effective, under 5e rules, to accept the -3 dice penalty for shooting someone at arms reach with a goddamned sniper rifle when you're already throwing like 16 or 20 dice.
I'm kind of excited about 6we changing up all sides of that dynamic to something more *gasp* realistic!
But honestly? Virtually all the time we were indoors, or close enough to buildings while outdoors that you can go around a corner and break LOS if the other side had a meaningful range advantage.
Besides. Since spells and critter powers didn't (and still don't) have range bands, MagicRun is likely to still dominate combat that extends beyond one's arm's reach, anyway.
Another point: The potential for raw DV of 10 is game-breaking.
But you can already come out of chargen swinging melee for 12P due to critical strike being a leveled power now. That aside, you can come out of chargen doing 8-9P with appropriate ranged weapons (burst fire and explosive ammo), while melee weapons are capped at 5P (6 for the holy whip). How the hell is that balanced?
Melee Guy: "Nice, got an edge on that attack I can use on my next!".
Ranged Guy: "Cool bro, but mines dead from the first shot...".
Ok in the time it took me to wall of text my way to this point, you still hadn't edited this portion so I have to assume this is what you actually meant.
Big DVs with Crit Strike: Well, yes, that's a thing. But +6DV means you have to have both 1) 6+ Magic and 2) 6 PPs spent on that one thing. If we're talking chargen, you've got an awfully one dimensional character and that's not the best assumption to base game balance on. Post chargen? Ok, so you hit someone for 12DV. Congrats, you gave up a whole lot of other powers to deal that much damage when you would have won the fight anyway dealing 5. Hell of an opportunity cost to get a LOL.
But the part that confuses me is your example dialogue. Um. MELEE is the way you're one shotting someone, not ranged... I think you got something backwards in what you're trying to say there?