BRP SIZ Table(Metric Corrected)

[Atgxtg]

Here is a corrected version of the BRP SIZ table.

What's wrong with the table in the BRP rulebook?

All of the metric values given in tons are about half of what they should be. Apparently whoever did the table originally, assumed that since 1 kg = 2.2 pounds, then 1 metric ton = 2.2 English short tons, when in fact 1 metric ton is about 1.1 short tons.

[RosenMcStern]

The problem is: what is the correct value in the original table? The metric tons or the british tons?

[Atgxtg]

The problem is: what is the correct value in the original table? The metric tons or the british tons?

The British tons. Three reasons:


1) The British values progress normally, while the metric values for SIZ 64 (6455-7000 kg) and SIZ 72 (6.4-7 mt) are basically the same. So either every SIZ value between 64 and 72 has the same mass or the metric values are off.

2) The rules specially state that for SIZ 330+ the SIZ value is 1/10th the weight in short tons. The metric value listed, 1500 metric tons is about half what it should be to correlate with 3300 short tons.

3) I asked Jason, and he said to assume the English measurements are correct.

[RosenMcStern]

3) I asked Jason, and he said to assume the English measurements are correct.

Well, point 3) was enough to persuade me :lol:

I will be eternally grateful to you for this, atgxtg. I will be running a mecha game at Tentacles, and the SIZ values in the mecha range are really important for that kind of game. I'll have to rewrite all the stats, but it is worth doing it.

[Atgxtg]

Well, point 3) was enough to persuade me :lol:

I will be eternally grateful to you for this, atgxtg. I will be running a mecha game at Tentacles, and the SIZ values in the mecha range are really important for that kind of game. I'll have to rewrite all the stats, but it is worth doing it.

Thanks. Sorry about the rewrite.
If it is any consolation, II'm in the same boat. You see, the way I spotted the error. I was working on my vhecile and spaceship rules and was getting the "wrong" speed answers when I switched from metric to English (smaller SISZ scores meant faster vehciles). I ended up with a headache at 3:30 AM wondering if I had forgotten how to do math. It wasn't unitl the next day that I looked closely at the table, then I pulled out a copy of Call of Cthulhu and discovered it had the same bug, and then asked someone else to double check it for me, as I began to doubt if I knew what a ton/tonne was.


If it would help, I have a table with values for all SIZ scores from 1 up to 330. I need to tweak it a little to match up perfectly, but it is fairly close (within a lb/kg/ton/mt or two).

If you want, I could email it to you, and even add in conversion from old metric SIZ to new.

Least I could do, since I messed up all your mecha.

[rust]

Here is a corrected version of the BRP SIZ table.

Thank you very much indeed.

Until now I have only used the table for creatures, so I did not encounter
the problem, but I will soon need stats for the various vehicles of my new
setting, and then I would have walked into that trap.

You really saved me a lot of time, because the contradictions between the
already known size of the vehicles and the mass they should have according
to the flawed table would have caused me to take the vehicles back to the
drawing board.

Good that you found and solved the problem. :thumb:

[Agentorange]

If it would help, I have a table with values for all SIZ scores from 1 up to 330. I need to tweak it a little to match up perfectly, but it is fairly close (within a lb/kg/ton/mt or two).

If you want, I could email it to you, and even add in conversion from old metric SIZ to new.

Why not stick it up in the downloads section under Resources ? It might come in handy for lots of folk

[rust]

Why not stick up in the downloads section under Resources ? It might come in handy for lots of folk

Yep, and also in the Errata in the Wiki.

[Mechashef]

Thanks for the great work.

I second the request to put your Siz table in the downloads section and (or at least a reference to it) in the Wiki.

[Atgxtg]

Thanks for the praise, but...


I spotted a couple of errors that I need to fix.

1) SIZ 3 should be 38-51 pounds not 38-54.

2) SIZ 248 should be SIZ 240 to match with the table in thew BRP rulebook. However, according to the mathematical progression used in the table, SIZ 235 is probably the correct SIZ. I got to check with Jason on that and on a couple of things I discovered while working on the Expanded SIZ table that covers everything up to SIZ 330. THe table in the BRP book uses a increasing progression from SIZ 96 up to around 272 or so.

SIZ 96-103 is +1 ton per SIZ point
104-111 is +2 tons per SIZ point
112-119 is +3 tons per SIZ point

...and so on up to over +23 tons per SIZ point.

Unfortunately, the table breaks with the progression in a couple of spots that I believe are typos rather than intentional changes. For example SIZ 232 is listed as 1220 tons, only 36 tons more than the value for SIZ 224,but according to the mathematical progression used, it should probably be 1320 tons. 1320 would fit the progression perfectly (+16 tons per SIZ at that point), and smooth out the SIZ values from 224 to 232. But it would also throw the values over 232 off by 100 tons up to 330.


Give me a little time to work out the expanded SIZ table before we talk wiki.