(03-02-2013, 10:41 PM)Rhio Wrote:(03-02-2013, 10:29 PM)Siobhain Wrote: Touche....
In the future, I'll be more specific. For now, I suppose I'll writhe in my own shame.
Aw, shame-writhing is no fun.
Unfortunately, weight is a bit harder to calculate reliably simply because there are gaps in our knowledge about character mass. Â But we can still use some awkward math to figure out some ranges based on height, armed with a bit of BMI. Â Which is a terrible indicator in general, but it can work out well enough for these purposes.
A normal healthy adult is considered by the CDC to be someone with a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9. Â The lower end is skinnier, the higher end is fitter or more muscular. Â (Or heavier and softer, depending on taste.) Â The formula used is:
weight in pounds / ( height in inches ^ 2) X 703 = BMI
Except we don't want to find BMI, we want to work backwards from it. Â So let's just adjust this equation a little bit for what we actually want:
(BMI / 703) * height ^ 2 = weight
So. Â Let's figure this out with an average muscular Roegadyn woman with a BMI of 23 (fairly bulky) and a height of 7' (tall side of average). Â 7' is, of course, 84". Â We plug all that in and...
(23/703) * 84^2 = 231
So she'd be around 231 ponz, which certainly sounds reasonable for a tall and muscular woman. Â It's not perfect, but it's a worthy kludge without more hard data.
Edit: I managed to misspell "writhing," so good work getting math right when you're a writer. Â Derp me.
Thank you so much! I am pretty terrible at math so that just blew my mind. I will attempt to learn things better (but that end number is very nearly what I was looking for). Thank you again!
![[Image: ohkg_zpsca8eb911.png]](http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/lunar_kitsune/ohkg_zpsca8eb911.png)
 (Click images for link the Grindstone Page.)
