Post/Author/DateTime	Post
wordserpent 06-03-05, 03:26 PM	Have any of you noticed that certain monsters that are large-sized but have Human hands are using large-sized weapons? The centaur is a cross between a man and a horse. The man's torso, head and arms atop the body of a horse. this in essence makes it Large in size but it's hands are human sized aren't they? Why does this creature use weapons sized for larger creatures? The Marilith Demon is another example. The picture in the Monster Manual has her standing right alongside a Balor. now the balor is using a Large Sized vorpal longsword while the marilith is using weapons in each hand but they appear much smaller than the large sized ont that the balor uses. In earlier editions of D&D the Marilirth (also known as the Type V Demon) used regular sized swords. This would seem to make more sense since it is the giant snake portion of her body (and possibly her elongated torso that allows for all of those arms) that makes her a Large sized creature. Of course I could be totally off-base with marilith and the drawing could be scaled incorrectly, but she is standing right next to balor and the picturs overlap.
Ogre4Hire 06-03-05, 07:52 PM	It's a thing called consistancy. Big monsters use big weapons. It gets rather confusing if you have a half dozen different Large monsters and only 3 of them are actually able to use weapons that are sized for large creatures. With the Centaur and the Maralith both: While their upper torsos look human, if you were to take the skeletons of a Centaur, a Maralith, and a Human and put them side by side, you'd immediately notice that the skelatal structures of the Centaur and Maralith are decidedly larger and more heavily built than that of the human. The picture of the Maralith in the MM is simply bad artwork.
rymezies 06-03-05, 08:24 PM	and also, a centar isn't large "tall" there large "long"
wordserpent 06-05-05, 01:58 PM	Personally I like the current MM's artwork. But that is a simple matter of opinion. The 1st edition Marilith (Demon type V) was only a Black and white drawing but was much prettier. As for the large weapons, I can see what you are saying in the case of Marilith but in the case of the centaur I can't. I have never been one to blindly follow the rulebooks either. But lately, in my old age, I have been less and less inclined to houserule stuff only to keep everyone on the same page. Thank you both for your responses.
Azzedar 06-05-05, 02:17 PM	There's also a matter of leverage. You don't necessarily need large hands to use a large weapon. You need enough mass in the lower part of your body to offset the momentum of swinging a huge chunk of steel above your head so you don't tip over. Centuars are well qualified for that. Also, I think if you notice how *large* the front of a horse is, centuar's torsos should be slightly larger than the average human size.
Rulebook 06-05-05, 03:16 PM	yeah centaurs arent human sized in the torso and up. they're noticibly larger. your average centuar, if fully human, would still probably be over 8 feet tall.
Mellowship Slinky 06-05-05, 04:18 PM	The size modifiers are all a bunch of hooey anyway. the difference between medium and large is less than a foot, yet a seven foot tall humanoid is medium and an eight foot tall humanoid is large with 10' reach and space. Also, by the rules, a half-giant using a monkey-gripped huge greatsword (which should be around 10' long) only has a 5' reach. Still, a marilith should have the reach of a "long" large creature, so should a centaur.
Sildatorak 06-05-05, 05:22 PM	Though the half-giant has been mentioned in passing, I would like to draw attention to a specific racial feature. Powerful build. Basically it is big enough that it can handle large weapons without penalty and counts as large for combat maneuvers like grapple. I think that the torso portion of a marilith or a centaur easily could fall in the same boat. I do think they should be "long" rather than "tall," though, which would deny them their reach.
Lord Schpungus 06-05-05, 06:48 PM	Look. For any game system to work at all, there has to be a level of abstraction going on. All you have to decide is whether the abstraction goes too far for you. For me, it doesn't.
Slagger the Chuul 06-06-05, 04:56 AM	Agreed; there has to be a line drawn somewhere if you're going to have those modifiers for different sizes (without getting bogged down in elaborate mechanics expressing a creature's height, weight, hand size and so forth). The size of the weapon gets especially dubious with reach, where a creature with either the powerful build ability, or the Monkey Grip feat carries a weapon that would give a bigger creature an extra 10 feet of reach, but only grants them an extra 5 feet of reach (I'll assume the weapon is a spiked chain to avoid excessive talk about the area that's inside their reach). It's a similar situation with disarm and sunder, where the modifier for size (not the light/one-handed/two-handed size) is based on the creature not the weapon. Possibly there should be some overlap here, where the creature can gain the size bonus by either being larger or having a larger weapon (but not both, obviously). I can sustain disbelief with the argument that they can't wield the weapon quite as effectively as a larger creature, but it's a bit threadbare.
Ogre4Hire 06-06-05, 09:41 PM	I think that the torso portion of a marilith or a centaur easily could fall in the same boat. I do think they should be "long" rather than "tall," though, which would deny them their reach. With the Centaur, I agree that they're "long not tall", but it's a slightly different story with the Maralith. All though her arms aren't as long as those of an Ogre or a Minotaur, her serpentine lower body's extra flexability gives her quite a bit of reach (like a coiled snake). Edit: My previous comment on bad artwork was refering to lousy size consistancy, though I do think that they did a bad job on the Marilith's face and head, as well.