Post/Author/DateTime	Post
baby_kamikaize_kobold 06-01-07, 04:02 PM	I was wondering if someone could tell me whether or not size itself is worth a level adjustment? I heard someone mention that the sizes where auto balancing but I'm not sure.
Crimson_Concerto 06-01-07, 04:06 PM	Size isn't automatically worth a level adjustment, but the stat adjustment and extended reach that usually come with larger size are worth an LA.
Derren S. 06-01-07, 04:11 PM	Size > medium or < small is worth an automatic LA as those sizes give very strong bonuses (Strength + Reach or Hide and AC).
baby_kamikaize_kobold 06-01-07, 04:23 PM	so what your saying is that it is only a level adjustment if the race has a high strength bonus? example: large ogre with +8 str
Argo 06-01-07, 05:00 PM	Or, conversely: a high Dex bonus due to small size. Example: (insert any smaller than small creature with a jacked Dex here).
Thomar_of_Uointer 06-01-07, 08:29 PM	I was wondering if someone could tell me whether or not size itself is worth a level adjustment? I heard someone mention that the sizes where auto balancing but I'm not sure. It depends on a lot of things, which themselves can depend on any number of other things. Creatures smaller than Small have many bonuses to skills, AC, and attack rolls. They make excellent casters due to these defensive abilities. This is important when determining the LA of a Tiny or smaller race (don't use the fighter class as the baseline even if it's the favored class, use a primary spellcaster) On the other hand, creatures larger than Large have many bonuses to damage, grapple checks, and the benefit of reach. They make excellent melee fighters due to these offensive abilities. This is also important. However, there's no such thing as an "automatic LA". There are abilities that make it very difficult for a race to be LA +0, but it's not like LA is formulaic or anything (and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying or ignorant). Also, ability scores based on size are only suggested. When you make a race, you can make its ability modifiers whatever you want them to be.
RobbyPants 06-01-07, 08:33 PM	Creatures smaller than Small have many bonuses to skills, AC, and attack rolls. They make excellent casters due to these defensive abilities. This is important when determining the LA of a Tiny or smaller race (don't use the fighter class as the baseline even if it's the favored class, use a primary spellcaster) Very true. Don't forget rogues too. Most small races get a good Dex bonus, and even though your shortsword or dagger damage might by abysmal, your sneak attack still uses d6.
Yadot 06-01-07, 08:43 PM	So what about say, a large race without reach. Would that auto-balance?
Thomar_of_Uointer 06-01-07, 08:55 PM	So what about say, a large race without reach. Would that auto-balance? Large (Long) is the official way to do this. It's a bit min-maxxed (but so is the Power Attack feat). No, it does not "auto-balance", it just requires you to weight other racial abilities (notably natural attacks and Strength bonuses) a little differently.
baby_kamikaize_kobold 06-02-07, 12:53 AM	Thank you this really helps. But, what about an ability like Powerful Build would that automatically be a level adustment or would it be weighed with other racial abilities like size?
Perun 06-02-07, 01:43 AM	Thank you this really helps. But, what about an ability like Powerful Build would that automatically be a level adustment or would it be weighed with other racial abilities like size? Powerful build gives you a bigger damage base (since you can use weapons one size category larger), a bonus on grapple, bull-rush, and trip checks (since you're treated as Large), and a bonus to any other opposed roll where being larger is an advantage. In a way, it's like a Str boost, except it's not :P I wouldn't say it was worth a LA by itself, but when making a race with the powerful build quality, you're likely to give it Str and Con bonuses (to represent it being larger and stronger), which might "unbalance" it enought to warrant a LA. Take a look at half giants (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicRaces.htm#halfGiants) and goliaths (from Races of Stone). They have unbalanced ability scores (the -2 Dex penalty of half-giants balances either the +2 Str or +2 Con, making the net result a +2 bonus). Large size is worth a LA, IMO. Although you get a -1 penalty on attack rolls and AC, you also get a 10-ft. reach (which increases to 20 ft. with a reach weapon), a larger damage die, and increased carrying capacity, accompanied, likely, by a signifficant Str bonus. Regards.
MikeN 06-02-07, 02:41 AM	It depends on how much you and your DM know about the game, how appropriate it is to the campaign, and what stuff you have available to use. If you both know a lot and have unlimited sources, it's not worth an incredible lot because it's so easy to duplicate. The only thing you can or can't do is access certain feats or PrC's that are size- and/or race-dependent. If you both don't know very much, it might be worth a bit because your DM won't know how to build an acceptable challenge for your character and you will probably either roll over stuff or else die really fast...kind of like how high-level play tends to work out anyway :P If you know more than the DM it really doesn't matter because you're either going to abuse your superior knowledge in a lot of other ways anyway or you will just design something that you think is cool and go with it (the way I like to do things generally). If he knows more than you it also doesn't matter because he'll know how to challenge the party and the only "issue" would be your being better at a certain role than other party members...except for the fact that a well-balanced party usually has defined roles for its members and so you're not usually stepping on their toes anyway...
penchant 06-02-07, 02:47 AM	Most of the examples we have are creatures that have Str bonuses AND are larger or have Dex bonues AND are smaller. While the stat bonues always require a LA unless countered by equivalent penalties, they are not part of the size increase. They make sense when coupled with differently sized creatures but are not direct aspects of the size change. If all you did was increase a human to large size (10ft reach, -1 AC, -1 to hit, increased carrying capacity, etc.) but no change in strength dex or anything OTHER than that specifically mentioned in the size entry, then it would not require a level adjustment. This is less powerful than casting enlarge person on someone, since that at least has a +2 Str adjustment added to it. Its all the other goodies that people add on to a bigger or smaller racial build that gives the level adjustment. Sure you want a large creature, but you also want the +8 to strength to go with it. You like the tiny sniper in the bushes but it just doesn't work without the +6 to dex and racial abilites that stack on the +8 to hide. Size alone is not worth a level adjustment.
BW0222 06-02-07, 12:09 PM	baby_kamikaize_kobold, I was wondering if someone could tell me whether or not size itself is worth a level adjustment? I heard someone mention that the sizes where auto balancing but I'm not sure. Size alone is not worth a level adjustment. Large humaniods might gain reach and a few combat bonuses (slightly more damage from larger weapons, grappling, disarm, etc.) but that is typically countered by needing a 10'x10' area and general problems with movement, travel, equipment, etc. Squeezing to fit in a 5' hallway, and having to make escape artist checks to fit through a 3' doorway is makes adventuring difficult. Ropes, small boats, inns, inability to ride most mounts, inability to hide, disquise, go unnoticed, adventure in many dungeons, etc. are serious drawbacks. You also tend to become a target. Beyond large, you are unplayable in most settings. Anything smaller than small typically has issues with equipment, carrying capacity, needing to enter a square to attack, and extremely reduced weapon damage, etc. So, IMO, size has its own serious drawbacks. Alone it isn't worth LA. However, races of different sizes other than small and medium almost always have stat adjustments to strength and/or dexterity, so it is hard to find examples where size is the only difference.
Thomar_of_Uointer 06-02-07, 03:59 PM	Thank you this really helps. But, what about an ability like Powerful Build would that automatically be a level adustment or would it be weighed with other racial abilities like size? I've already said what I'm going to say about "automatic level adjustment". Powerful build on a Medium creature (it's different for smaller creatures) is like Large (long) size without any of the penalties (-1 to attack and AC), so it's more powerful (though not as powerful as Large (Tall), which grants 10' reach).
baby_kamikaize_kobold 06-02-07, 04:37 PM	Thank you all for your help I really appreciate it.
Rohano 06-03-07, 11:40 AM	Sizes are autobalancing. The more extreme the size (either smaller or bigger), the greater the benefits, indeed. But the vulnerabilities become more powerful than you can ever imagine, to misuse a dead jedi's words. If you're 100 stories tall, it's extremely easy to hit you with just about any attack. If you're as tall as 100 stacked atoms, your grapple sucks. An equal-CR colossal creature could probably destroy you with a couple rounds of grinding you into the ground. But don't take that as big creatures being stronger; if the microscopic creature can stay out of the big creature's reach, picking it off with various attacks should be easy.
Nifft 06-04-07, 09:37 AM	Large size is worth a bonus in and of itself: + Grapple & trip checks + Swallow Whole / Snatch / etc. + Reach + Larger weapon damage If your character focuses on reach + trip, you will have a significant advantage. If the Large size comes with a Strength bonus, this compounds the advantage. :) - - - Of course, small size is worth a bonus for completely different reasons, so long as you can compensate for grapple, reach and reduced weapon damage -- by being a spellcaster, for example. Starting around 10th level, small size is almost pure bonus for spellcasters -- before that, it's a mixed blessing. Cheers, -- N
YabaTheWhat 06-04-07, 02:20 PM	Getting too far from normal (medium) size is always a bonus. Certain changes are self-balancing. Going down to tiny size (including the lost reach) or up to large size (excluding bonus reach) are self-balancing changes, each with advantages and disadvantages, regardless of ability scores adjustments. Beyond that, the bonuses mount exponentially, whereas the penalties diminish or cease to matter. Getting larger without reach would probably continue to break even (better damage countered by lower attack/AC), but the (required) boost in reach is such a tremendous benefit that it usually dominates the size change. Conversely, getting smaller results in huge boosts to attack and armor class, and the penalties cease to matter, as anyone playing a creature that small will ride a flying mount (if it can't fly on its own), and will either cast spells or snipe from a distance.
penchant 06-04-07, 11:46 PM	Large size is worth a bonus in and of itself: + Grapple & trip checks + Swallow Whole / Snatch / etc. + Reach + Larger weapon damage If your character focuses on reach + trip, you will have a significant advantage. If the Large size comes with a Strength bonus, this compounds the advantage. :) - - - Of course, small size is worth a bonus for completely different reasons, so long as you can compensate for grapple, reach and reduced weapon damage -- by being a spellcaster, for example. Starting around 10th level, small size is almost pure bonus for spellcasters -- before that, it's a mixed blessing. Cheers, -- N A large creature can benefit IF... A small size after 10th level... If you compensate for... A larger creature hits less often and is hit more often due to attack and AC penalties. His ability to hide is geometrically reduced. The bigger a creature is, the more limited he is as far as his role. A huge human (with no other adjustments) almost certainly has to be a melee specialist. He cannot be a rogue since he can't hide or do dungeons or hit most medium creatures. He can't be a spell caster because he will be swarmed with a dozen adjacent attackers who can all hit his AC. He might be a cleric but he really better have good hit points. So while a huge human barbarian might do better than a medium barbarian in the short game, he will not have the battle longevity that a medium barbarian does. By the same token a tiny character seems relegated to the sniper or spell caster role. The great bonues to hide and AC are offset by the limited movement, the lack of any reach and therefore a moratorium on touch spells. Certain min/max builds can make better use of a +0 LA race, but just because one particular use of that race is more powerful does not mean its worth a Level Adjustment. That is also true of size modifiers. Human Barbarian Str 18, Dex 12,Con 18, level 5, size medium. Average Hit points (46.5), AC 14 (hide armor) Attack +9 Medium Club 1d6 + 4 damage. Grapple +9 Human Barbarian Str 18, Dex 12, Con 18, Level 5, size HUGE. Average Hit points (46.5), AC 12 (hide armor) Attack +7 Huge Club 2d6 +4 damage. Grapple +17 As you can see the differences are not much between the two when only size changes. The huge human will have a great grapple check and have a large threatened area with which to make attacks and AoO. However, he won't hit as often and will be himself hit more often. His damage only goes up two steps with no other bonuses. He will never be able to sneak or hide, and he is limited to open air environments. The huge human, even min/maxed will die quicker than the medium barbarian. This is the best possible scenario for a huge character. I don't think I have to stat out a huge mage to show the contrast. The tiny example is very much the same. To put it shortly, I had a tiny spell caster (it happened to be a monkey) and he did well, until I was grabbed. Without other protections, a tiny spell caster dies from a grapple. The best possible scenario for a tiny creature is not the sniper mage but the sniper rogue. Mages cannot go and hide (not a class skill and the +8 just doesn't go far enough). The sniper rogue has an all or nothing problem. When he screws up and botches his hide, he gets caught and grabbed. He won't make a grapple check and will be crushed to death by a medium character. You've seen it in movies countless times.
Perun 06-05-07, 01:50 AM	<snip> Human Barbarian Str 18, Dex 12,Con 18, level 5, size medium. Average Hit points (46.5), AC 14 (hide armor) Attack +9 Medium Club 1d6 + 4 damage. Grapple +9 Human Barbarian Str 18, Dex 12, Con 18, Level 5, size HUGE. Average Hit points (46.5), AC 12 (hide armor) Attack +7 Huge Club 2d6 +4 damage. Grapple +17 As you can see the differences are not much between the two when only size changes. The huge human will have a great grapple check and have a large threatened area with which to make attacks and AoO. However, he won't hit as often and will be himself hit more often. His damage only goes up two steps with no other bonuses. He will never be able to sneak or hide, and he is limited to open air environments. The huge human, even min/maxed will die quicker than the medium barbarian. I won't argue the class suggestions for non-Medium characters, since those make sense (and are, in a limited form, present in the game right now -- how many halfling and gnome barbarians are there in the game?). However, to discuss Huge humans and not take ability adjustments in effect is pointless. Simply enlarging a human from Medium to Huge would give him +16 Str, -4 Dex, +8 Con, +5 natural armour, -2 size penalty to attacks and -2 size penalty to AC (MM, p. 291). Human Barbarian 5: Medium humanoid; hp 58; BAB +5; Grp +9; Attack club +9 melee (1d6+4); Face/Reach 5 ft./5 ft.; Str 18, Dex 12, Con 18 Note: You got the hp wrong. Average for a 5th level barbarian with 18 Con is 58: 12 (max. hp at st level) + 4 x 6,5 (avg. on d12, or 26 in this case) + 20 (5 x Con modifier). Even if you don't give him/her the max. hp at 1st-level, average is still 52.5 hp. Huge Human Barbarian 5: Huge humanoid; hp 78; BAB +5; Grp +25; Attack Huge club +15 melee (2d6+12); Face/Reach 15 ft./15 ft.; Str 34, Dex 8, Con 26 Of course, this is the take-an-existing-monster-and-just-change-its-size scenario. There could easily be a larger-than-Medium race with smaller Str bonuses, but it should have a Str and Con bonuses, to reflect its larger size. Even mercanes, the relatively inofensive Large Outsiders (ELH and MoP) have +4 Str and +6 Con. It's also important to note that the further one moves from Small and Medium and "balanced"-for-PC-use races, the fewer (optimal) choices one has in character creation. Note how, probaly to increase playability of traditional D&D races like halflings and gnomes, Small characters don't follow the "default" sizing progression. For example, their carrying capacity is 3/4 (75%) of that of Medium creatures (when it should be 50%), they get only a -2 Str penalty (should be -4), and so on. The tiny example is very much the same. To put it shortly, I had a tiny spell caster (it happened to be a monkey) and he did well, until I was grabbed. Without other protections, a tiny spell caster dies from a grapple. Without other protections most Medium wizards and sorcerers can easily die in grapple. Strength is not an important stat for wizards and sorcerers, and a 5th level Medium wizard with Str 10 has a +2 grapple check. Smaller characters will just have an even harder time in a tough situation. Of course, they're compensating somewhat with their (very likely) Dex bonus and size modifier to AC. The best possible scenario for a tiny creature is not the sniper mage but the sniper rogue. Mages cannot go and hide (not a class skill and the +8 just doesn't go far enough). Mages generally don't go and hide. A mage stays out of melee combat, barring unusual circumstances. If a mage, of just about any size, gets close enough that an opponent can attempt a grapple, he's likely dead. (That's talking mages before 7th-level and dimension door. Having played a grappler, and having attempted to grapple several mages, I sort of know what I'm talking about.) The sniper rogue has an all or nothing problem. When he screws up and botches his hide, he gets caught and grabbed. He won't make a grapple check and will be crushed to death by a medium character. You've seen it in movies countless times. That's a problem with smaller than Medium characters in general.
penchant 06-05-07, 04:11 AM	Ok, the posts are getting geometrically longer, so I'll keep it short (though its fun to ramble). On page 314 it gives the summary of size attributes. While I've read the reference you provided, this refers to increasing creature size (with a resultant increase of CR). While it is very similar, I don't see it as exactly being the same as referring solely to the benefits of size alone. As you point out, these ability modifiers aren't universally applied but general guidelines, whereas a size is a universal statistic that everyone gets who is in the category. I suppose its the difference between form and function, and which follows what. The truth is you won't see a huge creature that doesn't have a severely increased strength, so the point is more esoteric than practical. I will stand by my point that I originally made though: Its all the other goodies that people add on to a bigger or smaller racial build that gives the level adjustment. Sure you want a large creature, but you also want the +8 to strength to go with it. You like the tiny sniper in the bushes but it just doesn't work without the +6 to dex and racial abilites that stack on the +8 to hide.
YabaTheWhat 06-05-07, 08:12 AM	Here are some vital points that need to be made: >> A huge greataxe deals 4d6 points of damage, vs a medium greataxe's 2d6. Given the huge character's reach, going for whirlwind attack is almost irresistable. Of course, trample and similar large+ only abilities have similar potential. Sure they have -2 AC and -2 to hit, but they get far more opportunities to attack, are harder to obstruct, and they hit a lot harder (with or without a strength bonus). >> Larger creatures get a speed boost. Don't disregard this, as it's considered a pretty important class feature. >> If the DM allows huge playable races, the party isn't going to spend much time (if any) in cramped dungeons. >> Tiny and smaller creatures can avoid the penalties to movement by riding mounts. They can even ride birds, giving them flight for free. Spellcasters can ride their own familiars or animal companions, while skill monkey classes can afford to sink points into the 'ride' and 'handle animal' skills. >> This is important! A race's level adjustment is determined based on the worst-case scenario. That means you take a member of a race, and give them levels in the class that benefits most from the race's bonuses and suffers least from their penalties. Saying a race is bad because it doesn't do well in one particular role is like saying education is useless because dock workers don't need algebra. The same principle applies to size changes. Larger creatures make better melee fighters, while smaller creatures make better back-line artillery. Thus size changes in both directions are beneficial.
BW0222 06-05-07, 10:54 AM	Nifft, Large size is worth a bonus in and of itself: + Grapple & trip checks + Swallow Whole / Snatch / etc. + Reach + Larger weapon damage +4 to grapple and trip checks. yes. Reach, on a humaniod. yes. Larger weapon damage. yes. Yes can add greater carrying capacity as a minor benefit also. Swallow whole, snatch, etc. have nothing to do with size. Merely being larger doesn't mean gain any of these. Lots of large creatures don't have these abilities. However, you have to balance the pluses out against the negatives. The -1 to AC and attack roles, -4 to hide checks, inability to disquise yourself, etc. likely negate out the +4 to grapple and trip checks. The need to squeeze in most 5' passages (half movement, inability to allow folks through your square, AC and dex penalties, etc.) easily negate the reach. Lots of combat take place in buildings, dungeons, caves, etc. If you then consider than you need escape artist checks to fit through a normal doorway, there are a lot of dungeons or buildings you simply can't enter. The equipment damage is nice, but countered by the fact that you often can't use normal equipment -- from a bed, row boat, normal ropes, most found armors and weapons, arrows, horses, etc. If your character focuses on reach + trip, you will have a significant advantage. If the Large size comes with a Strength bonus, this compounds the advantage. Until you come in a dungeon with a 5' hallway... your AC is so low, your movement so slow, and you can't get by folks... that they pepper you to death in the hallway. or... The PCs enter a building through a 3' wide doorway and you are standing outside because you can't get in. or... The bad guys are on a ledge firing down and wooden ladder can't hold your weight. or... There is a narrow rope bridge which you can't get across. etc., etc. Honestly, in a good percentage of 3.5 combats merely being large means that you can't even get to the fight. In some cases, it may mean you can't even go on the adventure. Say folks want to take a row boat down river? Say that you need horses/mounts to get to the city within two days to stop the assassination attempt, etc. I don't know how many times my druid's tiger has had to park itself outside a building, sewer entrance, or narrow cave complex. Even in normal dungeons with 5' wide hallways, it can be a major hassle as it 'gums' up hallways and it's AC is so low. Just getting the cat to the dungeon can use a ton of (not so low level spells) such as reduce animal, air walk, tree stride, etc. because the animal is too big to take in a boat, through a narrow passage, hauled up a cliff face, etc. Now, it doesn't bother me that the tiger might go a half session parked outside. Same with paladin mounts, folks with mounted combat, etc. Fine... the PC can still play the game, he is just a little less effective. However, if the PCs was large, they virtually have to sit out on entire sections of the module, often including key encounters and combats. That is a major downside for any PC.
runestar 06-05-07, 11:05 AM	IMO, being large alone is not enough to warrant a LA boost, but I probably would not give it to a LA+0 race either (at least not without suitable drawbacks). It is one of those 0.5 LA abilities which has to be paired with other abilities (such as appropriate stat modifiers) to fully justify the LA assigned to it.:)
Nifft 06-05-07, 04:18 PM	Yes can add greater carrying capacity as a minor benefit also. Surprisingly, this is a penalty -- and for Small races, it's a relative advantage. Equipment weight doesn't scale at the same rate. Swallow whole, snatch, etc. have nothing to do with size. Merely being larger doesn't mean gain any of these. Lots of large creatures don't have these abilities. Right, but being Large means you're immune to many of them. The -1 to AC and attack roles, -4 to hide checks, inability to disquise yourself, etc. likely negate out the +4 to grapple and trip checks. "Hi, I'm a human fighter in Fullplate. What's my Hide check?" -- seriously, another -4 isn't going to make a difference for this guy. Same thing for Paladins and most Clerics (Trickery domain adherents excepted). Until you come in a dungeon with a 5' hallway... your AC is so low, your movement so slow, and you can't get by folks... that they pepper you to death in the hallway. or... The PCs enter a building through a 3' wide doorway and you are standing outside because you can't get in. or... The bad guys are on a ledge firing down and wooden ladder can't hold your weight. or... There is a narrow rope bridge which you can't get across. Does your DM do this stuff to Medium PCs when they're fighting goblins or kobolds? Because it's the exact same thing. If kobolds in your world don't design tunnels too short for Medium PCs to stand in, there's no reason why other races would make tunnels too narrow for Large PCs. If they do, my hat's off to your verisimilitude. I just hope the DM is keeping you entertained in spite of it. :) However, the 10 ft. wide hallway is a dungeon staple. It may even be a sacred cow. All the maps I see WotC selling have (at least) 10 ft. wide gaps and doorways. And, of course, gelatenous cubes evolved to fit in 10 ft. wide hallways -- it's been the standard for millennia. Now, it doesn't bother me that the tiger might go a half session parked outside. Same with paladin mounts, folks with mounted combat, etc. Fine... the PC can still play the game, he is just a little less effective. However, if the PCs was large, they virtually have to sit out on entire sections of the module, often including key encounters and combats. That is a major downside for any PC. That's true. It would be a pity if a PC were excluded from an adventure. But let's assume that the players choose adventurers where the PCs will tend to not be excluded. Let's assume they won't agree to take a job on the Plane of Elemental Acid when only one PC in the group resists acid. Because players aren't stupid, right? Assuming that the DM allows the PC to actually participate, I argue that Large is worth something. Cheers, -- N
Onikani 06-05-07, 04:53 PM	Getting too far from normal (medium) size is always a bonus. Certain changes are self-balancing. Going down to tiny size (including the lost reach) or up to large size (excluding bonus reach) are self-balancing changes, each with advantages and disadvantages, regardless of ability scores adjustments. Beyond that, the bonuses mount exponentially, whereas the penalties diminish or cease to matter. Getting larger without reach would probably continue to break even (better damage countered by lower attack/AC), but the (required) boost in reach is such a tremendous benefit that it usually dominates the size change. Conversely, getting smaller results in huge boosts to attack and armor class, and the penalties cease to matter, as anyone playing a creature that small will ride a flying mount (if it can't fly on its own), and will either cast spells or snipe from a distance. Emphasis mine. Here are some vital points that need to be made: >> A huge greataxe deals 4d6 points of damage, vs a medium greataxe's 2d6. Given the huge character's reach, going for whirlwind attack is almost irresistable. Of course, trample and similar large+ only abilities have similar potential. Sure they have -2 AC and -2 to hit, but they get far more opportunities to attack, are harder to obstruct, and they hit a lot harder (with or without a strength bonus). >> Larger creatures get a speed boost. Don't disregard this, as it's considered a pretty important class feature. >> If the DM allows huge playable races, the party isn't going to spend much time (if any) in cramped dungeons. >> Tiny and smaller creatures can avoid the penalties to movement by riding mounts. They can even ride birds, giving them flight for free. Spellcasters can ride their own familiars or animal companions, while skill monkey classes can afford to sink points into the 'ride' and 'handle animal' skills. >> This is important! A race's level adjustment is determined based on the worst-case scenario. That means you take a member of a race, and give them levels in the class that benefits most from the race's bonuses and suffers least from their penalties. Saying a race is bad because it doesn't do well in one particular role is like saying education is useless because dock workers don't need algebra. The same principle applies to size changes. Larger creatures make better melee fighters, while smaller creatures make better back-line artillery. Thus size changes in both directions are beneficial. QFT. I admit it, i'm a fan of Yaba's Feature points, but the two times he has posted on this thread everyone seems to disregard what he's saying. Listen to that man, he know's what he's talking about.
BW0222 06-05-07, 06:52 PM	Nifft, Surprisingly, this is a penalty -- and for Small races, it's a relative advantage. Equipment weight doesn't scale at the same rate. I'm not sure how this is a penalty. Large creatures have twice the carrying loads and their weapons, armor, and some equipment will weigh twice as much. However, a lot of equipment won't weigh any more since they aren't any larger -- sacks, scroll cases, oil, etc. They can thus, carry twice the amount of most equipment without issues. Most importantly, they can carry more treasure. If you kill some bad guys and need to carry their creature back, being large allows you to carry or drag twice as many sacks of coins, piles of weapons, bodies, etc. with you as a medium-sized person. Right, but being Large means you're immune to many of them. Good point. Small benefit, but definitely there. "Hi, I'm a human fighter in Fullplate. What's my Hide check?" -- seriously, another -4 isn't going to make a difference for this guy. Same thing for Paladins and most Clerics (Trickery domain adherents excepted). Except anyone can hide in a covered cart, under a stairway in an alley, behind a tree, in with a crowd, etc. provided that you have total concealment or cover. No hide check necessary. Unless.... you are too big for those things to provide you with total concealment or cover. i.e. the mere fact you are large makes it far more difficult to hide you in places where others could easily hide. Does your DM do this stuff to Medium PCs when they're fighting goblins or kobolds? Yes, if the kobolds made the passages, I would see little reason for them to spend four times the effort making a hallway larger than they need -- unless they have wolves, visiting orcs, etc. and need larger hallways. I would expect them to realize than smaller passages keep out larger opponents. And yes. Many published modules have tunnels less than 5' wide. I and my DMs do enforcing squeezing rules. Because it's the exact same thing. If kobolds in your world don't design tunnels too short for Medium PCs to stand in, there's no reason why other races would make tunnels too narrow for Large PCs. Hallways and doorways will be of whatever size the builders need. A giant stronghold should have 10' wide hallways, an orc build area 5' wide halls, and a kobold build cave should have 2-1/2' wide hallways. Unless they have some reason to make them larger. Unfortunately, for large-sized creatures, 5' wide passages are common -- because medium-sized humaniods are common. Most campaign settings are human(iod) centric. Cities, towers, inns, sewers, crypts, etc. are typically build by humaniods... for humaniods. You won't run into too many caverns designed for large sized creatures until higher levels. It is certainly fair to say that at lower levels, about 80% of dungeon, city buildings, towers, etc. settings are going to be designed for humaniods. 5' passages and 3' doorways should be expected. Other than city streets, outdoors, and the occational large hallway... being large is a serious drawback. Now... it isn't fatal. You can squeeze down a 5' hallway, most rooms are larger than 10x10', you are usually fine outdoors, you can make escape artist checks to get through doorways, you can drink potions of reduce person to get through smaller area, you can use flight/magic to avoid the need to mounts or boats, you can sleep in the stables instead of an inn room, etc. If they do, my hat's off to your verisimilitude. I just hope the DM is keeping you entertained in spite of it. Yes. They do. When deciding upon the tiger, I did consider size as an issue. I realized that outdoors or in most dungeons it would be powerful. On the flip side... there would be cases where I couldn't use him. No big surprise. Same as folks (other than small-sized folks) who decide on mounted combat. You just can't use it in a lot of places. However, the 10 ft. wide hallway is a dungeon staple. It may even be a sacred cow. All the maps I see WotC selling have (at least) 10 ft. wide gaps and doorways. And, of course, gelatenous cubes evolved to fit in 10 ft. wide hallways -- it's been the standard for millennia. Sorry, 5' hallways are standard or at least so common as to expect them in a good 80% of adventures. Search for 'map of the week' on the Wizard's site. Races of the Dragon, Darkcrypt, Saltmine, Subterranean Prison, Subterranean Palace, Tower of Mystery, etc. all have 5' passages, and narrower doors. Nearly all of my published 3.5 modules have 5' wide hallways and often narrower doorways -- especially at lower levels where you rarely encounter large creatures. But let's assume that the players choose adventurers where the PCs will tend to not be excluded. Let's assume they won't agree to take a job on the Plane of Elemental Acid when only one PC in the group resists acid. Because players aren't stupid, right? There is a difference between not going somewhere rare you know you can't survive and choosing to play a character which you know has problems functioning in commonly expected areas. If some player brings a merfolk to a game... it isn't the DMs fault that the player can't participate. There is no reason to think that the campaign would be all water. Same if you want to play a dog... you can't complain that the DM didn't put enough telepathic creatures into the game so you were excluded from talking anyone. And, yes, if you bring a large character to a campaign you can expect problems finding an inn to stay at, getting into the nobles meeting hall, and fighting in many buildings, caves, and dungeons. The D&D universe (modules, encounters, settings, etc.) is designed around humaniods. The player knows this before he starts playing. I don't expect the DM to alter the world, modules, etc. just because I decide to play something other than a humaniod. And ones ability to choose not to go to places with 5' wide hallways or 3' wide doorways is severely limited unless you are playing in some unusual setting. Assuming that the DM allows the PC to actually participate, I argue that Large is worth something. It isn't the DMs choice. It is the player's choise. Presumably, the DM is going to say something like... the setting it Greyhawk or Arcanis or FR. The buildings aren't suddenly going to double in size because the player decided to be large. Large has benefits and drawbacks. I don't expect the DM to alter standard campaign settings such that the drawbacks go away.
Perun 06-06-07, 01:38 AM	If some player brings a merfolk to a game... it isn't the DMs fault that the player can't participate. There is no reason to think that the campaign would be all water. Same if you want to play a dog... you can't complain that the DM didn't put enough telepathic creatures into the game so you were excluded from talking anyone. And, yes, if you bring a large character to a campaign you can expect problems finding an inn to stay at, getting into the nobles meeting hall, and fighting in many buildings, caves, and dungeons. I don't have the time to go point by point now, and I'm sure the others will cover it, I'll just do the bit above. It is the DM's fault if a player can't participate, provided the DM approved of a player's choice of PC, and barring any silly players. There are, generally, two choices when the group starts a new campaign, either the DM has a ready-made adventure (regardless of whether it's a published adventure, or something he wrote up himself), or the DM is prepared to base the future campaign on his player's wishes. In the former case, I expect the DM to come up front and say what general type of adventure it's going to be (dungeon crawl, diplomacy and intrigue, primarily outdoor, etc.) so the characters can make characters suited for that type of game. In the latter case, the players will create a (somewhat coherent) group of characters, and if they choose to make a party of underwater races, the DM should not base his adventures around Dryland Kingdom, a 1,000 miles away from the nearest large body of water. If I make a Large character in my DMs campaign, I do expect a few problematic situations, especially in settlements and certain dungeon crawls, but that should not be the hallmark of the entire campaign (again, provided the DM approved of my character choice -- and if he didn't, I shouldn't be playing the character). The D&D universe (modules, encounters, settings, etc.) is designed around humaniods. The player knows this before he starts playing. I don't expect the DM to alter the world, modules, etc. just because I decide to play something other than a humaniod. I agree, as long as the DM is using published adventures. If he says: "Hey guys, we're starting the Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde tonight. Roll up your characters; here are the guidelines on what's available!", it's OK, and perfectly understandable (I run this kind of campaign in Eberron, since I don't have the time to write adventures of my own at the moment). But if he says something along the lines of: DM: "Guys, roll up your new characters, we're starting a new campaign." Player: "Cool. Can I play this new race, Large Human? It's from this new book, "Complete Large Human"." DM: Let me see. <Reads racial write-up> Okay. Seems like a nice race. It's Large, though, you know you can expect some problems with that? Player: Yeah, I know, cramped quarters and all... but it seems cool, and I'd like to try it. DM: OK. Then it's the DM's job not to screw-up the player. Regards.
BW0222 06-06-07, 05:46 AM	Perun, It is the DM's fault if a player can't participate, provided the DM approved of a player's choice of PC, and barring any silly players. Fair enough. A good DM should say... "Gee... one PC can't survive on land this isn't a water campaign. Sorry, Joe, I'm not allowing this." ( Although, I'd also slap Joe in the head since anyone should be able to see that that character isn't playable! ) However, the large-sized character isn't so clear cut. It isn't completely unplayable. There are some 5-10% of the encounters in which that player won't be able to participate in any meaningful way and another 10% or so in which he might be hampered. (Although presumably he could purchase magical items, max ranks escape artist, take spells, etc. to get around some of these.) I personally wouldn't play one. I've seen what it does to animal companions and mounts. But some folks might not be so bothered by missing out on a few encounters each month and don't really care much about the negotiating/city type encounters. So how is the DM supposed to tell the difference between me (who won't be happy) and another player who is perfectly fine with it? And, what is he supposed to do even if she can tell the difference between us -- ban one and not the other? At this point, the DM has no choice to be shift the responsibility to the player. Assume that the player honestly can accept those limitations and accept his judgement over yours. Another reason for core-only races.
Perun 06-06-07, 08:13 AM	So how is the DM supposed to tell the difference between me (who won't be happy) and another player who is perfectly fine with it? And, what is he supposed to do even if she can tell the difference between us -- ban one and not the other? This is no different than the situation where a player makes a character he thinks he'll have fun playing, but doesn't (for whatever reason). I've found out that often the simplest and most elegant solution is to simply let the player retire the character and make a new one, even if it "hurts" the campaign continuity. For example, once I came up with a paladin concept I really liked. I made a character, wrote a lengthy background, and played the said paladin for a few sessions, but in the end decided paladins weren't for me, I wasn't enjoying playing the said character, and I retired him. Another reason for core-only races. Meh, I really like my aasimars and tieflings :) However, I'm with you when it comes to elven subraces. Regards.
YabaTheWhat 06-06-07, 08:14 AM	I don't expect the DM to alter standard campaign settings such that the drawbacks go away.You do realize that every campaign setting has predefined races. If the race isn't in the campaign setting, the player can't play it. If the DM decides to modify the campaign setting to allow the player to play a larger race, then he/she has decided to use a custom setting that's based on a published setting. The same goes for prefabricated adventures, more or less. Most are designed with medium PC races in mind, and if the DM allows larger PCs, then he should avoid using modules that exclude those PCs. Now, a module that makes a larger PC's life a bit difficult isn't a bad thing. Many dungeons have predominantly 10ft corridors, with a few 5ft passages that would require a large-sized PC to squeeze, and that's perfectly fine. However, if the entire dungeon has 5ft corridors, the DM shouldn't use it because he knows it will exclude the large PC from the adventure. On a related note, most creatures make hallways wide enough so that at least two members of the race can walk abreast. This doesn't mean the corridor needs to be 10ft across, because humans aren't actually 5ft wide (even in full plate). They do, however, need a full 5ft space during combat, because they need swinging room for a weapon (or for the somatic component of a spell) and to evade incoming attacks. Most halls are only made in multiples of 5 ft for simplicity; a corridor could easily be 6-7 ft wide, but that would just be confusing on a dungeon map.
BW0222 06-06-07, 01:27 PM	Perun, This is no different than the situation where a player makes a character he thinks he'll have fun playing, but doesn't (for whatever reason). ... Understood. However, the previous poster suggested that it is the DMs responsibility (and therefore not the players) if the DM allows it. I'm saying that it is ultimately up to the player. I can't expect the DM to read the players mind to see if they truely can handle it or (even if he could) rule that one player could play the race and another can't. As a DM, I'll take the responsibility for merfolk in a standard campaign. Sorry... I'm not allowing it. Maybe 0.1% of players would be happy roleplaying swimming around while the other PCs assault the goblin stronghold ten miles away, but I'm not risking it. As a DM, I won't take responsibility for allowing you to play a paladin. Even if I knew from experience, that paladins weren't for you, I'm not going to say "You can't play a paladin, but Mary can." The same goes for large characters. Solely the players responsibility for ensuring that they are able to handle it, even if the DM does allow it. (Not that I'd allow it but that's me.) I've found out that often the simplest and most elegant solution is to simply let the player retire the character and make a new one, even if it "hurts" the campaign continuity. Sure. Hopefully, they realize it sooner. YabaTheWhat, You do realize that every campaign setting has predefined races. If the race isn't in the campaign setting, the player can't play it. If the DM decides to modify the campaign setting to allow the player to play a larger race, then he/she has decided to use a custom setting that's based on a published setting. Unless you are playing RPGA or organized play adventures, every campaign setting is custom even if based on a published setting. There are no rules in the Greyhawk Gazateer, Codex Arcanis, etc. on what races are playable or on character generation. The DM must always determine the character creation rules -- point-buy, which races are allowed, which books, which feats, etc. The same goes for prefabricated adventures, more or less. Most are designed with medium PC races in mind, and if the DM allows larger PCs, then he should avoid using modules that exclude those PCs. There are few even published adventures which totally preclude large creatures -- especially if the PC takes precautions (wands of reduce person, potions gaseous form, etc.) Maybe 5% of encounters might actually exclude the PC and even then it can be overcome with effort. But again, why is it the DMs responsibilty to ensure that you are capable of having fun under that restriction? At what point is it the player's responsibility for judging their own likes, style, etc.? On a related note, most creatures make hallways wide enough so that at least two members of the race can walk abreast. And 5' is more than enough for this purpose amongst humaniods. You can pass through someone's square and you can squeeze four people into a 5' square if you need to. Moving at half speed over a 5' section is hardly an issue. Most hallways aren't designed for running or folks fighting while passing each other. When you start talking about mines, crypts, sewers, inns, shops, etc. I don't know why you expect to make hallways with combat in mind? Real world hallways in houses and apartments are spec'd at 3'. You can still get two people by. Public areas in hotels, retail, and residential buildings typically requires larger 4' hallways. I don't see too many 10' wide hallway requirements except in industrial, retail malls, or public stadiums.
YabaTheWhat 06-06-07, 05:13 PM	Unless you are playing RPGA or organized play adventures, every campaign setting is custom even if based on a published setting. There are no rules in the Greyhawk Gazateer, Codex Arcanis, etc. on what races are playable or on character generation. The DM must always determine the character creation rules -- point-buy, which races are allowed, which books, which feats, etc. There are few even published adventures which totally preclude large creatures -- especially if the PC takes precautions (wands of reduce person, potions gaseous form, etc.) Maybe 5% of encounters might actually exclude the PC and even then it can be overcome with effort. But again, why is it the DMs responsibilty to ensure that you are capable of having fun under that restriction? At what point is it the player's responsibility for judging their own likes, style, etc.? Actually, the settings (greyhawk, etc) do have built-in race lists. In greyhawk it's the standard PHB races. Planescape offers a huge selection. Faerun has numerous subraces. In each case, there's a prefabricated list of races that are present in the world, and a shorter list of "civilized" races. Third party races (such as Arcana Evolved) also have their own race options. When a DM allows something that isn't on the list of playable races, he's making the decision to open the extra option to players. By making that decision, the DM not only must believe the player can "handle it", but he must be willing to supply scenarios where "handling it" is possible. And if the PCs are going to need special magic items in order to "handle it", he needs to make sure those items are available. And 5' is more than enough for this purpose amongst humaniods. You can pass through someone's square and you can squeeze four people into a 5' square if you need to. Moving at half speed over a 5' section is hardly an issue. Most hallways aren't designed for running or folks fighting while passing each other. When you start talking about mines, crypts, sewers, inns, shops, etc. I don't know why you expect to make hallways with combat in mind? Real world hallways in houses and apartments are spec'd at 3'. You can still get two people by. Public areas in hotels, retail, and residential buildings typically requires larger 4' hallways. I don't see too many 10' wide hallway requirements except in industrial, retail malls, or public stadiums. Even though you apparently didn't read everything I wrote on this matter, I'll respond anyway, repeating statements as necessary. Most locations that serve as adventure dungeons are designed with combat in mind, or something requiring similar open spaces. Crypts need to fit paul bearers (sp?) on either side of a coffin. Strongholds are places where patrols need to move hurriedly, and can't afford to be caught moving single file. Castles need to accommodate crowds for galas, and must leave room for servants to work without obstructing their masters. Many of these places have wide doors (or double doors), either for ceremony or to allow large objects to be moved in and out. Kings don't shop at IKEA and build their furniture in the room where it belongs. While a kobold hive (or whatever it's called) would have some narrow passages (to improve traps & ambushes), most of their area would exist as either natural (and generally wide open) caverns, or excavations large enough for group activity. Just because your house has a 3-4 ft hallway doesn't mean that everywhere you go will have them. Of course, the no-giants-allowed inn will have narrow hallways. It also says on the sign above the bar, "No giants allowed." And if the PCs have a giant with them, odds are they won't stay at that inn.
Nathreet 06-06-07, 09:27 PM	technically? LARGE SIZE: combat: +1 to +5 damage (depending on weapon, # of hands) -2 AC special tactics: -1 initiative -4 hide 10' reach +4 grapple, etc. You usually become worse in simple front-line combat, but the special tactics usually make large size an advantage during combat. SMALL SIZE combat: -1 to -4 damage (depending on weapon, # of hands) +1 AB +2 AC special tactics: +1 initiative +4 hide -4 grapple, etc. usually only 20' movement speed As you can see, a small size often provides better benefits for combat than a large size. True, you lose a little damage, which hurts at early levels. But at later levels when you're giving and receiving large amounts of damage, AB and AC matter a lot more.