Strength to More Stuff

[Keneth]

Strength is a pretty focused stat, it increases melee attack and damage, and the former one is already dubious as far as logic goes. It's pretty poorly represented among the skills too.

Having improved upon the utility of other ability scores to reduce MADness, I feel like Str is slowly becoming a dump stat in my games. I would like to give Strength some secondary functions, but nothing really comes to mind.

I was thinking of having it increase movement speed, but that seems a bit more like it should fall under Dex. I've also seen it applied to Fort saves (if it's higher than Con), but I find it hard go with the strong = healthy idea.

I was wondering if you guys have any ideas, or whether you've been using Str in your games for anything other than hitting really hard.

Note: I don't need a link the X stat to Y bonus thread. That's not what this thread is about.

[OldTrees1]

Strength is used for combat manuever combat.

However more information would help.

[Kazudo]

In certain cases my players have made a very valid point for STR being used to Intimidate in place of CHA. Simply because, well, if you choose to Intimidate by flipping a table, how hard it's flipped would matter more than how you looked doing it really. At least that's their argument. And I tend to go with it as a houserule.

Aside from that, STR just has it's limitations and is kinda one of the easiest stats to mitigate out. Need a combat heavy person that drops STR? Take a few levels in Swashbuckler. You're using DEX to hit and INT for damage. DEX also happens to be your AC stat, and INT is what you use to get your skill points! Drops the MAD a bit.

The problem is that, like with most stats, when used to excess, it doesn't REALLY matter what it's used for.

I ran a character that had a 70+ STR due to template layering and War Hulk shenanigans. Could get taken down with anything requiring a will save, since he was a BSF. His idea of getting through traps was to just plow through them and let the Cleric take care of his wounds after thanking him for being a BSF. Specifically, though, he had a 70+ STR. He won a lot of fights by bringing the building down on them. Wanna know how he got people to go with him on a mission or quest, or how he rescued the prudish and angry damsel? by picking them up and threatening to throw them if they refused. He eschewed the rest of the stats simply by spelling out the BSF to the letter.

Now, I'm kinda shooting myself in the foot when I say that he also had something in the neighborhood of a 40+ CHA, and was later rebuilt as a really, really rude multicasting gish.

But that's neither here nor there.

[pwykersotz]

You could apply the Str mod as a favorable circumstance bonus to various physical activities that require Dex or Con. A high Str may not control a certain skill or check, but it could enhance it.

Movement speed for sprints might benefit from a high Str.
If you don't go epic, you could always crib the Legendary Dreadnoughts ability to shatter force walls with a DC 35 Strength check.

I can't think of any more offhand...

[Keneth]

In certain cases my players have made a very valid point for STR being used to Intimidate in place of CHA.

Pathfinder has a feat called Intimidating Prowess which lets you add Str to Intimidate (in addition to Cha). I've turned it into a trait (which is worth about half a feat), so that's already covered.

Using it in place of Charisma doesn't really make sense to me. You can manage to antagonize or frighten someone like that, but it won't really do much in the way of intimidation unless you know what to say after that.

[Rebel7284]

Are you keeping track of encumbrance?

[Kazudo]

Pathfinder has a feat called Intimidating Prowess which lets you add Str to Intimidate (in addition to Cha). I've turned it into a trait (which is worth about half a feat), so that's already covered.

Using it in place of Charisma doesn't really make sense to me. You can manage to antagonize or frighten someone like that, but it won't really do much in the way of intimidation unless you know what to say after that.

To each his own. Adding them together seemed less balanced than just replacing one or the other. The idea is that a really, big, rippling specimen walks into the room, demands information, then breaks a stool across the floor and demands again. Rather than using his dump stat as whether or not the enemy was affected by this, he just uses his strength. How broken was that chair? Did he break it in such a manner that the target is wondering whether he'd do that to them or not? Are they a bit more loose-lipped now that there's someone very violent in the room who appears to have the muscle to snap them like a twig? Yeah.

[Telonius]

"Lost Tradition" is a feat from Bastards and Bloodlines (3rd-party, Green Ronin IIRC) that allows a spellcaster to change their casting stat to anything they want.

[Metahuman1]

Think of it this way, Guy comes in the room, demands you do something. You don't cooperate, until he picks the entire bar up with one hand and tosses it across the room like it's a soft ball, or grabs the next biggest guy in the room and breaks him in half like a tooth pick in less then 6 seconds.

And then he gives you a very Irate, impatient look, and demands it again with the not subtle implication your his next target if he doesn't get what he wants.

That's one reason it's intimidating.


Another way is the same reason Intimidation has Size Modifiers and they tend to be bigger positives the larger you are and bigger negatives the smaller you are. If the dude your talking to has a single calf on his leg that's a big as both your thighs, and a matching one on the other leg, abs you could grind a stone on and biceps several times the size of your head and a chest larger then any barrel you've seen to date, are you really gonna want to take your chances brawling with the guy? That he might turn that muscle on you? Or are you just gonna give him the info he wants to the best of your ability so that he won't grind you into paste?


As for making strength more versatile, there was a dragon mag issue that had ideas for feats of strength such as you see in some super hero comics and old pulp stories such as Conan the Barbarian, Sam Spade/**** Tracy, Flash Gordon, so on. That might be an idea. Strength becomes much more tempting to invest in when you can do cool stuff with it like Bend the cell Bars with your hands to free yourself quietly, or hold the gate open in a dead lift.

Or you could just show them all how to build muscle wizards. ;)

[Hazuki]

To each his own. Adding them together seemed less balanced than just replacing one or the other. The idea is that a really, big, rippling specimen walks into the room, demands information, then breaks a stool across the floor and demands again. Rather than using his dump stat as whether or not the enemy was affected by this, he just uses his strength. How broken was that chair? Did he break it in such a manner that the target is wondering whether he'd do that to them or not? Are they a bit more loose-lipped now that there's someone very violent in the room who appears to have the muscle to snap them like a twig? Yeah.That method can be inappropriate in some cases of intimidation, however. When you encounter somebody who fears for something else more than their own life. A (decent) King would value his Kingdom over his life, so such brute force would be ineffective. As would be the case with the chivalrous, who always value others over their own lives. Those who see their own lives as worthless, such as the depressed, traumatized, or obsessed. And many others. For those surprisingly common cases, Charisma is far more important than lethality.

[Vhaidara]

My group runs intimidate on a case-by-case. If you're pulling out physical threats, you can use Str if it's higher. If you're implying that something unpleasant might happen to the local merchant if he doesn't donate some money to the local crime fighting fund, that's Cha (and possibly a Bluff check).

[PaucaTerrorem]

Think of it this way, Guy comes in the room, demands you do something. You don't cooperate, until he picks the entire bar up with one hand and tosses it across the room like it's a soft ball, or grabs the next biggest guy in the room and breaks him in half like a tooth pick in less then 6 seconds.

And then he gives you a very Irate, impatient look, and demands it again with the not subtle implication your his next target if he doesn't get what he wants.

That's one reason it's intimidating.


Sounds like force of personality is in play here as well. That's CHA.

I always like being able to make a STR check to aid an Intimidation.

[Metahuman1]

Sounds like force of personality is in play here as well. That's CHA.

I always like being able to make a STR check to aid an Intimidation.

No, it sounds like he's not patient, you can see he's not patient, and he's just demonstrated violently that he can swat you like a fly. Cause the whole thing fall flat on his face very quickly when he doesn't throw the bar across the room or destroy the big guy in record breaking time or similar.

[Vhaidara]

Point: who is more intimidating when threatening physical harm (these assume level 1)
1. A raging half orc barbarian with a 24 Str and an 8 Cha (modifier with max ranks = +3, or +11 with Str in place of Cha)
Or
2. A half elf social rogue with an 18 Cha and maxed Intimidate (modifier with max ranks = +8)

[Curmudgeon]

Strength does apply to movement already: it's the base ability for Climb, Jump, and Swim checks. And, as Rebel7284 mentioned, it's a big deal for encumbrance. On the rare occasions when I play a Wizard or Sorcerer, I like to use Enlarge Person (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/enlargePerson.htm) as an offensive spell. Hit a lightly-loaded enemy with that spell, indoors, and you may take them out of most of the combat. If you do the math, the effect of +2 to STR and an 8x multiplication of gear weight has the same effect as if they didn't change size but their load tripled. Most of the time that'll put them into medium encumbrance, slowing them down (to about 69% of normal speed). But being taller than ceiling height will mean squeezing rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#squeezing) apply: double movement cost penalties, with a net reduction to about 34% of their normal speed. They'll have another -4 to attack and AC, on top of the -1 from size increase. And, with double movement cost penalties, they can't take 5' steps. :smallbiggrin:

Encumbrance can be a big deal, tactically speaking. It's not just a way to manage how much treasure and gear the PCs can carry. And the nifty thing about STR is that the load increase is for every single point, not just at even numbers.

[Hazuki]

Point: who is more intimidating when threatening physical harm (these assume level 1)
1. A raging half orc barbarian with a 24 Str and an 8 Cha (modifier with max ranks = +3, or +11 with Str in place of Cha)
Or
2. A half elf social rogue with an 18 Cha and maxed Intimidate (modifier with max ranks = +8)It depends. It the Half-Elf Social Rogue really good at describing the brutality of what they're going to do? 'Cause I'd rather have my skull clubbed in by one swift blow from the Half-Orc than have a blade dragged along my spine while I'm paralyzed by poison, unable to react or fight back as I'm slowly tortured to death.

[PaucaTerrorem]

It depends. It the Half-Elf Social Rogue really good at describing the brutality of what they're going to do? 'Cause I'd rather have my skull clubbed in by one swift blow from the Half-Orc than have a blade dragged along my spine while I'm paralyzed by poison, unable to react or fight back as I'm slowly tortured to death.


Exactly. Now I'm making the assumption that the Barb ain't the brightest one in the pack. If I can out think you enough, your strength is a much smaller factor. If I can out maneuver you, your ability to smash isn't intimidating. Something to be wary of, yes, but not the scariest around.

Now someone explaining what will happen to me if I don't comply is up to their and my imaginations. What you think you know can be the most terrifying thing ever.

Plus, you get hit enough times you start to go numb or unconscious. Pain is in the mind and willpower alone can get you through some tough snizz out there.

[PaucaTerrorem]

Strength does apply to movement already: it's the base ability for Climb, Jump, and Swim checks. And, as Rebel7284 mentioned, it's a big deal for encumbrance. On the rare occasions when I play a Wizard or Sorcerer, I like to use Enlarge Person (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/enlargePerson.htm) as an offensive spell. Hit a lightly-loaded enemy with that spell, indoors, and you may take them out of most of the combat. If you do the math, the effect of +2 to STR and an 8x multiplication of gear weight has the same effect as if they didn't change size but their load tripled. Most of the time that'll put them into medium encumbrance, slowing them down (to about 69% of normal speed). But being taller than ceiling height will mean squeezing rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#squeezing) apply: double movement cost penalties, with a net reduction to about 34% of their normal speed. They'll have another -4 to attack and AC, on top of the -1 from size increase. And, with double movement cost penalties, they can't take 5' steps. :smallbiggrin:

Encumbrance can be a big deal, tactically speaking. It's not just a way to manage how much treasure and gear the PCs can carry. And the nifty thing about STR is that the load increase is for every single point, not just at even numbers.

I like how you think.

[Metahuman1]

Exactly. Now I'm making the assumption that the Barb ain't the brightest one in the pack. If I can out think you enough, your strength is a much smaller factor. If I can out maneuver you, your ability to smash isn't intimidating. Something to be wary of, yes, but not the scariest around.

Now someone explaining what will happen to me if I don't comply is up to their and my imaginations. What you think you know can be the most terrifying thing ever.

Plus, you get hit enough times you start to go numb or unconscious. Pain is in the mind and willpower alone can get you through some tough snizz out there.

And when it's coming from someone who can't back it up, all that imagination is relegated to nothing more then the butt of a joke.

[PaucaTerrorem]

To assume that someone will make the threat without a way to back it up is a deep assumption.

I start making threats and breaking things.
I convince you that your family is being held and horrible things will happen.
Go ahead and hurt me, but stay away from my family.

Granted, we are arguing online and each has a valid point. I prefer my way.

[Metahuman1]

Not as deep as you might think, historically speaking. And besides, bluff is a skill for a reason....


And yes, you do have a valid point and yes, strength isn't required to be scary, I'm just saying it should never be irrelevant to being scary. Even if the fear is instinctive adrenaline rush stuff and not intellectual level material.

[pwykersotz]

To assume that someone will make the threat without a way to back it up is a deep assumption.

I start making threats and breaking things.
I convince you that your family is being held and horrible things will happen.
Go ahead and hurt me, but stay away from my family.

Granted, we are arguing online and each has a valid point. I prefer my way.

The rogue knifing my family is definitely scary, but I take a look at a guy who's bigger than me that I don't know, and I treat him with a certain degree of deference. He gets angry, I start really hoping I'm smarter than him and can trick him. I am not less intimidated though.

But yeah, both work.

[PaucaTerrorem]

That's why I say a DC(variable) STR check to add +2 to +5 to your Intimidate. Not saying it's irrelevant, just not the biggest factor.

[Sian]

X Stat to Y Bonus (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?125732-3-x-X-stat-to-Y-bonus)

Really handy list to have in your toolbox

[Metahuman1]

The problem is that that doesn't really make str useful. It's a minor benny and the character is far better off pumping Cha like it's going out of fashion still.

Now, allowing better of Str or Cha, and then allowing a check from your weaker stat with a variable DC/Bonus output in addition works much better, as you can play to your strengths and style and combine the best of both factors up to a point.

[PaucaTerrorem]

I like that idea. Leaving it open to a case by case style. I would play that rule.

[Metahuman1]

Hey, glad we found a happy medium.

That said, here's another though, let feats of peak human and super human (You know this level will be hit sooner or later, it's in the nature of the system.), to give them significant circumstance bonuses to bluff and diplomacy. It means a Str based character can convince the towns people that if they don't do as instructed with regards to the imminent orc invasion they will die, but if they listen to the man holding a Clydesdale over his head like a boogie board they can live and maybe not even loose all there stuff.

[Know(Nothing)]

You still need to know HOW to use your strength to intimidate someone in the first place. That's worth a feat, or skill trick, or some sort of investment. For a feat I think you should be able to add STR to it, for a skill trick you could just replace it.

[Windstorm]

Strength does apply to movement already: it's the base ability for Climb, Jump, and Swim checks. And, as Rebel7284 mentioned, it's a big deal for encumbrance. On the rare occasions when I play a Wizard or Sorcerer, I like to use Enlarge Person (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/enlargePerson.htm) as an offensive spell. Hit a lightly-loaded enemy with that spell, indoors, and you may take them out of most of the combat. If you do the math, the effect of +2 to STR and an 8x multiplication of gear weight has the same effect as if they didn't change size but their load tripled. Most of the time that'll put them into medium encumbrance, slowing them down (to about 69% of normal speed). But being taller than ceiling height will mean squeezing rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#squeezing) apply: double movement cost penalties, with a net reduction to about 34% of their normal speed. They'll have another -4 to attack and AC, on top of the -1 from size increase. And, with double movement cost penalties, they can't take 5' steps. :smallbiggrin:

Encumbrance can be a big deal, tactically speaking. It's not just a way to manage how much treasure and gear the PCs can carry. And the nifty thing about STR is that the load increase is for every single point, not just at even numbers.

This right here.

one of the many common house-rules I have been exposed to is the "no coin weight" rule, intended to make a PC's life easier by not having them convert gold into lighter forms. personally when I DM, I expressly ask my players to consider and track thier encumberance, and this usually results in either innovative solutions, or the buying of +str items so that they can actually move. Curmudgeon's post illustrates very effectively why most martial characters that use any kind of heavy armor medically need a heavily boosted str score, even if they don't apply it to damage..

[Keneth]

I like the whole Str to Intimidate business just as it is. A massive orc breaking a table might be enough to intimidate a 1st level commoner, but people with several class levels aren't that easy to scare with a simple display of strength. Especially in D&D where brute strength can be rendered useless with a flick of a finger and a few funny words.

Even in real life, most people with combat training aren't quick to shy away from a fight just because the other guy is bigger. Yeah, some dude at the gym can bench press three times your weight, but there's nothing intimidating about that guy if he can't convince you that you can't take him on. Charisma should always be a factor. Strength not so much.


"Lost Tradition" is a feat from Bastards and Bloodlines (3rd-party, Green Ronin IIRC) that allows a spellcaster to change their casting stat to anything they want.

I don't have any particular wish of doing spellcasters any favors. :smallbiggrin:


Strength does apply to movement already: it's the base ability for Climb, Jump, and Swim checks. And, as Rebel7284 mentioned, it's a big deal for encumbrance.

All true, but Climb, Jump, and Swim are still all limited by your base speed. I was thinking of making Strength increase your actual base movement speeds, at least those affected by it.

As for encumbrance, we mostly disregard it after the first few levels. It's a unnecessary complication, except in express cases where it's the point of problem, like moving something heavy around.

I must admit, I have never considered the carrying capacity for enlarge person though. The fact that strength goes up by only +2 has bothered me for quite a while. With that kind of increase, you probably wouldn't even be able to move your own weight around.

[squiggit]

Using it in place of Charisma doesn't really make sense to me. You can manage to antagonize or frighten someone like that, but it won't really do much in the way of intimidation unless you know what to say after that.

I always felt kind of the opposite. It seemed bizarre to me that the eight foot tall barbarian who armwrestles dragons and wins and the archmagus who could level an entire continent, rip your mind in half, or turn you into a chicken were less threatening and intimidating than... That half elf who plays the flute all day an pretty much nothing else.

Certainly charm and personality can be good for certain types of intimidation, the mob boss or politician offering smooth threats to cow his enemies, but it's far from the only sort that works. In d&d land a mugger couldn't get a child to fix up a lollipop, but a halfling with a xylophone could a trained assassin **** themselves in terror.

[Keneth]

I don't find that odd at all. Yeah, some people can be outwardly imposing, but that does little when it comes to actually convincing anyone to do things for you, except for craven rogues and common folk.

I should probably note that I have divorced demoralization and intimidation quite some time ago. The act of demoralizing creature is primarily Strength based in my games. All other forms of persuasion are not.

[Know(Nothing)]

If you're trying to demoralize someone on the battlefield, yeah, size and strength may make more of a difference.

But if you're in a social encounter, trying to manipulate someone into behaving how you want(and for longer than the amount of time they are within your reach), that's more subtle than just being strong at them can convey. This is why even though Chewbacca is the strong one, Han is the one who makes the intimidate check.

[Kazudo]

It is worth noting at this point that demoralization, in D&D 3.5, is actually square within the purview of Intimidate, and is typically the only time that I permit in my groups the substitution of a higher STR score than the mandatory CHA.



Demoralize Opponent (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/intimidate.htm)

You can also use Intimidate to weaken an opponent’s resolve in combat. To do so, make an Intimidate check opposed by the target’s modified level check (see above). If you win, the target becomes shaken for 1 round. A shaken character takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws. You can intimidate only an opponent that you threaten in melee combat and that can see you.

[Deadline]

I must admit, I have never considered the carrying capacity for enlarge person though. The fact that strength goes up by only +2 has bothered me for quite a while. With that kind of increase, you probably wouldn't even be able to move your own weight around.

It's worth noting that:

1. Your own weight has nothing to do with your carrying capacity.

2. Going from Medium size to Large size doubles your carrying capacity.

[Person_Man]

Ideas:


Players must be a full-BAB class to have a base Strength of 18 or higher, including any increases from race or class levels. (I suggest using this for Constitution as well. 2nd edition had similar restrictions and a lot fewer sources for bonuses, which is why people bothered to play Fighters).
To-hit with melee and thrown weapons by default.
Armor scales up to +15 by default (without enchantments), and has a minimum Strength requirement equal to 1/2 the bonus provided (in place of light/medium/heavy proficiencies). For example, Super Heavy Dwarvern Platemail might provide a +15 bonus to AC, and require a Strength of 30.
Consolidate Climb, Swim, and Jump into a single Str based Athletics Skill.
Bonus to all Combat Maneuvers (Trip, Bull Rush, Grapple, Disarm, etc)

[Knaight]

Certainly charm and personality can be good for certain types of intimidation, the mob boss or politician offering smooth threats to cow his enemies, but it's far from the only sort that works. In d&d land a mugger couldn't get a child to fix up a lollipop, but a halfling with a xylophone could a trained assassin **** themselves in terror.

Hardly. Lets take this mugger again - they probably have Charisma 10 or so. That's a bonus of 0. Then we have the halfling with a xylophone - call it Charisma 16, which is solid for a performer. They have a +3 advantage. However, the mugger probably actually has ranks in intimidate. It's their core skill. So, they're now up to 4, plus another one per level past the first. Xylophone guy? Not so much. Then we take circumstance bonuses. The mugger cornered said child in an isolated area, which is an obvious circumstance bonus. The halfling likely didn't, and quite possibly is in the process of being assassinated, which works out to neutral or a penalty. Then there's the matter of the target resisting it, where the child obviously is worse at it. The mugger has the advantage here, in a big way.

Now, if the assassin is tied up or something, and the halfing does have ranks in intimidate, then they're ahead. At that point though, they quite possibly should be, as charisma includes the sort of social senses that tell them what they should threaten.

[Keneth]

Players must be a full-BAB class to have a base Strength of 18 or higher, including any increases from race or class levels.

That's a bit arbitrary, and I want more characters to consider using Strength, not fewer. :smallbiggrin:


Armor scales up to +15 by default (without enchantments), and has a minimum Strength requirement equal to 1/2 the bonus provided (in place of light/medium/heavy proficiencies).

That might be something to consider. I'm all for freeing up feat slots, but I'll wait until I'm ready to remake the whole armor system.


To-hit with melee and thrown weapons by default.

Already use that.


Consolidate Climb, Swim, and Jump into a single Str based Athletics Skill.

Been considering this for a while (I've used it before), but I don't really feel like those should be the same thing.


Bonus to all Combat Maneuvers (Trip, Bull Rush, Grapple, Disarm, etc)

Already implemented in Pathfinder, which is the system I considering these changes for.


1. Your own weight has nothing to do with your carrying capacity.

I know, which is why I've never considered the issue of carrying capacity for enlarge person, only the ridiculousness.

[Deadline]

I know, which is why I've never considered the issue of carrying capacity for enlarge person, only the ridiculousness.

I'm a bit confused here, because I'm not sure you picked up what I was laying down.

Large creatures have a carrying capacity that is twice that of an equal strength Medium creature. So enlarge person lets you carry a ton of extra stuff, in addition to giving you a strength boost. Where is the ridiculous part?

[Metahuman1]

The problem is your gear grows with you for the duration of the spell and becomes x4 as heavy. Every, individual, piece, your weapon, armor, everything in you back pack, all of it, weights x4 what it use to, and your str only went up by 2 and your carrying capacity only doubled and not quadrupled.

[Keneth]

Where is the ridiculous part?

The fact that your own weight actually increases. Humanoids aren't built to be that big, so you'd probably collapse. That's the ridiculous bit, but this is D&D, we can ignore the physics.

Also, even with the +2 Str and x2 multiplier, your carrying capacity increases by about 230%, while all your equipment increases in weight by 800%. Which is what Curmudgeon pointed out, and I've never even considered that.

[Deadline]

Ah, yes, the increased gear weight, I'd forgotten about that (we just use the mechanical increases and don't worry about the increased gear weight because magic).

It is worth noting that your concern about collapsing under your own weight has no basis in the rules, and can even be addressed by the spell (clearly, you gain more sturdiness than +2 strength if you also double your carrying capacity).

[icefractal]

Re: Intimidation - Keep in mind there are two parts to it. You need to convince the target that:
1) Bad things will happen if they don't comply. (brawn works great here)
2) Bad things won't happen if they do comply. (brawn alone doesn't do this)

So if you're just trying to make people flee or get out of your way, then a show of force works great. If you're trying to get information, maybe not.
Orc Berserker: *smashes table apart* "Tell me where crime boss is!" (fails check).
Innkeeper: "Oh ****, he's going to kill me, even if I tell him!" *jumps out window, screaming for help*

Also, intimidation by force is obviously limited to people who aren't actually more of a force than you:
Orc Berserker: *smashes table apart* "Flee now or die!"
Storm Giant: "Was that supposed to be impressive?"

[Keneth]

It is worth noting that your concern about collapsing under your own weight has no basis in the rules

Well, yes, like I said, it's D&D, real physics don't really apply in such cases. That doesn't make it any less nonsensical though.

I'd be much more comfortable saying that the spell doesn't increase weight at all and get rid of all those shenanigans. It's magic after all.

[Seerow]

Well, yes, like I said, it's D&D, real physics don't really apply in such cases. That doesn't make it any less nonsensical though.

I'd be much more comfortable saying that the spell doesn't increase weight at all and get rid of all those shenanigans. It's magic after all.

But increasing weight gives you access to fun shenanigans like jumping off cliffs onto people for extra damage. And is likely at least part of the reasoning behind size modifier applying to most of the combat maneuvers in the game.

I'm not sure why it's easier to say "I increased size but magically did not increase in weight at all" than "I increased size and weight, and am magically still able to survive". In either case, Magic is what is making the difference in allowing the change to work.

[Keneth]

It's more like "I increased in size, but now I can't move around because my armor is too heavy". You would need a +10 bonus to Strength in order to maintain the weight to carrying capacity ratio, but since the spell doesn't increase your strength proportionally, I don't see any reason why it should increase your weight by a large amount either.

[Curmudgeon]

... but since the spell doesn't increase your strength proportionally, I don't see any reason why it should increase your weight by a large amount either.

This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8. The immediate answer is because that's the way the game designers specified the effect. The ultimate reason would probably be because they didn't pay sufficient attention to the details. The end result is that Enlarge Person is good for three uses:

Monks and other characters who carry next to nothing, so it's still a Light load.
Armored characters who go from Medium to Heavy encumbrance, which imposes no additional penalties. (My guess: that's really the only case the spell was designed for.)
Enemies, to make them encumbered.

[NoACWarrior]

You could always homebrew a magic system relying on strength.

Just like Incarnum is Con, Spell casting and Psionics take all the non-phy scores, theres still Dex and Str to make a magic system off of.

But then again ToB isn't called the book of fighting magic for nothing. Maybe I'm overthinking this.

[Metahuman1]

Actually, just out of curiosity, were does it explicitly state that the gear becomes exactly x8 as heavy when it goes form medium to large?

I ask cause now that this trick has been pointed out to me, I really want to use it with my sorcerer in a game I'm involved in to give me something else to use offensively. Cause, you know, more options are good.

[Dienekes]

I don't find that odd at all. Yeah, some people can be outwardly imposing, but that does little when it comes to actually convincing anyone to do things for you, except for craven rogues and common folk.

I should probably note that I have divorced demoralization and intimidation quite some time ago. The act of demoralizing creature is primarily Strength based in my games. All other forms of persuasion are not.

Some points. Learning to be actually convincing also comes from putting points into the Intimidation skill.

This is a game, when the option is available, simplify. We all agree that Strength can be used for Intimidate? Then just give it to them. There's no need to make them put in more rolls that they can lose, no need to clutter up the system. And in all honesty, Strength to Intimidation is more reasonable than quite a few stat to skill transitions. When given the option, just let your players have fun.

[Deadline]

Actually, just out of curiosity, were does it explicitly state that the gear becomes exactly x8 as heavy when it goes form medium to large?

Unless the spell specifies it, your gear doesn't increase in weight by x8, it only doubles in weight. For reference, the spell only states that all carried and worn gear "similarly increases in size". Presumably, folks are reading that to mean that the gear suffers the same x8 increase rather than the normal x2 that large weapons and gear normally applies.

[Metahuman1]

Actually, never mind, I'm a derp, Curmudgeon had already answered the question before I asked it.

[Keneth]

Unless the spell specifies it, your gear doesn't increase in weight by x8, it only doubles in weight.

The spell says the gear enlarges in a similar manner. Since it doesn't say otherwise, "similar manner" refers to x2 size, x8 weight.

Gear specifically made for large creatures is only twice as heavy because it's not a linear upscale.


We all agree that Strength can be used for Intimidate? Then just give it to them.

We all agree that player characters should be able to defeat monsters. Should they just die as soon as they get attacked?

A hyperbole, obviously, but simpler is not always better. We hated 4th edition for a reason. Sometimes you need to simplify the rules, and sometimes you need to expand them.

I don't agree that Strength should be added to normal persuasion checks without some investment (a trait in my case), but if that works for your group, good for you.

[Dienekes]

We all agree that player characters should be able to defeat monsters. Should they just die as soon as they get attacked?

A hyperbole, obviously, but simpler is not always better. We hated 4th edition for a reason. Sometimes you need to simplify the rules, and sometimes you need to expand them.

I don't agree that Strength should be added to normal persuasion checks without some investment (a trait in my case), but if that works for your group, good for you.

I find there's a difference between a mechanical problem and a goal problem. The goal is to kill the monster, sometimes you fail though, that's the game. The mechanic is to intimidate someone.

Now, I should have been more clear. I'm not against there being a trait or feat or ability that allows Strength to Intimidate. What I was arguing against was more the concept of making a Str check to see if it gives a benefit to Intimidate only within specific circumstances. It's just clutter to over complicate the point that yeah, strong people that can rip you in half are scary.

[geekintheground]

im sure you all know this, but there IS a feat for adding STR to intimidate. its called "Dread Tyranny". sure its a cleric only, deity specific feat but it provides precidence(SP?).

[Keneth]

What I was arguing against was more the concept of making a Str check to see if it gives a benefit to Intimidate only within specific circumstances.

DMs can always give you circumstance bonuses based on *drumroll* circumstance. Such bonuses are supposed to be used in a game so that you don't need rules for every single triviality.

A successful Strength check in an appropriate situation should give you a circumstance bonus to your Intimidate check, sure.

But we're talking about mechanical bonuses that should apply consistently, which is why I have a trait for it, and why I split demoralize and intimidate.

[icefractal]

You know, thinking about it, the problem is that really that most stat-generating methods make you trade between Charisma and the stats to be effective, for most classes. Because when you look at characters from fiction, most of them are effective and have a high Charisma (or are ineffective and uncharismatic).

For example - that mysterious stranger? The one who doesn't go much for speeches, but his actions speak louder than words, and everyone knows he's not to be messed with? That guy has a high Charisma. The guy with high Strength and low Charisma is the hulking bully who the hero kicks the ass of to demonstrate how badass he is. See Fist of the North Star for examples.

So - on the one hand, I feel like trying to make an end-run around Charisma is kind of like making your character weigh 300 lbs and then claiming his Grapple check should be good (despite his low Strength and lack of BAB) because "well he's like a super heavyweight".

On the other hand, the reason people do it is kind of justified, because making "protagonist quality" something that you trade off actual effectiveness for, and some classes benefit from more than others, is not really a good way for a system to work. And it didn't, originally - with roll-in-order, warriors end up with as good a Charisma as anyone else. Not that we should probably go back to that, but in an ideal system, the choice would be more like "what variety of presence do you have" not "are you a mook people ignore"?

[Deadline]

The spell says the gear enlarges in a similar manner. Since it doesn't say otherwise, "similar manner" refers to x2 size, x8 weight.

I stated that in the other two sentences of my post that you didn't quote. And it was an answer to Methuman1's question about the explicit place that it mentions the increase in weight (i.e. it doesn't explicitly mention it, it's inferred).

Obviously, I disagree with interpreting "similarly enlarged by the spell" to extend to weight for gear (since there are clear rules on how to determine weight for weapons, armor, and gear for creatures larger or smaller than medium), but that's neither here nor there.

[Keneth]

I disagree with interpreting "similarly enlarged by the spell" to extend to weight for gear (since there are clear rules on how to determine weight for weapons, armor, and gear for creatures larger or smaller than medium)

You are, of course, free to do so. But the spell doesn't reforge the equipment for a large creature, it simply increases it linearly. It doesn't do anything it doesn't say it does, and the specifics of enlargement are pretty clear.

Curmudgeon and I actually agree on RAW for a change. :smallbiggrin:

[TuggyNE]

You are, of course, free to do so. But the spell doesn't reforge the equipment for a large creature, it simply increases it linearly. It doesn't do anything it doesn't say it does, and the specifics of enlargement are pretty clear.

All this is correct except the conclusion, since, logically, the spell should work by the usual rules for equipment sizes, barring anything more specific.

I'm not entirely sure how to resolve this odd dichotomy where both sides can use almost identical arguments with opposite conclusions, but it seems that "similarly enlarged" is not a particularly clear clause.

[Curmudgeon]

All this is correct except the conclusion, since, logically, the spell should work by the usual rules for equipment sizes, barring anything more specific.
The spell is more specific than "the usual rules for equipment"; it doubles the extent in all dimensions. Normal clothing doesn't use cloth that's twice as thick for larger creatures, but cloth that's increased in all dimensions by Enlarge Person isn't normal. Your "logically" premise fails to actually be a logical consequence of what's stated in the spell description. :smallamused:

[TuggyNE]

The spell is more specific than "the usual rules for equipment"; it doubles the extent in all dimensions.

Well, there we go. That's just not correct.
This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8. This increase changes the creature’s size category to the next larger one.

That's all it does (relevant to the question, at least). It certainly does not say that it doubles all dimensions of the creature it is cast upon, and therefore there is no reason to suppose it does the same for the creature's equipment.

[Curmudgeon]

It certainly does not say that it doubles all dimensions of the creature it is cast upon ...
That's exactly what it says. A creature's height (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/height?s=t&path=/) is their "extent or distance upward". If the creature is standing, that extent is from sole to crown. If the creature is lying on their back, the extent is from back to front. If the creature is lying on one side, the extent is from that side to their opposite side. Doubling the height, regardless of creature orientation, is the same as doubling all dimensions and (assuming no change in density) multiplying the weight by 8 — exactly as stated in the spell.

[Hurnn]

The core of the issue is that it would appear some people have a halfling child with a 16 cha is more intimidating than a half orc fighter with a 6......

[TuggyNE]

That's exactly what it says. A creature's height (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/height?s=t&path=/) is their "extent or distance upward". If the creature is standing, that extent is from sole to crown. If the creature is lying on their back, the extent is from back to front. If the creature is lying on one side, the extent is from that side to their opposite side. Doubling the height, regardless of creature orientation, is the same as doubling all dimensions and (assuming no change in density) multiplying the weight by 8 — exactly as stated in the spell.

I have difficulty expressing just how painfully wrong this is, but I think reference to the Height and Weight section under the PHB's Vital Statistics is sufficient. Height is a single number, referencing the creature's height when standing upright or similarly acting in combat. It is not some bizarre freeform measurement of all three dimensions simultaneously, either by idiomatic English nor by D&D's rules. Just … no. Stop already. Please.

Now, I'm not going to say the spell is completely unambiguous. It's pretty fuzzy, actually, although I do think it's decidable. However, the ambiguity is not as bad as that, and it certainly isn't based on the meaning of "height". Auuugh.

Edit:
The core of the issue is that it would appear some people have a halfling child with a 16 cha is more intimidating than a half orc fighter with a 6......

Halfling has +3-4 for -1 modifier; half-orc has -2 modifier, assuming neither has any ranks. So yes, just barely, unless the child is young enough to be Tiny, in which case it's a matter of -5 vs -2.

Honestly, though, it's kind of hard to deduce exactly what the outcome should be there. Just how significant is the difference in their ability to concisely and believably deliver some sort of verbal threat?

I'd prefer to have a setup where there are half a dozen or so ways to trigger Intimidate, some relying on fixed Str checks and some not, all of which then add a different bonus to the final ranks+Cha check depending on how hard they are to trigger. Or something. Basically, a bit more multiplicative than merely "Str or Cha".

[icefractal]

There's also the fact that high Strength is only impressive when you outweigh the person you're intimidating. The orc and the halfling are about equally unimpressive to a dragon.

[Keneth]

That's all it does (relevant to the question, at least). It certainly does not say that it doubles all dimensions of the creature it is cast upon, and therefore there is no reason to suppose it does the same for the creature's equipment.

So your argument is that the person only increases in one dimension, making a really thin, really tall person? If that were in any way true, why would the weight increase by a factor of 8, when that clearly implies cubic expansion?

Even if that were somehow true, which makes it even more ridiculous physically, the method of expansion is still clearly noted: x2 size (or height), x8 weight. It has nothing to do with equipment crafted for large creatures.

[TuggyNE]

So your argument is that the person only increases in one dimension, making a really thin, really tall person? If that were in any way true, why would the weight increase by a factor of 8, when that clearly implies cubic expansion?

Of course not. What I am arguing against is the still more ridiculous idea that height automatically involves all dimensions, including (for armor or clothing) thickness. It doesn't. What is specified is that the creature's height, weight, and size category change; from that, a creature can reasonably be extrapolated to increase in size along all dimensions equally. But this extrapolation is not necessarily the same for things that are definitely not creatures, so claiming that the result of this extrapolation is actually explicitly written into the spell is flat-out wrong, and dangerously misleading.


Even if that were somehow true, which makes it even more ridiculous physically, the method of expansion is still clearly noted: x2 size (or height), x8 weight. It has nothing to do with equipment crafted for large creatures.

"Similarly" could more sensibly refer to the increase in size category, which then jives neatly with the usual rules with no special casing needed. And a reading that relies on implicit special casing is weaker than one that relies on standard rules.