Size modifiers

[Westhart]

Ok, so there has been something I never really understood... why large (r) creatures take a penalty to hit... I mean a colossal club... smashing down... I'm not doing the math but I would imagine something the size of a rather large tree/small house? I mean I can understand them taking a penalty to AC and all, but that just struck me as somewhat... off?

[zlefin]

I dkon't know, and dnd systems often aren't htat well thought out.
from what I've heard, it's so a creature attacking something its own size stays at ac 10 baseline as a target.

so the to hit modifier is to offset the ac penalty.

[Westhart]

I dkon't know, and dnd systems often aren't htat well thought out.
from what I've heard, it's so a creature attacking something its own size stays at ac 10 baseline as a target.

so the to hit modifier is to offset the ac penalty.

Hmm, fair enough... I guess.

[Altair_the_Vexed]

The idea is that it's harder to hit things that are smaller than you are. It's in the PHB in the Combat chapter, (on p134 of the 3.5 version) under size modifiers.

Try catching a cat to take it to the vet, or swatting a fly - the small creatures are hard to hit. Similarly, it's relatively easy for a person to step out of the way of a big animal.

Massive creatures that are very strong have big STR bonuses, and probably a good BAB - but they are still hampered by their relative size.

[Westhart]

The idea is that it's harder to hit things that are smaller than you are.

Try catching a cat to take it to the vet, or swatting a fly - the small creatures are hard to hit. Similarly, it's relatively easy for a person to step out of the way of a big animal.

Massive creatures that are very strong have big STR bonuses, and probably a good BAB - but they are still hampered by their relative size.

Yeah, I just have the mental image of a halfling basically dodging small houses stuck in my head... It makes sense, I just keep thinking of things that you shouldn't be able to dodge... in real life... :smallbiggrin:

[Altair_the_Vexed]

The smaller a creature it is, the faster time apparently moves for it - there's actually good solid neurological research to back this up these days (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold#Non-human_species), but it's been clear by observation for centuries.

A fly can detect movement about 20 times sooner than a human. A mouse reacts and moves incredibly fast - just with a low movement rate. So we can get out of the way of a lumbering big creature's attack.

Also, a massive weapon has way more inertia - that is, it's hard to change the direction of swing when the target dodges.

Of course, the STR bonuses tend to make the attack penalty irrelevant.

[Westhart]

The smaller a creature it is, the faster time apparently moves for it - there's actually good solid neurological research to back this up these days (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold#Non-human_species), but it's been clear by observation for centuries.

A fly can detect movement about 20 times sooner than a human. A mouse reacts and moves incredibly fast - just with a low movement rate. So we can get out of the way of a lumbering big creature's attack.

Also, a massive weapon has way more inertia - that is, it's hard to change the direction of swing when the target dodges.

Of course, the STR bonuses tend to make the attack penalty irrelevant.

fair enough.

[Deepbluediver]

I'm actually discussing something similar in a homebrew thread right now: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?539002-Size-in-Combat-amp-Spellcasting
I had a little different focus: I was trying to come up with something to balance out that fact that there was a definite advantage to making your spellscasters small-sized because I want to offer my players standard large-sized race option. Anywho, this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22475409&postcount=12) includes revised size-modifier rules that I think are a little more straightforward and balanced, if you're interested.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Anywho, this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22475409&postcount=12) includes revised size-modifier rules that I think are a little more straightforward and balanced, if you're interested.
So basically, subtract your size modifier from spell save DCs?

It'll definitely affect spell selection, but it doesn't affect all builds--for example, mailmen are unaffected. Overall, not a bad houserule at all. Encourages some variety in spell loadouts between different spellcasters, especially when comparing dragons and kobolds, for example.

[Deepbluediver]

So basically, subtract your size modifier from spell save DCs?

It'll definitely affect spell selection, but it doesn't affect all builds--for example, mailmen are unaffected. Overall, not a bad houserule at all. Encourages some variety in spell loadouts between different spellcasters, especially when comparing dragons and kobolds, for example.
Yes, I believe you're reading that correctly.
One of the reasons I liked that tweak was that it DOESN'T affect every single spell, and you can work around it if it proves to be problematic.

What's a "mailmen build" by the way?

[Necroticplague]

Yes, I believe you're reading that correctly.
One of the reasons I liked that tweak was that it DOESN'T affect every single spell, and you can work around it if it proves to be problematic.
Honestly, most useful caster builds aren't affected too much by low save DCs. Buffs, summons, and a lot of BFC (i.e, wall of X) don't have any save, and utility spells almost never do in a relevant way. Still best to get tiny unless you're an Enchanter, Illusionist or Evocations blaster.


What's a "mailmen build" by the way?
A build that does obscene amounts of damage via very heavily metamagicked Orbs of X.

[Deepbluediver]

Honestly, most useful caster builds aren't affected too much by low save DCs. Buffs, summons, and a lot of BFC (i.e, wall of X) don't have any save, and utility spells almost never do in a relevant way. Still best to get tiny unless you're an Enchanter, Illusionist or Evocations blaster.
I think I'm alright with that for now- it wasn't meant to be an overwhelming change, just a little something to address the disparity between Large and Small casters, because I want to offer more variety in the standard races.

Long-term I'd try to try and even out magic a bit, both in terms of balance with non-magic classes and for some of the schools in relation to each other, but that's off-topic to discuss here. I just thought it was amusing that someone else was thinking about issues of character-size at the same time I was.


A build that does obscene amounts of damage via very heavily metamagicked Orbs of X.
Ah, I see. Thank you.

[Fizban]

The penalty is actually quite small until you reach extreme sizes: Large is only -1 and Huge is only -2. It's only once you ht Gargantuan and Colossal at -4/-8 that the penalty is really noticeable (for basic hit/AC). Only the weakest Gargantuan creatures have less than 30 strength and most have more than 12 HD. So even with the size penalty they'll clobber anyone without an AC in the 20's. The main reason it's even noticed is size altering magic.

Gargantuan is also the point at which you've left the realm of realistically sized modern land creatures for the most part: Elephants are only Huge. So unless you've gone swimming with whales it's probably hard to calibrate expectations.

[KillianHawkeye]

It's simple math.

The odds to hit for two giants fighting each other should be the same (relatively speaking) as it for two humans fighting each other, or for two halflings fighting each other.

So if we start comparing the sizes against each other, and we decide that it's harder for a human to hit something smaller than they are (Small creatures gain +1 AC), but it's easier to hit something larger (Large creatures gain -1 AC), then it logically follows that a Small creature must also gain +1 to hit to balance their +1 AC, and a Large creature must gain -1 to hit to balance their -1 AC.

That's literally all there is to it.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Yes, I believe you're reading that correctly.
One of the reasons I liked that tweak was that it DOESN'T affect every single spell, and you can work around it if it proves to be problematic.

What's a "mailmen build" by the way?
"Mailman" refers to the reliable, on-time delivery of damage. That means using SR: No/Save: None direct damage spells, typically orb of acid, which can even be fired into an antimagic field (depending on how you rule the line of effect-blocking abilities of the field, anyhow, YMMV).

And yeah, I agree that the best part is how it's not a blanket nerf of smaller casters, but rather an encouragement for certain types of casters to be big.

[Deepbluediver]

"Mailman" refers to the reliable, on-time delivery of damage.
Hehe- that's clever. :smallamused: