Reasonable homebrew "fix" for the Enlarge/Reduce spell

[CTurbo]

So I've always felt that the damage difference should have been greater than just a single 1d4 for this spell. I've seen a lot of complaining about it over the years too. I've never really used it, but the party Bard is going to take it so this is the first time I've put this much thought into it.

Enlarge. The target’s size doubles in all dimensions, and its weight is multiplied by eight. This growth increases its size by one category – from Medium to Large, for example. If there isn’t enough room for the target to double its size, the creature or object attains the maximum possible size in the space available. Until the spell ends, the target also has advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. The target’s weapons also grow to match its new size. While these weapons are enlarged, the target’s attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage.

Reduce. The target’s size is halved in all dimensions, and its weight is reduced to one-eighth of normal. This reduction decreases its size by one category – from Medium to Small, for example. Until the spell ends, the target also has disadvantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. The target’s weapons also shrink to match its new size. While these weapons are reduced, the target’s attacks with them deal 1d4 less damage (this can’t reduce the damage below 1).

My first thought was to have the damage increase/decrease by 50%.
So a 18 Str Dueling Fighter would have a base average hit of 1d8+6 = 10.5 damage. Enlarge would increase that to 15.75. Reduce would drop it to 5.25.
A 18 Str GWM Greataxe Barb would have a base average of 1d12+14 = 20.5 damage. Enlarge would increase that to 30.75. Reduce would drop it to 10.25.

50% is pretty significant. Is it too much?

25% doesn't feel significant enough. The Dueling Fighter would deal similar damage to the original 1d4. The GWM Barb would still come out better than the d4 at least.

I like the idea of a scaling difference so using a % seems like a good idea. Just need to find the sweet spot. I was trying to keep it quick math easy like 25% or 50%, but I guess most people could do 33% in their head.

Maybe I'll go with 33%

Opinions?

[Dork_Forge]

Personally I'd just say double whatever the weapon die is (ignoring any magical weapon dice like a Flame Tongue), it keeps it simple to work out what to use without added math and keeps the excitement of crits alive.

[Teaguethebean]

I find it to be a perfectly serviceable buff. I am yet to hear anyone complain about it in my experience.

[PhantomSoul]

Personally I'd just say double whatever the weapon die is (ignoring any magical weapon dice like a Flame Tongue), it keeps it simple to work out what to use without added math and keeps the excitement of crits alive.

Yeah, extra Weapon Die is something people are used to from Crits, will feel extra good with Crits, makes Weapon Choice matter (so the proportional increase is larger for "more martial" characters and "more hefty" weapons), and is simple overall...

...but 1d4 has seemed good overall at the table so far! (It's still 1d4 on every Attack, so it can stack.)

[JLandan]

Personally I'd just say double whatever the weapon die is (ignoring any magical weapon dice like a Flame Tongue), it keeps it simple to work out what to use without added math and keeps the excitement of crits alive.

I've been doing this for a long time. It's never been an issue. I double the damage die for Enlarge (which is the same as monsters in the MM). But I keep the -1d4 for Reduce, unless for whatever reason it's done to a big creature with multiple damage dice, then I reduce it by one.

[ender241]

Keep in mind that enlarge/reduce is not just a damage buff. It can do a lot of different things. First, just in combat, you can: buff damage + buff str checks (to help with grapple builds, probably) or debuff an enemy's damage + debuff str checks/saves (for easier grappling or synergy with certain spells/affects). But it has utility usage as well. Need to get through a locked door and don't have a party rogue? Reduce the door and walk right in. Need to transport something big and heavy? Reduce! Need to block a choke point temporarily for a quick escape? Put something large there and enlarge it. Need to smuggle something past some guards? Reduce it and stash it away. Etc. This versatility in and out of combat means that it shouldn't increase damage as much as other spells of similar level that solely buff damage. I think the d4 is fine. Bumping to a d6 probably won't make it too op. But 50% damage boost or an extra damage die on a heavy weapon seems a bit much when it's already a decent spell.

[No brains]

One 'fix' Enlarge needs is a clarification or a handwave on the creature's gear Enlarging with it. In many cases, multiplying weight by eight and only multiplying capacity by two means that a creature becomes encumbered when Enlarged. It's practically a trap option when played straight. A Monster Manual Knight NPC won't be able to move if its plate armor and greatsword get eight times heavier, and that's with a 16 STR. A Duergar is left with only the power to immobilize itself under the weight of its gear.

[Christew]

+d4 has always seemed pretty consistent with other bonus damage spells (Divine Favor and Elemental Weapon for example). As others have stated, the grappling uses are arguably the meat of the spell anyway.

[ender241]

One 'fix' Enlarge needs is a clarification or a handwave on the creature's gear Enlarging with it. In many cases, multiplying weight by eight and only multiplying capacity by two means that a creature becomes encumbered when Enlarged. It's practically a trap option when played straight. A Monster Manual Knight NPC won't be able to move if its plate armor and greatsword get eight times heavier, and that's with a 16 STR. A Duergar is left with only the power to immobilize itself under the weight of its gear.

I can't imagine that any DM would rule that the enlarged creature can't carry the enlarged gear it was previously able to carry. The whole idea is the creature becomes bigger and stronger (hence advantage on Str checks/saves). Technically, I suppose you're right by a very strict reading of RAW. But RAI is clear as day that this shouldn't be a concern.

[ftafp]

You know, RAW Enlarge's effect on weapons only applies if it's cast on the creature or vehicle using the weapon. If you cast it on the weapon itself you can argue it counts as a large-sized weapon, giving medium creatures disadvantage on attacks with it but doubling its damage dice

[Greywander]

An extra 1d4 damage makes this similar to Divine Favor, a 1st level spell. The difference is (a) you also increase in size and get advantage on STR checks (great for grapplers), (b) you can give it to someone else, (c) you can also reduce instead of enlarging, and (d) it works on objects, too. All of this combines to make it worthy of a 2nd level slot.

You do have to be careful with per-attack damage buffs. Those who get more attacks get more benefit out of it. So fighters and monks (depending on if the damage buff applies to unarmed strikes, seems RAW it doesn't) get more benefit than most others, but even things like PAM or CE can make the benefit disproportionate. That said, it baffles me that Enlarge/Reduce applies to each attack, but the Rune Knight's Giant's Might only applies to one attack. Getting more attacks is the fighter's entire schtick, why would you have a subclass with a feature so similar to to the Enlarge effect but only make the damage bonus apply to a single attack? If anything, I'd expect the two to be switched around.

[Frogreaver]

So I've always felt that the damage difference should have been greater than just a single 1d4 for this spell. I've seen a lot of complaining about it over the years too. I've never really used it, but the party Bard is going to take it so this is the first time I've put this much thought into it.

Enlarge. The target’s size doubles in all dimensions, and its weight is multiplied by eight. This growth increases its size by one category – from Medium to Large, for example. If there isn’t enough room for the target to double its size, the creature or object attains the maximum possible size in the space available. Until the spell ends, the target also has advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. The target’s weapons also grow to match its new size. While these weapons are enlarged, the target’s attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage.

Reduce. The target’s size is halved in all dimensions, and its weight is reduced to one-eighth of normal. This reduction decreases its size by one category – from Medium to Small, for example. Until the spell ends, the target also has disadvantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. The target’s weapons also shrink to match its new size. While these weapons are reduced, the target’s attacks with them deal 1d4 less damage (this can’t reduce the damage below 1).

My first thought was to have the damage increase/decrease by 50%.
So a 18 Str Dueling Fighter would have a base average hit of 1d8+6 = 10.5 damage. Enlarge would increase that to 15.75. Reduce would drop it to 5.25.
A 18 Str GWM Greataxe Barb would have a base average of 1d12+14 = 20.5 damage. Enlarge would increase that to 30.75. Reduce would drop it to 10.25.

50% is pretty significant. Is it too much?

25% doesn't feel significant enough. The Dueling Fighter would deal similar damage to the original 1d4. The GWM Barb would still come out better than the d4 at least.

I like the idea of a scaling difference so using a % seems like a good idea. Just need to find the sweet spot. I was trying to keep it quick math easy like 25% or 50%, but I guess most people could do 33% in their head.

Maybe I'll go with 33%

Opinions?

For a level 3 Greatsword Fighter with defensive style the spell adds 25% damage. At level 4 it's 23% damage.

If you want to buff it, just make it a +d6. It really doesn't need the buff though.

[sambojin]

It's not bad. Damage-wise it's about a Barb Rage's worth (2-3 damage per attack on average for a minute), with advantage on Str checks. And it keeps going for a minute even if you don't hit something for a turn. And it works on ranged weapon users, or finesse melee'rs and stuff. Which is ok for a lvl2 spell slot. It's flexible.

Fair enough, you don't get the resistances or subclass stuff, but it can do a lot more too. It's both enlarge and reduce. It has a 30' range, so it can do it to anyone/anything, including objects. It opens the doors for ridden mounts and summons. And pocket-sized small races. And a whole heap more.

It's one of those spells that I might not use much, but was *so very happy* when it got added to the druid's list. A lvl3 Moon Druid, as an enlarged Deinonychus is an absolute combat blender, and can be ridden by other characters too.
(Or just be a brown bear or warhorse or ape or something. Has weird effects that Giant Spider webs and nets and stuff cause damage too, and vials of acid and stuff cause a bit of extra damage as well. Even other druid subclasses wildshaped as a velociraptor/ ape/ black bear can do a bit in combat at lvl3-4, or just cast it on someone else in the party. The PAM or TWF character is usually best).

It's like Levitate. It's not Fly, but it can do a heap for the slot it's in, and can be used against enemies or for friends. Enlarge/ Reduce isn't an embiggening Barb Rage, but it kinda is, and can do a lot more too, both in and out of combat. It's pretty good. And it scales a bit due to character power, not spell slot, so it's nice like that.

I don't think it needs a buff for combat, or if you do, just make a new spell: Massive Strength. Level 2 Concentration spell, 1min duration. 30' range. Enlarges a creature one size category, gives +2Str, gives +d6 to damage, and advantage on Strength checks and saves, and doubled carry capacity.
(*Edited with the buffs below included. Now *there's* a combat buff spell 😏*)

I'd still take Enlarge/ Reduce over Massive Strength most times, due to its versatility and limited spell preps available (I think *that homebrew spell* needs a buff. +2 Str perhaps for to-hit and +1 damage? Maybe double carry capacity as well, so 4x with the size increase? Averagely better damage and to-hit, nearly all the time for strength characters, but a bit of utility for heavy-lift and stats and saves alongside as well. Highly focused on being the "you're big and strong and do lots of damage" side of it, which sounds like what you want).

((Can't imagine how Massive Strength + new multiverse Bugbear + Moon Druid deinonychus wildshape would stack if the enemy hadn't had a turn yet... Lol))

[kingcheesepants]

I don't think that it's necessary at all, the majority of the times that I've seen enlarge reduce used in game (and I've seen it used a fair number of times in a variety of campaigns) the extra or lower damage was just a cherry on top. It's usually used for grappling, or growing/shrinking something in order to do some shenanigans with it. Shrinking big objects to steal them, or shrinking an enemy vehicle to immobilize them, or enlarging some food to feed a bunch of people.

[JLandan]

It's one of those spells that I might not use much, but was *so very happy* when it got added to the druid's list. A lvl3 Moon Druid, as an enlarged Deinonychus is an absolute combat blender, and can be ridden by other characters too.
(Or just be a brown bear or warhorse or ape or something. Has weird effects that Giant Spider webs and nets and stuff cause damage too, and vials of acid and stuff cause a bit of extra damage as well. Even other druid subclasses wildshaped as a velociraptor/ ape/ black bear can do a bit in combat at lvl3-4, or just cast it on someone else in the party. The PAM or TWF character is usually best).


I'm not sure casting Enlarge on yourself, then Wildshaping would tranfer the enlargement to the new shape. Might it only affect the original shape? I'm not saying it does or doesn't, it just has never come up in any game I've played. How have DMs that have come across this handled it?

[Guy Lombard-O]

it baffles me that Enlarge/Reduce applies to each attack, but the Rune Knight's Giant's Might only applies to one attack. Getting more attacks is the fighter's entire schtick, why would you have a subclass with a feature so similar to to the Enlarge effect but only make the damage bonus apply to a single attack? If anything, I'd expect the two to be switched around.

Agreed 100%. I will note though that mechanically, the single larger extra damage die to one attack may well be better than multiple smaller damage die in some cases. Since Rune Knight is perfectly equipped to build as a grappler, it's quite possible that a shove and then a weapon attack (or a shove, grapple & weapon attack post 11th level) actually works better with the single die. Also can be better if hitting the target is an iffy proposition and many attacks won't land.

Thematically and logically, though, I absolutely hate that aspect of the Giant's Might mechanics.

[sambojin]

I'm not sure casting Enlarge on yourself, then Wildshaping would tranfer the enlargement to the new shape. Might it only affect the original shape? I'm not saying it does or doesn't, it just has never come up in any game I've played. How have DMs that have come across this handled it?

It probably should carry over, including the size increase. If you cast Invisibility on yourself and then wildshape, you stay invisible (or should). Why would Enlarge be any different? Spells do what they say they do...

[Atranen]

I can't imagine that any DM would rule that the enlarged creature can't carry the enlarged gear it was previously able to carry. The whole idea is the creature becomes bigger and stronger (hence advantage on Str checks/saves). Technically, I suppose you're right by a very strict reading of RAW. But RAI is clear as day that this shouldn't be a concern.

It sounds like someone should convince their GM to run RAW and use it as an offensive debuff!

[Greywander]

I'm not sure casting Enlarge on yourself, then Wildshaping would tranfer the enlargement to the new shape. Might it only affect the original shape? I'm not saying it does or doesn't, it just has never come up in any game I've played. How have DMs that have come across this handled it?
A similar question comes up with Rune Knights who stack Enlarge/Reduce on top of Giant's Might.

My take is that Enlarge is a spell effect that is applied to whatever your current form is. So if you are a druid and you Wild Shape, you take on a new form, and then that form is also Enlarged. Likewise, a Rune Knight who uses Giant's Might becomes a Large creature under the effect of Enlarge, thus increasing to Huge.

[TaiLiu]

One 'fix' Enlarge needs is a clarification or a handwave on the creature's gear Enlarging with it. In many cases, multiplying weight by eight and only multiplying capacity by two means that a creature becomes encumbered when Enlarged. It's practically a trap option when played straight. A Monster Manual Knight NPC won't be able to move if its plate armor and greatsword get eight times heavier, and that's with a 16 STR. A Duergar is left with only the power to immobilize itself under the weight of its gear.
Giants and dragons exist in many D&D settings—we can only assume that their physics and metaphysics are different from ours!

[Segev]

The DM of the game I'm in has large creatures benefit from larger weapons by increasing the die type and adding one more die. This is just true of larger creatures in general, and applies to enlarged creatures, too. A similar formula applies to reduction to Small and Tiny weapons.