Square-Cube Law and fantasy physics

[PhoenixPhyre]

If someone is asking for how giants would make sense with the square-cube law, then D&D giants, which emphatically don't make sense, have already lost their merit for that person's hobby and should be broken over the knee and cast aside when answering their questions.

Personally Hill Giants are the only D&D giants I care about anyway, and they would essentially just need shorter, thicker legs, a bit of fur and a propensity for sitting around chewing tree bark when nothing more digestible is readily available.

I disagree. Frame challenges (ie "they don't, but that's a feature, not a bug" or "nothing in D&D makes sense, so trying to shove that in is pointless") while preserving context ("we're playing D&D") are useful.

Sometimes, the answer is "you can't, not while preserving their nature." "Fixing" giants by throwing them away and substituting something else with the label slapped on is just as bad (or worse) than saying "well, it's a magical world. So magic." It's like saying "Javascript is fine if you don't use javascript and instead use <hipster language here>."

[Grim Portent]

I disagree. Frame challenges (ie "they don't, but that's a feature, not a bug" or "nothing in D&D makes sense, so trying to shove that in is pointless") while preserving context ("we're playing D&D") are useful.

Sometimes, the answer is "you can't, not while preserving their nature." "Fixing" giants by throwing them away and substituting something else with the label slapped on is just as bad (or worse) than saying "well, it's a magical world. So magic." It's like saying "Javascript is fine if you don't use javascript and instead use <hipster language here>."

This is technically a system-neutral thread, D&D giants are useful as a type-example of illogical giants but not the sole subject of discussion, so proposing biologically plausible interpretations of various fantastic beasts is very much appropriate. For a discussion on oversized fantasy creatures/machines and physics Dragon Age ogres, Titans from 40k or Sandworms from Dune would all be appropriate subjects.


Second thing, if someone was asking a question that boiled down to 'D&Dism doesn't make sense, what do I do?' then saying 'ditch the D&Dism,' is a valid response.

[Devils_Advocate]

That is, completely change how all of them are from the ground up. If I saw any of that in a D&D game, I'd say "not a giant" and "not a dragon".

A problem with hyperbole is that it's often unclear exactly how much of it someone intends. Several of the points that Grim Portent raises strike me as in keeping with plenty of depictions of fantasy giants:

- Fighting with clubs, slings and thrown weapons (including boulders) rather than with sword and bows
- Wearing fur instead of artificial fabrics
- Laziness and gluttony

I agree that "giants" are bipedal humanoids. A giant gorilla isn't really the same thing; giant the adjective yes, giant the noun no. But giants do behave differently from humans, and quite frankly it would be absurd if they didn't. The bigger the giants, the more that the sheer difference in scale means that they have to relate to their environment differently.

[deadman1204]

Its not hard to say that they can only exist because of magic - giants and dragons are magical creatures.

However, there are bigger issues with the adventurers. A giant or dragon should 1 hit kill any adventurer. 50 ton dragon step on you? Doesn't matter who you are, your squished. No death saves, no nothing, just like a bug.

Got a sharp sword? How do you actually hurt a dragon when you cant actually reach anything vital? How do you survive the equivalent of getting hit by a semi (the force behind a giant/dragon attack). Armor won't actually protect you from any of that, the impact will still squish you even if the metal doesn't get demolished. The best armor in the world won't do crap against a truck hitting you.

Honestly the very concept of adventurers fighting giants and dragons is ludicrous. They should be like top tier epic level fights with high chance of failure. However, dnd is more and more designed to not be a challenge and let the players always win. 5th ed takes this to ridiculous levels.

[Duff]

So the real issue is needing to assign a real, tangible weight value to an item (or creature), and how that weight value might interact with a giant-sized creature's carrying capacity. I'm not looking for a justification for why the giant doesn't collapse under his own weight, I'm trying to figure out how to avoid a situation where the giant can't lift his own pants.

As the GM, you do indeed need to do this.
If you want to have consistent, rules based, answers to those questions.
I've gotten away with not having to do this over 20 years of GMing and about 40 years of playing.

I suggest you probably do not, in fact, needto do this.

But it's cool that you want to. There is no correct answer, but I'd be curious to know what you decide to go with - one of the options suggested?, some combination? Maybe you've come ups with something new?

[KorvinStarmast]

Giants (and other megafauna) have bigger issues as well. For one thing, what do they eat?

Nachos, with cheese.

[Mechalich]

Honestly the very concept of adventurers fighting giants and dragons is ludicrous. They should be like top tier epic level fights with high chance of failure. However, dnd is more and more designed to not be a challenge and let the players always win. 5th ed takes this to ridiculous levels.

The Columbian Mammoth reached at least 10 metric tons in weight, and humans hunted it regularly (quite possibly to extinction) with simple stone weapons. Giants would almost certainly be less massive (Gigantopithecus the largest known ape and an animal similar in size to a Hill Giant, is estimated to have weighed around 300 kg) as would any dragon designed for non-magical flight (probably no more than 1000 kg on the upper end). It is absolutely possible for small groups of humans to fight and kill such animals, though D&D admittedly represents this poorly due to a lack of a bleed mechanic; very large animals have extremely high blood pressure and are extremely vulnerable to bleeding out if major blood vessels are severed and those vessels are not located especially deep in the tissue.

Dragons, in particular, are likely to be very vulnerable to injury. Fantasy often depicts extremely large animals are ludicrously tough and armored, and while that's largely true for terrestrial megafauna, because their thick skin is necessary to maintain the high blood pressure they need to function even in the absence of predator deterrence, it does not hold for flying animals. While many birds, such as eagles, are quite strong and powerful for their body mass, they lack durability and avoid fighting on the ground for that reason.

[gbaji]

Here's the thing. Anti-magic field is, really, a misnomer. And a name that confuses things. As is Dispel Magic. Specifically, the names are part of the hubris of wizards, thinking that spells == magic and that magic == spells.

It doesn't. Those effects? They disrupt organized, artificial uses of magic. Not magic itself--no human is that strong. And if they were, the powers that be would smack them down right quick. Because magic is the stuff of existence in a D&D-like. It's in and through everything. It's as much a part of fantasy reality as the strong force is a part of our reality. And stopping it entirely is like stopping the strong force--BAD THINGS HAPPEN. Instead, those spells merely prevent and dampen existing resonant manifestations of manipulated magic (aka spells and suchlike), like a jamming device prevents coherent radio signals on the covered band by flooding the airways or like oil dampens waves by changing the surface tension. A summoned creature is fundamentally different from a natural one--the summoned one's body is made up of active spell-work, which cannot exist in the jamming zone.

Spells =/= magic. Or, said another way, the "magic" we're talking about here isn't the same as "the thing wizards do when they cast spells". It's the sum total of all fantastic nature of the setting, all the ways that the fundamental properties of the setting differ from those of our reality.

This. As to the OT, when people ask me "how do giants walk or dragons fly?", I answer "very well". Honestly, the only issue I ever really run into is weapon size issues, and then only because of the game system I use makes an actual distinction between "natural weapon damage" and "strength bonus damage" (well, and "magic damage added to it" as well), which makes problems for things like "how do you calculate the damage done by a giant wielding a greatsword?". Is it a human sized greatsword (which might be more like a broad/long sword to the giant), or is it a giant sized greatsword? Do I adjust the damage, such that in the first case, we do longsword damage and add the giants extra damage bonus due to strength and size)? Or such that we assume greatsword damage (since that's what it technically actually is)? But then what if he's actually wielding a giant sized greatsword? Can anyone else use it? Probably not. Do I invent new/higher damage for it? Or again, just use the same greatsword base damage? If a giant picks up a humans greatsword, what weapon damage do I use?

I think that's why I usually just have giants use clubs or something.


As to the magic thing, that's 100% what I do. The cosmology of my game world is that the entire universe (multiverse?) is a random flux of chaotic energy. A universe is formed via a super powerful will existing (supreme being, primal dragon, Azathoth, whatever) which takes on a shape and form that reflects/refracts the chaos into an ordered pattern. The flow of energy thus reflected/refracted is "magic", but also forms the entire reality of the world. Everything is magic. The ground, the trees. Everything. This magic forms at different levels, which creates things like the realm of runes (archtypes which form reality), then the realm of gods, then the realm of spirits (and other incorporeal and conceptual things), then finally, the realm of physical creatures (prime material plane).

What mortals call "magic" is merely using their own (much much smaller will) to manipulate the flow of magical energy that forms that reality. Those alterations create effects which are called "magic". Depending on the power level of the caster (from mortals up to gods), they can affect that flow at different points in the path, thus affecting a greater "level" of the magic. This allows for "basic reality", which can be altered. Then "normal magic stuff" (spells you cast). Natural magical effects/abilities (basic enchanted materials and special creature abilities), then artifact effects, and then finally primal magic (cast by gods or extremely powerful artifacts). Each is changing the flow at a higher point, and each can only affect reality that is below that effect. So no spell cast (except by a god using direct primal power) can affect/prevent/whatever an artifact effect, for example.

But yeah. The basic "rules" of the world are set at the highest level. You can't change that with magic. So if your rules say that giants can walk and carry stuff, then they can. If dragons can fly, they can as well. Because the whatsit at the center of your universe declared it to be so. Your spells could harm that giant, weaken it, or otherwise hamper it. But you can't affect the actual rules that determine how it exists in the first place. A dispel magic in my game can only ever get rid of basic cast spells. Can't remove enchantments (but might affect normal spell effects from an enchantment that does such things). Can't affect the innate properties of magical materials (like you might use to create magic armor or weapons). Can't turn off natural abilities (fire breathing, vampiric gaze, etc). And absolutely can't do a darn thing about artifact effects or god magic.

It's a great way to look at reality and magic. Not so great with me figuring out the greatsword thing though.

[deadman1204]

The Columbian Mammoth reached at least 10 metric tons in weight, and humans hunted it regularly (quite possibly to extinction) with simple stone weapons. Giants would almost certainly be less massive (Gigantopithecus the largest known ape and an animal similar in size to a Hill Giant, is estimated to have weighed around 300 kg) as would any dragon designed for non-magical flight (probably no more than 1000 kg on the upper end). It is absolutely possible for small groups of humans to fight and kill such animals, though D&D admittedly represents this poorly due to a lack of a bleed mechanic; very large animals have extremely high blood pressure and are extremely vulnerable to bleeding out if major blood vessels are severed and those vessels are not located especially deep in the tissue.

Dragons, in particular, are likely to be very vulnerable to injury. Fantasy often depicts extremely large animals are ludicrously tough and armored, and while that's largely true for terrestrial megafauna, because their thick skin is necessary to maintain the high blood pressure they need to function even in the absence of predator deterrence, it does not hold for flying animals. While many birds, such as eagles, are quite strong and powerful for their body mass, they lack durability and avoid fighting on the ground for that reason.

Your giants should be in the same magic armor as the adventurers with class levels, well organized, throwing fireballs and healing, shooting arrows (ballista) from half a mile away. Heck, the giant could easily NEVER let a human in melee range. Step back 1 step is multiple strides for a human. They should have WAY more reach than 10 feet (being 25-30ft tall with big weapons). Besides, any hit from a giant should send the player 30ft back and chopped in half. Imagine hitting a small dog with a sword - its basically impossible to not kill it with a single hit.

The dragon should literally NEVER land to fight. It should cast/breath from the air and then just leave. However, this doesn't make the game fun, so dragons always suicide to "fight".

However, you leave out simple things with the mammoth - anyone who gets hit died instantly. Elephants (way smaller than a giant or dragon) are the most deadly animals in zoos today. They kill MORE people than all the predators do - and thats all by accident. They "bump into" or try to play with the zoo keepers and squish them. Now imagine a creation that can actually move WAY faster and further than a human can.

I don't think these monsters would be invincible, but the idea that 3-5 people can win is whats just plain silly. However, the system is incredibly simplified to make it possible for the players to always win in situations they shouldn't be capable of. Large creatures are always stupidly slow and incapable with small reach, very low damage for their size, very little movement ect. The turn based system makes it so you can always stroll up to something that can easily outrun you and keep hitting you with reach, knocking you back. However, these things require a game which isn't overly simpified and simple, and thinking might hurt.

[gbaji]

Your giants should be in the same magic armor as the adventurers with class levels, well organized, throwing fireballs and healing, shooting arrows (ballista) from half a mile away. Heck, the giant could easily NEVER let a human in melee range. Step back 1 step is multiple strides for a human. They should have WAY more reach than 10 feet (being 25-30ft tall with big weapons). Besides, any hit from a giant should send the player 30ft back and chopped in half. Imagine hitting a small dog with a sword - its basically impossible to not kill it with a single hit.

This is where a well thought out (and hopefully relatively easy to implement) AoO system helps a lot. Combine that with set of ZoC rules, and you can make encounters with large creatures (especially humanoid or serpent/draconic shaped) much more interesting and difficult. My attack of Opportunity rules are really simple (assuming a hex map in my case):

1. Once you move into an opponents Zone of Control, you must stop moving. Period. Even if you have more movement.

2. Once within any opponents ZoC, you may only move one (hex). If that movement is from a ZoC space to another ZoC space, you are done moving for the round. If it's to a "safe" spot, you may resume moving later in the round (this depends on specific movement rules for different game systems). This allows you to shift position around an opponent, or advance one hex (space) towards a large or long weapon wielding opponent (pikemen say), but makes this a slower, more methodic attack.

3. Any movement in violation of these rules prompts an Attack of Opportunity by the opponent(s) who's ZoC hex you are moving out of (or multiple if you're just charging along ignoring enemies), and who can target you (invisibility spells help a lot here). You may not defend against AoO's at all (game specific implementation here obviously). You're basically assumed in combat to be moving as safely as possible, paying attention to enemies, on guard, etc. When doing this, you're just running through a gauntlet of someone else's weapons and hoping you survive.

4.(the good news). Any one person may only make one AoO at a time. This may need to be adjusted depending on the movement rules though (one large movement per round systems work differently than segment/phase/rank movement systems). The idea is that if a bunch of people all do a lemming move towards a large opponent, some of them will get through just due to them not being able to smoosh them all.

These rules become even more effective if you also have some sort of knockback rules (AoO's don't allow for whatever bracing rules you may have). Doubly so if you have sweep attack rules for large opponents as well.

Giants in my game are really really tricky. Especially if there are multiples of them. And they can do massive damage per hit. Range weapons are great ideas (but giants have notoriously thick skin, so this can take some time). Spells are helpful as well.

Oh. And I have rules that establish base ZoC for different creatures based on size. Weapons can also extend ZoC as well. And some weapons may have extra reach but not extra (or as many) ZoC plusses. Some weapons can attack at longer distances, but aren't very effective at keeping people at bay at those same ranges. Obviously, how complex you want to make this is up to you. Rules like this also force PCs in combat to stick to at least somewhat realistic combat moves during battle, and allow for defensive formations of opponents (perhaps with a second rank line of spears) become an actual threat instead of a speedbump that PCs just plow through.

The dragon should literally NEVER land to fight. It should cast/breath from the air and then just leave. However, this doesn't make the game fun, so dragons always suicide to "fight".

Yeah. If the dragon is attacking you, it should be pretty impossible to defeat and should pretty much always just be able to fly away if you're annoying enough. Strafe runs with dragon breath weapons should be nasty. Most actual dragon fights (at least ones the party has a chance to win) typically occur inside the dragons lair. The assumption there is the dragon isn't going to be able to use their flight to as much advantage and will be unwilling to leave its horde.

Of course, that requires actually tracking said dragon to its lair. And unless it's sleeping or something (which apparently dragons do), it'll likely "discourage" those who try to come near. Parties should pretty much never just be allowed to come up and attack a dragon while at full strength, fully rested, etc. Not without some extreme amounts of intelligence about the dragon and lair, and some ability to get there quickly and undetected.

[Quertus]

So… Bang, Headshot!, you shoot the giant / dragon in the brain / through the eye?

[gbaji]

So… Bang, Headshot!, you shoot the giant / dragon in the brain / through the eye?

Game system dependent. In my game, it's more like: You crit the giant in the head for max damage. That's, um... 18 point of damage. Oh, and plus three cause you spent time casting a damage enhancement on the arrow before shooting (but may have reduced your firing rate by doing so), so 21. The giant has 10 point skin, and cast up 8 more points of protection before the battle (we house rule half armor on crits, not zero armor, so slight variation but makes for better gameplay). So, you do 12 damage. He's got 25 hps on his head, so um... now he's angry at you? He pulls out the arrow, casts a heal spell on himself (cause this is the only damage he's taken in the battle so far because anything less than a crit from a ranged weapon can't hurt him). And now he's picking up a nearby boulder with his off hand and throwing it at you...

Statistically, your (highly skilled) archer might get a hit like that maybe once every 6-8 rounds. Maybe. There is some additional bow magic that may help things, but that's pretty limited to specialized folks who worship specific deities where archery is a focus. Or, I suppose, some rare arrows with some innate extra damage properties could be employed. Point being it's not as simple as "get some random folks with bows in their hands and this'll be a snap".

And don't forget that the ZoC rules disallow you from running up and into range to melee the giant, but the giant can absolutely run right up to *you*. And can, if he's big enough, decide to get closer than "just within reach", meaning you also can't quickly *leave* his zone of control without prompting an AoO. So you'd better not think you can just stand there at bow range and he'll just complain about it. You pretty much have to have melee folks advancing and occupying the giants attention, while the ranged folks do what they can. And in the game system I play in, giants are just plain immune to mind/emotion affecting spells. Direct damage dealing spells are rare, but will still usually have to get through the physical armor of the giant. There's no such thing as "X damage, save for half". Almost everything is "X damage, subtract armor, remainder get through to HPs". And giants have a heck of a lot of hps.

There are rare spells that can just take giants out quickly in the game system I play. But they are usually one-use per scenario type things, so you'd better use them wisely and judiciously. Then again, a big fight with giants may be exactly the situation where you'd use that sort of powerful magic.

[Psyren]

If this was true, I wouldn't be here asking the question.

I mean, you can ask any question you want. You can ask for the meaning of life. Expecting a TTRPG to provide a definitive answer might leave you disappointed, however.

[King of Nowhere]

Your giants should be in the same magic armor as the adventurers with class levels, well organized, throwing fireballs and healing, shooting arrows (ballista) from half a mile away. Heck, the giant could easily NEVER let a human in melee range. Step back 1 step is multiple strides for a human. They should have WAY more reach than 10 feet (being 25-30ft tall with big weapons). Besides, any hit from a giant should send the player 30ft back and chopped in half. Imagine hitting a small dog with a sword - its basically impossible to not kill it with a single hit.

The dragon should literally NEVER land to fight. It should cast/breath from the air and then just leave. However, this doesn't make the game fun, so dragons always suicide to "fight".

However, you leave out simple things with the mammoth - anyone who gets hit died instantly. Elephants (way smaller than a giant or dragon) are the most deadly animals in zoos today. They kill MORE people than all the predators do - and thats all by accident. They "bump into" or try to play with the zoo keepers and squish them. Now imagine a creation that can actually move WAY faster and further than a human can.

I don't think these monsters would be invincible, but the idea that 3-5 people can win is whats just plain silly. However, the system is incredibly simplified to make it possible for the players to always win in situations they shouldn't be capable of. Large creatures are always stupidly slow and incapable with small reach, very low damage for their size, very little movement ect. The turn based system makes it so you can always stroll up to something that can easily outrun you and keep hitting you with reach, knocking you back. However, these things require a game which isn't overly simpified and simple, and thinking might hurt.

Those adventurers aren't regular humans. They have super strenght and super endurance, and they have magic.
That strafing dragon is doomed; the party can simply cast protection from energy and tank the breath wespon; fly spells and teleportation to engage the dragon.
Really, if i tried having the dragon flying away to kite, the wizard would teleport the flying party over the dragon, and the martials would get a round of full attack with flanking. Staying on the ground at least lets the dragon unleash a full attack.

You made the comparison with hitting a small dog, but it's more like fighting a small dog whose body is hard as concrete, loaded in magic boosts and shooting lasers from the eyes.
If you take the stats for regular, unenhanced humans, and put them against giants and dragons, then it goes like you described