A little help with Strength checks please

[guachi]

Good, so I'm not crazy! LOL

What about trying to shove a creature with 4-legs by something with 2? It seems like that would be harder to shove or grapple. I mean I've worked at a stables and trust me, without a harness or something, trying to control a horse is NOT easy when nervous. Of course, maybe I just sucked at Animal Handling!

I get a more nimble creature could use Acrobatics so that makes since, but I also sometimes things like shoving require a Strength saving throw instead of Strength check. Seems inconsistent.

Some animals, like the goat, have the Sure-Footed property that grant them advantage on saving throws made against effects that would knock it prone.

It's a bit odd it doesn't grant the advantage on checks as well.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I also tend to use advantage when appropriate. If you can effectively use your mass, of course you may roll with advantage.
The standard usually is strength vs dexterity so no advantage. You might think that it is quite hard to actually grab a creature that is smaller than you. (think of a fly)

 

[ClaytonCross]

I think it’s a mistake to assume that a larger creature would have advantage, simply because the smaller creature is has the potential to be more nimble. The larger creature probably already has a significant bonus to their strength, simply by being large.

That doesn't make since. The nimbleness of a smaller opponent doesn't have anything to do with a competition of strength between them. If your saying that perhaps an opponent could use Dexterity (acrobatics) to escape because that is an option for escaping grapples that is one thing and in the RAW. However, the size advantage on a strength check could also be considered a matter or reach and leverage that grants that advantage which the attacker would have regardless of the smaller creators decision to use strength (athletics) or dexterity (acrobatics) and in D&D their is no inherent reduction in strength or increase in nimbleness in speed due to size per rules as written. If a player wants to play a 20 strength Gnome with a 8 dexterity is not going to be more nimble than a medium or larger creature with 18 Strength and a 16 dexterity.

I am not saying I agree with the original post's stated GM call. I am just saying there is nothing in the rules for or against it. So it appears to be just a GM call that a larger creature has an advantage due to larger limbs having greater reach to catch smaller nibble opponents and superior leverage to over power smaller strong opponents. In fact a smaller target that is both more dexterous and stronger than the attacker would still have to face the larger attackers leverage and reach.

That said, watching SUMO its not uncommon for the smaller opponent to get under a larger one lifting them to reduce footing and gaining the ability to push large opponents around. So I don't see a need to add that advantage myself and I certainly wouldn't give the smaller opponent disadvantage. I feel like its fine to let the stats speak for themselves. If your smaller but stronger and more proficient in feats of athletically prowess its simply covered in your character design. … and yes a small Gnome is unable to target a giant for a grapple. So size is already accounted for in my opinion. I do over all see this as matter of GM discretion.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

This why we have DMs spelling out the rules for every conceivable situation is impossible as there are just too many variables. For example: are you shoving the 4 legged creature from the front or the side? The DM needs to quickly resolve all the variables and make an adjudication: Success, failure, uncertain (whereupon you roll some dice and maybe get advantage or disadvantage)

Only applicable when cow tipping.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Good, so I'm not crazy! LOL

What about trying to shove a creature with 4-legs by something with 2? It seems like that would be harder to shove or grapple. I mean I've worked at a stables and trust me, without a harness or something, trying to control a horse is NOT easy when nervous. Of course, maybe I just sucked at Animal Handling!

I get a more nimble creature could use Acrobatics so that makes since, but I also sometimes things like shoving require a Strength saving throw instead of Strength check. Seems inconsistent.

Here is the thing. If your GM is giving the advantage to the large sized attacker for longer limbs providing greater leverage to counter strength, greater reach to cover dexterity, and greater mass making it harder to resist them by pushing them around (since 2 opponents of equal strength pushing each other will make the one of lighter mass move back everything else being even and larger opponent is simply limits space by preventing removing space which you might otherwise maneuver into) he has a valid reason but there is no RAW that requires it. It is just a judgement call. The same with 4 legs. If your GM says the ground is sturdy, so do to mass and leverage it has advantage .. sure that is with in his right to call that.

Your GM could just as easily go the other way with it thought. He could argue the smaller target has advantage due to the larger opponent being off balance and using poor body structure to grapple at something so low. A horse with four legs but hard hooves might have his weight spread out and difficulty gaining traction on the slightly muddy top soil resulting in it slipping around giving the smaller opponent with lower center of gravity and its weight focused more closely together the advantage of better traction.

Ultimately, there is no rule on this. Just a GM call. If your having issue with it because it comes up regularly in your games the best and really only thing you can do is talk the your GM about it and explain that its making the game less fun for you. Hopefully your GM listens and stops granting it all the time at the very least. Maybe Narrate how your character drops low to make it harder for the larger creature to reach you. No amount of forum discussion will change your GMs mind or create a rule that will allow you to avoid this.

I hope your GM is a reasonable person to talk to and not a "my way or the high way" type but I fear if your posting this here you already tried and it didn't go well. Good luck. Sorry there is no rule to help you but D&D really is always the GMs world and the players just live in it. Best any of us can hope for is reasonable GM who listens.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

If you are remembering reading something, you may be remembering the Disarm rules on page 271 of the DMG, where advantage and disadvantage based on size are applied.

 

[S'mon]

As I house rule I'll typically give +1 size category creatures advantage on Athletics checks to avoid being Grappled, since they typically weigh about 8 times as much as the attacker, but not on their attempts to Grapple others. Realistically they should probably get both, but then realistically they should have Advantage on melee attacks likewise!

 

[DND_Reborn]

As I house rule I'll typically give +1 size category creatures advantage on Athletics checks to avoid being Grappled, since they typically weigh about 8 times as much as the attacker, but not on their attempts to Grapple others. Realistically they should probably get both, but then realistically they should have Advantage on melee attacks likewise!

Thanks everyone for the responses. I think that is what he is doing. It is funny I suppose you could rule a larger creature trying to grapple a smaller one using Dex to evade should have disadvantage (or give advantage to the smaller dodger). How many times have we seen or read about small heroes evading large ogres or giants trying to grab them?

I think it makes since if the creature being grappled is larger and resisting with Str, especially if it is 4-legged. But I'll talk to him next session and the rest of the group. Our DM pretty much goes with the consensus of the table unless he feels really strongly about something.

 

[thorgrit]

I believe the Advantage on Strength checks when Enlarged is an artifact of the mechanical game design. In previous versions of the game (or at least just 3e), the target was granted a flat bonus to their strength score when Enlarged. Since this forced recalculation of so many things including attack rolls, damage rolls, skill checks, etc. on the fly and took up time, in 5e they tried to limit stat increases to permanent or semi-permanent effects. So, in 5e, rather than your Strength score going up when Enlarge is cast, they have the increased strength represented by Advantage on checks and a d4 bonus to damage rolls. (The lack of a bonus to attack rolls I presume is made for flatter "bounded accuracy" reasons.)

A creature that is naturally Large or larger could have its strength accurately represented by its Strength stat naturally, so the 'hack' of granting Advantage on checks to represent greater strength wouldn't be needed. Or so I believe.

 

[S'mon]

I suppose you could rule a larger creature trying to grapple a smaller one using Dex to evade should have disadvantage (or give advantage to the smaller dodger).

Have you played Tag with a 6 year old? Who has the Advantage?