Level Up (A5E) Strength − Size matters

[Snarf Zagyg]

Depends on what you call big. Modern depiction of Hercules and Achilles don't display them as overly big.

And if you go into the superhero world, the super strong supes that aren't clumsy have been skrinking in muscle mass.

And let's not get into the budding East Asian, Western style fantasy market. Warriors coming from Japanese, Chinese, and Korean artists are thin.

And if you get into Western T and Film, strong men are often not huge do to needing real human actors. They're muscular but no way bodybuilder status like before. Then you have trends of them fighting with or against women. Since everyone doing have an Amazon fetish, you get men in strength matches with women and not auto winning.

Not that I'm saying people don't see a correlation with size and strength at all. I'm saying it;s combined with dexterity/agility. I would guess that people under 40 would see a very big person as stronger and clumsier. It's hand and hand.

So the choice would to be:

1. Let it as is
2. Make the Big characters both stronger but clumsier.

So, back to the point you made, which I think you are (correctly) clarifying.

There is a correlation between size and strength. Still, and obviously. In fantasy. In modern fantasy. However you want to put it, and however elastically you define the terms. It's a normal visual cue that someone has gotten "stronger" by getting "bigger" and always has been- from Bane to Hulk (superheroes); and Hercules is almost always depicted with a large physique:

Schwarzenegger, Sorbo, The Rock, and so on. Hardly small guys! Even "Young Hercules" was played by a pretty buff Ryan Gosling.

But I do agree with you that there is a premium on dexterity and agility. It's just not .... new. The idea of the protagonist defeating the bigger, stronger baddie with agility and smarts is as old as time. It's appearance in movies predates even Errol "Not a BodyBuilder" Flynn's swashbuckling.

So .... yeah. Not sure where your original statement came from.

 

[R_J_K75]

It feels like among those with similar work put into it, that size still matters a lot. Are they close to getting rid of weight classes in the fighting sports or in power lifting? Just like in D&D, in real life is it the combination of the base (pre-work) physical attributes and the work put into honing them that matters?

Sure. I was just giving my POV from my real life personal experiences.

 

[Minigiant]

So, back to the point you made, which I think you are (correctly) clarifying.

There is a correlation between size and strength. Still, and obviously. In fantasy. In modern fantasy. However you want to put it, and however elastically you define the terms. It's a normal visual cue that someone has gotten "stronger" by getting "bigger" and always has been- from Bane to Hulk (superheroes); and Hercules is almost always depicted with a large physique:

Schwarzenegger, Sorbo, The Rock, and so on. Hardly small guys! Even "Young Hercules" was played by a pretty buff Ryan Gosling.

But I do agree with you that there is a premium on dexterity and agility. It's just not .... new. The idea of the protagonist defeating the bigger, stronger baddie with agility and smarts is as old as time. It's appearance in movies predates even Errol "Not a BodyBuilder" Flynn's swashbuckling.

So .... yeah. Not sure where your original statement came from.

I'm more saying that there is a range where the size to strength correlation is more or less not stressed. When modern media wants to stress someone's size equally strength, the person is huge. Not kinda big. Not sorta muscular. But HUGE.

It's really not the level of size and mass you see in Medium characters of D&D. Golaiths and Orcs more or less push the limit of what people see as extra strong before it starts to tank dexterity and agility.

So when you start messing with that too much, you will get hits from the other end of why halflings and gnomes don't get bonus AC for being smaller targets.

 

[Scott Christian]

Did you see the Mountain vs. the Viper in GoT? Both characters are strong AF. The Mountain’s size gives him a strength advantage, but a speed disadvantage. And in general, that show is full of strong characters who aren’t especially big.

How about LotR? Gimli is smaller than the rest of the fellowship (except the hobbits) but he’s generally framed as fighting using more direct application of strength as opposed to Legolas’ and Aragorn’s more agile approaches.

Fantasy video games, especially JRPGs are chock full of incredibly strong, waif-thin characters, as are fighting games, fantasy anime, comics... It’s a pretty common trope.

You are defining strong as "combat strong."
The OP is defining strong as the ability to lift (and therefore grab, punch, etc.).
There is a huge difference.

GoT is not full of strong characters that aren't especially big. It is full of skilled fighters that aren't especially big. Brienne defined herself by being big and skilled, which is why she was one of the few women that could fight equally with a man. The Hound and the Mountain, both known for being stronger than others, were indeed bigger. Drogo, Hodor, Tormund, Wun Weg (the giant) were all physically stronger than the entire cast. And all of them are big. Drogo looks like a modern day action doll.

In LotR, Gimili looks like a modern day powerlifter, just short. His shoulders, despite being two feet smaller than Aragorn, are wider. That is why he is strong. Legolas is a better fighter, but he is not physically stronger.

Most fantasy video games that appeal to more mature crowds (The Witcher, Dragon Age, Skyrim) almost directly correlate size with physical strength. Magic can imbue strength. But that is why it is magic. But size equals strength. It is why a giant in Skyrim can send you flying across the battlefield or Letho in The Witcher is physically superior to Geralt.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm more saying that there is a range where the size to strength correlation is more or less not stressed. When modern media wants to stress someone's size equally strength, the person is huge. Not kinda big. Not sorta muscular. But HUGE.

It's really not the level of size and mass you see in Medium characters of D&D. Golaiths and Orcs more or less push the limit of what people see as extra strong before it starts to tank dexterity and agility.

So when you start messing with that too much, you will get hits from the other end of why halflings and gnomes don't get bonus AC for being smaller targets.

Again, this was the comment you made that I didn't understand:

"In modern fantasy, strength and size are not related."

To the extent that you are now qualifying this comment as being in error or hyperbole or overstated to support an argument regarding D&D, I think we are good.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would guess that people under 40 would see a very big person as stronger and clumsier.

If you look at a lot of professional athletes, especially sports like football, this is VERY untrue and promotes a stereotype that someone who is big/strong is likely uncoordinated/clumsy. I've known tons of thinner people who were just as clumsy as bigger people.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

If you look at a lot of professional athletes, especially sports like football, this is VERY untrue and promotes a stereotype that someone who is big/strong is likely uncoordinated/clumsy. I've known tons of thinner people who were just as clumsy as bigger people.

Not just football.

I'm pretty sure LeBron James, among others, might take issue with the idea that his strength and size make him a clumsy oaf.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Not just football.

I'm pretty sure LeBron James, among others, might take issue with the idea that his strength and size make him a clumsy oaf.

True. It just seems like some people are still thinking in terms of the bumbling giant. I would bet you just about anything more pro-athletes have 14+ on average in STR, DEX, and CON, you just can't compete at that level and not have worked hard to get there. And that says nothing about the mental work, dedication, study, and belief in yourself (i.e. INT, WIS, and CHA) to get there as well!

 

[DEFCON 1]

When you are adding a 20-point swing to your ability to lift something due to the d20 die... the fact that some people seem to need half-orcs to have a +1 bonus over haflings in their STR stat is baffling to me.

If the half-orc and the halfling both roll a d20 plus their STR mod and the half-orc gets to have their mod be one point higher on average cause "Dey bigger and stronger and we need to see that represented in their racial write-up!"... of those possible 400 roll combinations the halfling is still going to win just under HALF of those strength contests. So what exactly did that +1 give you? Almost half the time your half-orc is a CHUMP and getting pwned by the halfling in the strength contest. That +1 bonus did NOTHING to make your half-orc seem stronger than the halflings out there.

When you are adding 20 points of randomness to ANYTHING in this game, thinking the modifier number is an actual meaningful representation of the character's abilities is ridiculous. So no... using stats to signify anything other than a generalization of who the character is, is folly and a waste of time. And thus the game should never screw over potential character combos because it gives the appearance of making some combos less than ideal. Let the halfling and half-orc start potentially even at Level 1 and eventually end even when they buy their stat to 20. It's meaningless if you do otherwise, in my opinion because the game mechanics do little to ever match the fiction.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

True. It just seems like some people are still thinking in terms of the bumbling giant. I would bet you just about anything more pro-athletes have 14+ on average in STR, DEX, and CON, you just can't compete at that level and not have worked hard to get there. And that says nothing about the mental work, dedication, study, and belief in yourself (i.e. INT, WIS, and CHA) to get there as well!

One of the issues (only one, I know there are many!) with the six ability system is that they are all treated independently.

While there is not a perfect correlation between physical abilities, there tends to be a high correlation; it is unusual for someone to be ONLY strong, but not dexterous or healthy. Oftentimes, they come as a pack (as in athletes, who are usually strong, dexterous, and healthy/high constitution).

It's similar with the mental abilities as well. Not perfect, but there tends to be a correlation.