Seriously, this is getting frustrating, every time I post here about D&D, everyone just assumes I'm talking about 5e. Note this post is NOT tagged for 5e, it was tagged for D&D General. Does anyone even pay attention to post tags anymore?
Is this just a 5e fansite, or is it for all D&D editions, because this is far, FAR from the first time I've tried to talk about D&D and everyone just assumes I'm talking about 5e, or tries to pressure me to switch to 5e.
Pathfinder giants are similar to 3.5, but their fire giants are taller than their frost giants.FWIW, not all 3e giants are Large - so you can use the huge fire giant mini for some kind of weird cloud or storm giant. Maybe one pretending to be the high king of fire giants, or something. Or use it for that fire giant high priest with righteous might.
Also, look for Pathfinder 1e miniatures - the giants are (IIRC) the same size as 3e, and as the minis are more recent, they may be easier to find and cheaper to acquire. Check out WizKids' Pathfinder Battles minis, too. (However, I don't know what PF 2e giants are like, so double check before you buy any PF 2e minis!)
Fire giants advance by character class and not by HD in 3.5 though. For something like a huge fire giant by the rules there are things like the gigantean template from the Advanced Bestiary.in 3.5 though you can always consider them advanced and make them the larger versionsi do like the larger models. the GF9 collector series and wizkids preprimed are both official D&D lines and thus are in scale with 5e...
i also play 3.5E but i make giants, dragons, etc as big as i need. dragons i still use the 2e sizes (so crazy big at the upper end)...
SF
I think there's a difference between a little shuffling around (like giant heights or adding new lore that complements what's there) and much broader changes (like making storm giants evil). One isn't very likely to pose a barrier to long term campaigns converting to the new ruleset, the other has the potential to be an inconvenience. Ideally, a new edition of a game should be shooting for relatively easy replacement of its predecessor, not throwing up hurdles to its own success.I pretty much disagree. This is pretty much saying that designers should not have the ability to make lore level changes between editions. I feel that setting and lore are just as important of a vector for designers to consider when looking at how to improve the game.
I think there's a difference between a little shuffling around (like giant heights or adding new lore that complements what's there) and much broader changes (like making storm giants evil). One isn't very likely to pose a barrier to long term campaigns converting to the new ruleset, the other has the potential to be an inconvenience.
Wouldn't Jotunblood be more appropriate in that case?Fire giants advance by character class and not by HD in 3.5 though. For something like a huge fire giant by the rules there are things like the gigantean template from the Advanced Bestiary.![]()