A little help with Strength checks please

[DND_Reborn]

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

Umm... aren't you agreeing with me? Otherwise I don't get your point.

 

[S'mon]

Umm... aren't you agreeing with me? Otherwise I don't get your point.

I guess you haven't, then!

 

[DND_Reborn]

I guess you haven't, then!

LOL, just to be clear then, please elaborate!

And I have played tag with kids, but it has been a while.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

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

LOL, just to be clear then, please elaborate!

And I have played tag with kids, but it has been a while.

Tag?? Have you ever tried wrestling a toddler in to a car seat??

That said, having had to chase 6 year olds to put them to bed, they aren’t hard to catch. In the fiction, I think A halfling (would be the size of a six year old) is probably supposed to be more coordinated and dexterous than my kids.

I’m not sure how this adds to the conversation. I guess I would get advantage against my six year old. I might not get advantage against his evil alternate dimension, D&D universe halfling twin.

 

[ClaytonCross]

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.

I personally find the difficulty catching something half your size being difficult because of dexterity to be very bad writing. If your trying to catch something like a mouse or fly that is supper fast and small its fine but as an adult catching my nieces and nephews my 3ft arm reach means I pretty much catch them before then can run and I can tie them up in my long arms an tickle torcher them pretty much with out fail. Its easy to explain the use of bad rule with bad writing but that doesn't make the rule or the writing better. Its kind of like, well all villains with guns that could one shot heroes are required to throw there gun down a pull a knife instead of just shooting the hero in the head... "because its personal" but later when the hero manages to get the gun he does not hesitate to show the villain between the eyes... I am sure we have all seen that in book and movies more than a few times too but that doesn't mean in D&D I will ever have a villain discard his advantage.

Players: "we sneak in the bosses thrown room after blowing up his guards our side with fire ball"
GM: "sure roll for stealth then roll for perception"
Players: "Got a 10 for stealth and a 15 for perception... why are we rolling for perception?"
GM: "the boss heard the fire ball and hide too, you didn't see him but he did see you... which is unfortunate because he now stabbing your cleric with large marked shield flaunting that he is healer in the back, roll initiative"
Players: "What what?!?! he wasn't sitting stoic waiting to villain dialogue and us to get a free ambush like all the movies!?!"
GM: "No he figures you killed all the guards on the way to him so your not really in a talking mood and you survived it so he is not taking you lightly. He instead is thinking he should kill any healers he can guess as quickly as possible to increase his odds of survival"


. . . I see no reason to follow bad tropes in D&D. If your Gnome has haste I might give have advantage for being fast but his dexterity (acrobatics) is his skill level on avoiding being grappled. They don't necessarily have any more agility. You can be small, slow, and unagile. You can also be large, fast, and nimble. Those traits might be considered more come in one or the other but your character design determines if its actually true for your character. Like I said, that goes both ways... I would not get a creature advantage on grappling for being one size larger since its not inherent that being large makes you proficient at grappling things you could simple be uncoordinated. I might make slick floors, low ceiling, or if its a monster extra long arms like a Giant Ape, I might give it advantage.

 

[S'mon]

Tag?? Have you ever tried wrestling a toddler in to a car seat??

That said, having had to chase 6 year olds to put them to bed, they aren’t hard to catch. In the fiction, I think A halfling (would be the size of a six year old) is probably supposed to be more coordinated and dexterous than my kids.

I’m not sure how this adds to the conversation. I guess I would get advantage against my six year old. I might not get advantage against his evil alternate dimension, D&D universe halfling twin.

My point was that size and reach is a huge advantage for evasion not just for brute force.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Good points all.

I think one of the key problems with shoving or grappling most creatures is that few creatures have Athletics or Acrobatics proficiency, as where the character attempting to grapple will typically have it.

For instance in our last session the player had +9 to their shove, as where the target (a gorgon) was only +5 to resist despite being both a size larger, four-legged, and outweighing the character by about 1200-1500 pounds. If the gorgon also had Athletics and wasn't using only Strength, it would have been another +3, making the contest more even. The DM had to keep narrating it that the character was targeting the hind legs, forcing the rear-half down and the rest followed. Of course, the character was usually facing the gorgon, so how he continued to get to its hind legs was a bit questionable.

I know it is a fantasy game, but it seemed a bit "super"-heroic and too easy. Now, you give that gorgon advantage due to its size and four-legs, then it would be about an even contest. I suppose another alternative is to simply grant such creatures proficiency against such attacks, making the field more even and realistic.

 

[Oofta]

I agree with the DM giving large size creatures advantage; there is simply an advantage to being bigger.

Part of the problem as well is that strength doesn't really scale with size like it should. A giant or huge creature should be enormously strong, far, far stronger than any person could ever be. In fiction, a giant picking up a horse should be reasonable but it probably couldn't happen in D&D unless we're talking about a colt. Using standard rules a dragon would have to have a strength of 100 to carry a heavy horse which breaks all sorts of math.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think carrying works okay since with each size jump you double capacity.

A Hill Giant with STR 21 could carry 21*30*4 = 2520 lbs., or roughly the weight of most large creatures such as horses or bulls, although some might be heavier.

It is a bit sad and does break down in some cases, though. A gargantuan creature with STR 30 could carry 30*30*8 = 7200 lbs. I would expect that to be MUCH larger.

I think a better rule would be Medium x1, Large x4, Huge x16, and Gargantuan x64. Then use STR*30 for max lift/push/drag.

Using the above variant, the STR 30 gargantuan creature could lift 30*30*64 = 57,600 lbs. Much more realistic IMO.

 

[robus]

Here’s the thing. If the action should succeed (giant picking up a horse) then why are we even checking the rules? They’re for handling uncertainty. If there is none, then why are we checking the rules?

This is where we can get silly but we shouldn’t. Uncertainty is when things of roughly equal power go up against each other and the outcome is unknown. So hill giant strength is compared to the strength of similar creatures for resolving uncertainty, not for creatures in wildly different power brackets.

Or would DMs here allow an arm wrestling contest between a halfling and a hill giant to be resolved by dice?

Let’s get a grip on things! (so to speak...)