Pathfinder 1E Are giants too strong?

[Celebrim]

They certainly are and that's part of the problem. There's nothing wrong with them being a powerful melee combatant. But when 3e started giving monsters bonuses to hit based on their stats, the system generated a very powerful melee combatant whose threat level lobbing rocks dropped off significantly compared to his 1e/2e counterparts whose ability to hit in melee or at range was dependent on pretty much just hit dice. The system may work pretty much seamlessly when comparing PCs and NPCs, but it probably makes the giants too nasty up close but not nasty enough at a distance.

If you are really concerned about this, giving giants a larger racial bonus to accuracy when throwing rocks would let them pummel parties from a distance.

Besides which, I'm thinking your referring to the classic case of 1e as you experienced it. In 1e as I experienced it, giants were among the more feared opponents precisely because their ability to hit wasn't just based on HD, but they got bonuses to hit from their strength - making them one of the few foes that could challenge a PC in melee once you got better than 0 AC. Frost giants got +4 to hit and +9 to damage when using weapons in all the 1e games I played.

 

[Derren]

I do not see a problem.
Size/mass increase is quadratic while strength gain in D&D is linear. So in order to have a huge creature with a adequate strength score you have to start with a higher base value.

 

[billd91]

I do not see a problem.
Size/mass increase is quadratic while strength gain in D&D is linear. So in order to have a huge creature with a adequate strength score you have to start with a higher base value.

It's even worse than you think. Mass increase with size isn't quadratic, it's cubic.

 

[MerricB]

If you are really concerned about this, giving giants a larger racial bonus to accuracy when throwing rocks would let them pummel parties from a distance.

Besides which, I'm thinking your referring to the classic case of 1e as you experienced it. In 1e as I experienced it, giants were among the more feared opponents precisely because their ability to hit wasn't just based on HD, but they got bonuses to hit from their strength - making them one of the few foes that could challenge a PC in melee once you got better than 0 AC. Frost giants got +4 to hit and +9 to damage when using weapons in all the 1e games I played.

You were playing with house rules. There is no such modifier in the AD&D 1E Monster Manual for giants using weapons. Indeed, they are given a flat die code for damage (which is pretty high for the larger types).

In 2E, the strength bonus was added to damage rolls with weapons, but not the "to hit" modifier.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

The high strength scores of giants comes down to two of the big failures of 3E design: ability score modifiers for creatures and size modifiers. They both look fine on first glance, but repeated play has shown how horrible they are in play and monster design.

The problems come from the cascading effects of ability scores: you give a creature a high strength so it hits more often and does more damage. That's fine, because you tweak the numbers to make those work. Unfortunately, Strength also figures into other aspects of the game: grappling checks. CMD (in Pathfinder). Skill checks. If you're talking about Dex, Con or Wis, they also then feed into defences. And, to make things worse, there was no advice in the monster creation rules as to what reasonable stats were for each CR. So you got things like the Cave Troll in 3E, and people polymorphing into a 9 HD creature with a 29 Strength!

Size modifiers on grappling checks are one of my most hated 3Eisms. PF cut them in half, and they're probably still too high. In 3E, if you got grappled by a big creature (likely with a high strength), you couldn't escape except through magic. (Opposed checks mean that small differences in bonus are magnified.)

Giants work as long as they get used precisely doing what their main design is (fighting in melee), but badly outside of that.

 

[Derren]

Size modifiers on grappling checks are one of my most hated 3Eisms. PF cut them in half, and they're probably still too high. In 3E, if you got grappled by a big creature (likely with a high strength), you couldn't escape except through magic. (Opposed checks mean that small differences in bonus are magnified.)

There are enough magical items/enchantments to give you a good chance to escape a grapple which are quite affordable, especially when you start to encounter huge enemies. Of course that requires players to plan ahead and actually take items/spells which do not fit their "ultimate DPS guide".
And don't forget unless some severe penalties are taken a grapple also disables the attacker somewhat and against huge opponents the PCs usually outnumber the monsters.

The problem is that many players expect "Combat as sport" in 3E, not all that unjustified because of the CR system, which can get them into tight spots when they do not prepare for the enemy.

 

[billd91]

The high strength scores of giants comes down to two of the big failures of 3E design: ability score modifiers for creatures and size modifiers. They both look fine on first glance, but repeated play has shown how horrible they are in play and monster design.

The problems come from the cascading effects of ability scores: you give a creature a high strength so it hits more often and does more damage. That's fine, because you tweak the numbers to make those work. Unfortunately, Strength also figures into other aspects of the game: grappling checks. CMD (in Pathfinder). Skill checks. If you're talking about Dex, Con or Wis, they also then feed into defences. And, to make things worse, there was no advice in the monster creation rules as to what reasonable stats were for each CR. So you got things like the Cave Troll in 3E, and people polymorphing into a 9 HD creature with a 29 Strength!

Size modifiers on grappling checks are one of my most hated 3Eisms. PF cut them in half, and they're probably still too high. In 3E, if you got grappled by a big creature (likely with a high strength), you couldn't escape except through magic. (Opposed checks mean that small differences in bonus are magnified.)

Giants work as long as they get used precisely doing what their main design is (fighting in melee), but badly outside of that.

I'm going to disagree with this to some degree. I don't have a theoretical problem with the ability scores affecting other things like attack bonuses, damage, grapple checks (whatever system you use), and defenses. I have absolutely no problem with all of these applying... smartly. The problem I see has more to do with excessive inflation of those stats. I don't see much reason for a large creature to have more Con than a smaller version when, chances are, the hit dice would be increased anyway with the increase in size. The creature's size is increased in design and two effects based on that size difference affect the end results, skewing the resulting stats much higher than either change taken alone would produce.

As far as size modifiers, I have no problem with them in grapples either. A human should be harder for a halfling to grapple than another halfling simply because of size. But the size difference, again, produces two effects that work together to skew the grapple penalty higher than it needs to be.

 

[brvheart]

I think he is confused with the Girdle of Frost Giant Strength rather than the giant itself. I didn't have an issue with the grappling rules in 3E. If you didn't want to get grappled by a large or huge creature stay home and grow vegetables! Why is it players think they are the biggest baddest thing on the battlefield or even should be? This isn't a Marvel Comic book. In my world most characters die before they reach 10th level. Those that survive and can overcome the challenges might actually go on to become heroes.

 

[ImperatorK]

This isn't a Marvel Comic book.

Actually, PCs become superheroes past 6th level. Earlier with heavy optimization.

 

[MerricB]

I'm going to disagree with this to some degree. I don't have a theoretical problem with the ability scores affecting other things like attack bonuses, damage, grapple checks (whatever system you use), and defenses. I have absolutely no problem with all of these applying... smartly.

Agreed.

As far as size modifiers, I have no problem with them in grapples either. A human should be harder for a halfling to grapple than another halfling simply because of size. But the size difference, again, produces two effects that work together to skew the grapple penalty higher than it needs to be.

Indeed it does. I do have other issues about grappling, but we'll let those rest for the time being.

Cheers!