Burst Effects and Big Monsters

[BASHMAN]

Using the size of the creature as the origin of the burst is grossly unfair & over-powered, getting more powerful the bigger the burst. It should be 1 square. Otherwise a creature taking up 2x2 squares increases the size of the burst exponentially. A Burst 1 attack will cover 12 squares instead of 8 this way. A burst 2 attack will cover 32 instead of 24, etc. A burst 5 effect will cover 142 instead of 120 squares.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well, PCs really aren't intended to ever be bigger than medium size. If it makes monsters stronger, well, such is the life of an adventurer.

 

[sfedi]

I don't feel like the monsters are given an edge on getting larger close bursts.
They already have disadvantages because of it's size. So some little perks seems to even out.

 

[Jhaelen]

Using the size of the creature as the origin of the burst is grossly unfair & over-powered, getting more powerful the bigger the burst.

Huh? Since there are no large player races, it doesn't matter at all if the number of squares affected by a burst increases with a monster's size.

Actually, I think it makes a lot of sense.

 

[Mesh Hong]

Using the size of the creature as the origin of the burst is grossly unfair & over-powered, getting more powerful the bigger the burst.

Grossly unfair? When compared to what exactly? Monsters and PCs are designed differently and follow their own design, logic, and version of the rules.

Monsters really get shafted in the fairness department. Sure they have a few advantages, but they also have some major disadvantages. I am not sure if this thread is the place to get involved in that discussion or not but consider this very basic concept of the game.....

PCs are designed, built and governed with the express expectation of success. The game is designed around the heroes triumphing over evil and saving the day, the world, or their lunch.

Monsters are designed, built and governed with the express expection of defeat. The game is designed around the monsters falling to the blades and spells of the good forces over running them, their ultimate measure of value is rated on how entertaining they were to kill.

In my opinion, if you are going to talk about fairness you should be looking at something a lot more fundamental than the number of squares a burst attack covers.

 

[CapnZapp]

Using the size of the creature as the origin of the burst is grossly unfair & over-powered, getting more powerful the bigger the burst. It should be 1 square. Otherwise a creature taking up 2x2 squares increases the size of the burst exponentially. A Burst 1 attack will cover 12 squares instead of 8 this way. A burst 2 attack will cover 32 instead of 24, etc. A burst 5 effect will cover 142 instead of 120 squares.

Huh?

Remember, we're only talking close bursts here. A close blast 3 or an area burst 3 would always remain the same size, regardless of how big the caster is.

And as mentioned, there's nothing "fair" or "unfair" about it. It only applies to monsters, simply because player characters are always 1x1 square.

 

[CapnZapp]

Assuming you meant...

If it's a blast, you chose a square adjacent to your space as origin square.

If it's a close burst, your -space- is the origin.

If you have a larger space than one square, that doesn't change that. I don't see how this is a problem. You measure two squares from your space in every direction for a Close burst 2. Not hard.