Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 97177" data-attributes="member: 2011">I figured x8 was incorrect, but knew if I posted it that someone would correct me. Thanks. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />So, the square function of strength increase (presumably due to the square increase of muscle attachment to bone surface area) would result in a x4 increase in strength at double the size.Hence, my compromise of x4 Strength for 100% increase in size would correspond to +10 Strength for 100%. Or +1 per 10%.This to me would make at least Enlarge useful and it would correspond to real world physics.The problem with this is that the "large" lifting modifier rule is only there because of the magical nature of DND. The designers looked at it and said, "Hey, it doesn't make sense that a giant can only lift this many pounds", so they put in an additional increase.In real life, there are no 12 foot tall humanoids. Even 9 foot tall ones develop severe back and joint problems.But, in a magical world, the designers wanted the large magical creatures to not be wimps when it came to lifting capacity.In reality, you should have no such large lifting capacity rule. It should absolutely not exist in the rules.If you want stronger large humanoids, you should make them stronger. Period. A doubled sized human should have four times the lifting capacity because his Strength is increased by 10.This is a lousy reason to set up the spell as +1 per 20%. Another lousy reason is that even with the large lift capacity rule, it does not apply to this spell. Hence, the spell is way underpowered since it is half powered plus it can never apply that rule.And, knowing that a medium encumbered human is suddenly unable to move due to his enlarged equipment should have been a clue to the designers that no, the spell does not increase the strength enough.Quite frankly, they dropped the ball on this one. IMO.</blockquote>

Verification