Giant by Poll: Post-crash Poll #10: Rock damage

[Shade]

How much damage shall our giant deal with its thrown rocks?

 

[Conaill]

If you'll allow me to repost the rock damage analysis from the Gargantuan "Traditional Giant":

Rocks... well, it seem the Giant's rocks don't really follow the normal size progressions. I suspect this is an inconsistency that slipped through the 3.5 cleanup.

Most Large giants have 2d6 rocks, with the exception of the Stone giant who has 2d8. Huge giants seem to use 2d8, even though it should be Large 2d6 -> Huge 3d6 (-> Gargantuan 4d6). The Colossal mountain giant uses 4d8 rocks, which isn't a standard for Colossal weapons. It's closes to 6d6 (Colossal Falchion or Longsword), which would scale down to 4d6 at Gargantuan. (See the "Larger and Smaller Weapon Damage" table, which is much more useful than the "Increased Damage By Size" table.)

Overall, I think 4d6 rocks seem to make most sense. At least it's a standard damage for that size.

Note also that the Stone Giant uses two hands for throwing, which could explain its higher damage output.

All in all, I think 4d6 should at least be an option in this poll. Neither 2d8 nor 3d8 is a standard weapon damage for a Gargantuan creature. I'm voting 3d8 since that's closest to 4d6, but I'd prefer restarting the poll... (I could also live with 3d6, as a lower rock damage for a Gargantuan giant.)

 

[Shade]

Feel free to do "write-in" votes for 4d6. I'm happy with 3d8.

 

[Shade]

Anyone else?

 

[Conaill]

Yeah - Anyone else prefer 4d6 over 3d8?

 

[dhaga]

I voted for 3d8 but would like to include myself as a "write-in" for 4d6.

 

[Shade]

As an aside, the following giants deal 2d8 with rocks:

• Stone giant, as Conaill mentioned earlier
• Ocean giant (H)
• Geriviar (H)
• Death giant (H)
• Greater dusk giant (H)
• Sun giant (H)
• Cloud giant (H)
• Greater cyclops (H)

According to the Monster Manual, 2d8 increases to 3d8 for a size category boost. 4d6 would actually be the "odd" amount to use.

 

[dhaga]

Hrm. Thought 2d8 went to 4d6. Guess I remembered incorrectly (IIRI?)

I still think 4d6 sounds cleaner than 3d8.

 

[Shade]

Hrm. Thought 2d8 went to 4d6. Guess I remembered incorrectly (IIRI?)

I still think 4d6 sounds cleaner than 3d8.

It may have in 3E, but not anymore:
http://srd.pbemnexus.com/weapons.html
http://srd.pbemnexus.com/improvingMonsters.html

 

[Conaill]

According to the Monster Manual, 2d8 increases to 3d8 for a size category boost. 4d6 would actually be the "odd" amount to use.

I prefer to use the "Larger and Smaller Weapon Damage" table instead - much more complete than the "Increased Damage By Size" table (quick - what would 6d8 increase to?). Besides, the MM still has plenty of the old 3.0 weapon damage inconsistencies they tried to iron out in 3.5.

Yes, 2d8 should increase to 3d8.For example, a Large 2d8 bastard sword becomes a Huge 3d8 bastard sword. But 2d8 isn't a standard damage for a Huge weapon to begin with, and 3d8 isn't a standard damage for a Gargantuan one.

WotC may not have bothered changing all of the MM over to the new standard weapon damages when they went to 3.5 (they might have had to call it 3.6 otherwise), but I'd prefer to stick to the 3.5 standards when creating new critters, if at all possible.

[/nitpick]