Giants: How big should they be in an a Fantasy RPG?

[Garnfellow]

Those seem much more fitting for thier HP / HD / sizes.

That was one of Dan's original insights -- true giants fall way, way outside the monster creation guidelines:

The Giants from the Monster Manual do not comply with the HD ranges in Mr. Williams' [Dragon magazine article, "How to Create a Monster."] All true giants have HD above the range indicated for the Giant type (hill, stone, frost, and fire all have at least triple the listed HD range); so do ettins, ogre mages, and trolls. Ogres are the only giant-type to comply with the Giant HD ranges from the article (and they have the absolute maximum). Note that if one (a) used the suggested "smooth" HD progression, and (b) returned giants to the HD they had in 1st Ed. AD&D (prior to a +50% increase), then they would in fact, in the majority of cases, fall into the proper ranges.

Me, I think lower HD giants are a better design choice primarily because it gives the DM much more room to add character classes, templates, and other cool tools. Racial HD are almost always a suboptimal choice next to class levels, which offer far more interesting and powerful abilities.

 

[genshou]

I checked the monster design perameters from v5 of Upper Krust's work for the Immortals Handbook, and according to that the minimum hit die for a Large creature is 4, and the minimum for a Huge creature is 8. For stocky/bulky creatures a x1.5 multiplier is recommended. Also, the following text is what caused me to remember the document:

NB. There is some inconsistency between these rules and the Giant
Type. Whilst Ogres; Ogre Magi and Trolls (treat hunched as stocky)
adhere to these rules; Ettins and Giants deviate considerably. In fact
given giants equally incongrous strength bonus you could be forgiven
for thinking they were initially designed to be double the listed size.

So, I would either increase size or decrease hit dice on many of the giants.

 

[Felon]

Meh. Giants are large enough that they're worthy opponents. Not so large that the idea of a human attacking one with a sword isn't ridiculous.

Sorry, I just get ludicrous images of the characters from "Land of the Giants" trying to take down one of their pursuers with those makeshift axes made out matchsticks with a rasorblade tied to one end.

"Ooooo, I'll give your wingtips such a thrashing!"

 

[Conaill]

Meh. Giants are large enough that they're worthy opponents. Not so large that the idea of a human attacking one with a sword isn't ridiculous.

As opposed to, say, attacking a Collosal red dragon with a sword?

There's plenty of other Huge and larger creatures in D&D which are considered acceptable opponents for a party armed at least in part with melee weapons. Sure, you woudn't want to attack that Colossoal red dragon with *only* a sword. But I don't think a Huge or larger giant would make for a "ridiculous" encounter...

 

[pogre]

Good lord man! What are you trying to do - make me re-base all of my figs?

And this, from a fellow miniatures enthusiast even!

 

[frankthedm]

Good lord man! What are you trying to do - make me re-base all of my figs?

And this, from a fellow miniatures enthusiast even!

Heavens no, I want you, and the players' minis, to base some action figures!



Besides, a huge add-on base is not hard to do. See the stone giant construction details.

 

[frankthedm]

And another artist votes for huge*, this time on the new Dragon magazine. [click for larger image]


http://paizo.com/dragon/products/issues/2006/345

*Or at least tries to make it look that way by using a Gnome or Halfling. Her sword blade does look a lot like a historical short sword in the hand of a smaller race. Given the artist also does not oversize the giants weapon as most do, I suspect the off sizing of her weapon was intentional.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Large is Large enough to me; after all, that's Eight to Sixteen feet to play with! Anyone who is six feet tall is going to see a 15 foot giant as three times his size, pretty much; visions of that can really evoke some terrifying thoughts.

One of the biggest problems with the miniatures thus far is that they have a great inconsistancy when it comes to showing the size of giants, trolls, and ogres as their sizes bounce all over the place due to having to fit on a certain sized base with zero variance.

 

[Ilium]

One of the biggest problems with the miniatures thus far is that they have a great inconsistancy when it comes to showing the size of giants, trolls, and ogres as their sizes bounce all over the place due to having to fit on a certain sized base with zero variance.

The minis are notorious for having wonky sizes for everybody. I'm not a big minis collector, but I have halflings, dwarves and humans that overlap each other in size.

I remember seeing a picture of two different "Lidda" minis that didn't even look like the same species.

 

[frankthedm]

One of the biggest problems with the miniatures thus far is that they have a great inconsistancy when it comes to showing the size of giants, trolls, and ogres as their sizes bounce all over the place due to having to fit on a certain sized base with zero variance.

I actually think way too many metal minis had their feet spread wide apart*. I think that screws with basing conventions more often than the actual sizes of figures. Heck one good thing to come out on mini companies making their own wargames is that those minis tend to fit better onto appropriate sized bases without busting and re-sculpting limbs.

*this one takes the cake
http://www.whiterose.org/dr.elmo/GSMC/Reserve/Frost Giant-Front.JPG