Is the SIZE modifier more trouble than it's worth?

[Squire James]

If I had more grappling monsters, I'd probably do the following:

1. No size bonus to grapple checks.

2. No creature can start a grapple on someone more than 1 size level larger than himself.

3. If starting a grapple on someone larger than himself, apply a -4 penalty to grapple check.

4. The penalty for a large creature holding a smaller one without being treated as grappled is reduced to -10 if one size larger, -4 if 2 sizes larger, or -2 if 3 or more sizes larger. Multiple creatures can be held in this way by taking the penalty multiple times. Grappling a creature of any size will deprive the large monster of one natural attack form (which is presumably being used by the monster to restrain the grappled creature).

5A. Touch attacks always use Dex bonus instead of Str bonus. This applies to all touch attacks unless they want to touch as part of a natural or unarmed attack (which would only work for melee touch spells if "holding the charge").

OR (AND if you want to emphasize small creatures in your game)

5B. Double size bonuses/penalties to AC against touch attacks.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I think one of the weaknesses of the size modifier is that it doesn't increase speed. If a halfling automatically moves 10 slower than a human because he is one tick smaller, why doesn't a Huge or Gargantuan creature move faster (and this includes the 5" step, which should also be scaled).

I also think there should be more of an upside for being small. As written being small is almost always a penalty and because of that we rarely see halflings or gnomes in our games.

DS

 

[mearls]

Size, as we understand it, gives modifiers to
* Hide checks
* Attack rolls
* Armour class
* Grappling checks

It was a pretty neat innovation of 3e. However, six years in, is it a failed innovation?

I've thought about this a lot, as someone who has left size modifiers out of more stat blocks than he cares to recall.

I think the issue is that size's primary use is that it provides a numerical modifier, yet size itself is described using words.

If size was instead expressed a modifier, it's easier to use. it looks a little weird (size -2 means I'm big) but it's likely faster to apply in the game.

I wonder if something as simple as "Large (-1)" would be easier to use.

 

[Vocenoctum]

However, doesn't the fact that the hill giant has a +14 bonus to Strength compared to the halfling's -2 modifier to Strength already give a rather large swing towards the giant?

Cheers!

I think that's where Size modifiers are useful, is offsetting some features of the Attribute modifers.

A halfling is going to do less damage than a human, but will have an easier time hitting the human than vice versa. So, he gets a -1 on damage and to hit because he can't penetrate as well, but the +1 for size nullifies that. Larger creatures get a strength bonus, which lets them smash through stuff better, and also lets them do ore damage, but the Size penalty is taking into account that he'll miss more.

The main thing there is the abstract nature of hitting vs AC.

If it were an Armor As DR thing, it'd model better, since a larger creature would miss more, but do more damage when he did hit and penetrate the armor better.

As for Hide, unless you want to look up the Spot DC for relative sizes, the Size Modifier seems a pretty easy and useful thing.

Grapple can get harsh, yeah. That's what Escape Artist is for though! Usually vs a dedicated grapple monster, the size modifier is the least of your worries.

The other thing is, a Human with 14 strength, vs a gnome with 14 str, the human is still generally going to have advantages for his size, even if they're the "same" strength.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I like 'em, but I'd go one step further:

I'd have size modifiers also affect initiative, in the same way it affects attack rolls and AC. Big creatures tend to be far slower than small creatures, but that isn't usually reflected in the rules.

This is generally accounted for by the Dexterity modifier.

 

[reanjr]

Ah, but the chimpanzee has Improved Grapple and Str 14!

And I'll second the the suggestion made upthread that 5'-adjustments should be based on creature size. They should be equal to reach, maybe (which means Tiny and smaller creatures get no "5-foot-steps", they either take a move action or stay put).

Make it equal to space. There are odd creatures with excessive reach. Space is usually equal to reach anyway.

 

[reanjr]

I think one of the weaknesses of the size modifier is that it doesn't increase speed. If a halfling automatically moves 10 slower than a human because he is one tick smaller, why doesn't a Huge or Gargantuan creature move faster (and this includes the 5" step, which should also be scaled).

For the same reason that an elephant (or just about anything the size of an elephant) cannot jump. The 3rd power to 2nd power ratio on larger creatures is more significant than the increased gait. On smaller creatures, the ratio is not of as much significance, so the shortened gait effects them detrimentally.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Size modifiers are just fine. There are much more broken things in D&D than this little guy!

Like, the grapple rules for instance. Cripes, the grapple rules. Ow.

As for giants, they are crazy powerful these days, yes ... but I think the main problem with them is the natural AC bonus. Even the lowly hill giant randomly has +9 natural AC! What is that about? I've got no problem with giants being able to put a world of hurt on whoever they can grab -- they are giants after all -- but they've got 12d8+48 hit points, that makes them plenty durable enough! There's no reason to make them nigh-invulnerable as well.

-The Gneech

This touches upon something I've always thought was rather silly in the d20 system. Larger than man-sized creatures (size Large and up) have a penalty to AC based on size . . . then almost every large (and up) creature gets some arbitrary natural AC bonus! What's the point of having a size penalty to AC factored in at all if the resulting AC can essentially be set at whatever the designer wants by assigning natural AC bonus?

 

[MerricB]

I've thought about this a lot, as someone who has left size modifiers out of more stat blocks than he cares to recall.

I think the issue is that size's primary use is that it provides a numerical modifier, yet size itself is described using words.

If size was instead expressed a modifier, it's easier to use. it looks a little weird (size -2 means I'm big) but it's likely faster to apply in the game.

I wonder if something as simple as "Large (-1)" would be easier to use.

That'd be rather useful, I think.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

MerricB, what are you suggesting the outcome of a hill giant vs. halfling match be?

Dependent on their relative strengths, not sizes - as size already affects strength.

Here's a point that you might overlook: a grapple check is screwy with probabilities. A +4 modifer is not a 20% swing; it's variable depending on where the balance was before then. As an opposed check, grapple checks use a bell-curve type probability distribution.

Cheers!