Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tequila Sunrise" data-source="post: 5818521" data-attributes="member: 40398">Stranger, this forum ain't big enough for two size threads. You best have yer six shooter ready at high noon. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Okay personally, I either prefer to have no size penalties, or to have internally-consistent size penalties. In other words either take the last step and drop that one weapon restriction that 4e has, as many of us already do, and don't even bother having a separate size category. Or tweak 3e's size mods so that they actually make sense.I agree that no penalties is silly; I also think it's downright absurd that every small creature in WotC D&D has the same space and reach as a Medium creature, despite being roughly half the size. As I mentioned in my thread, the penalties mostly disappear into the stat block and I wouldn't know they're there without looking. But space and reach are clearly and intuitively related to size.I understand that Small creatures have the space and reach of Mediums so that Sam and Frodo aren't outright gimped in melee. But from an internally-consistent and a realistic PoV, it's absurd that they all seem to have chimpanzee arms. It makes those Small penalties mere tokens, lip-service to realism, in a game that has never been overly concerned with realism. 3.x and 4e effectively have one PC size category: Smedium.</blockquote>

Verification