Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nail" data-source="post: 566422" data-attributes="member: 224">Re: Re: Re: Size ChartTrue enough.&nbsp; However, I've seen (tho' I can't quote them) rule supplements which take this table and do other things with it.&nbsp; For example, if you were to make a &quot;real&quot; Enlarge spell (rather than the bizarre legacy version in the PH), you might be interested in how changing size affects your physical stats.&nbsp; This table seems the closest thing we'll get to that.I'll bet that if we ask really nicely, someone out there could point us to the approriate splat-book.....But the implication is there that there are no significant differences.&nbsp; (Conversely, they treat Int a bit differently when rolling up a monster character....a marginally related topic.)I disagree with your premise.&nbsp; There is no difference between balancing stats for spell casters vs fighting-types.&nbsp; For example, a fighter has little use for Cha, and yet it is often used to balance against the fighter-type attributes of Str (1/2 orc) or Con (dwarf).I'm among the chorus that says &quot;half-orcs got the shaft&quot;.&nbsp; The fact they didn't get any &quot;stocking stuffers&quot; (excellent use of a seasonal reference, BTW!) is a bug, not a feature.(sigh) I suppose yer right.&nbsp; I'll stay away from a +/-4 racial bonus from now on......probably.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Great catch, and one I hadn't thought of.&nbsp; Given that, I suppose it would be best to treat the races as...well, as races (half-this, half-that) rather than as feats.&nbsp; The logical confusion (and balance problems) with stacking racial modifiers (if 1/2 races are feats) makes the experiment fall flat on its face.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nail, post: 566422, member: 224"] [b]Re: Re: Re: Size Chart[/b] True enough. However, I've seen (tho' I can't quote them) rule supplements which take this table and do other things with it. For example, if you were to make a "real" [i]Enlarge[/i] spell (rather than the bizarre legacy version in the PH), you might be interested in how changing size affects your physical stats. This table seems the closest thing we'll get to that. I'll bet that if we ask [i]really[/i] nicely, someone out there could point us to the approriate splat-book..... [b][/b] But the implication is there that there are no significant differences. (Conversely, they treat Int a bit differently when rolling up a monster character....a marginally related topic.) [b][/b] I disagree with your premise. There is no difference between balancing stats for spell casters vs fighting-types. For example, a fighter has little use for Cha, and yet it is often used to balance against the fighter-type attributes of Str (1/2 orc) or Con (dwarf). I'm among the chorus that says "[i]half-orcs got the shaft[/i]". The fact they didn't get any "stocking stuffers" (excellent use of a seasonal reference, BTW!) is a bug, not a feature. [b][/b] (sigh) I suppose yer right. I'll stay away from a +/-4 racial bonus from now on......probably. :D [b][/B] Great catch, and one I hadn't thought of. Given that, I suppose it would be best to treat the races as...well, as [i]races[/i] (half-this, half-that) rather than as feats. The logical confusion (and balance problems) with stacking racial modifiers (if 1/2 races are feats) makes the experiment fall flat on its face. [/QUOTE]

Verification