Size Tiny heroes

[fireinthedust]

I`d like to hear what anyone has to say about playing Tiny-sized characters in an RPG, what the issues with them are, etc.

My issue is that I`m putting together potential races, and Size: Tiny seems appropriate for some of them, but I don`t know if it`s a hassle or not.

In theory there are a number of Tiny races, so it`s a fairly normal situation in the setting: it`s not going to be a big surprise for monsters or heroes.

I just don`t know if mechanically there are pitfalls I should look out for. I`ve never tried it out, and I`m not... as abusive a player as I would need to be to know about such issues.

 

[Cerebral Paladin]

Size modifiers can create weird dynamics; in general, allowing a wider range of size modifiers will make characters more powerful, because players can build a character optimized to take advantage of the benefits and to avoid the pitfalls.

In particular, very small PCs make for deadly spellcasters (especially with an orientation towards rays), and to a lesser degree rogues. I would greatly fear the 3e tiny warlock (or ray oriented wizard). The key is that if they can avoid taking substantial damage penalties (i.e. by casting spells instead of using weapons, or by relying on sneak attack damage instead of weapon damage to make their attacks effective) then they get a +2 to all attacks and a +2 to AC (compared to a medium creature) for free. Of course, they're very vulnerable to grapples, but even so. For the rogue approach, you should also expect huge stealth scores. That said, the inability to flank and reach 0 really hurts a tiny rogue. You might build a rogue sniper--relying on stealth to get sneak attack on ranged attacks. That's probably actually an interesting build to play, with both major benefits and major penalties, at least until improved invisibility makes them death incarnate.

I don't think it's impossible to balance them, but you'll need to balance based on an assumption that they'll be getting a bunch of bonuses from size. As I said, it's the tiny wizard/sorcerer etc. that is likely most abusive (even the halfling wizard is surprisingly powerful). And then there's the stat question. If you give them a +Dex -Str sorta build, you make the size modifiers even worse: they're even less effective in melee combat, which they don't do anyway, and they get even higher AC and ranged touch (or ranged) attack rolls. -Con does provide some balancing value, but it creates real glass cannons.

It's not impossible, but you need to be aware and be careful. (And conversely, most melee non-rogue builds (and maybe even the rogues because of the lack of flanking) will be crippled by being tiny.)

 

[Dice4Hire]

I think pixies are the poster child for problems with tiny races, though that is in large part de to the flying and invisibility.

The bonuses can be immense for tiny creatures.

 

[GSHamster]

In some respects, it might be better to treat a Tiny race as a Class, kinda like the old D&D races. So you'd be a 6th level Pixie, rather than a 6th level Pixie Wizard.

Otherwise, it really feels like the player is going to find some race-class combo which is mechanically broken, or which just doesn't feel right (Pixie Monk?).

 

[On Puget Sound]

I once played a pixie sorcerer/ rogue who sneak attacked with Scorching Ray, while staying both invisible and out of reach. Yes, it was quite broken.

 

[Alzrius]

I think Cerebral Paladin nailed it pretty well. Size tiny characters will, like any other characters, play to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses as best they can.

In this case, having no reach and terrible grapple modifiers (and usually Strength penalties), plus bonuses to attacks, AC, and Stealth/Hide (and usually Dexterity) means that they'll usually act as ranged strikers, either with weapons or spells.

The major problem is if things become too lopsided. A character like Cerebral Paladin described can be overkill at range, but will be in severe danger if an enemy gets within melee distance. So you'll have a character that's either slaughtering foes, or being slaughtered by them, without a comfortable middle ground.

Of course, that's a worst-case scenario, and I think there are ways to minimize that sort of thing from happening. Consider making a lower-Dex higher-Str build, give them a racial ability to threaten adjacent squares, and you'll likely be alright.

 

[fireinthedust]

Is that an issue, tho... I mean, what are the bonuses in 3e with size Tiny, and what`s the average amount of bonus such characters can get (question mark not functioning, i`ll µ)

would the system be hurt by having no size modifiers, I wonder.µ

Or have a wider degree of what Small can cover, so I don`t have to use Tiny per se with all the associated modifiers, but just a range of `effectively Small` sizeµ

The issue for balance for Tiny creatures is to *not* give them a Dex bonus or an Int bonus, then. Avoid the power flop in the one strategy.

That said, I think it isn`t an issue having them severely weak in melee if they`re powerful at range. Wizards have had d4 HD for decades because of this. Just like there are races that are built for melee, like the Half-orc or the Goliath, or Pathfinder elf rogues or wizards, it isn`t a bad thing to have a race that`s tailored to be ranged or stealthy.

Other than the Dex-AC issue, do Tiny characters break the game by being that small, like strategically. Maybe a Tiny archer riding a larger character, using their move actions to move around while firing off full-round action attacks. Or the ability to squeeze through Tiny sized spaces balanced against the lack of size Tiny magical items, that sort of thing.

non-standard balance issues, basically.

 

[Vespucci]

It's how you use it.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

In some respects, it might be better to treat a Tiny race as a Class, kinda like the old D&D races. So you'd be a 6th level Pixie, rather than a 6th level Pixie Wizard.

Monte Cook's Unearthed Evolved's halfling race could take three racial levels and if they reached three they became a pixie-ish character who was Tiny and I think had flying. I wanted to play one but our GM didn't think it fit into his game, so I have no first hand experience with them. But maybe the cost of three class levels makes up for most unbalancing issues.

 

[fireinthedust]

iirc they had bonuses to each of those levels, so it's not a total loss. And there was a lessening for Spellcaster levels, I think, but I see your point.

Maybe a speed reduction due to smaller legs? Like 15 instead of 20?