D&D 5E Strong Small

[Horwath]

That kinda makes more sense to me than Medium with 25 foot speed.

Well, mt. Dwarves come with the str bonus and -5ft move can be justified with their short legs. We have similar diference in humans right here. Not that exreme but length of arms and legs in comparison to torso do differ

 

[Tonguez]

Gnome barbarians

That kinda makes more sense to me than Medium with 25 foot speed.

Why? Dwarves at 4-5ft are close to human height and broad and stout enough so they dominate their 5x5 space. Its the dominanting bulk that makes them medium.

Plus if Dwarfs are small then that just means even less reason to include Halflings and other small races who failed to clear their orbits.

(my gnomes are all under 2ft, so a Tiny race)

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, mt. Dwarves come with the str bonus and -5ft move can be justified with their short legs. We have similar diference in humans right here. Not that exreme but length of arms and legs in comparison to torso do differ

Right, but I’m saying I feel like Small size and powerful build would be more elegant.

 

[Charlaquin]

Why? Dwarves at 4-5ft are close to human height and broad and stout enough so they dominate their 5x5 space. Its the dominanting bulk that makes them medium.

They don’t have to be 4-5 feet though. They could be 3-4 or whatever. I’m just saying I think Small size combined with powerful build feels very fitting for what comes to mind when I think of a fantasy dwarf, whereas medium size and reduced speed always felt kinda kludgy to me. Either way, the idea is to communicate “bigger than hobbits but smaller than humans.” I just like the sound of doctobadwolf’s suggestion for how to do that better.

Plus if Dwarfs are small then that just mean even less reason to include Halflings and other small races who failed to clear their orbits.

...Huh? Why?

(my gnomes are all under 2ft, so a Tiny race)

Interesting choice. Any specific reason?

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Right, but I’m saying I feel like Small size and powerful build would be more elegant.

Dwarves simply aren't "small". They may be short but are bulky and have around the same mass as humans.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Nac Mac Feegles, but they are tiny.

 

[Charlaquin]

Dwarves simply aren't "small". They may be short but are bulky and have around the same mass as humans.

Yes, that is the logic behind their design. It also, in my experience, never fails to throw off first-time players, who generally assume that a race called “dwarf” would fit into the size category called “small.” I think Small size combined with Powerful Build would be a more intuitive way to mechanically express their particular combination of small stature and disproportionate bulk. Especially in light of the fact that Powerful Build is generally used to allow races like Goliaths and Firbolgs to stretch the limits of Medium size, I think it would be more consistent to do the same with dwarves and Small size.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think it's fine to be S and have a STR bonus. This is D&D. There are plenty of races who defy conventional physics or Wisdom, and a lot of very big guys are remarkably weak for their size in D&D too (and only size M by the most dubious of logics).

Just make them a terrifying little ball of muscles, perhaps with slightly disproportionately long arms. Small isn't Tiny anyway.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Redcaps in 5e might be similar to what you're after.

 

[Horwath]

Right, but I’m saying I feel like Small size and powerful build would be more elegant.

From mechanics point of view it's more elegant simple -5 move speed, rather than; you are small for this, this and this and you are medium for that, that and that.