Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fate of the Smol
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 8567412" data-attributes="member: 6799660"><p>It could be a personal background issue. I started with BX/BECMI where races didn't have stat bonuses or penalties (although they did have speed and polearm issues), and later went to the AD&Ds where halflings pretty much had to find gauntlets of ogre power before they could credibly play fighters. Also had a female gamer that wanted to play a Red Sonja/Wonder Woman type character and ran into the AD&D Str rules and the boys going 'it's just realistic that you can't play a good woman fighter, why don't you play a cleric?' So I'm relatively suspicious of 'it just makes sense' stuff. Regardless, I think that a Strength 20 represents being able to do certain things. If you don't think a halfling should be able to do those things, I think the reasonable solution is to not play a 20 strength halfling, and worldbuilding-wise not have a lot of 20 strength halflings wandering around (but the player who wants to play a 20 strength halfling, and has fullfilled whatever game-price-paid necessary to get it, that's the super-outlier halfling, and I'm not sure they need any special side-penalty for wanting to do so.</p><p></p><p>As to splats needing to mechanically define things and wizards not casting healing spells, I don't see how they are relevant. Things are allowed to have boundaries. I'm saying I do not see a strength limit (or penalty at character creation) is a boundary that adds to the game. At least not in the new paradigm where most gamers don't want to restrict certain races to certain subsets of playable roles. Class role boundaries are a separate category of boundaries and, for the most part (healing magic in particular seems to be spreading out like spilled oil), is still being considered a primary set of limitations within which an individual character can work (barbarians limited to str-weapons and rogues to dex-ones being good examples). </p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm rather vocal about thinking that the game would work better if attributes were mostly separated from primary-class-function and mostly cover things like skills, maybe saves, carrying capacity, extra languages, henchmen rules, etc. The move to 'you really want an 18-20 in your classes' main stat as soon as possible' seems to homogenize characters more than size benefit/penalties ever could. </p><p></p><p>I agree. It seems absurd to me as well* . But... (I like that word, don't I?) I dipped out of video games around when they made a second nintendo system. However my understanding is that in one of the late-90s Final Fantasy games, there was a protagonist who walked around with an absolutely <strong>bonkers!</strong>-sized greatsword. He was human, and it was like 12' long. That's about what a halfling with a human greatsword would be like. It's not <em>my </em>fantasy, but I can see the merit to it for someone who grew up with that media (and it certainly seems less absurd to me than 3.5's spiked chain or 5e's one-handed-quarterstaff-and-shield-and-doing-back-end-attacks-with-the-polearm-master-feat). </p><p><span style="font-size: 9px">*personally I miss 3.0's specially-sized weapons for smaller races, but I understand that also was a 'unnecessary fiddly bit' scenario</span></p><p></p><p>So again, I do not disagree that small size should have some benefits and penalties, but other than trivial things, everything I come up with seems like grand fiddliness, a penalty for the party over penalty for the player, restricting of race-class combos (which I do think is a reasonable goal, considering the modern games' audience), or the like.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 8567412, member: 6799660"] It could be a personal background issue. I started with BX/BECMI where races didn't have stat bonuses or penalties (although they did have speed and polearm issues), and later went to the AD&Ds where halflings pretty much had to find gauntlets of ogre power before they could credibly play fighters. Also had a female gamer that wanted to play a Red Sonja/Wonder Woman type character and ran into the AD&D Str rules and the boys going 'it's just realistic that you can't play a good woman fighter, why don't you play a cleric?' So I'm relatively suspicious of 'it just makes sense' stuff. Regardless, I think that a Strength 20 represents being able to do certain things. If you don't think a halfling should be able to do those things, I think the reasonable solution is to not play a 20 strength halfling, and worldbuilding-wise not have a lot of 20 strength halflings wandering around (but the player who wants to play a 20 strength halfling, and has fullfilled whatever game-price-paid necessary to get it, that's the super-outlier halfling, and I'm not sure they need any special side-penalty for wanting to do so. As to splats needing to mechanically define things and wizards not casting healing spells, I don't see how they are relevant. Things are allowed to have boundaries. I'm saying I do not see a strength limit (or penalty at character creation) is a boundary that adds to the game. At least not in the new paradigm where most gamers don't want to restrict certain races to certain subsets of playable roles. Class role boundaries are a separate category of boundaries and, for the most part (healing magic in particular seems to be spreading out like spilled oil), is still being considered a primary set of limitations within which an individual character can work (barbarians limited to str-weapons and rogues to dex-ones being good examples). I'm rather vocal about thinking that the game would work better if attributes were mostly separated from primary-class-function and mostly cover things like skills, maybe saves, carrying capacity, extra languages, henchmen rules, etc. The move to 'you really want an 18-20 in your classes' main stat as soon as possible' seems to homogenize characters more than size benefit/penalties ever could. I agree. It seems absurd to me as well* . But... (I like that word, don't I?) I dipped out of video games around when they made a second nintendo system. However my understanding is that in one of the late-90s Final Fantasy games, there was a protagonist who walked around with an absolutely [B]bonkers![/B]-sized greatsword. He was human, and it was like 12' long. That's about what a halfling with a human greatsword would be like. It's not [I]my [/I]fantasy, but I can see the merit to it for someone who grew up with that media (and it certainly seems less absurd to me than 3.5's spiked chain or 5e's one-handed-quarterstaff-and-shield-and-doing-back-end-attacks-with-the-polearm-master-feat). [SIZE=1]*personally I miss 3.0's specially-sized weapons for smaller races, but I understand that also was a 'unnecessary fiddly bit' scenario[/SIZE] So again, I do not disagree that small size should have some benefits and penalties, but other than trivial things, everything I come up with seems like grand fiddliness, a penalty for the party over penalty for the player, restricting of race-class combos (which I do think is a reasonable goal, considering the modern games' audience), or the like. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fate of the Smol
Top