Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lamoni" data-source="post: 1963116" data-attributes="member: 12680">I apologize if this was already responded to (I didn't finish the entire thread).  The halfling DOES wield his longsword with equal damaging potential.  The two PC's see a sword on the ground.  The halfling picks it up and does 1D6+3 damage.  Then the human takes the sword for his turn and does 1D6+3 damage.  Whether it was actually a medium sized shortsword or a small sized longsword makes no difference on potential damage... only whether it is easier for the human or the halfling to use.Edit: Comparing strength based on carrying capacity isn't always too accurate.  Every strength based check is determined by your strength modifier, not your carrying capacity.  If the human was actually stronger, wouldn't he have an easier time breaking a rope?  The carrying capacity could be due to bone density and body structure.  Thick bones can generally support more weight than smaller ones... but with more strength training your bones become more dense to help compensate.  The carrying capacity might also try to compensate a little for room.  There is much more room on a human to place things before it encumbers them.  Transfer it to a halfling and there just isn't room.  Anyway in conclusion, carrying capacity isn't as good of an argument as it first appears when comparing strength.</blockquote>