Aquarist's page

2 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Melkiador wrote:
That template precedes the FAQ by a lot. The issue is that “step” gets used in a confusing redundant way here. There is the size damage increase step and the damage dice chart step. No rules outside of the damage dice chart are referring specifically to the steps of the damage dice chart

This is exactly why this has been so divisive at the table. There's so many different damage steps referred on the FAQ and rules that no one knows which to follow since the template doesn't specify.

Java Man wrote:

Also note that the Bestiary Universal Monster Rules has a table of typical natural weapon damage by size, I'd think the template was referring to that table

Like this one, right? I forgot about this one, too. It presents itself as a THIRD option. In this case the bite would go from 1d8 > 2d6, but the tail slap would go from 1d12 > 2d8.

I guess this is just something you have to reach an agreement with the GM.


Heyas.

After an egregious amount of research, I couldn't find a satisfying answer when it came to the RAW ruling of this template.

Simple Template: Giant (CR +1)
Creatures with the giant template are larger and stronger than their normal-sized kin. This template cannot be applied to creatures that are Colossal.

Quick Rules: +2 to all rolls based on Str or Con, +2 hp/HD, –1 penalty on all rolls based on Dex.

Rebuild Rules: Size increase by one category; AC increase natural armor by +3; Attacks increase dice rolled by 1 step; Ability Scores +4 size bonus to Str and Con, –2 Dex.

In particular I want to know what it means with 'Attacks increase dice rolled by 1 step.' Let's use a CR 2 crocodile for example. It normally has a 1d8 bite attack and a 1d12 tail slap. Would the template increase the damage dice from the bite attack from a 1d8 to a 1d10 or a 2d6? And with the tail slap, would it go from a 1d12 to a 3d6 or a 2d8? Normally a size increase would increase the damage dice by two steps, but the template specifically calls for only one step. The people in my table argue for both, but is there a definitive answer for this?